When was the last time an election based on promises for "smaller government" really worked? Answer: Not in my lifetime and I'm 66.

Understand that there is an evil thing called "base line spending." If congress never approved another spending bill, the federal government would pile up additional debt to the tune of 8% a year (an approximation), increasing our debt by 80% over the next decade. In addition to this, we are told only 18% of government spending is "discretionary." The remaining 82% is structural and "cannot" be changed -- because it is . . . . . structural, or did I just say that? Actually, I believe that all of the federal budget can be changed, if the need and desire is great enough. Understand that the federal budget does not include entitlement spending such as Social Security. It has its own budget and sources of income. Anyway, I think (as a layman analyst) that "discretionary" is a word that means "keep your hands off."

Election after election have been over the issue of "reducing spending" "cutting the size of government." Obama is pretending to be concerned after spending more money than any president in history. Same old crap and nothing less. And Obama is not the only politician to play this word game.

Understand that "increase spending" more often than not means "bigger and bigger government." They are joined at the hip. The two charts below, one showing states (plural) spending and the other showing federal spending are remarkably similar in picturing spending increases, and give the onlooker a scary view of what she can expect 30 years from now.

We are on a 30% incline as to spending. With all the talk of Obama's spending idiocy, a view of the chart shows only a minor alteration in that "30% incline" have occurred during his years in office. McCain and his Establishment cronies have been as comfortable with the growth of government as are the Democrat hordes with whom he loves to compromise.

Point of post: we have been talking about cutting government for decades without success. Government grew under Reagan and under Clinton. While we have been arguing about spending, the real battle is about the purpose and scope of the Federal Government. The more centralized the scope of government, the less [individual] freedoms we all have. And it is this fact that is of far more concern to me than "cutting" and "capping." When you centralize education, for example, in Washington, we all lose the ability of self-determination as to what is taught to your children. In the commune State of California, parents are not allowed in the classroom with tape recorders. They are not allowed to know if their children will be given an abortion. God is refuse any time in the classroom, much less equal time. The fantasy of evolution is taught as fact and in some circles, there is a move to criminalize educational conversation otherwise. This Marxist centered Administration is working overtime to destroy private education.

Now, if you are a Democrat, you apparently do not care what is taught to your kids, as long as it (education) has nothing to do with God or a critical review of evolution.

Understand this and make no mistake - all national elections since the 1960's (and the communist sympathizing anti-war riots of that era) have been about the advancement of marxist/socialist/one world/borderless/secular ideologies. The Lefties knew this all along. The Right Wing fell for the "spending debate" nonsense and we are now at the verge of a fundamental transformation of this great country. We find ourselves asking, "How in the world did we get where we are?" Again, because only the Left has been focused on the ideological war. It is easy to win when the other side does not believe there is a game to play. Well, we believe, now, and 2012 is only the beginning of that war.

Know this, when Obama says, "Time for talk is over, time for action is here," his implicit meaning is this: We have spent decades laying the foundation for fundamental transformative change to this country, and, now, is the time to close the deal.

Spending is important, but let's not get caught up in that debate to the exclusion of what is really happening to our country.