I was happy to receive your solicitation for a campaign contribution, Michelle, and was glad to see that like President Obama, you are taking care to show the world that your campaign is supported by the grass roots - that we ordinary folks support not only liberals but constitutional conservatives like you.

    "My Democrat opponent has raised over $500,000 -- but what is worse -- he has loaned his campaign $250,000. Unfortunately, I'm afraid this is just the beginning. Because as you know, my opponent is worth up to $111 million.
    There is no doubt that liberals are going to continue to pour millions into their campaign to defeat me and I need your immediate help. Can I count on you to contribute $25, $50, $100 or more today?"

When I look at the amounts of money that are being spent by liberals to consolidate their control over the process of government, and the fact that a liberal is willing to lend that much money to his own campaign, it suggests one thing - that they see the business of politics as... well, a business. And one that can bring in big returns on investments. That's why I'm so glad to see that politicians like you and the President are looking to us little folks, folks who have to work for a living, for support (not that I think handling such large amounts of cash, especially with people looking over your shoulder, isn't work!). It reassures us that we, too can have a little piece of government, no matter how small.

    "Since becoming a Member of Congress in 2007, I have worked overtime to take our fiscally conservative message of limited government and individual responsibility to the American public. Time and again, I've gone head-to-head against some of the most dedicated deficit-spending liberals on the campaign trail, on national television, and on the House floor.
    I've made it a top priority to create jobs, fight for individual liberty and to keep our country safe. But in order to do this we must ensure Barack Obama is a one-term President and we must completely repeal the big-government monstrosity known as 'Obamacare.'"

I'm very glad to see that you're a believer in limited government. We all know that seeing to it that people have decent health care - much better than in countries like France or Canada or Cuba - is much too important to be entrusted to government. It simply stands to reason that if we allow the private sector to control access to health care and make sure that health can generate big profits just like telecommunications or luxury goods or military hardware, the profits will be invested back into the system and make health care cheaper and better for everyone. Well, at least for everyone who can afford access to it.

And speaking of military hardware, the first thing that comes to mind, of course, when someone mentions "limited government" is the Defense budget - now approaching $800 billion a year, not counting funding for actual ongoing military operations, including covert actions in sovereign nations. The defense of our nation is another thing that's far too important to trust to government bureaucrats - whether or not they have "eagle shit" on their hats (I hope you'll pardon that expression - one that just comes naturally to a veteran like myself). I know I can count on you to see to it that our national security is taken out of the hands of government and entrusted to the private sector, where it belongs. Then we'll be able to read the balance sheets for ourselves and make sure that the hundreds of thousands of people we've killed around the world since 9/11 are worth it in terms of what really counts - the bottom line.

So I'm all for limiting government, and seeing to it that it has no control whatever over the things that really matter to us working folks - the right to life (meaning not having to die from an illness while trying to cut through endless red tape), the right to a decent home and decent schools for your kids, and the right to live our American lifestyle and all it represents free of the fear that some disgruntled non-Christian will push the button and start a nuclear holocaust just because his kid was taken out by a drone while serving as flower girl at an outdoor wedding.

But what really convinced me is your mention of individual responsibility. My brother's house went underwater a while back and he didn't have the money to pay the property tax on it. He knows I have a little salted away from my generous government pension, and he made the mistake of mentioning that - as if I owed him a share of the taxpayers' hard-earned money. I realized that he has a lesson to learn. "Be thankful for your individual liberty," I told him, patting him on the back. "But realize that along with that liberty comes the freedom to fail. Individual liberty means individual responsibility." And I'm so happy to see a politician who shares my views on that. Here's my contribution.

Gene R. Poole, USN (ret.)