The Constitution of the United States of America is a model for a system of government designed to enable the prosperity of the nation without directing it. It provides a framework for a federal government that promotes the cooperation of the states on those functions that transcend the governance of any single state, such as national defense and interstate commerce. The Constitution names the powers the federal government has, and the Bill of Rights says that if a power is not ceded to the federal government, then it remains with the states and the citizens.

One of the hottest issues in the current campaign comes under the heading of the economy. With regard to the economy, the federal government mints the money and assures the free flow of goods and services through all the several states. The role of the federal government in the economy is to enable free enterprise. This is the way the Constitution is written.

It is interesting to note that one of the most revered thinkers in history, Moses Maimonides, said that the highest form of charity is to do the things that enable a man to earn money and stand on his own two feet. The role of performing that high level of charity is written into the Constitution. It maintains order within the republic and assures safety from outside attack. It enables the states to cooperate so that goods and services flow freely through the republic. It maintains a safe money supply. Otherwise, it leaves the citizens free to pursue their dreams and create wealth for themselves.

Barack Obama does not support this model for the country. He believes that the federal government is more important than the dignity and freedom of individuals. He has the vision that the state has more value than individual dignity. He wants to give people money and things, but he plans to acquire the means for these gifts with high taxes that rob the individual of the reward for hard work and ingenuity. If you want to check what Obama really stands for, take a look at his endorsement from the Communist Party USA. If anything should make you doubt Obama’s goals, this should be it.

John McCain stands for our Constitution. Constitutional government provides citizens with the greatest opportunity for freedom and prosperity. This is what we all want, even when handouts look good to us. We know in our heart of hearts that the economic stimulus checks we received last spring are just a forerunner of new taxes that will be required to replace that money in the national treasury.

When you vote, choose a candidate that will get out of your way and let you pursue your dreams, not one that will mandate what work you can do, what food you can eat and what doctor you can see. Vote for freedom. Vote for prosperity. Vote for the Constitution. Vote for John McCain.

I hope a lot of people scratch their heads over the title of this blog. I hope that some will even challenge my grammar. If so, it will help to make my point. We have an expensive education system in this country, we claim to make it available to every possible student, but it is obvious that our citizens are not universally well-educated. Why is that a problem?

If we have any doubts that whatever we are doing in the realm of education is not producing educated people, we have only to read newspapers or view television news. Today’s news includes an interview with a woman who believes that a lot of people lied to her, and that is why her house is currently inundated by the Mississippi River. NOAA or the USGS lied when they mapped out a “100-year” floodplain. FEMA lied to her when they told her that the levees built to hold back the Mississippi in flood would not fail. Her bank lied to her when it said that she did not need flood insurance. Every conclusion she drew from the information available to her points to one fact: this woman is not well-educated.

A good education is critical to a society of free people. Free people do not expect government to take care of them the way a nursemaid cares for a two-year-old. They expect to evaluate their own risks, using their minds educated in the skills of analysis and critical thinking. They expect to make their own decisions to accept risk or protect against it. They are able to read statistics and understand that statistics are not prophecies. They read history and understand that engineers plan as well as they can with the information they have, but bridges still fall down and levees still break. They make decisions in their own best interests, not based on wishful thinking.

This woman made numerous mistakes that she would not have made if she had a good education.

First, when she heard or read the words “100-year floodplain” she interpreted it as a rule, not an analysis. She clearly believed that a 100-year flood would occur only once in 100 years. She did not know that the statistical analysis that produced a map with a “100-year” floodplain marked on it had actually produced only an average of the inundations of many floods. The analysis suggested that, based on whatever information was provided, this floodplain would be inundated about 10 times in any 1000 years. If all the information was 100% correct, and if the algorithm used to produce the statistics was 100% correct, and if all weather and water and terrain remained unchanged for 1000 years, then it could be assumed that the 100-year floodplain would be inundated about 10 times during that 1000 years. Maybe only 9 times. Maybe 11 or 12 times. Possibly, all the 100-year inundations would occur over 10 years in a row. And of course, this calculation does not account for all the floods in the “500-year” range or the "90-year" range or other possible ranges. This woman jumped to the conclusion that if a 100-year flood has occurred, we know it will be 100 years before there is another like it. Whether she failed to pay attention in school, or whether the school failed to teach her about statistics, the consequence is that she has a deficient education.

Second, this woman believed whoever told her that the levees beside the Mississippi would hold back the floods. Anyone who has read any history of flooding along any river knows that nobody can actually promise that a levee will not fail. The history of attempts to manage the Mississippi by building levees is full of evidence that levees fail. A principle of a good education is not to jump to conclusions or believe things people say without evidence. A person who lives in the floodplain of any river must know the history of flooding and be prepared to deal with very real risk. Whoever built the levee had good intentions and no doubt used the best engineering available. However, any person who would believe the statement that the levee would not fail could only have such faith if that person were ignorant. Whether the woman failed to listen when her teachers taught her about researching the truth of public utterances or whether the teachers never taught this material, the consequence is that she has a deficient education.

Third, this woman chose not to buy flood insurance simply because her bank did not require it. I can’t guess why the bank did not require it, but the bank’s decision not to require it did not exempt this woman from assessing her own risks and making the decision herself. In a free country, free people make these decisions and take the consequences. In a free country where flood insurance is available, her decision not to buy it cannot be blamed on the bank. She is free to choose to be insured or not, but it isn’t the fault of anyone but herself after she makes her choice. Whether this woman failed to listen when her school taught the responsibilities of free citizens in a free country, or whether her teacher never tried to teach this truth, the consequence is that she has a deficient education.

The Founders who wrote the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States knew that the electorate in a free country required good education. People cannot and do not make good choices for themselves as private individuals or for the country as voters unless they are well-educated. The news of the woman who accuses everyone but herself of failing to protect her in this flood is iconic for its depiction of the consequences of a deficient education. In the current presidential election campaigns, we are hearing some vague references to the need for good education and a few suggestions that more money will help. I believe that we need to think more deeply about the meaning of our freedom and the personal and civic responsibilities associated with freedom. If we citizens of this country do not have the courage and the education to assess our own risks and make decisions about risks we will either accept or mitigate, then we will inevitably turn to government to take care of us and we will lose all our freedoms.

Socialism is a caretaker government. At least, that is the disguise under which it operates. In fact, socialism takes very good care of government minions and very little care of the citizens. Under the mask of equality for all, socialism robs citizens of the earnings from their productivity and dribbles back to them only enough for survival to produce more. All the wealth of a socialist country lies in the hands of government. The citizens are robbed and oppressed. The USSR, where people stood in line for toilet paper and soap, showed us exactly what socialism does for the citizens. This is the kind of government Obama proposes to give us.

If we don’t do anything else during this election, we must use the best skills acquired in our own education to protect the prosperity of this nation which is due to the freedom of citizens to engage in commerce and keep their earnings. We must not elect a socialist to the office of president. John McCain is suspect with regard to his commitment to personal freedom and free enterprise, but Barack Obama is completely and unabashedly socialist. I will vote for John McCain and count on our citizens to educate him on the necessity of protecting our freedoms.