Real Hope & Change

It's been a month since the latest congressional election. And, the Republicans have been given a clear majority in the House. But, that is not the Real Hope & Change the American people are looking for. The Real Hope & Change the American people are looking for, is in the way the government is run. It has nothing to do with one party, or the other. It has everything to do with bringing some integrity to a morally bankrupt institution. So, Republicans beware: Independents like myself have passed the mantle of leadership to you - but we can just as quickly take that mantle and pass it elsewhere.

Rush likes to refer to Independent voters like me as "no labels". Implying that we do not have the guts to follow our convictions and be either a Democrat or a Republican. Well sir, I think you have just proven that you are in fact the mouth piece for the Republican party. And, I resent you calling people like me a "no label". It is true that we do not want to be associated with one party or the other. And, that is because we do not identify strictly with one party or the other. We are not blind followers of the hype and spin that both parties like to spread, in order to maintain their power base. Independents like myself are thinkers; and, we want to look at each issue, and each individual, and make decisions based on the facts. We are not likely to blindly follow your propaganda (or anyone's). In fact, I think it is rather arrogant of you to take credit for the Republican victory; the Independents are the ones that made the difference. You would do well to remember that little fact. But, I digress ...

Today, in both the House and Senate, our elected government officials use earmarks to bribe one another to vote a particular way. That is corruption - plain and simple. Any time an elected government official votes with his or her party instead of his or her constituents, there is something wrong. The same is true when an elected government official votes with a PAC, instead of his or her constituents. And, when that same government official is putting (or permitting) earmarks into legislation, that representative is no longer serving the interests of America, or the American people.

Earmarks are intended to provide elected government officials with a "prize" they can take back to their constituents, in order to prove that they are looking out for the interests of their constituents. However, earmarks encourage decisions based on "deals" and "bargaining", rather than looking at the needs of the American people. Earmarks also encourage spending on particular projects or issues; something that has gotten way out of hand. In a time where our deficit is our biggest national security risk, I think it is time to put an end to earmarks.

The Real Hope & Change I see is the fact that the new House Majority Leader (Boehner) is calling for a ban on earmarks. Of course, an earmark ban is no substitute for a Balanced Budget Amendment, but, it is certainly a step in the right direction. We can only hope that Mr. Boehner will follow through with his promise to ban earmarks.

I was not as encouraged with the Senate Minority Leader's (McConnell) refusal to support the earmark ban. The ball is squarely in the Republican court on this issue. And, the American people are watching very closely. If the Republicans want to keep their majority in the House, I suspect they will need to do more than just talk about this issue. The Real Hope & Change is that we will finally see steps toward fiscal responsibility, and a government institution that is not based on bribes and backroom deals.

I have one more example of Real Hope & Change that I would like to mention. I was very impressed with President Obama's move to get both tax cuts and the extension of unemployment benefits put in place by the end of the year. To me, this is the way government should work; elected officials should be making laws that actually benefit all the American people. That said, I am not at all happy with all the earmarks that have been put into this bill. And, I am counting on the Republicans to make sure that the earmark ban is enforced on all legislation (including this one).

Again, I congratulate the administration for what I consider to be its very first effort towards Real Hope & Change. I am anxious to see if this is the beginning of a new era, or, if this was just a tactic to lure the American people into a false sense of security. I think only time will tell on this point.

So, what is the Real Hope & Change I am looking for:

• No more earmarks
• No more legislation that is accomplished by making backroom deals and bribes
  
• Legislation that keeps the needs of the American people at the center (like the tax cuts and unemployment benefit extensions)
• Elected officials that remember they work for the American people; particularly when it comes to things like special benefits and automatic pay raises
• A balanced budget amendment, that will force our elected officials to be fiscally responsible

Virtual Strip Searching

The TSA has started with their new virtual strip search policy. That's right, if you want to be able to fly today, you have to submit to a machine that is able to see underneath your clothing. What's the big deal? After all, don't we all want to be safe when we fly? Well, yeah. But, what are you willing to give up as a result of your fear? I think this is the real question.

Do you think they (our government) are applying these same standards to people that fly on ... say ... Air Force One? What about private jets? Do you think someone like Bill Gates will be subjected to these kinds of screens? What about his wife and kids? What about people in the Obama administration (those that fly commercial that is)? Do you think they are being subjected to these screens? What about the other elites - any of the elites?

So, is it Justice when we have laws like the one they are using to perform a virtual strip search of American Citizens? How can this be Justice? Can this be applied equally to every American Citizen? The simple answer is no. Those who have the financial means to fly on private jets will not be subject to these screens. Likewise, those with "celebrity status" will not be subjected to these kinds of screens. Is this Justice?

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

Martin Luther King Jr., Letter from Birmingham Jail, April 16, 1963

This is discrimination plain and simple. It may sound absurd, but, think about it. doesn't this law put those who cannot afford to fly, in a private jet or at the expense of the taxpayers, at a distinct disadvantage? Isn't that the definition of discrimination and injustice?

Fear is an amazing thing. And, it is a great motivator. People seem to be afraid of lots of things. Now, I believe in caution, and I am not saying that we should be taking all kinds of risks. But, I think we also have to be rationale about what we are asking the public - Innocent American Citizens - to do.

How do we measure the loss of liberty against the gain in security? More importantly, are we really gaining in security by giving the government even more control over us? And, doesn't it seem interesting that the federal government will not protect our borders, but, they are willing to have armies of TSA agents performing virtual strip searches and walking through airport terminals asking for our "papers"?

Terrorists succeed because we let them make us afraid. Nobody wants to die. And, its even more tragic when innocent people are victims. But, lets face it: lots of people are killed by violent crimes and drunk drivers every day - innocent people. Isn't a virtual strip search kind of like stopping every vehicle on a road, in the hopes that you are going to catch a drunk driver? How long before our benevolent government sees fit to remove more of our civil liberties in the name of protecting the population?

How is it possible that our Supreme Court upheld this absurd law? What's next? Government agents monitoring all our phone calls and email? Cameras on every corner recording our actions day and night? Police who can take you into custody and keep you for as long as they deem necessary? Biometric scans as we enter any public building? Transponders and RF-ID chips inserted into our bodies?

When the government uses these kinds of tactics to erode our civil rights, then what is next? Is it really better to have security at the cost of liberty?

First Things First

Well, if you read my latest (previous) post, you know that I am hopping mad over the money that was spent on this boondoggle to India and Indonesia. And, it was while writing that last post that I realized that our elected officials really do not give a hoot about us average Americans. They are gonna keep spending our tax money however they want; on what ever they want.

As I understand it, the Republicans have said that their first priority is to repeal ObamaCare. Well, I think we have a bigger problem than ObamaCare. I think the spending epidemic is the biggest threat we are facing as a country. And, I believe this is going to finally break the back of our Great Nation, if we do not act quickly to get things under control. In a triage situation, you always stop the bleeding before you try to treat other symptoms. Well, we are bleeding big time! And, we need to stop that bleeding before it is too late!

We need the Balanced Budget Amendment RIGHT NOW before it is too late!

I would rather see the Republicans put all efforts towards getting a Balanced Budget Amendment. I don't think anything else matters. A Balanced Budget Amendment would stop the bleeding.

Look, passing a repeal of the ObamaCare is a political tactic. The republicans want to keep a hot topic in front of the American voters, in the hopes that we will elect a Republican President in 2012. Listen up Republicans. We are onto the political games that both you and the Democrats are playing. And, we the people are not gonna put up with it anymore. We voted to put you into power, and we can vote to take you back out again. So, maybe its time to think about the people for a change. If you (the Republicans) want a platform for 2012, the Balanced Budget Amendment should be that platform. If you want to make the Democrats look bad, then do it by making them vote against the Balanced Budget Amendment. That will go a lot further than the repeal of ObamaCare. And, a Balanced Budget Amendment would force the kind of spending restraints that would get rid of ObamaCare anyway. It's a win-win scenario.

First things first - we need to stop the financial hemorrhaging. We need a Balanced Budget Amendment NOW. In order to make this happen, We the People need to stand up and make our voices heard. We have a new Congress coming in January. We need to let them know that the financial hemorrhaging has got to stop. We need to let them know that we want - no we demand - a Balanced Budget Amendment NOW.

So, I am asking you to forward this post to everyone you know. And, most importantly, I am asking you to forward this to your congressional representatives and your senators. We need a grass roots campaign for a Balanced Budget Amendment.

God Bless America!

Waste, Fraud & Abuse

That is what the government calls it when tax dollars are not spent properly: Waste, Fraud & Abuse.

So ... let's talk about this latest trip that the President is taking. As I understand it, the President is taking a trip to India and Indonesia. And, if the information I have heard from the media is correct, the price tag for this trip is in the neighborhood of 2 Billion Dollars. Seriously?

2 Billion Dollars for a trip? Well, as one of the tax payers, whose money you are spending, I certainly hope that there are going to be some jobs or other benefits to us average Americans as a result of this trip. Perhaps you could enlighten us average Americans as to the purpose of the trip, since we are the ones who are paying for it (after all). How is this trip benefiting the country?

Mr. President, How can you possibly think it would be okay to spend 2 Billion Dollars for a trip to India and Indonesia? Let's put this in perspective. What is the total annual budget for NASA? Well, I am not sure, but it seems to me that 2 Billion Dollars is a sizable percentage of the NASA budget. Yet, if memory serves me, you are cutting the NASA budget because we cannot afford the expense. You are cutting NASA's budget, but you are taking a trip to India and Indonesia? I dare say that the American people will get a lot more benefit from 2 Billion Dollars being spent with NASA, than by spending it for you to travel to India and Indonesia.

And you were wondering (after the elections) why the American people just threw out so many Democrats. Do you seriously not see how the American people would be upset with your decision to spend 2 Billion Dollars on a trip to India rather than spending the money on NASA? I have tried to figure out what rationale you could possibly use for spending this kind of money. Did it never occur to you that the average American is never going to understand why you are making this trip? Did it ever occur to you that this is NOT leading by example? People are worried about their jobs. People are worried about the tremendous amount of debt that is being racked up by your administration and the Democratic Congress. Are you that out of touch that you cannot see how this kind of expenditure would be received poorly by the average American?

To me, this is an expenditure that should not have happened. To me, this is a classic example of Waste, Fraud & Abuse. It also reaffirms to me that you and the Democratic party are out of touch and out of control. You are so set in your elitists ways, that you cannot see how obviously wrong it is to make this kind of expenditure; particularly when we have the kind of deficits we have today. Shame on you!

I did something this last election that I have never done before in my entire life: I voted AGAINST every Democrat on the ticket. That's right. I voted Liberatarion. I voted for Green party. I voted Republican. I refused to vote for one single Democrat. I voted for a Democrat in both of the previous congressional elections. Not this time. I not only voted against the Democrat congressional candidate, I handed out fliers for his opposition. I called and emailed every family member to be sure that everyone voted. I put more time and energy into this election than I have put into all the other elections combined. And, I am going to keep doing this while we are having the poor quality of elected officials that I believe we have today. I guess I was hoping the right wing media was wrong about you, Mr. President. I was hoping that at some point you would demonstrate your leadership.

How dare you cut the funding for NASA, and then turn around and spend this much money on a boondoggle. Don't bother sending me any of your campaign materials. I will be voting AGAINST you in 2012 - no matter who the other candidates are. This trip has proven to me that you do not have the judgment or integrity that I require for my elected president.

Ground Zero Mosque

I have decided to weigh in on the Mosque at Ground Zero. First, a warning to my ultra-conservative friends: you are not gonna like this post. Sorry.

Let me start by saying that the Right of Religious Freedom is just that: a Right. This means that any citizen has the Right to practice their religion in this country.

Now, that said, this does not have anything to do with what I believe the majority of Americans have expressed as their views. After all, the majority of Americans support the constitution. I believe that the majority of Americans understand and respect the Right of Religious Freedom. And, I believe that the majority of Americans are simply expressing their desire to have the mosque built some place else. They do not want to impede anyone's Religious Freedom. Rather, they would just like for people to be sensitive to the location where the mosque is to be placed. And, to some degree, I think the majority of Americans are both disappointed and angry about the apparent lack of compassion from the organization that is trying to build the mosque.

I think that is enough said about the mosque topic. And, frankly, I do not consider this to be news worthy. This goes to my next point. This mosque is becoming a political football. And, I think this needs to stop.

To be clear, this all started when the President decided to provide his position on the mosque. And, to be honest, what he said was quite literally correct.

1. The constitution provides for religious freedom
2. The issue is more about the "judgment" rather than the legality

Here's the deal:

• The president should stop trying to have beer summits every time two people have a disagreement; there are lots and lots of other issues which are far more important (e.g. jobs, border security, government transparency, etc.)
• The conservative media should stop trying to pin this mosque on the President - yes, he stuck his nose into yet another social issue, but, enough is enough

I will agree with the conservative media on one point: the President only seems to focus on those issues which will continue his celebrity status. Lets face it; why on earth would the President feel the need to get in the middle of every little dispute? By sticking his nose into this (and other similar issues), it is providing fuel for the conservative media. It just helps to fuel the image of the president as the head of a government that is out of control (even drunk) with power. Mr. President, is that what you want?

Yes, building a mosque next to ground zero is really bad judgment. But, don't we have more important things to worry about right now?

Mom was right!

Mom, I know you have been waiting a long time to hear this, but, you were right.

When I was younger, my mother continuously told me that Television was evil. And, that if I watched too much Television, it would rot my brain. Well, like every other kid in America (at that age), I thought my mother was crazy.

I admit: it took me a really long time to figure it out. In fact, it was not until about four years ago that I started to realize that there was something disturbing about some of the television shows. Up to that point, I would just watch the shows and be entertained - just like everyone else in America. Then, I started to notice patterns in the situations that were being portrayed in the shows. These were situations that were not really that prevalent, but, these situations were being portrayed as being very prevalent. At first, I thought the choice of situations was based on dramatic license; doing something that was out of the ordinary in order to keep the interest of the audience. Then, I realized that the scenarios were aligned with liberal social issues.

I started to pay much closer attention to the plots; noting the messages that were embedded in the plots. And, over time, I realized that the plots were crafted to garner sympathy (or tolerance) for certain social situations. You see, when someone sees a certain situation over and over again, they begin to adjust what they consider to be normal. If you are curious about the psychological principles, your should read about hostages and the Stockholm Syndrome. The messages have been extremely subtle over that last couple of decades - kind of like boiling a frog. :-)

I would like to give you a scenario. Now, what I am about to say is going to sound really strange. When I first wrote this blog (months ago), I could not bring myself to publish it, because I was afraid that it made me sound like some kind of nut. But, I remembered something my mother told me: "Don't let someone else think for you - that is why God gave you have a brain". I decided to go ahead and post this blog; with the message that readers should use their brains, and make up their own minds about things. And, now that I have given the disclaimer, I will get on with the scenario.

The thing about Television is that it enables viewers to immerse themselves in a fantasy world. Viewers can experience all kinds of scenarios and situations through the drama of Television. The problem is that viewers can begin to adjust their perceptions on things, based on repeated exposure to a particular theme from certain Television shows. You see, the brain (over time) will treat the Television shows just like any other real-life experience. And, repeated exposure to a common theme will effectively brain-wash a viewer. Believe me, I know how crazy this sounds. It has taken me four years to finally come the realization: mom was right!

Here is the really scary part: imagine if a person or group of people could have their perception modified over time. People would not know who or what to believe. Or, they would only believe, based on the major source of the information that was used to form their perceptions. In other words, if they are basing their beliefs on what they have learned from Television, then it is likely that they would trust the Television more than any other source. Got goose bumps yet?

Lets take this one step further. Why would anyone want to manipulate the perception of a population of people? Well, the answer seems to be very straight forward. If people are thinking for themselves, then they are more likely to ask questions. And, if they are more likely to ask questions, they are less likely to just blindly do what they are told. So, it's all about control; the ability to control a population. In fact, with Television, it's not likely that the viewers would even know they were being manipulated. It's like: The Matrix. :-)

So ... mom ... I know you have been waiting decades to hear this. Here goes. You were right about Television. God gave us all brains, and we should be using them to think for ourselves. I know it took a really long time for me to figure this out. But, I finally did!

Thanks mom!

Border Security: What Happened?

What happened to all the discussion about the Border Security???

No one in the media is covering this topic anymore. And, I am sure (since I live in a border state) that the problem has not gone away. Yeah, sure, they put a few National Guard troops on the border. And, I understand that they are going to hire more Border Security personnel. But, a month ago (or so) none of these plans were good enough to address the problem. Now, all of a sudden, its like we have given up and moved on to a new "hot topic".

This is not about immigration - this is about security. My concern is about the drugs (and who knows what else) that are being smuggled into the country across our southern border. One of the most important roles of the federal government is to protect the Nation; that includes border protection. And, if things are still being smuggled in, then I do not think they are doing a very good job.

Have you flown lately? You are practically strip searched prior to entering the boarding area. Then, even in the boarding area, there are TSA agents walking around constantly asking for your identification papers. This is so ironic, given the Democratic claims that the Arizona law would violate people's civil rights. Well, what about being repeatedly asked for my identification papers, while I am waiting for a flight within my own country!?! An even bigger irony is that it's the same government agency that is hiring lots and lots of TSA agents, yet not hiring enough Border Protection Agents. That just smacks of political agenda to me.

So, do we have a problem with border security or not? Is there a solution that will fix the problem, or not?

This administration has time for beer summits for all kinds of topics that are best left to local governments. I think it is about time for this administration to focus on the things the federal government is supposed to be doing.

Well folks, I think this is a serious problem. And, I think we need to stay on the administration until the problem is completely resolved. If we do not stay on them, they will continue to "wait us out" on issues where they (the administration) want to do something contrary to the majority of us working class Americans.

Border Security needs to stay on the front page until we are sure the problem has been resolved. We should not be playing political games with our Border Security.

NAACP Racist Claims

This morning, I heard on the news that the NAACP is calling everyone in the Tea Party a racist. I suppose asking why, would be unacceptable; since we are not supposed to question anything that is done by this administration, or the evangelists of its political agenda. Even though I am not a member of the Tea Party, I suspect they will be calling me a racist next! It seems that anyone who does not endorse the political agenda of this administration is a racist.

I'm a math and logic guy. So, I have some knowledge of things like mathematical proofs. I also understand logic. There is a well know mathematical principal: a single example does not prove a theory. A single example can be used, however, to disprove a theory. The NAACP claims that all members of the Tea Party are racists. This is a statement of a theory. The beauty of this claim is the damage it can do, whether it is proven or not. And, I suspect this is the goal. But, I digress; back to the theory. It's simple and logical: this theory can be dis-proven by having one member of the Tea Party that is not racist. So, can the NAACP prove that every member of the Tea Party is a racist? If not, then this theory is false. It's what we call an unsubstantiated statement.

I heard an interview, where an advocate of the NAACP's position stated things like "small government" and "states rights" were code words for racism. Wait - I thought racism was treating someone different because of their race. How did states rights and small government become part of the equation? It's almost as if the NAACP is saying that the only way to avoid racism, is to have a centralized government (opposite of small government and states rights) to control its citizens - to ensure racism does not happen. Well, history tells us that governments can have racists policies; depending on the people who act on behalf of the government. So, I am not sure why someone would trust the government not to be racist. But, I guess someone might believe that the government would be able to prevent racism. It's ironic; the Tea Party is the party that basically says government is supposed to serve the people, rather than the other way around. The Tea Party advocates personal liberty. I guess it comes down to whether you trust the government more or less than the people around you. And, I guess if you are a minority, it would be hard to trust those who are in the majority. That said, we do have laws in this country that expressly make discrimination illegal.

Lets go back to logic for just a moment. Is it logical that all people are racists, if only one person is proven to be racist? The answer is no. So, since racism is assumed when we talk about the need for big, centralized government, can the conclusion be true if one of the fundamental assumptions is proved wrong? The answer is no. The reality is that people are being manipulated.

What could possibly be accomplished by claiming that the Tea Party is racist? It's all about guilt. That's right. It's about the fear of being called a racist. It's leverage against people like me, who try to be independent of the political parties. And, as hard as this is for me to admit, It's leverage against people like me who have been afraid to be called racist.

You see, some people will almost always vote Republican. And, others will almost always vote Democratic. The independents are the ones that really determine elections. They are the group that were fundamental in the 2006 and 2008 elections. They are the group that were upset with President Bush and the Republicans (for any number of reasons). The independent voters are the ones who put the Democrats in control of Congress in 2006. And, they are the group that elected President Obama in 2008.

Why would anyone want to use racism to manipulate a population? Simple - Power. By manipulating people into thinking they are victims of racism, you can get them to support your political agenda (enemy of my enemy, etc.). And, by making people afraid of being called racist, you accomplish the same exact thing. Basically, it's all about fear. Fear of being a victim of racism (on the one hand), and fear of being called a racist (on the other hand). I think it goes without saying, that this kind of public manipulation is just plain bad.

By the way, if the agenda is a centralized government, to ensure that racism does not occur, then the government would have to be able to control everyone. People who are dependent on the government would be very easy to control.

I was taught to treat people the way I want to be treated. And, I have tried to live up to this every day of my life. To me, this is what is important: living according to my values. I have decided to get over my fear of being called a racist. I have never treated someone different because of their race, and I never will. I refuse to be manipulated, based on my fear of being called something that I know I am not. If someone calls me a racist, I could spend lots of time trying to prove they are wrong. Or, I can take it for what it is: an inaccurate statement. No more guilt. I will not be manipulated.

Way to Go!

I just found out that a bunch of friends, who live and work in Houston, have been released from their jobs with oil companies. And, I understand that more people will be losing their jobs over the next couple of weeks. We (as a Nation) are still struggling with a bad economy. People need jobs! And, yet, this administration takes the decision to stop deep water oil and gas activities in the Gulf. Why?

Well, this administration is all about perception. And, by shutting down deep water drilling in the Gulf, it looks like the administration is being tough with the oil industry. Maybe this administration should have thought this through. Clearly, stopping oil and gas activities in the Gulf is costing jobs. This, at a time when we really need fewer unemployed people - not more. The situation in the Gulf is an environmental tragedy of epic proportions. But, shutting down the oil and gas industry in the Gulf is just making the problem worse.

I wonder ... what if these oil and gas workers were union workers? Would this administration have been so quick to cut off their lively-hood? We know the administration used tax payer's dollars to save auto worker's jobs. What if these jobs were in a blue state? Statistics show that most oil field workers are very conservative; thus, not Obama supporters. Let's keep this simple: Did the administration consider the loss of jobs before they shut down the oil and gas industry in the Gulf? Was there a political agenda?

If this administration understood the concept of a free market, they would not have needed to shutdown the oil and gas industry in the Gulf. It's really simple. It's called risk. Businesses (particularly the oil industry) are constantly evaluating the risks they are willing to take, in order to earn revenue. I assure you: no oil company (or any company) wants to take the risk of losing billions of dollars because of an accident; like the one in the Gulf. It's just common sense. If this administration understood more about business, they would have realized that they did not need to shut down the oil industry in the Gulf; they would have realized that businesses know how to manage risk in order to get a return on investment.

Yet another reckless action by this administration, is resulting in more unemployed people. This administration claimed that GM was too big to fail. Really. They claimed that if GM went bankrupt, that all the businesses who depend on GM would also go bankrupt. What about the large scale economic havoc, that shutting down the oil business will have on the Gulf States? How is this different? Oh yeah, this administration bailed out GM; and, they caused the shutdown of the Gulf oil industry. Isn't this a double standard?

It gets even better. Not only has the administration destroyed the oil industry in the Gulf, they have severely impacted our supply of oil. We are still in an economic crisis! If you do something to drive up the cost of oil, you will make the economic crisis worse. It's called inflation. Oil is required to transport goods. That cost is passed onto consumers. I will not even talk about all the foreign countries that are still sucking our (American) oil reserves dry. What were you thinking!

This administration had an opportunity to demonstrate leadership. Instead, they have cost more American jobs at a time when jobs are scarce. And, this administration has put our supply of oil at risk. I just don't understand the rationale for such reckless behavior. Don't you care about the American people?

Filibuster Kagan

Hello!?!? Any Republican Senators out there?!?!

Where in the world have all the Republican Senators gone? What are you doing?

Perhaps it is time for you to do something. Here's an idea: how about taking a stand on the appointment of an obviously extremely liberal supreme court judge.

We need checks and balances. Given the importance of the Supreme Court, I would think this is the perfect time, and issue, for the Republicans to take a stand. Democratic strategist have painted Republicans as advocates for big business, and not as advocates for the American people. Why not show the American people, that the Republicans are willing to stand up for the preservation of the Constitution?

Get off your butts and stop the Kagan appointment to the Supreme Court! Prove to the American people that your party is truly all about the Constitution.

Hannity Hype

I did not like the Bush bashing, when Bush was President. And, I do not like the Obama bashing. I know that Obama, himself, bashed Bush mercilessly during the 2008 election. So, maybe he deserves all the abuse. But, I was taught that "two wrongs do not make a right".

During the 2008 election, Obama was bashed regularly. And, what happened: he got elected. I don't believe the bashing does any good.

I sometimes have to drive for two or three hours, as I live in one town and work in another. The last two weeks I have had to change radio stations, because the attacks on Obama were just too much. Enough already. If I am changing the channel, then I assure you other like-minded independents are changing the channel. Obama is in office. He is going to be in office until 2012. I really do not want to have to listen to the Obama bashing for another two years.

Here's the deal. The 2010 elections are just around the corner. And, I know that you (Hannity, et al) think that the Republicans are going to get majorities in both the House and the Senate. I am not so sure. While you are bashing Obama, the Republican candidates are losing ground against the Democratic candidates. If you really want to get rid of this Democratic Congress, you had better find a way to start helping the candidates that are running against Democratic Congressmen and Senators. It's almost like you think that bashing Obama will translate to votes against the Democrats. I am not so sure.

It seems to me that if you really want to vote out all the Democrats, you need to start talking about what the American people need to do to make this happen. What is the battle plan? Who are the Democratic Congressmen and Senators who are vulnerable? What are the specific issues that indicate why their Democratic Congressman or Senator should be voted out of office?

Enough Obama bashing. Let's focus on how we get these government elitists out of office; starting with the 2010 elections.

Papers Please!

I'm sitting in the airport waiting to board my flight. I've already been through security, where we were subjected to the wands and all kinds of modern technology. So, I'm sitting here, and a TSA agent walks past me. I noticed because she had a cast on her foot. Actually, I noticed the limp, then the cast, then the TSA uniform. Well, the TSA agent proceeded to walk through the seating area asking for boarding passes and IDs. Then, a second TSA Agent appeared; doing the same thing. As a person who has flow a million miles on two different airlines, I know what security was like before 9\11. And, I cannot tell you how happy I am that the TSA was put in place.

As the TSA agents were making their way through the seating areas, I had a thought. I'm sure there is value in random searches. And, I am not about to second guess their methods. But, a thought occurred to me: what if they are just doing this because they don't have anything else to do? Then another thought occurred to me: how is this any different than an Arizona police officer asking for immigration papers? And finally, I had a flash back to the movies where Russian police and Nazi SS were walking around constantly asking people for their "papers please".

First, I certainly hope we are not just throwing federal dollars at all the various federal agencies, telling the supervisors to "find them something to do". Surely, we would not spend money just to spend money. Right?

Next, how is this different from Arizona trying to protect their citizens? The federal government (TSA agent) could discriminate against someone just as easily as an Arizona police officer could. The situations are exactly the same. Yet, I hear democratic congressmen saying that asking for papers could be discriminatory. Please, someone tell me what the difference is here, other than one is not being subjected to a political agenda.

Finally, doesn't the idea of a federal agent walking up to you and asking for your papers bother anyone else? I get that we need security. And, I have already said how much I appreciate what the TSA has done to improve airplane security. But, the federal government puts the effort into protecting airports, rather than protecting our borders. Why is that? Why wont the federal government put the effort into protecting the borders? They seem to be able to hire TSA folks. Why not give the police on the border the support they are begging for?

By the way, when is asking for your papers "over the line"?

Sotomayor should resign

I am really sick of politicians who say what ever they need to, in order to get the public's support for an election. Although, one could argue that I should not be surprised by politicians who lie. I guess I'm an optimist. But, when a supreme court judge does it? Well, that cannot stand. Judge Sotomayor made statements under oath regarding her stance on gun control and the second amendment. Yet, the first time a vote comes up on this very important issue, she votes against the second amendment, and for gun control. Is it too much to ask to get a supreme court judge with integrity? In my opinion, Judge Sotomayor should resign.

Politicizing Top Chef

I was very surprised to find this administration involved in an episode of Top Chef. This begs the question of why the administration would find the need to be on a TV show. Particularly, when we have issues that are much more pressing (e.g. jobs, border protection, gulf cleanup, Afghanistan, etc.). Perhaps, this is why spending is so high. Perhaps, we need to get our priorities in the correct order. I digress.

In the first part of the episode, the producers had the chefs “work together” by using two person red and blue chef’s aprons. Each team member literally had one hand tied behind their backs. Cute, but this was over reaching, in my opinion. The commentary from the administration official (who was on the show) was all about how hard it is to work together in a non-partisan method; with a hint of how things work better when there is a single agenda. Well, the fact is that we are a representative republic. That means that “we the people” expect our representatives to work together on our behalf - keeping our interests as their primary impetus. The problem we have today is that our elected representatives are more concerned with their positions within their own party, than they are about things like ethics, integrity and fairness.

After the political message about working together, the Top Chef contestants were moved to a local Washington D.C. school, where they were expected to produce a nutritious lunch for a budget of $4 per child. Now, the administration official’s message was very clear: there is not enough money for the school lunch programs. Why is this a government problem? Lets analyze this. Whose responsibility is it to feed a child - the government or the parent? We cannot be guilted into a particular point of view - we need to be logical. Nobody wants to see starving children anywhere. That is beside the point. Back to the question. The answer is that the parents are fundamentally responsible for feeding their children. They can accomplish this one of two ways: they can send lunch to school with their child, or, they can provide the child with money to buy the school lunch. If a parent wants the child to have a nutritious lunch, then they should probably send lunch with the child. If a parent trusts the school to provide a nutritious school lunch, then they should send the child to school with enough money to buy the school lunch. Simple, huh?

Well, it’s not as simple as it sounds. At one point in time, I was a child attending public school in the Washington D.C. metro area. And, while I do not want to get too far off track, I need to describe some of the perils of taking money to school. When I was in school, it was routine practice to “mug” kids in the stairwells to get their lunch money. In fact, there were numbers of gangs that specialized in this kind of activity. Also, drugs have become a serious problem in the schools today. That said, these are reasons for not sending money to school with a child. These are not reasons for not taking responsibility for your child’s nutrition. As a parent, I understand wanting school lunch money to go to school lunches. That is why I made payments directly to the school for my children’s school lunches (when they were attending public school).

There is another thing to consider: some parents just cannot afford to provide a nutritious lunch for their children. Or, they cannot afford to provide nutritious food for their children in general. While I am sympathetic to this issue, this is not a role for any government entity (local, state or federal). People who have children have to take responsibility for feeding those children. Those who have children need to be the ones that make the decisions on how to take care of their families. If the government inserts themselves into this process, then they risk having future generations of people who will simply let the government take responsibility for feeding their children. And, that is not a good thing. This kind of approach will lead to a huge dependence on government and society for simple things like food. Remember the proverb about the value of teaching a person to fish, so they can sustain themselves? I think this is good advice.

As a society, we will have to provide some mechanism for governing those who are not willing to live up to their parenting responsibilities. But, that should be the extent of government’s involvement.

I found it inappropriate for this administration to use a TV show to attempt to once again manipulate public opinion. This administration is notorious for using this kind of media manipulation to advocate their liberal agenda. And, this is unacceptable. So, from this moment forward I will be boycotting Top Chef. I am sending letters to the advertisers for this show stating my objections to the politicized content. I encourage every American to do the same. In addition, every TV show that facilitates this kind of liberal propaganda will receive the same treatment. It’s time to reign in the liberal media!

Come on America - let’s make our voices heard!

Freedom of Choice

My wife and I decided to catch a movie this afternoon. We got to the
theater, and discovered the "sit where you want" business model has
been replaced with a "reserved seat" business model.

Now, this would be novel, if it were not for:

• crying kids and not being able to move
• someone else is not smart enough to sit in their own seat, and not willing to move to the right seat, or cannot move to their own seat because someone else is sitting in it - you get an interesting social dilemma
  

Sent from my iPhone

Deja Vietnam

Who are we kidding? Afghanistan is another Vietnam. The government micromanaged Vietnam - we lost. This administration is micromanaging Afghanistan. And, we are gonna lose in Afghanistan. Let me say, my opinion has nothing to do with the general being fired - I think the President made the right decision. My problem is the way this administration is micromanaging the rules of engagement. The same thing happened in Vietnam. And, we lost in Vietnam.

Another thing to think about: drugs. Vietnam was a huge source of drugs. Afganistan is a huge source of drugs. Drugs are a serious problem; not just in Afghanistan, but on our own borders. I don't think we can win in Afghanistan. Having troops in a situation where they are nothing but targets is ridiculous. Let's bring the troops home and put them on the US Mexican border.

Enforce the Law!!

What is the deal? First, our elected officials decide to pass healthcare reform against the will of the American people. Now, our elected officials are refusing to enforce the immigration laws. Why bother having laws? To make it even worse, our elected officials are refusing to protect our borders, until they get an agreement on comprehensive immigration reform. That's just plain sick! Tell me, what is the federal government supposed to do? How can we trust the government with our healthcare? How long before our healthcare is held hostage? Think I'm joking? Well, I would have never thought it possible. But, it seems this administration has an agenda. And, it's clear this administration is going to get what they want AT ANY COST to the American people. At this point, I can see this administration holding Americans hostage, in order to get their agenda put in place. We need checks and balances. November cannot come soon enough!

I heard some Democrat saying that the Arizona law is unconstitutional because some law enforcement officer might profile some innocent driver. Well, at this point, I would trust any law enforcement officer before I would trust this administration. It's ridiculous. This administration has put their agenda above everything - especially the American people. Pretty bad when you consider the elitists are supposed to be working for the American people. So, we should believe that we can trust the federal government with our healthcare more than we can trust a law enforcement officer. I choose the law enforcement officer. Hey Mr. President, Enforce the damn border!

Oil War?

I am simply disgusted. 

How in the world can the president compare this environmental disaster to a war?  Oh, I get it.  This administration does not want this disaster characterized as "Obama's Katrina".  Haven't you heard the administration trying to compare this disaster to Bush's 9/11?  That is why they are using the war metaphors.  How despicable.  And, how is it that this president is willing to put 17,000 National Guard troops to work on this problem?  Are you serious?  This president is not wiling to put 6,000 troops to protect the US borders.  But, they are willing to put 17,000 National Guard troops to work on this disaster?  I think comparing this disaster to a war is disrespectful to the men and women who have and are continuing to fight on behalf of the nation.

While I am giving my opinion on the president's speech, I would also like to comment about the "we don't know where we are going or what we want" comment.  Mr. President, once again you are demonstrating that you are out of touch with us working class Americans.  We know what we want, and we know what we do not want.  Why don't you try listening for a change?  Oh, that's right: we (the American people who you work for) are too dumb to know what we want.  That is why elitists like you have to make decisions for us.  Well, November is just around the corner.  I think you will find out what we want then.  Just in case you have not followed my blog before, I voted for a Democratic Congressman in the 2008 election.  I am not only voting AGAINST that person in 2010, I am donating money and time to the campaigns of all the other candidates in the race - I am actively campaigning AGAINST the democratic incumbent. 

Mr. Obama, no matter how much your spin doctors try to spin this, the gulf oil disaster will always be your Katrina.  I just made another post about "Arm Chair Quarterbacks", where I said that I did not appreciate the media bashing you about things that were beyond your control.  But, you are the one who is supposed to be demonstrating your leadership.  And, I just don't see anything from your administration but politics as usual.

Arm Chair Quarterbacks

We've all done it.  It's a normal human behavior to express one's opinion.  The problem is when these opinions become confused with the facts.  And, it's even more dangerous when aggressive (or arrogant) individuals try to represent their opinion as fact.  Throughout my career, I have been amazed by the number of people who think they can do a particular job just by reading a book.  I guess it is possible that, in my youth, I was arrogant and naive enough to think that experience did not matter.  I am much wiser now.  :-)

But seriously; the term expert applies to an individual with knowledge, experience and skills in a particular domain.  An individual's expertise is based on their knowledge and skills.  And, the way an individual gets expertise is by learning and applying their skills to real world problems.  Experts are not elected or assigned based on political methods (like most managers).  Thus, an individual's expertise has nothing to do with whether they are "in charge" or not.  And, clearly, individuals cannot gain experience (or expertise) simply by being put in charge of something.   

So, where am I going with this, you might ask?

Well ... it's like this:  I see lots of people "arm chair quarterbacking" the Gulf situation.  Instead of doing that myself, I just want to say that this is a difficult situation for all parties.  And, I think we need to let the folks with the knowledge of these kinds of wells do their job.  I am not at all happy with the news media that has been attacking this administration for lack of action; particularly when this particular set of media is very quick to scream whenever the government attempts to do anything that could be perceived as "anti-business".  Nor am I happy with the oil company's response to the situation.  But, I still believe in letting the experts do their job.  And, I am quite sure that this administration does not have any expertise in deep water oil wells.  This is a perfect opportunity for this administration to demonstrate its leadership abilities, by working with the oil company to resolve the problem.  Of course, that is not what is happening.  I guess it was too much to expect leadership from an administration that sees itself as a monarchy.  So, I guess you could say that I am also not happy with the way this administration has handled this crisis.  Basically, I am not happy with the situation.  I think the media should shut up.  I think the administration should demonstrate leadership rather than it's regular political manipulation.  And, I think the oil industry at large should make a commitment to deal with this economic and environmental disaster; so this administration does not use this as an excuse for more big government. 

Hmm ... I guess that was still "arm chair quarterbacking".  I just hope it was in perspective. 

Arizona Hat Trick

What is a "hat trick", you might ask? A "hat trick" is a technique used by a magician to distract the audience from what is really going. A "hat trick" is nothing more than a diversion. 

So, what do I mean when I say the Arizona "hat trick"?  I am talking about a deliberate diversion; I am saying that this administration's reaction to the Arizona immigration law is intended to take the focus off of something else they are doing.  I believe this administration is trying to put the focus of the American people on anything other than the way our government passed the healthcare reform law.  

This administration is not stupid. They know very well that the American people were severely angered by the process used to push healthcare reform through Congress.  And, they know that the American people are going to do something about it, once they get the chance. Of course, they also know that the American people have a very short attention span. Put this with the fact that this administration believes that they can manipulate public opinion (given enough time), and you can see why a "hat trick" makes good strategic sense (from their point of view). After all, why wouldn't this administration think this would work?  Particularly when this is precisely how they manipulated the public to get the votes they needed to get elected.  They are thinking: The American people fell for it before - they will fall for it again.  Okay, maybe I am being a bit too cynical.  Nevertheless, this administration knows that if they do not find a way to take the public's collective mind off the way healthcare reform was passed, the Democratic Party is going to potentially lose both the House and the Senate in the November election.  That is a mighty big motivator for a "hat trick"; wouldn't you say?  The American people must not forget the despicable behavior of our government representatives during the healthcare reform process; the American people must not be distracted by the "hat trick".

The fact is, the Arizona immigration law is a law. And, laws are supposed to be enforced. Otherwise, there's no reason to have the law in the first place. If we are going to selectively enforce laws in this country, then we run the risk of having all our laws questioned and selectively enforced. What kind of country will this be, if all the citizens were to just choose the laws that they wanted to obey?  It's called anarchy.  And, it is a sure fire way to tear the country completely apart.  This country has succeeded because of the way laws are made to reflect the values of our society.  If we politicize the enforcement of laws, then we run the risk of encouraging anarchy.  It's bad enough that our elected officials are all above the law.  That is, our elected officials have a different set of laws, than us average working class Americans.  What kind of example does this set for the average working class American?  The Arizona law needs to be enforced; just like every law needs to be enforced: equally and without prejudice.  Isn't that what "government of, by and for the people" really means?

My cynical side also came up with a really good conspiracy theory.  This administration is so aggressive in trying to control and micro-manage everything, I could actually see them rationalizing the elimination of "States Rights"; based on the inability of states to get along on this issue.  I can see this administration trying to eliminate or weaken the states ability to put laws (like this immigration law) in place.  Cynical, huh?  Well, it kind of seems to me that the government wants to be involved in every aspect of everything.  So, maybe this is not so cynical after all.

Arizona, a Sovereign State within the United States of America, made a new immigration law; which is within its rights as a Sovereign State.  I find it dispicable that this administration is trying politicize this law for its own political gain.  Oh, and not matter what this administration does to try to distract from how the healthcare reform was passed into law, I (for one) will never forget.  I voted for the incumbent Democratic congressman.  And, I am going to be walking neighborhoods till November, to make sure he does not get re-elected.

Student Loans

I am happy to see that the government is taking over student loans.

Current day politics has come down to either trusting government more than industry, or, trusting industry more than government. Well, I believe our founders intended for a system of checks and balances. That is, I think there are times when the government should step in and protect it's citizens. And,to be clear, I think this should be when the citizens want and have asked for the government's help. But, for the most part, I am like most Americans: I want the government to stay out of private industry; and, specifically, to stay out of my private life!

Here's the thing. I would not have been able to go to college and earn a degree, had it not been for government managed, low interest student loans. I believe that it is in the best interest of our country, when people, who have the brains to do more, are empowered to get a better education. After all, isn't the American Dream about being able to live up to your full potential? How can the average person do this? Win the lottery? Get lucky and come up with a great idea? I submit that the path to the American Dream is through education. And, I believe that every American should have the opportunity to get a better education.

Now, let me define what I mean by having "the opportunity to get a better education". First, this is a loan. And, it should be treated like a loan; meaning that it should be paid back! Otherwise it becomes a grant - which is a fancy word for entitlement. I am not in favor of entitlements of any kind. Further, I believe that all grant programs need to be terminated; in favor of loan programs.

Oh, and one more thing: I am not in favor of the way this became law. While I am happy to see the government providing low interest student loans to our next generation of leaders and innovators, I am not happy that this bill was passed using legal trickery. At some point the Democratic "ruling party" had better wake up and realize that they work for the American people. The Democratic "ruling party" seems to think the American people are gonna forget what they have done. I will take that bet! Elections are just around the corner. And, I for one will be working very hard to make sure Americans do not forget the Democratic "ruling party's" unforgivable sin. So, I really cannot say congratulations on getting the student loan program put in place; even though I think it is a good idea. The way this legislation was put in place was not acceptable.

A note to Republicans: be careful. This is the kind of issue that reminds us independents that you are polarized towards enabling business - no matter what. Money does not grow on trees. Sometimes people need help dealing with economic disadvantages. The Republican "business at any cost approach", is precisely why you were voted out of power in 2006 and again in 2008. The average working class American is not happy with corporate executives, that earn millions of dollars a year in salary. And, this is what the Democrats play to: that sentiment. Thus, there are gonna be times when the government should provide programs, that will help the average working class person to have the opportunity to get a better education. Better educated Americans will ultimately stimulate our economy, and, help to maintain a middle class. This student loan program is a good program, that should have been passed in the first place. Shame on you for not thinking of the American people; other than when it is convenient for you to do so.

And finally, a note to Democrats: make sure this loan program does not become yet another entitlement program. As an independent, I am okay with a progressive tax system. But, that is as far as it goes.

What did you expect?

"This is what change looks like". What kind of statement is that? The context of this statement could have been a lecture; like that of a parent to a child, when the parent is trying to instruct a child on the proper way to handle a particular situation. Isn't this the kind of thing that one person would say to another, if the person making the statement thought the other person did not understand what was meant by the word "change"? Or, at least, wouldn't this kind of statement lead a rational person to believe that the person making the statement is trying to some how instruct the person (or people) that the statement is being made to?

So, why would someone make this kind of statement; after a health care bill, that the majority of the people in the United States did not want, passed through congress? Well (rolls eyes in a condescending manner), the American people cannot possibly know what is good for themselves. So, we, the Democratic Leadership, are just going to have to make those decision for them (uniformed and illiterate as they are).

If we, the American People, are as stupid as our Democratic Leadership would like to contend, then whose fault is that? In case you have forgotten, all the schools through High School are run according to government mandated instruction programs. So, what, we are all just too dumb or lazy to learn anything in school? If we are as stupid as you think we are, whose fault is that? Yeah, we the American people were dumb enough to fall for the Democratic Road Game. But, that was a momentary lapse in judgment, not a systemic indication of stupidity. Come on! We are not stupid. And, we do not like being treated like we are not smart enough to make important decisions about our lives. But, I digress.

So, what is the real reason behind the "This is what change looks like" comment? Well, the only thing that I can think of is utter disrespect for the American People. It's either lack of respect, or, an agenda that is profoundly contrary to the majority of our cultural values. I do not say this lightly. And, I am very much aware that the Republican Talking Heads have been saying this for a couple of years now. As an independent thinker, and an American that has tried to find the positive in every situation, I have been hoping that the talking heads were wrong. I hereby apologize to all the Republican Talking Heads (even you Rush). I was absolutely and completely caught off guard by the audacity of the "This is what change looks like" comment. The utter arrogance of this statement, in light of the situation, was both appalling and insulting.

To be fair, I think I figured out the motivation behind this statement; after hours of contemplation. I suspect that the speech writers wanted a "Mission Accomplished" moment (recall Bush on the aircraft carrier). Well, guys and gals, you got it. I think this comment went over as well as the Bush "Mission Accomplished" statement went over. I get it. The President promised change. The President said on election night that change had come to America. Now, he is saying that he accomplished the change he promised. To bad the change is not what the American People wanted or needed. To bad the statement came across as arrogant and condescending. But, I guess I should not be surprised. After all, this administration has not thought anything through; they are simply on an idealistic binge. That seems to be the one true trademark of this administration: doesn't think things through. From the Air Force One flyby over the Statue of Liberty, to the passing of legislation (using bribery and coercion) that will almost surely guarantee that Democrats loose lots of seats in the House and Senate.

What did I expect?

I was hoping that the deal making and corruption in Washington would stop. That is the change I was hoping for. That is the change I was counting on. But, that has not been the case. Instead, I see things in Washington are as corrupt as ever. The only change, is the political party doing the dirty deals. The irony is that I am still hearing the Democrats blame Bush; as if it's some kind of excuse for their behavior. Let's be clear about this: the corruption was not acceptable under the Bush administration, and, it is not acceptable now. Using Bush (or any republican - for that matter) as an excuse for spending trillions of tax payer's hard earned dollars is despicable.

Up to the "This is what change looks like" comment, I was not thinking that the admistration has some kind of idealistic libral agenda. I have been hoping that this administration would do what Clinton did, and govern from the middle. This administration, however, seems to think they have some kind of majical influence with the American People. I suspect they are not gonna change - ever. After all, they know what is best for the American People.

We are Watching!

My fellow Americans,

It is time for action. No matter what your involvement prior to this moment, your fellow Americans need you now more than ever.

We need to send a message to our elected representation in Washington D.C. And, since they do not seem to be able to understand us (the American People), we need to keep it very direct and very simple. Please do the following:

1) Forward this message to everyone you can. Now is the time for all Americans to let their voices be heard.

2) Get the email and phone numbers for your:
a) Congressional Representative - http://www.senate.gov/reference/common/faq/How_to_contact_senators.htm
b) Senators - https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml

3) Send each of your elected representatives the following very simple message:

"We, the American People, are Watching ..."


That's it! It's not hard to do. And, it will not take much of your time. Keep it simple. Set the example.

Come on America, make your voices heard!

Founding Fathers

Thank God our Founding Fathers had the vision to construct a government with multiple branches. They were very much afraid of one branch of government gaining too much power. Thus, the "checks and balances" of a government with three branches was born.

This Administration motivated the American People with a message of hope and change. Were these just words on a TelePrompTer? Did you not understand the change the American People wanted? Let me spell it out for you: We the people wanted (and still want) a government with integrity. We did not (and do not) want all the back room deals that are required to get legislation through Congress. We did not (and do not) want government elitists, who think they know better than us; what is good for us. Did you not understand the message from those Patriotic, Independent thinking voters in Massachusetts?

The American people elected you, Mr. Obama, because they thought you were going to work on their behalf. Instead, you are off on some idealistic binge. We, the American People, are not mindless serfs to be ruled by a bunch of elitists. We are a free and independent thinking people, who want our government representatives to remember that they work for us.

Case in Point: What is the deal with this health care reform summit? You are having a summit with the very people that have already proven that they are not listening to the American people? What do you hope to gain from this? It does not make sense. Unless ... you are not listening to the American people either. What else could it be? You are still on an idealistic health care agenda, rather than taking care of fixing the economy and creating jobs. You seem to think that you can put the republicans "on the spot" about this legislation. Listen up - the Republicans are not the problem! Government Elitists are the problem! If you really wanted to do something on health care, then why not just take those issues that would most benefit the largest portion of the American population? Eliminate all the pork-barrel deals - you would not need them if the legislation benefited a larger segment of the population. How about a "keep it simple stupid" approach? Perhaps, you should have brought in some of the average Americans to your summit; some of the folks who are going to get stuck with the bill. At least they would be working for the American people, and, not trying to make deals for lobbyists.

Now that the American People understand what you meant by change, Mr. Obama, we are gonna make some changes ourselves. We call it operation "Throw the Bums out!" It's time to put people in Congress, who understand their responsibilities to the American People.

It's time for checks and balances!

No More Excuses!

News Flash!

Bush is no longer President!

Listen up, you Government Elitists. Do you really think the Independent voters of this country are still buying the "Blame Bush" mantra? If you think this tactic is going to continue to work, you are sadly mistaken. The Independent voters of this country put you, Mr. Obama, into office, because you told us that you were different. You told us that you were going to change the way politics is conducted in Washington. Well, I don't see any change; except for the labels on the Government Elitists wielding the power. Washington is just as corrupt as it was when you were elected; maybe even more so. Legislators are still making deals in order to pass legislation. So, what has changed? Our government representatives are too busy taking care of themselves; they are not acting on behalf of their constituents.

Instead of focusing on approaches that would generate jobs, this administration and the congress have been trying to pass some idealistic health care reform. Have you ever heard the anecdote "Can't see the forest for the trees"? Why aren't you (government elitists) doing things that will generate jobs? Or, why aren't you at least doing things that will not cost jobs? Perhaps, if you had focused on policies that would fix the economy, before you went on this idealist health care binge, more Americans might have jobs. And, for you (government elitists) to try to blame the Bush administration for the economy, when, you have had a year to address the issue, is ... despicable. Yes, despicable. You have been focusing on health care. You took your collective eyes off the ball. You are responsible for the economic mess we are in today. It's that simple.

Read the polls; the majority of Americans are convinced that
health care reform is not going to benefit them. And, they are
right. Every deal in this bill is hurting some American, somewhere. It is unethical, immoral, and, it should be criminal.

You Government Elitists believe that the American
people are not smart enough to know what will benefit them. So,
instead of focusing on jobs, you are blaming the Bush administration,
and working on idealistic health care reform. Well, if you wanted health care reform, why not listen to your constituents? Americans have been telling you what they need. But, instead of listening to the voices of Americans, you (government elitists) are listening to the lobbyists and the special interests. If you had listened to the American people, you would not have been forced to make a bunch of deals to get the legislation approved. And, you might have actually done something that would have benefited the American people.

We the people are not as dumb as you might think. We want Government representatives that will:

• Listen to their constituents
  
• Keep the real world interests of their constituents in mind during their decision processes
• Do their jobs, and, not just vote with their
  political party

We the people are sick of all the Government Elitist excuses, and, politics as usual.

Government Elitists

What is a Government Elitist?  Well, a Government Elitist is a member of our government, that thinks they are better than the people they were elected to represent. 

How do we know they are Elitist?  Let's take a look at some examples.

Does the average American get automatic pay raises?
Well, the members of Congress all get automatic raises.  In fact, they have to vote to stop a raise.  What's up with that?  Can anyone explain to me why that makes sense?  These Elitists have tried to distract the American people, by criticizing Wall Street.   What is ironic, is that these Elitists are the ones who are really taking advantage of the American people.  This needs to stop!  We need ethical government representation.  We need a law that ties compensation for members of Congress to the minimum wage.  They get a raise, when the average American gets a raise. 

Does the average American get a life-long pensions for just a couple of years work?
Well, the members of Congress all have specialized pension plans.  And, they get their pensions no matter what.  This, while they are voting in legislation to dilute and remove pension benefits for the men and women who have defended our country for decades.  Think about it: how much money could we save by not awarding all of these lavish benefits on our congressional representatives.?  Why can't these congressional representatives live with the pension benefits that all Americans are expected to live with?  We need to make sure our congressional representatives live with the laws (and consequences) they make.  I think that if all government workers (including members of congress) had to live with Social Security, then, they would make sure it worked well.  The problem is that Elitists like to make rules for the masses (us average Americans), and, then, they like to do what ever they want to do.  They believe they are ... special.  ;-)

Does the average American have a designer Health Care plan FOR LIFE?
Uh, no.  The average American is lucky if they have a health care plan through their employer.  Given the number of people we already have on the Medicare and Medicaid programs, it seems to me that we should be concentrating on improving the quality and efficiency of these programs.  Well, there is no better way to motivate Members of Congress to fix these programs, than to make them (the members of congress) to use these same programs.  

The bottom line is simple.  These people work for us.  So, how does it make since that they are able to determine their own compensation?  We need a constitutional amendment, that forces any changes to the compensation for elected members of government, to be put to a national referendum.  That is the one way to make sure there are no deals; it's the only way to ensure that we have ETHICAL behavior out of our elected officials.

Every average American has to live with the risk of losing their job.  It's time for these Government Elitists to be held accountable.  They should have to live with the same programs as the people that they are supposed to be representing.  It's time for average Americans to take back their country!

Vote the Government Elitists out of office!

My Congressional Representative

I just got a letter from my Congressman.

Imagine Snoopy dancing in front of his dog house as the Peanuts music is playing ...

I would like to point out (and discuss) a couple of things that were in this letter. Here we go.

"I pressed leadership in my party to slow down the rush to push a bill through Congress prior to the August recess, as I would prefer to get healthcare reform right rather than just get it done. "

Hmmm. Okay.

"I know that, at the end of the day, I work for you, and every two years you decide whether you would like to renew my employment contract. I do my best to work diligently and honestly to represent all 650,000 of my constituents, my employers, to the utmost best of my ability."

Okay, hold it right there. Mr. Congressman, you claim that you are representing all your constituents. Do you understand what this means? Let me help you. This does not mean that you make deals in order to get legislation done. It is not in the best interest of your constituents to spend tax money bribing other legislators to get a particular piece of legislation done. Consider this: if one representative gets some kind of incentive (BRIBE!) to vote a particular way, then all of the others are going to want some kind of incentive to vote a particular way. How is this in the best interest of your constituents? The best thing for your constituents is to govern in a way that will benefit them without having to spend hard earned tax money on earmarks (bribes)!

Let's be clear: it is not in the best interest of any constituent to have legislation passed by bribing some of the legislators.

Tell me something: why is it that we have to bribe legislators to vote for a particular piece of legislation? Isn't this the thing that most Americans wanted changed about Washington? Isn't this the real problem with government? Isn't this why most Americans think the government is corrupt? Well, why wouldn't they? Is there anyway to spin the deal making as something other than broken (if not corrupt) government? Doesn't the answer seem obvious? The change we really needed was not to change the names of the people in Washington that were making all of these deals. The change the American people really wanted was to stop making these kinds of deals.

And, to my Congressman, who I voted for in the last election: You are not representing me in the manner that I expected. I expected you to vote against any legislation, where some other legislator has made some kind of deal, that will end up with my taxes being higher because you voted with your party. I expect my representative to have the integrity to speak out against this form of government.

News Flash!

If you wanted to get healthcare reform right, you failed!

And, I am not even going to go into the amount of money "we the people" are paying for you to just vote with your party. If you truly are representing your constituents, you will not go along with the party and all the deals; you will do the right thing.

This is not change I can believe in ...

Heathcare Solutions

Tell me again why we are trying to reform health care?

Well, I do not want to sound like the talking heads (sorry guys). So, I am going to try something different. I am going to suggest what we should be doing to fix the health care system.

First, we need to make a list of the real needs for average Americans. I have already covered these in my other blogs, so, I will not repeat them here. Suffice to say, we can make a very simple checklist.

Next, we need to solve the cost issue. The secret here, is not really much of a secret. If the government really wants to reduce the cost of health care, they should be working to promote more competition in the market. I know they know how to do this; they've done it before. Remember the Information Technology bubble? This is where the government intervened in the free market by granting millions (yes millions) of visas for Information Technology workers. This resulted in the collapse of the Information Technology job market. But, it worked - it reduced the cost for Information Technology services. So, why not do something similar for the health care industry? Well, not that I would wish the kind of collapse that the Information Technology job market encountered. But, it would be nice to have more competition.

I believe that instead of spending money giving health care away, the government should find a way to increase the number of health care workers and the number of health care facilities. Why not make low interest government loans available for the following:
- Building new hospitals and other medical facilities
- Educational Loans for Health Care workers
- Research grants for medical research

Imagine what the health care market would look like if all this capital were put into the market? That said, these investments alone will not make the difference. But, if legislation were put in place to protect those individuals who are supposed to be serviced by the insurance companies (standard consumer protections), we might actually be able to do something good for the American People.

Go Figure ...

Heathcare Realities

Where to begin ...

Given where we are with the government health care takeover, I felt like I needed to share a real world experience; to provoke some thought.

Dedicated Service
An older man started to feel different early in 2009. So, he went to the doctor to find out what was going on. His doctor started to run tests. After a number of months, the man had a massive heart attack and died. He was on Medicare. And, after his death, his family started to investigate the medical treatment he was receiving; trying to understand how a seemingly healthy individual, who was going to the doctor regularly, could just up and die. This can be summed up by a text message from the man to his son, which reads "Have not heard anything on my tests. I am taking no news as good news." Two weeks later, he collapsed in his kitchen.

Here's the thing: this gentleman was a model citizen. He was active for more than 50 years in a number of service organizations. I dare say that this individual did more things for more people than the average Congressman or Senator; and, he did it for far less compensation. After all of this, his reward was the simple epitaph: "A Life of Dedicated Service". Actually, this is not completely true. He served as an International Director for the Lions. He was a very well respected Mason. This individual was extremely well known. And, he was very well liked. He was very much loved by his wife, children and grand children. But, he still had things that he wanted to do. He missed his grandson's wedding. He missed a long anticipated family trip to Hawaii. He did not have to die. He should not have died.

Imagine what would have happened if this gentleman's medical treatment had been more prompt. But, that is what you get with Medicare: you have to wait your turn. Essentially, there are so many people in the system, the care has to be rationed. And, sometimes people will die. These appear to be acceptable losses. Except, I don't think this gentleman's family considers this an acceptable loss. Would you? I thought the purpose of universal health care was to actually provide health care. What good is poor quality health care? Imagine what will happen when everyone is on this kind of system? Don't think that will happen? Read on ...

No Vacancy
A family is in Hawaii on vacation. No, they were not invited to have dinner with either Rush or Obama. I digress. One of the family members started to cough the day after arriving. After three days, the cough became more serious. So, being concerned about pneumonia, the family tired to make an appointment with a doctor. No such luck. All the doctors were "full" (not taking new patients).

Stop and think about this. In this case, the doctors have just decided that they are not going to treat anyone, that was not already a patient. Thus, forcing everyone else to go to the single emergency room, at the single hospital within miles. Can you imagine? Only a short time after losing his father, a man is now trying to get his wife's obvious respiratory illness treated. And, this man cannot find a doctor to treat his wife!

What now! In an already crowded health care system, doctors are choosing to limit the patients they will treat. Its a simple matter of supply and demand. If doctors are leaving the system, then there will be less doctors to treat more patients. And, as we have seen from the first real world experience, this kind of thing will have unhappy results.

Reality Check
While waiting in the emergency room, a man is lamenting the lack of medical treatment options for his wife. After pointing out the supply and demand issue regarding doctors, the man is accosted by a liberal family member; the liberal family member exclaiming "the system was broken, and we had to do something". Sound familiar?