Thursday, February 28, 2013

You've Got to Stand for Something...

You've Got to Stand for Something...

...or you'll fall for anything. So go the lyrics to a legendary country song by Aaron Tippin. It's true, and America did.

Almost 4 months ago, we elected a lying socialist, who many believe “sacrificed” the lives of 4 Americans in favor of the “greater good,” which he defined as his re-election. Those who believe this can put forth a credible, convincing argument for it – yet he was re-elected.

Many of his promises were promises he had made before and had not kept – yet he was re-elected.

His personal attacks and character assassination on a Mormon opponent were obviously and demonstrably the opposite of reality – yet he was re-elected.

His policies were easily identifiable as socialist – yet he was re-elected.

We created this mess and it's up to us to make it right. You have to decide what it is you stand for. Once you do that, you have to decide who best represents your view of the world. Sounds easy, but we've screwed it up over and over again. That's how we got here. That's why we find ourselves disgusted with government, regardless of who is in the White House or running the congress.

People voted based on single-issues. That's wrong, not because I think it is, but because it invariably gets you the wrong result.

People voted against people that they didn't bother to get to know. Again, wrong because it invariably gets you the wrong result.

People voted because they have always voted for a particular party. Wrong, because those parties change over time and if you haven't followed those changes closely, it invariably eventually gets you the wrong result.

And by the wrong result, I don't mean what I think is the wrong result. I mean a result inconsistent with your intent.

You can't “stand for” a single issue and succeed because you have to elect a person, and that person has views on other issues. Eventually, your issue is resolved. Then what? Some value guided you to the issue. You have to stand for the set of principles that support the issue. It's as true for the issues of gay and reproductive rights as it is for gun rights and governmental scope.

The days of this crap of expecting to be respected for claiming to be “independent” are over. It's another way of copping out. Choose or it will be chosen for you. And so far those choices have not gone well.

You've Got to Stand for Something,or you'll fall for anything. It's true; you did.

It's 3½ years until the next presidential primary season and I, personally, have had it with both parties, so-called independents, and single-issue advocates. At least the Libertarians are honest, so the only person I actually believe in Washington currently, is Rand Paul (although to be fair, I'm still on the fence about Marco Rubio). Listen to these people; they say a lot. Watch what they do; they are doing a lot. Compare it to what they say. It's easy. It's simple, and there is no longer an excuse not to.

Wednesday, November 14, 2012

Be Careful What You Ask for, Mr President

What if the next speech President Obama gives on the economy had the following elements:
  • I got elected on a platform of higher taxes, so that's what we're going to do – NOW!”
  • The Republican Congress has agreed to do it my way, because, after all, I won the election and I'm never going to let anyone forget it.”
  • This is the effect that this policy will have on each income class of Americans and on the economy as a whole” and then he outlines things like unemployment rate, U6, inflation, income delta by income level, and GDP changes as well as the timetables associated with them.
  • This speech marks the end of George W. Bush's responsibility. The Congress has given me everything I need to make this, once and for all and for better or worse, the Obama Economy.” (repeat at least 4 times).

What if the President gives this speech in a prime time network TV slot and it is carried over all the cable news channels, then, and only then the president gets his way.

I don't believe this would be beneficial to the American economy or American society. But what if the situation is analogous to the real estate crash. The markets had to clear and bankruptcies had to run their course before any signs of a recovery emerged. Every measure taken by the government just prolonged the misery. What if it is necessary to hit rock bottom before any recovery is possible? They were both made necessary as a normal course of government meddling resulting from societal greed and congressional stupidity. Same cause; no difference. See what I mean?

I know a great many people who voted for Obama. Fine. Well, not really THAT fine, but it is what it is. He was elected on a platform of “fairness.” As he explained it, everyone should feel the pain, and I expect that everyone will.

What if this scenario needs to be played out in order for the real recovery to begin? Should we just get it over with? Am I going to be happy about it? No. Is it time to stop arguing with friends, neighbors, and acquaintances about what is best. NO, but the American people have decided, so let's get on with it, but NOT UNTIL PRESIDENT OBAMA GIVES THAT SPEECH.

I don't believe he will; I don't believe he can; I think that no matter what Republicans cave in to, he will demand more. Like all the other causes that the Democrat party claims for it's own, it is not in its political best interest to actually solve it – just to prolong it and blame others for it. And in 2014, the TEA party will continue its inroads into power as it began doing in 2010. And in 2016, Rahm Emanuel will run on exactly the same platform with exactly the same fingers pointing at exactly the same people for exactly the same reasons.

Wednesday, November 7, 2012

Merry Christmas, President Obama

Dear President Obama,

Well, November 6th has come and gone, and you won. Consider that your Christmas present for this year. You won fair and square; you didn't even need the New Black Panthers or those murals at the polling places in Philadelphia, although they were a nice touch. You won, in part because the Republican Party has forgotten how to run a presidential campaign, in part because you made the election about non-issues, and in part because you ran as Santa Clause. The single most meaningful piece of information to come out of your campaign in 2012 was the assertion that “this ain't tiddly-winks” - a lesson the Republican Party just never seems to learn.

So in the end it wasn't that difficult, especially since they didn't actually make you run on YOUR record and instead let you run against a record you made up for Mitt Romney. OK. You still ran a damned effective campaign. In 2008, Bernie Goldberg wrote a book - “Crazies to the Left of me, Wimps to the Right...” Yup! That about covers it.

They let you make the election about non-issues, like contraception, abortion, and gay marriage. Why non-issues? Because they are either settled law (abortion), well on their way to becoming instantiated into society (gay marriage) or, frankly, just penny-ante crap (free contraception).

Since you ran as Santa Clause, I know you need to get those elves busy making those Obama-phones for the upcoming holiday. So I won't keep you much longer. Long-story-short – it's good that you got your Christmas present early. You'll need time to get to work on those Obama-phones so it's good you get to enjoy your present. I'm a little worried that you may have a conflict with that fiscal cliff thing and a much needed few rounds of golf after a tough campaign. Oh, well, I'm sure you'll set priorities and work it out appropriately.

Congratulations and know that no one will be more surprised or happier than me to see you work out that fiscal cliff thing for real this time (not just pretend) – if you can find the time, of course.

One of the 48.8% who didn't vote for you.

Monday, November 23, 2009

The 28th Amendment

I get a lot of useful, funny, not-so-useful, and not-so-funny emails. I also get some things that are, in their own way, profound and deserve attention. One of those I feel deserving of attention recently came across my screen. It proposed a 28th amendment to the United States Constitution. The proposed amendment read as follows:

Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators or Representatives, and Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States.

In principal, I looked at this and thought “Yup! This needs to be done.” As a practical matter, I thought “I wonder if this will really serve its intended purpose.” I believe it was conceived with regard to the idiotic “Health Care Reform” proposals now floating among the idiots in Washington DC.

Its intention appears to be to get rid of the special health care plan for congress, their ability to vote unconscionable pay raises for themselves, their 100% pay pension for life regardless of time served, and their apparent disregard of tax laws that they ignore or short-circuit, confident that their colleagues will not prosecute – or even investigate – them. People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones, after all.

I would be interested in the opinions of others on this. Specifically:

-Should the wording be otherwise worded to better eliminate the new class of royalty?

-How do YOU feel about such an effort?

-What are the non-violent alternatives in dealing with an American aristocracy that was never supposed to be able to exist?

Friday, December 19, 2008

It’s the Oil Stupid

So here we are in yet another crisis – this one economic. As usual, our government is focusing on what they think we think is the obvious problem in an effort to get re-elected in 2010 – not to fix the actual problem long-term, which is what we pay these dolts for. McCain lost the election because he injected unsuccessful drama into the situation, halting his campaign, flying back to Washington, and voting for the pork that he promised to make people famous for. On top of that, the bill ultimately failed.

Now we have to fix the car companies. While it is true that government regulation had a role in their failure, are we really stupid enough to believe that these same idiots can undo the damage they have done. Additionally, the car companies and their UAW counterparts are not blameless. They have acted as an arrogant monopoly in America since the 1950s, were completely caught by surprise by competition, and stubbornly failed to adjust. They might as well be members of Congress themselves. Congress should have an independent auditor evaluate the damage they have done to the car companies, pay it, and move on. The rest is the car companies’ problem – not mine.

Add to that the recent revelation that we have actually been in recession for about a year now, and we should all see that these recent crises are not causes, but symptoms. Of what? To paraphrase Bill Clinton – IT’S THE OIL, STUPID! The big oil price run-up started in early 2008 and the beginning of the recession followed shortly thereafter. Duh! It’s happened before, it’s happening now, and thanks to our short-sighted Congress, it will happen again.

Fixing the oil problem is the key to economic stability – stability that will allow us to address other problems, such as national security, social security, health care, and crime. Obama has this one right. We need to invest and successfully develop alternative energy sources now, while the price of oil is low, without waiting for economic recovery, and the resulting re-spiking of oil prices. He campaigned on it; he should make sure it happens. All else depends on it. I repeat:


It always has been, and it always will be until we change it.

Friday, March 14, 2008

Thank You Mike Huckabee

Seemingly lost in the furor over Barack Obama’s latest political problem – his long and close association with his hate-baiting minister – is recognition for the man who brought us this controversy. That man would be Mike Huckabee. It was Mike Huckabee who allowed his faith to become a campaign issue.

It was Mike Huckabee who appeared for a time to benefit from his faith. It was the rest of the politicians running for President of the United States who followed (as opposed to leading) in seeking to take advantage of their faith or at least to use their faith to not lose votes to someone else who might become “the next Mike Huckabee.”

It was Barack Obama, however, who didn’t see the day coming when Saturday Night Live (God help us) would force the press to actually look at him. The free ride always ends eventually and politicians are notoriously short-sighted in these and other matters, which explains a lot about the way they run our government. Yep, it’s still OUR government.

The only thing that is somewhat surprising is that the Clintons couldn’t find a blacker, more controversial minister to endorse them. Bill was the first “black” president after all.

Make no mistake. All of the candidates have this moment on the horizon. McCain’s will come when the violence in Iraq flares up again, as it inevitably must as a determined enemy makes its next move to counter the successful surge architected by General David Petraeus.

Since McCain threw Rumsfeld under the bus, he will look like an idiot when someone has an excuse to say that his idea was no better than Rumsfelds. He, like other politicians, see the present almost exclusively. The Rumsfeld strategy worked spectacularly. A determined enemy reacted – as we should have expected. A new set of eyes were necessary. The course of action was inevitable and based on the enemy’s moves. No one could have seen those enemy moves in advance. As then, there will be a new set of moves, which no one can currently see. A new set of eyes may well be needed again.

What about Hillary’s moments to come? Please! Her moments are never-ending and can never be justified except by a biased press that turns its head the other way for 20 years.

So thank you Mike Huckabee, for this moment of truth, unintended though it may have been.

Sunday, September 23, 2007

Stupidity in “top” American Universities

I thought you had to be smart to get into MIT or Columbia University. Apparently not.

How stupid do you have to be to falsely represent yourself as someone carrying a bomb into the airport where two of the four 9/11 attack planes launched from? A lot of people risk life and limb in non-productive endeavors as the MIT sophomore did, but they don’t intentionally do things that are likely to shut down major transportation hubs. That takes a special kind of self-absorbed, ignorance-cultivated, stupidity - the kind that can only be cultivated in a “top” American university.

How stupid do you have to be to give the leader of the world’s leading terrorist state a global platform to propagandize against America? Once again, it is the kind of self-absorbed, over-indulgent, head-in-the-sand type of stupidity that can only be cultivated at a “top” American university.

How stupid do you have to be to allow the leader of the worlds leading terrorist state to maneuver you into a no-win situation?

There is nothing new to learn about this man. We know it all. He has told us what he stands for. Even if, as the university claims, he will be “challenged” by the students, what will it accomplish? Well, again, he holds all the cards. His mind will never be changed. He can filibuster so that only a limited number of questions can be asked, effectively eliminating the so-called challenge. If the students react to him as they did to the minutemen (which we all know is extremely unlikely), he is given propaganda to take back to his world showing the evidence that Americans are “rude and unholy.” It’s a no win situation, you idiots. Checkmate – he wins no matter what.

Once again, I ask “How stupid do you have to be to let this happen? How hungry for your 15 minutes of fame do you have to be to be eager to play a part in this fiasco? Apparently, you have to be stupid enough to believe the politically correct crap that is fed to students in our “top” universities in 2007, completely ignoring the lessons they should have learned on 9/11. Personally, I think it’s time for a major revision of the syllabus.

New York City officials, by contrast, saw right through the ruse to visit ground zero to lay a wreath in honor of the fallen – his fallen, not ours. What’s the moral of the story?

There are two really:

First, it makes you question the value of a college education, if these are the results.

Second, if you want a real education in New York City, join the NYPD or the FDNY, and stay as far as you can from Columbia University lest it infect you.