Congresswoman DeGette,
I recently read a press release from your office touting the Passing of the Mathew Shepard Hate Crime Act. I would like to take a moment to express my absolute puzzlement as to how you, or any other member of congress can so boldly and proudly claim victory in the passage of a bill that you chose to sneak in between pages of another, completely un-related bill.
To make matters worse, congresswoman, you chose to hide this abomination inside a military appropriations bill! This makes the disdain you feel towards our men and women in uniform painfully obvious. The willingness you have shown to use our military personnel as political human shields underscores your level of corruption and incompetence in the office you so undeservedly hold. I can tolerate many things in quiet frustration, congresswoman, but the manipulation of our military to move your political agenda forward is more than I can bear. I promise to actively work against your re-election during your next campaign, and will tout this bill as evidence of the type of deceit that you are capable of.
Ryan Tuleja
Arvada, CO
This page will be a running record of what goes on in my head. Most of it will be gibberish with no value whatsoever, and the rest will be garbage with no value whatsoever.
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Thursday, October 15, 2009
hate crime legislation hidden in the military budget
Looking through the news, I have been seeing a trend in Washington that I find both appalling, and terrifying. The dishonesty and inconsideration for the will of the American people are becoming increasingly evident by the day.
In a recent move, congressional Democrats have pulled an incredibly disgraceful move, by attaching hate crime legislation to the 2010 military appropriations bill. What does that mean, you ask? Well, by putting this legislation INSIDE the militaries' budget (see division E, aka the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act), they have made it impossible for any representative to vote against the bill without being accused of standing against the better interests of Americas finest. This is political sleaze at it's most ugly and depraved, and I simply cannot see how we the people can stand to have these kinds of tactics used by either side ever again! The very concept of rider bills is so despicable that several states (including my own) have laws against such dishonest and underhanded tactics.
Things have to change. We, the people of the United States of America, can not sit idly by and watch as these bureaucrats, liars and thieves use our military men and woman as political human shields to achieve their ideological goals. Please join us here and help to make the changes that we can actually believe in.
In a recent move, congressional Democrats have pulled an incredibly disgraceful move, by attaching hate crime legislation to the 2010 military appropriations bill. What does that mean, you ask? Well, by putting this legislation INSIDE the militaries' budget (see division E, aka the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act), they have made it impossible for any representative to vote against the bill without being accused of standing against the better interests of Americas finest. This is political sleaze at it's most ugly and depraved, and I simply cannot see how we the people can stand to have these kinds of tactics used by either side ever again! The very concept of rider bills is so despicable that several states (including my own) have laws against such dishonest and underhanded tactics.
Things have to change. We, the people of the United States of America, can not sit idly by and watch as these bureaucrats, liars and thieves use our military men and woman as political human shields to achieve their ideological goals. Please join us here and help to make the changes that we can actually believe in.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
The DOW climbs to 10,000
Today the DOW climbed over 10,000 for the first time in over a year, and Americans are understandably pretty excited about it. Reporters are interviewing experts who proclaim that the recession is over, and that we can credit it all to the stimulus bill that President Barak Obama so wisely signed into law at the beginning of his term in office, nine months ago.
On the surface, this seems like great news, and we should all be out in the streets celebrating such wonderful news. Ticker tape parades should be littering the streets and we should all find ourselves on shopping sprees that would make Paris Hilton look like a pauper...But we aren't.
We aren't, because something doesn't add up, and we the American people know it. We remember that the government printed money to the tune of a trillion dollars, a number so large that we choose to spell it, rather than use digits. A trillion dollars that largely went to the very same companies who's stock prices have been rising since. Companies that needed the money due to their own incompetence. Companies that, according to the national unemployment rate 9.8% still aren't hiring. Companies that, according to our government, saw lower that expected sales this quarter for something like the millionth quarter straight.
So how do companies that are not selling their products and show no sign of growth have stock prices climbing? You guessed it! With the stimulus money!! So before you run out and start buying stock again, think it through, because as in almost everything else these days, things arent quite what they appear.
On the surface, this seems like great news, and we should all be out in the streets celebrating such wonderful news. Ticker tape parades should be littering the streets and we should all find ourselves on shopping sprees that would make Paris Hilton look like a pauper...But we aren't.
We aren't, because something doesn't add up, and we the American people know it. We remember that the government printed money to the tune of a trillion dollars, a number so large that we choose to spell it, rather than use digits. A trillion dollars that largely went to the very same companies who's stock prices have been rising since. Companies that needed the money due to their own incompetence. Companies that, according to the national unemployment rate 9.8% still aren't hiring. Companies that, according to our government, saw lower that expected sales this quarter for something like the millionth quarter straight.
So how do companies that are not selling their products and show no sign of growth have stock prices climbing? You guessed it! With the stimulus money!! So before you run out and start buying stock again, think it through, because as in almost everything else these days, things arent quite what they appear.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
I am the reason you are dying
Dear Media,
You dont know me very well, but I have seen you around over the years, and have become pretty aware of who you are and what you are capable of. I remember, somewhat vaguely, how you were once very powerful and influencial in all the happenings of my childhood era, but that was before.
I remember when people would repeat things that were spoken by your anchor men about the important topics of the day. I remember when your writers still had the integrity to report news as if it was...well...news. But again, that was before.
"Before what?" you may ask. Before me.Before you became so impressed with your own influence that you forgot that your job was to report the news, rather that dictate what the news should be.
I would like to take a moment to tell you a little about myself, and the reason you should care who I am.
I am the reason you are dying. I refuse to blindly accept one sided stories that only recognise one side of the political spectrum.
I am the reason you are dying. I believe that when thousands of people march on the capital of Denver, or hundreds of thousands march on Washington DC, it is a story worth covering.
I am the reason you are dying. I believe that media can and should remain neutral, but if you are going to take sides it should be on the side of the American people, rather than the side of those who come here illegaly and steal jobs and services that could otherwise go to my..no, YOUR countrymen.
I am the reason you are dying. I believe that you have become a bully and your size and age likens you to the schoolyard kid that got held back a couple times and wants to take out his anger on the nearest member of the chess club.
I am the reason you are dying. I am the generation you once deemed "X" and I dont need you.
You dont know me very well, but I have seen you around over the years, and have become pretty aware of who you are and what you are capable of. I remember, somewhat vaguely, how you were once very powerful and influencial in all the happenings of my childhood era, but that was before.
I remember when people would repeat things that were spoken by your anchor men about the important topics of the day. I remember when your writers still had the integrity to report news as if it was...well...news. But again, that was before.
"Before what?" you may ask. Before me.Before you became so impressed with your own influence that you forgot that your job was to report the news, rather that dictate what the news should be.
I would like to take a moment to tell you a little about myself, and the reason you should care who I am.
I am the reason you are dying. I refuse to blindly accept one sided stories that only recognise one side of the political spectrum.
I am the reason you are dying. I believe that when thousands of people march on the capital of Denver, or hundreds of thousands march on Washington DC, it is a story worth covering.
I am the reason you are dying. I believe that media can and should remain neutral, but if you are going to take sides it should be on the side of the American people, rather than the side of those who come here illegaly and steal jobs and services that could otherwise go to my..no, YOUR countrymen.
I am the reason you are dying. I believe that you have become a bully and your size and age likens you to the schoolyard kid that got held back a couple times and wants to take out his anger on the nearest member of the chess club.
I am the reason you are dying. I am the generation you once deemed "X" and I dont need you.
Friday, September 25, 2009
As of the last several months, I have been on a reading tear that I think may be unmatched in my life previously. In an effort to make up for my educational shortcomings, I have been making an effort to read as many of the greatest books in history as I can get my hands on. Now the books I have chosen have been referred to me through various sources including word of mouth, press articles and by simply holding the status of "classic".
It is a very interesting thing to note how ones thought processes begin to change and the paradigms shift as the mind expands to accomidate new ideas. It is also quite interesting to note how some of the ideas that once changed the world due to their insight or originality, are now common place thoughts and it is pretty hard to see them as anything other than basics.
It is a very interesting thing to note how ones thought processes begin to change and the paradigms shift as the mind expands to accomidate new ideas. It is also quite interesting to note how some of the ideas that once changed the world due to their insight or originality, are now common place thoughts and it is pretty hard to see them as anything other than basics.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Why didnt I preach for a third party when Bush was president?
Lately, I have been very vocal about the political climate in this country. During a recent conversation, I was asked why I never touted a third party back when Bush was President. As a reply, I would like to re-post a blog I wrote in April of 2007.
Third party
Flip to just about any of the major news networks and chances are, on any given day, you will see a member of either major political party being exposed for some disgraceful activity. From the virtual vacuum of new ideas and strong leadership in the Democratic party, to the unbelievable levels of arrogance and corruption of the Republicans, we can clearly see a problem with the current two-party system.
Talk to just about anyone on the street, at school, or at work, and chances are, you will find them to be of relatively moderate opinions on many of the major political issues of the day. Why then, do we see only staunch ideologues take positions of authority in either party? For instance, John Kerry is often considered to be the second-most liberal Senator (second only to his Massachusetts colleague Robert Kennedy) in the country, yet he is considered to be one of the dominant members of his party.
Another very big, and little discussed issue is cronyism, the appointing of friends, family and big donators to key positions. An example of this would be the recent debacle around the presidential appointment of Robert Brown to the head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA. Mr. Brown, or “Brownie,” as president Bush so fondly referred to him, has no real credentials to land him in this prestigious position. As a matter of fact, his only “real” job was as president of a horse association, a position from which he was fired. Prior to this, Mr. brown was a non-practicing lawyer whose only qualifications for the FEMA position were connections. It can be reasonably assumed that people died during the complete mishandling of the hurricane Katrina emergency due to this man’s incompetence and the presidents embarrassing decision to hire him.
Many people will say the existence and general failure of the Green and Libertarian parties are proof that alternatives do exist, and they are simply not of any real value. The major flaw of this idea is simple. Both of these parties are even more extreme Left and Right, respectively, of their mainstream counterparts. The Green parties affiliation with radical environmentalism and the Libertarians isolationist concepts tend to be too much for the average citizen. How, then, can we actually consider these two groups to be realistic alternatives?
Perhaps changing the major parties from the inside could be an option, but at what point do we decide to just tear up the page and head back to the drawing board? As the young up and coming members of either party begin making a name for themselves and rising to the upper echelons of their caucuses, party rhetoric and propaganda become the only tools available for further advancement. To speak of change or to go against the senior members by trying to “fight the tide” would only be political suicide. And those members with enough seniority and clout to feel confident in their ability to speak their minds have already become vested in the current stance of their political allies.
Many subjects such as: marijuana legalization, gay marriage, oil drilling in sensitive areas, affirmative action, and taxation are issues where a seemingly ever-increasing portion of our country are crossing party lines in both directions. As our leadership continues to lean farther and farther apart, the chasm of moderation between them grows exponentially larger. Where, then, is the representation for the average citizen? Are we to hope and pray that these men and women with such fringe positions and ideas are going to set aside their personal beliefs and work to achieve some compromise? Or do we simply accept that the career politicians who occupy our representative seats have become so far removed from the common citizen that we can no longer trust them to use common sense? In order for our government to be a body by the people and for the people, it needs, once again, to be of the people.
There is a saying, which states; if the people will lead, the leaders will follow. The time for the people to lead is now. By forming a third party and taking the power out of the hands of those who have abused it for so long, we will once again hold the reigns and control the direction in which our country moves. A party, which, instead of taking the most extreme stance on every position, tries to find ways to compromise and actually achieve progress. A party that recognizes cooperation as a key to social and fiscal progress. And most importantly, a party which can actually claim to be made up of the working class which the other guys so laughably claim to represent.
Third party
Flip to just about any of the major news networks and chances are, on any given day, you will see a member of either major political party being exposed for some disgraceful activity. From the virtual vacuum of new ideas and strong leadership in the Democratic party, to the unbelievable levels of arrogance and corruption of the Republicans, we can clearly see a problem with the current two-party system.
Talk to just about anyone on the street, at school, or at work, and chances are, you will find them to be of relatively moderate opinions on many of the major political issues of the day. Why then, do we see only staunch ideologues take positions of authority in either party? For instance, John Kerry is often considered to be the second-most liberal Senator (second only to his Massachusetts colleague Robert Kennedy) in the country, yet he is considered to be one of the dominant members of his party.
Another very big, and little discussed issue is cronyism, the appointing of friends, family and big donators to key positions. An example of this would be the recent debacle around the presidential appointment of Robert Brown to the head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA. Mr. Brown, or “Brownie,” as president Bush so fondly referred to him, has no real credentials to land him in this prestigious position. As a matter of fact, his only “real” job was as president of a horse association, a position from which he was fired. Prior to this, Mr. brown was a non-practicing lawyer whose only qualifications for the FEMA position were connections. It can be reasonably assumed that people died during the complete mishandling of the hurricane Katrina emergency due to this man’s incompetence and the presidents embarrassing decision to hire him.
Many people will say the existence and general failure of the Green and Libertarian parties are proof that alternatives do exist, and they are simply not of any real value. The major flaw of this idea is simple. Both of these parties are even more extreme Left and Right, respectively, of their mainstream counterparts. The Green parties affiliation with radical environmentalism and the Libertarians isolationist concepts tend to be too much for the average citizen. How, then, can we actually consider these two groups to be realistic alternatives?
Perhaps changing the major parties from the inside could be an option, but at what point do we decide to just tear up the page and head back to the drawing board? As the young up and coming members of either party begin making a name for themselves and rising to the upper echelons of their caucuses, party rhetoric and propaganda become the only tools available for further advancement. To speak of change or to go against the senior members by trying to “fight the tide” would only be political suicide. And those members with enough seniority and clout to feel confident in their ability to speak their minds have already become vested in the current stance of their political allies.
Many subjects such as: marijuana legalization, gay marriage, oil drilling in sensitive areas, affirmative action, and taxation are issues where a seemingly ever-increasing portion of our country are crossing party lines in both directions. As our leadership continues to lean farther and farther apart, the chasm of moderation between them grows exponentially larger. Where, then, is the representation for the average citizen? Are we to hope and pray that these men and women with such fringe positions and ideas are going to set aside their personal beliefs and work to achieve some compromise? Or do we simply accept that the career politicians who occupy our representative seats have become so far removed from the common citizen that we can no longer trust them to use common sense? In order for our government to be a body by the people and for the people, it needs, once again, to be of the people.
There is a saying, which states; if the people will lead, the leaders will follow. The time for the people to lead is now. By forming a third party and taking the power out of the hands of those who have abused it for so long, we will once again hold the reigns and control the direction in which our country moves. A party, which, instead of taking the most extreme stance on every position, tries to find ways to compromise and actually achieve progress. A party that recognizes cooperation as a key to social and fiscal progress. And most importantly, a party which can actually claim to be made up of the working class which the other guys so laughably claim to represent.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
some conservative approaches to health care
After having many conversations about health care in the recent past, I seem to continually run into the same, baseless argument over and over again in defence of the socialised systems being proposed today. Generally the argument sounds like this, "I know the current proposals have some flaws, but at least the Democrats are trying. What have the Republicans done other than 'just say no'?"
Now the first issue I take with this question in simple. While buying a new car is indeed one way to fix a flat tire, it is not really the most economical or intelligent way of operating, and that is what the current plans (including what I have seen of the Baucus bill) are proposing. The fact of the matter is that we as Americans enjoy the worlds longest survival rates for most of the common types of cancer among many other terminal illnesses, and the ideas being debated today would put that at risk so that less than 10% of our population can have an option other than the emergency room!
Next off, lets talk about why we don't hear any ideas coming from the conservative camp. We currently have large Democrat majorities in both the house and senate. Period. The majority position has the ability to control the dialogue in congress, in terms of which bills get brought forward for discussion and, ultimately, the vote.
Lastly, I would like to touch on a couple of the ideas I have heard, so that any of you who are truly interested in free market solution can see that some interesting possibilities exist.
1-REMOVE LEGISLATION THAT PROHIBITS INTER-STATE COMPETITION.
The first idea that out there is also my favorite. During a recent speech before a joint session of congress, President Obama spoke of how wrong it was for one or two insurance companies to be able to monopolize an entire state. This practice stifles competition, and allows the companies to raise rates with absolute certainty that no other company will come in and take away their business. Mr Obama was right. The issue here, is what our Dear Leader did not say. He did not say that it is Government regulation that outlaws competition between insurance companies from different states. Let me make that more clear. THE GOVERNMENT OUTLAWS COMPETITION IN THE HEALTH INSURANCE INDUSTRY. Removal of this legislation would be relatively inexpensive, require no intrusion on the lives of the citizens, and foster the spirit of competition that has the folks in the auto insurance industry practically fighting each other for your business.
2-TORT REFORM
In every industry, liability insurance is a big expense that is considered part of the cost of doing business. This expense is added into things like rent, utilities and salaries to make up what is known as overhead. This overhead is then divided up by the hours of anticipated work for a given period of time, and the result is an amount, sometimes called a margin, that makes up a portion of the bill which is presented to the customer.
Do to the general litigiousness of our society, these insurance costs are disproportionate in the medical Field. Allowing the government to institute some protections for the medical industry against frivolous lawsuits would help to lower insurance premiums, and therefore, the bills that eventually end up in the hands of the consumer.
3-GIVE INDIVIDUALS THE SAME TAX BENEFITS FOR PURCHASING INSURANCE AS BUSINESSES GET
To date, I have still not heard a single reasonable answer to my question of why we as individuals cannot purchase our own insurance, and utilize the same tax write-offs as businesses do. While this option would not apply to everyone, it would ABSOLUTELY benefit the young and healthy who are generally in need of little more than catastrophic coverage. By covering just one individual or even a family, the insurance company has the ability to gauge the risk of that customer and adjust it's prices accordingly, without needing to consider the overweight or sickly that would otherwise be part of any larger group plan.
Now the first issue I take with this question in simple. While buying a new car is indeed one way to fix a flat tire, it is not really the most economical or intelligent way of operating, and that is what the current plans (including what I have seen of the Baucus bill) are proposing. The fact of the matter is that we as Americans enjoy the worlds longest survival rates for most of the common types of cancer among many other terminal illnesses, and the ideas being debated today would put that at risk so that less than 10% of our population can have an option other than the emergency room!
Next off, lets talk about why we don't hear any ideas coming from the conservative camp. We currently have large Democrat majorities in both the house and senate. Period. The majority position has the ability to control the dialogue in congress, in terms of which bills get brought forward for discussion and, ultimately, the vote.
Lastly, I would like to touch on a couple of the ideas I have heard, so that any of you who are truly interested in free market solution can see that some interesting possibilities exist.
1-REMOVE LEGISLATION THAT PROHIBITS INTER-STATE COMPETITION.
The first idea that out there is also my favorite. During a recent speech before a joint session of congress, President Obama spoke of how wrong it was for one or two insurance companies to be able to monopolize an entire state. This practice stifles competition, and allows the companies to raise rates with absolute certainty that no other company will come in and take away their business. Mr Obama was right. The issue here, is what our Dear Leader did not say. He did not say that it is Government regulation that outlaws competition between insurance companies from different states. Let me make that more clear. THE GOVERNMENT OUTLAWS COMPETITION IN THE HEALTH INSURANCE INDUSTRY. Removal of this legislation would be relatively inexpensive, require no intrusion on the lives of the citizens, and foster the spirit of competition that has the folks in the auto insurance industry practically fighting each other for your business.
2-TORT REFORM
In every industry, liability insurance is a big expense that is considered part of the cost of doing business. This expense is added into things like rent, utilities and salaries to make up what is known as overhead. This overhead is then divided up by the hours of anticipated work for a given period of time, and the result is an amount, sometimes called a margin, that makes up a portion of the bill which is presented to the customer.
Do to the general litigiousness of our society, these insurance costs are disproportionate in the medical Field. Allowing the government to institute some protections for the medical industry against frivolous lawsuits would help to lower insurance premiums, and therefore, the bills that eventually end up in the hands of the consumer.
3-GIVE INDIVIDUALS THE SAME TAX BENEFITS FOR PURCHASING INSURANCE AS BUSINESSES GET
To date, I have still not heard a single reasonable answer to my question of why we as individuals cannot purchase our own insurance, and utilize the same tax write-offs as businesses do. While this option would not apply to everyone, it would ABSOLUTELY benefit the young and healthy who are generally in need of little more than catastrophic coverage. By covering just one individual or even a family, the insurance company has the ability to gauge the risk of that customer and adjust it's prices accordingly, without needing to consider the overweight or sickly that would otherwise be part of any larger group plan.
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Some simple gun rules
OK, so I'm no gun expert by any stretch of the imagination, but I feel the need to post a few simple, unoriginal rules for all of you first time gun buyers to keep in mind as you are looking for a new firearm. These rules are not of my creation, and they are really simplistic. They will also keep you from being beaten to a pulp by a fellow gun lover.
1- Do not cover anything with the barrel of a gun that you are not willing to destroy. That includes your fellow customers, the sales clerk and if that thing even comes close to my child's direction, you and I are gonna have a MAJOR problem. Comprende, sport?
2- ALL guns are ALWAYS loaded. While this is not technically true, you had better get used to the mindset. By treating the weapon as if it's loaded, we can avoid allot of the problems with rule number 1 while in the store, and you wont have to have your head bashed in with the butt of the aforementioned firearm.
3- Now this one is important, so pay attention, numb nuts. Keep your finger off the trigger until you have acquired your target and are ready to fire. I don't care if it just came off the shelf of the store, and I don't care if you know it is unloaded. Most accidents happen because the idiot who pulled the trigger thought the gun was unloaded. You want to dry fire the gun? No problemo, just do it in a safe and unpopulated direction, and no one has to pistol whip you for your stupidty, ok fucktard?
Now, I would like to apologise to every responsible, knowlegeable gun owner for the fact that I simply walked away from this idiot instead of confronting the situation and maybe educating him a little on proper firearm handling, but, as I mentioned earlier, I am no expert and I dont even play one on tv.
1- Do not cover anything with the barrel of a gun that you are not willing to destroy. That includes your fellow customers, the sales clerk and if that thing even comes close to my child's direction, you and I are gonna have a MAJOR problem. Comprende, sport?
2- ALL guns are ALWAYS loaded. While this is not technically true, you had better get used to the mindset. By treating the weapon as if it's loaded, we can avoid allot of the problems with rule number 1 while in the store, and you wont have to have your head bashed in with the butt of the aforementioned firearm.
3- Now this one is important, so pay attention, numb nuts. Keep your finger off the trigger until you have acquired your target and are ready to fire. I don't care if it just came off the shelf of the store, and I don't care if you know it is unloaded. Most accidents happen because the idiot who pulled the trigger thought the gun was unloaded. You want to dry fire the gun? No problemo, just do it in a safe and unpopulated direction, and no one has to pistol whip you for your stupidty, ok fucktard?
Now, I would like to apologise to every responsible, knowlegeable gun owner for the fact that I simply walked away from this idiot instead of confronting the situation and maybe educating him a little on proper firearm handling, but, as I mentioned earlier, I am no expert and I dont even play one on tv.
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Why I protest
Yesterday, September twelfth, I had the pleasure of joining four thousand like minded individual in Denver Colorado, and Millions of people nation wide in a protest of our government. After arriving home, I began searching for the media coverage of the events both locally and nationally and found to my utter dismay a pathetic amount of attention being paid to the gatherings. To add insult to injury, what coverage I did find was either very brief, or very misinformed. Political pundits talking about the motives of the protesters is almost as unrealistic as our politicians speaking for us! Because of some of the ridiculous claims I have heard espoused, I have decided to talk about some of my reasons for taking part in this, and one prior protest of the same nature.The list of reasons I have for my dissatisfaction with the government is long and maybe a bit too much to write in a single day, so I'll keep it to a few key points that I consider to be of the utmost importance.
The first issue that I find terribly concerning is health care reform. Not because I believe the representatives of our nation have concocted some devious conspiratorial plot to bring our country down into the bowels of communism, but because it is, thus far a plan wrought with potential for severe unintended consequences and massive corruption. I do not see included in the bills that I have looked through, any reasonable means of financing these plans, nor any real consideration for the fact that we are a free, capitalist society that has,not in spite of, but because of capitalism, brought forth most of the greatest advances in medical technologies and techniques the world has ever known. Freedom is in my blood, and no crises will ever scare me away from that.
The second issue may be directly tied to the first, as well as many others. I am truly upset..No, I am PISSED OFF that our elected representative have the nerve to pretend to have the best interests of their constituents in mind while they are signing bills that they do not read. This is an idea that offends me more than I have the words to express. I would never sign a contract without reading it, and I simply cannot except the idea that these men and women are doing it regularly in the name of the people! This must stop, and I want to see prosecution of ANY elected official, of either party, that signs a bill without reading and understanding the potential ramifications of the legislation.
Next, I want to discuss what is, in my opinion, a filthy word. Debt. Washington, Franklin and Jefferson all spoke at length about the dangers of a national debt. They, like many more of the founding fathers were very clear in their belief that each generation should consider it a matter of the utmost urgency to pay off the debt that they accrue in order to hand to the next generation a clean slate, free of an overwhelming burden that could inhibit the ability to act freely. As a man much smarter than I once said, "Debt is slavery." Our government is spending money faster that they take it from us, and I do not wish to see these corrupt and power hungry people mortgage the future of my son for the sake of political expediency.
Finally, an issue that I find increasingly appalling, is the treatment of our service men and women. I cannot recall the number of stories I have heard about poor conditions in our VA hospitals, poor rehabilitation of our soldiers who suffer from post traumatic stress disorder, or poorly equipped soldiers on the field of combat. Senator Barbera Boxers' recent display of arrogance toward a man who deserves far more respect then she ever will, was the straw that broke the camels back for me. Here we sit, stateside in our comfortable homes, working our jobs and enjoying rights and liberties that these people protect while no one seems to be standing up and fighting for them here in our own government! This must change, and it must change NOW!!
My reasons listed are not in any way an attempt to speak for anyone else. I neither pretend to be anyone elses mouthpiece, nor will I allow another to act in this capacity for me. I protest because I am free, and I plan not only to stay that way, but to hand to my son the very same right.
"I would rather die on my feet than live on my Knees."
The first issue that I find terribly concerning is health care reform. Not because I believe the representatives of our nation have concocted some devious conspiratorial plot to bring our country down into the bowels of communism, but because it is, thus far a plan wrought with potential for severe unintended consequences and massive corruption. I do not see included in the bills that I have looked through, any reasonable means of financing these plans, nor any real consideration for the fact that we are a free, capitalist society that has,not in spite of, but because of capitalism, brought forth most of the greatest advances in medical technologies and techniques the world has ever known. Freedom is in my blood, and no crises will ever scare me away from that.
The second issue may be directly tied to the first, as well as many others. I am truly upset..No, I am PISSED OFF that our elected representative have the nerve to pretend to have the best interests of their constituents in mind while they are signing bills that they do not read. This is an idea that offends me more than I have the words to express. I would never sign a contract without reading it, and I simply cannot except the idea that these men and women are doing it regularly in the name of the people! This must stop, and I want to see prosecution of ANY elected official, of either party, that signs a bill without reading and understanding the potential ramifications of the legislation.
Next, I want to discuss what is, in my opinion, a filthy word. Debt. Washington, Franklin and Jefferson all spoke at length about the dangers of a national debt. They, like many more of the founding fathers were very clear in their belief that each generation should consider it a matter of the utmost urgency to pay off the debt that they accrue in order to hand to the next generation a clean slate, free of an overwhelming burden that could inhibit the ability to act freely. As a man much smarter than I once said, "Debt is slavery." Our government is spending money faster that they take it from us, and I do not wish to see these corrupt and power hungry people mortgage the future of my son for the sake of political expediency.
Finally, an issue that I find increasingly appalling, is the treatment of our service men and women. I cannot recall the number of stories I have heard about poor conditions in our VA hospitals, poor rehabilitation of our soldiers who suffer from post traumatic stress disorder, or poorly equipped soldiers on the field of combat. Senator Barbera Boxers' recent display of arrogance toward a man who deserves far more respect then she ever will, was the straw that broke the camels back for me. Here we sit, stateside in our comfortable homes, working our jobs and enjoying rights and liberties that these people protect while no one seems to be standing up and fighting for them here in our own government! This must change, and it must change NOW!!
My reasons listed are not in any way an attempt to speak for anyone else. I neither pretend to be anyone elses mouthpiece, nor will I allow another to act in this capacity for me. I protest because I am free, and I plan not only to stay that way, but to hand to my son the very same right.
"I would rather die on my feet than live on my Knees."
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
On Rules for Radicals..
After reading about half of this book in two days and covering it with highlighters and notes, I feel compelled to compliment the author, Saul Alinsky on his many shrewd observations and thorough understanding on the nature of people. Make no mistake, I do not agree with the mans politics, but his tactics are unarguably Machiavellian.
An idea that I find particularly interesting is this: "Our cause had to be all shining justice, allied with the angels; theirs had to be all evil, tied to the devil; in no war has the enemy or the cause ever been gray."
I am made to think of the way anyone who denies global warming is called a Flat Earther, one of the modern versions of heretic, an intellectual death-sentence in today's politically correct thought.
"If you start with nothing, demand 100 percent, then compromise for 30 percent,you're 30 percent ahead."
Fundamentally, this is a fairly simple idea, and I think most people are somewhat familiar with it, conceptually at least. It is when this idea is taken to a grand scale, and applied repeatedly that this becomes a powerful tool in moving any agenda foreword.
Lets look at the current health care debate as an example. Currently, The argument is between two sides who basically consist of two positions. The first is; the system is fundamentally sound and needs only minor modifications; the second calls for drastic, if not complete overhaul. At the time of this writing, bills that have been produced in congress are very unpopular, and will probably be rejected outright. Those who stand in opposition to these bills, of which I may be counted, should not consider this a victory though, because now, the minds of the American public have a very extreme reference upon which to measure all future plans. In comparison, all future proposals will appear moderate and the word compromise will be proclaimed by people with a much longer field of vision. With this tactic,as in football, the opposing team can win by moving foreward only by inches.
I will continue to write on the this book, as I believe it should be required reading for anyone who has an interest in how and why this administration is moving in the way it is.
An idea that I find particularly interesting is this: "Our cause had to be all shining justice, allied with the angels; theirs had to be all evil, tied to the devil; in no war has the enemy or the cause ever been gray."
I am made to think of the way anyone who denies global warming is called a Flat Earther, one of the modern versions of heretic, an intellectual death-sentence in today's politically correct thought.
"If you start with nothing, demand 100 percent, then compromise for 30 percent,you're 30 percent ahead."
Fundamentally, this is a fairly simple idea, and I think most people are somewhat familiar with it, conceptually at least. It is when this idea is taken to a grand scale, and applied repeatedly that this becomes a powerful tool in moving any agenda foreword.
Lets look at the current health care debate as an example. Currently, The argument is between two sides who basically consist of two positions. The first is; the system is fundamentally sound and needs only minor modifications; the second calls for drastic, if not complete overhaul. At the time of this writing, bills that have been produced in congress are very unpopular, and will probably be rejected outright. Those who stand in opposition to these bills, of which I may be counted, should not consider this a victory though, because now, the minds of the American public have a very extreme reference upon which to measure all future plans. In comparison, all future proposals will appear moderate and the word compromise will be proclaimed by people with a much longer field of vision. With this tactic,as in football, the opposing team can win by moving foreward only by inches.
I will continue to write on the this book, as I believe it should be required reading for anyone who has an interest in how and why this administration is moving in the way it is.
Saturday, September 5, 2009
One possible piece of the healthcare puzzle
Bear with me as I work through a rough draft of an incomplete concept. With the whole health care debate raging on, I encountered a lady who is in a situation that I think I have an idea of how to help. Please, please correct me if any of the following suppositions or concepts are wrong, as I am woefully uneducated on this particular topic, and could be flailing wildly for something beyond my grasp.
Many Americans find themselves in something of a situation when they work and try to live responsible lives, meanwhile struggling with the dreaded "pre-existing condition", or they make too much money to qualify for medicaid, while their income is insufficient to cover insurance expenses. Here is my question/idea.
What if a new level were added to the medicaid system where people who make too much money to qualify could buy into the system through a voluntary increase of their federal taxes to offset the additional burden they place on the system?
To illustrate, lets say I am a 30 year old male with an existing condition who makes roughly $30,000 to $50,000 (I'm not sure where the numbers would actually work, these are just arbitrary) annually. Now because of my condition, I have been denied coverage by my employers program, into which I WOULD have paid several hundred dollars monthly, and find myself with limited options.
Now lets just imagine that the govt had a program where people in my situation could sign up to have several hundred dollars taken from my salary or paycheck in the form of additional FICA taxes and I would be allowed to receive all the benefits of other Medicare recipients, with maybe some additional co-pays and or deductibles comparable to those I would have dealt with in the private program offered by my employer.
This is not a panacea and I recognize it would not help everyone. I do think, however that this concept could be utilized to allow the government to assist people in need without placing undo financial strain on the system.
Again, this is a rough idea. Something like this may already exist, or it could just be stupid. Pleas let me know what you think.
Many Americans find themselves in something of a situation when they work and try to live responsible lives, meanwhile struggling with the dreaded "pre-existing condition", or they make too much money to qualify for medicaid, while their income is insufficient to cover insurance expenses. Here is my question/idea.
What if a new level were added to the medicaid system where people who make too much money to qualify could buy into the system through a voluntary increase of their federal taxes to offset the additional burden they place on the system?
To illustrate, lets say I am a 30 year old male with an existing condition who makes roughly $30,000 to $50,000 (I'm not sure where the numbers would actually work, these are just arbitrary) annually. Now because of my condition, I have been denied coverage by my employers program, into which I WOULD have paid several hundred dollars monthly, and find myself with limited options.
Now lets just imagine that the govt had a program where people in my situation could sign up to have several hundred dollars taken from my salary or paycheck in the form of additional FICA taxes and I would be allowed to receive all the benefits of other Medicare recipients, with maybe some additional co-pays and or deductibles comparable to those I would have dealt with in the private program offered by my employer.
This is not a panacea and I recognize it would not help everyone. I do think, however that this concept could be utilized to allow the government to assist people in need without placing undo financial strain on the system.
Again, this is a rough idea. Something like this may already exist, or it could just be stupid. Pleas let me know what you think.
Friday, September 4, 2009
My intellectual short mans' complex
A few months ago I was driving with a few buddies of mine and college life came up in conversation. The subjects studied, the teachers and the interesting people all spent time at the center of the conversation before I realized that I was merely listening, unable to participate intelligently in the topic. Suddenly, after thinking about it, I realized that most of the people I choose to associate with have some form of higher education while I was a high school drop out! When I say suddenly, I mean it. This fact hit me like a hammer and did not leave my mind for the remainder of the day.
After a few months of wrestling with this reality, I have come no further towards a conclusion to some of the questions I asked myself. Now I pose them to you, dear reader, to help me tackle.
The first question I have is; Do I lose credibility when I speak as a man with only part of a 10Th grade education behind me? This is definitely the hardest question because I cannot feign to answer it with any honesty. How can any man truly know how he is perceived in other people eyes?
The second question I ask is one that I think I can answer on my own, but would love to know if I am missing part or all of the answer. Am I unable to recognise/grasp significant ideas and or concepts due to my limited exposure to them? I never read the books that get assigned in the latter half of high school, much less college, and am often finding new and revolutionary ideas in books that most people read years ago. Is it safe to assume that my thinking is several years behind the thoughts of my educated counterparts, due to their having years to mull these things over? Or do I have an advantage in being a bit older with more life experience behind me as I try to dissect some of the great works on politics, philosophy and literature?
Finally,(and this sort of ties into the first question) can I honestly expect others to take my thoughts and ideas seriously if they know that I have only a few years of schooling behind me when they have dedicated so much time and effort toward their degrees? Does it display too much arrogance on my part to believe I can grasp so many complex ideas and concepts without the aid of teachers, fellow students and considerable amounts of discussion?
I would love to hear your ideas and thoughts on this subject, and appreciate all feedback.
After a few months of wrestling with this reality, I have come no further towards a conclusion to some of the questions I asked myself. Now I pose them to you, dear reader, to help me tackle.
The first question I have is; Do I lose credibility when I speak as a man with only part of a 10Th grade education behind me? This is definitely the hardest question because I cannot feign to answer it with any honesty. How can any man truly know how he is perceived in other people eyes?
The second question I ask is one that I think I can answer on my own, but would love to know if I am missing part or all of the answer. Am I unable to recognise/grasp significant ideas and or concepts due to my limited exposure to them? I never read the books that get assigned in the latter half of high school, much less college, and am often finding new and revolutionary ideas in books that most people read years ago. Is it safe to assume that my thinking is several years behind the thoughts of my educated counterparts, due to their having years to mull these things over? Or do I have an advantage in being a bit older with more life experience behind me as I try to dissect some of the great works on politics, philosophy and literature?
Finally,(and this sort of ties into the first question) can I honestly expect others to take my thoughts and ideas seriously if they know that I have only a few years of schooling behind me when they have dedicated so much time and effort toward their degrees? Does it display too much arrogance on my part to believe I can grasp so many complex ideas and concepts without the aid of teachers, fellow students and considerable amounts of discussion?
I would love to hear your ideas and thoughts on this subject, and appreciate all feedback.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Monday, August 31, 2009
Hypocrisy Continued
In my last blog, I spoke of how both major political parties were actively engaging in betraying their own position in ways that threaten the liberty and freedom of average Americans. I then went on to illustrate how the Republican party was inconsistent in it's stances, and would now like to move on to the democrat party.
Let us first look at immigration policy. As the "Party of the working man," the democrats should logically take the position that helps the blue-collar workers in this country. Instead what we see are the power players standing side by side with their Republican brethren, albeit for different reasons.
Think about this for a moment. By making sure our borders remain wide open, we allow enormous quantities of people to flood our job market with cheap, often unskilled labor. This helps to fill all those jobs that "Americans wont do" such as farm worker and house cleaning right? WRONG!! People who cross our borders illegally are poor and some are quite desperate, but not necessarily stupid. These people are taking jobs that keep America running. Jobs like sheet metal installers, mechanics, tile settiers, ironworkers and electrician! Jobs that traditionally occupy a significant portion of our middle class are rapidly becoming minimum wage jobs because the Dems work to keep the steady stream of future potential voters pouring in! Imagine, at nearly 10% unemployment what those thousands of jobs could do if the Democrats weren't selling us out!
The next idea I would like to touch on, is tolerance. While we have been battered over the heads for most of my life time with speech about tolerance and peace, the Democrats have been altering the way these words are defined. By describing an idea that stands in opposition to their own as hate speech , the Dems have found a way to silence people. Any idea that they deem inappropriate is called "intolerant" or "closed minded" while they shut down discussion in college campuses and other places all over the country.
While indeed bigoted and racist statements are difficult to hear, the ability to say those things is part of the foundation of our country. People have the freedom to say what they please (with certain limitations) regardless of how offensive or distasteful. The party that has been basking in that freedom for decades by burning the American flag is now working to shut it down by invoking Orwellian thought police whenever a valid political argument arises that they cannot otherwise counter!!! We already have hate crime legislation, and I predict hate speech legislation will come soon.
Lastly, I would like to bring up entitlements programs. By this term, I mean social security, Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare and the current health care debate. These programs are unarguably strongholds for the Democratic party from which they draw a tremendous amount of voters, but here is the rub. While I am not exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer, I cannot see the difference between these programs and the illegal pyramid scheme! While the system can function quite well when the people at the top are few, and the bottom are many, everything starts to crumble when the system approaches even, and it completely falls apart when it becomes top-heavy. Now this isn't complicated mathematics that only a brilliant mind can see, but simple common sense that the Democrats are arguing against when they fight to bring more people into the system at the higher level. Why are they trying to expand these programs if they are destined to fall apart you ask? My response is simple. Power. They are seeking to create an entire class of people who are completely reliant on the government and would therefore only vote for politicians who promised to keep the paychecks coming. By expanding these programs and creating more government dependants, the Democrats are purchasing a higher level political power with our freedom as the payment.
Let us first look at immigration policy. As the "Party of the working man," the democrats should logically take the position that helps the blue-collar workers in this country. Instead what we see are the power players standing side by side with their Republican brethren, albeit for different reasons.
Think about this for a moment. By making sure our borders remain wide open, we allow enormous quantities of people to flood our job market with cheap, often unskilled labor. This helps to fill all those jobs that "Americans wont do" such as farm worker and house cleaning right? WRONG!! People who cross our borders illegally are poor and some are quite desperate, but not necessarily stupid. These people are taking jobs that keep America running. Jobs like sheet metal installers, mechanics, tile settiers, ironworkers and electrician! Jobs that traditionally occupy a significant portion of our middle class are rapidly becoming minimum wage jobs because the Dems work to keep the steady stream of future potential voters pouring in! Imagine, at nearly 10% unemployment what those thousands of jobs could do if the Democrats weren't selling us out!
The next idea I would like to touch on, is tolerance. While we have been battered over the heads for most of my life time with speech about tolerance and peace, the Democrats have been altering the way these words are defined. By describing an idea that stands in opposition to their own as hate speech , the Dems have found a way to silence people. Any idea that they deem inappropriate is called "intolerant" or "closed minded" while they shut down discussion in college campuses and other places all over the country.
While indeed bigoted and racist statements are difficult to hear, the ability to say those things is part of the foundation of our country. People have the freedom to say what they please (with certain limitations) regardless of how offensive or distasteful. The party that has been basking in that freedom for decades by burning the American flag is now working to shut it down by invoking Orwellian thought police whenever a valid political argument arises that they cannot otherwise counter!!! We already have hate crime legislation, and I predict hate speech legislation will come soon.
Lastly, I would like to bring up entitlements programs. By this term, I mean social security, Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare and the current health care debate. These programs are unarguably strongholds for the Democratic party from which they draw a tremendous amount of voters, but here is the rub. While I am not exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer, I cannot see the difference between these programs and the illegal pyramid scheme! While the system can function quite well when the people at the top are few, and the bottom are many, everything starts to crumble when the system approaches even, and it completely falls apart when it becomes top-heavy. Now this isn't complicated mathematics that only a brilliant mind can see, but simple common sense that the Democrats are arguing against when they fight to bring more people into the system at the higher level. Why are they trying to expand these programs if they are destined to fall apart you ask? My response is simple. Power. They are seeking to create an entire class of people who are completely reliant on the government and would therefore only vote for politicians who promised to keep the paychecks coming. By expanding these programs and creating more government dependants, the Democrats are purchasing a higher level political power with our freedom as the payment.
Friday, August 28, 2009
Hypocrisy
I have long been making the case that out two party system is deeply flawed and in need of a third party, which would better represent the middle of the road Americans. One reason for this belief is the distance between the major parties, and their commonly claimed principles. I believe that I can make the case that through either of the big two, we as Americans find our liberty encroached upon.
Let me begin by "eating my own" and pointing out the issues with my former party. While the Republicans run on a platform of fiscal responsibility, small government and strong national defence, I believe they have strayed very far from these principles in ways that burden the average citizen.
When speaking of fiscal responsibility, we are generally talking about balancing our national checkbook. When a family, small business or even a large business sits down to make financial decisions they must consider how much money they have, and try to spend less in order to remain positive, or profitable in the business analogy. Seems fairly straight foreword right? Well, as many Americans know, another way to do get by is to borrow more, or use credit to purchase things that they cannot currently afford. The problem with this is two-fold. First off, that money must be paid back, which then leaves even less money with which to pay bills. Second, interest charges added on to the money borrowed increases the price of every item purchased. Now anyone with a little sense understands that this is a dangerous trap to fall into, and many Americans have found themselves very deep in this hole.
Republicans in the last administration didn't fall into this trap, they drove in with both headlights on and floored the gas pedal! Our national debt skyrocketed under Bush, and we were borrowing just to pay the interest on a sum of money that you and I will pass to our grand kids. In this way, the Repubs have bound us to generations of servitude to our creditors, primarily China. Hardly responsible.
Smaller less intrusive government has long been a mantra of the Republican party, and I submit to you that both parts of this phrase are flat out lies. Lets start with the less intrusive part. The Repubs have been fighting to prevent gay marriage for as long as this has been an issue. Think about that. Two adult individuals want to enter into a contract in which they share most or all of their personal property and responsibilities. How is this less intrusive exactly? Or what about the "war on drugs"? Why can a man drink himself to death under full protection of the law, while the same man cannot pick a plant from the ground and smoke it?
These are two examples of how the Republican party fights to keep government involved in the lives of private citizens, where there is no justifiable cause.
The argument for smaller government has been proven as just rhetoric over the last eight years as the govt has grown more under Bush than it did under any of the prior three presidents, and the office of homeland security shows no signs of slowing it's growth.
And finally, National security. We have under our command, the finest fighting force mankind has ever witnessed. The men and women of our armed forces are more highly trained, better educated and (in my humble opinion) of a higher caliber than that of anything the world has ever known. So what do we do with this massive tool in times of war? We send our nations defenders into dangerous places without proper equipment, in too small of number and with restrictions on their behavior that the enemy makes no pretense of respecting or imitating. We send these people to fight with one arm tied behind their backs and claim to support them! it is a shame and a disgrace to the Republican party that congress can even function without every advantage being first given to Americas finest! For this I am embarrassed.
Additionally, there was a man once, many years ago by the name of sun tzu who wrote a book called "The Art of War". This book and many like it have written about being outflanked and why any body at war should always guard its rear. This is basic warfare, and the Republicans have been ignoring this simple concept by leaving out borders open for the sake of importing cheap labor.
In these two examples, the Republicans have robbed us of the ONE basic premise of the Federal Government, protection of our borders and our interests, by first fighting a war without fully engaging, winning and leaving and secondly by ignoring the borders, allowing millions of unknown persons to cross without any authorisation in order to take jobs that could be done by the millions of Americans who are currently unemployed, or maybe worse.
Let me begin by "eating my own" and pointing out the issues with my former party. While the Republicans run on a platform of fiscal responsibility, small government and strong national defence, I believe they have strayed very far from these principles in ways that burden the average citizen.
When speaking of fiscal responsibility, we are generally talking about balancing our national checkbook. When a family, small business or even a large business sits down to make financial decisions they must consider how much money they have, and try to spend less in order to remain positive, or profitable in the business analogy. Seems fairly straight foreword right? Well, as many Americans know, another way to do get by is to borrow more, or use credit to purchase things that they cannot currently afford. The problem with this is two-fold. First off, that money must be paid back, which then leaves even less money with which to pay bills. Second, interest charges added on to the money borrowed increases the price of every item purchased. Now anyone with a little sense understands that this is a dangerous trap to fall into, and many Americans have found themselves very deep in this hole.
Republicans in the last administration didn't fall into this trap, they drove in with both headlights on and floored the gas pedal! Our national debt skyrocketed under Bush, and we were borrowing just to pay the interest on a sum of money that you and I will pass to our grand kids. In this way, the Repubs have bound us to generations of servitude to our creditors, primarily China. Hardly responsible.
Smaller less intrusive government has long been a mantra of the Republican party, and I submit to you that both parts of this phrase are flat out lies. Lets start with the less intrusive part. The Repubs have been fighting to prevent gay marriage for as long as this has been an issue. Think about that. Two adult individuals want to enter into a contract in which they share most or all of their personal property and responsibilities. How is this less intrusive exactly? Or what about the "war on drugs"? Why can a man drink himself to death under full protection of the law, while the same man cannot pick a plant from the ground and smoke it?
These are two examples of how the Republican party fights to keep government involved in the lives of private citizens, where there is no justifiable cause.
The argument for smaller government has been proven as just rhetoric over the last eight years as the govt has grown more under Bush than it did under any of the prior three presidents, and the office of homeland security shows no signs of slowing it's growth.
And finally, National security. We have under our command, the finest fighting force mankind has ever witnessed. The men and women of our armed forces are more highly trained, better educated and (in my humble opinion) of a higher caliber than that of anything the world has ever known. So what do we do with this massive tool in times of war? We send our nations defenders into dangerous places without proper equipment, in too small of number and with restrictions on their behavior that the enemy makes no pretense of respecting or imitating. We send these people to fight with one arm tied behind their backs and claim to support them! it is a shame and a disgrace to the Republican party that congress can even function without every advantage being first given to Americas finest! For this I am embarrassed.
Additionally, there was a man once, many years ago by the name of sun tzu who wrote a book called "The Art of War". This book and many like it have written about being outflanked and why any body at war should always guard its rear. This is basic warfare, and the Republicans have been ignoring this simple concept by leaving out borders open for the sake of importing cheap labor.
In these two examples, the Republicans have robbed us of the ONE basic premise of the Federal Government, protection of our borders and our interests, by first fighting a war without fully engaging, winning and leaving and secondly by ignoring the borders, allowing millions of unknown persons to cross without any authorisation in order to take jobs that could be done by the millions of Americans who are currently unemployed, or maybe worse.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Fake hate crime by the Left!!!
Yesterday, members of the Democratic party in Denver showed up to work to find all of their windows busted and pictures of the president smashed. Much of the day was spent talking about the right-wing extremists who must have committed such an act, and how they should be tried when caught. The phrase "Hate crime" was ringing in the air like church bells on Sunday Morning.
When the man was apprehended, it was discovered that he had a history of working for the Democratic party in various ways. Maurice "The Hammer" Schwenkler does not appear in the Colorado voter database, but he is recorded as having received $500 from a leftist political committee known as "Colorado Citizens Coalition".
Suddenly, the church bells have stopped ringing, and the locals are no longer quite so interested in how this man is prosecuted. I bet he gets a simple vandalism charge.
When the man was apprehended, it was discovered that he had a history of working for the Democratic party in various ways. Maurice "The Hammer" Schwenkler does not appear in the Colorado voter database, but he is recorded as having received $500 from a leftist political committee known as "Colorado Citizens Coalition".
Suddenly, the church bells have stopped ringing, and the locals are no longer quite so interested in how this man is prosecuted. I bet he gets a simple vandalism charge.
Monday, August 24, 2009
Moderation
I often feel compelled to cringe a little whenever I hear someone proclaim proudly that they are a moderate. The look of moral superiority shines in their eyes while their chest swells ever so slightly as if they were stating some bold position that none but the truest of patriots would dare to utter in the public arena. I sometimes feel bad for them before I dismiss them altogether.
"But why would you dismiss someone says they are a moderate?" you may ask. "shouldn't people be less partisan?" you may wonder. To you I say shut up. Shut up and think before you waste another moment of you're life repeating that senseless gibberish. Can you be moderately concerned for your own well being, or that of your loved ones? Can you be a moderate on issues concerning your life? I say no. Not just no, but Hell no! You are passionate in the pursuit of what you deem right for yourself, as you should be, and so should you be for the positions you take in the political realm!
I can respect the person with whom I disagree, no matter how passionately, but I cannot feel the same towards one who doesn't have the courage or the honesty to proclaim their positions. Stand up, take your position and defend it as long as you feel it is right! Foam at the mouth with passion and spit venom in defence of what you believe is the truth!
I'm not saying to follow blindly in the path of your chosen party, and I'm not claiming that everyone should opine on every subject. But please, stand and fight for what you believe, either with me when we agree or against me when we don't, because this is America and our ability to have passionate discourse, not moderation, is truly the lifeblood of our system!
"But why would you dismiss someone says they are a moderate?" you may ask. "shouldn't people be less partisan?" you may wonder. To you I say shut up. Shut up and think before you waste another moment of you're life repeating that senseless gibberish. Can you be moderately concerned for your own well being, or that of your loved ones? Can you be a moderate on issues concerning your life? I say no. Not just no, but Hell no! You are passionate in the pursuit of what you deem right for yourself, as you should be, and so should you be for the positions you take in the political realm!
I can respect the person with whom I disagree, no matter how passionately, but I cannot feel the same towards one who doesn't have the courage or the honesty to proclaim their positions. Stand up, take your position and defend it as long as you feel it is right! Foam at the mouth with passion and spit venom in defence of what you believe is the truth!
I'm not saying to follow blindly in the path of your chosen party, and I'm not claiming that everyone should opine on every subject. But please, stand and fight for what you believe, either with me when we agree or against me when we don't, because this is America and our ability to have passionate discourse, not moderation, is truly the lifeblood of our system!
Friday, August 21, 2009
Obamas visit to Colorado PartIII
In my last couple pages, I talked about some of the issues that I noticed on both sides of the protest/rally during President Obama's visit to Grand Junction Co. I would now like to run through a couple issues that I see on BOTH sides, that I think need to be addressed.
The peaceful transfer of power is one part of our political process that truly separates our nation from so many others. On a set date, we go from having one President to having a new one, and often that new man will share very few common ideas or beliefs with his predecessor. This is a concept that I don't see many people considering when they support legislation that has a broad range of powers. I listened to many Republicans argue for the necessity of the patriot act during the Bush administration, only to cry "Big Brother" now that a Democrat is sitting in the White house. I cannot help but wonder how many of the supporters of this (H.B.3200) current health care bill will think it was such a good idea the next time Republicans take power.
For my second point, I would like to discuss political division. Anyone who knows me has probably heard me talk about how I think the two parties are no more than "a two headed snake", to use a term I heard somewhere. We as Americans often argue and bicker over party lines when, in fact, they are both actively campaigning to rob you of your liberty. Sound crazy? Then tell me why the party that constantly chatters about "small, non-invasive government" fights like hell to keep two consenting adults from getting married due to their gender! Or tell me why the party that has argued against the government telling women what to do with their bodies, is now trying to dictate EVERY ONES health care choices! We have been duped into believing that this oligarchic two party system has a good side and a bad side when they are both villains in every equation I can think of.
Lastly, I would like to bring up, once again, education. The average American can rattle off winners in their favorite reality show, or statistics about "their team" in a given sport, whereas I find few that can speak intelligently about American history or our political system. In other words, we watch mindlessly as people entertain us with no practical impact on our lives, while politicians are making decisions about our money, safety, health and children without so much as a glance from the majority of us. We need to wake up and pay attention! It was once illegal to educate slaves because it was believed that education bred the desire for freedom. I believe we have collectively lost our fierce attachment for freedom as our senses have been dulled by the television. Our understanding of the system, how it works and how it came to be has grown so vague that we are allowing those in power to slowly drain our liberties away while we watch, unknowingly.
I believe that it is time to turn off the TV, find our common ground as Americans and Fight! Fight to have our politicians represent the people, not the special interests! Fight against the idea that we can spend our way out of debt! Fight against the leaders of the two political parties who believe we as Americans must sit by silently as they run roughshod over our Constitution! And fight to remain the greatest nation this planet has ever known! Together we stand, divided we fall.
The peaceful transfer of power is one part of our political process that truly separates our nation from so many others. On a set date, we go from having one President to having a new one, and often that new man will share very few common ideas or beliefs with his predecessor. This is a concept that I don't see many people considering when they support legislation that has a broad range of powers. I listened to many Republicans argue for the necessity of the patriot act during the Bush administration, only to cry "Big Brother" now that a Democrat is sitting in the White house. I cannot help but wonder how many of the supporters of this (H.B.3200) current health care bill will think it was such a good idea the next time Republicans take power.
For my second point, I would like to discuss political division. Anyone who knows me has probably heard me talk about how I think the two parties are no more than "a two headed snake", to use a term I heard somewhere. We as Americans often argue and bicker over party lines when, in fact, they are both actively campaigning to rob you of your liberty. Sound crazy? Then tell me why the party that constantly chatters about "small, non-invasive government" fights like hell to keep two consenting adults from getting married due to their gender! Or tell me why the party that has argued against the government telling women what to do with their bodies, is now trying to dictate EVERY ONES health care choices! We have been duped into believing that this oligarchic two party system has a good side and a bad side when they are both villains in every equation I can think of.
Lastly, I would like to bring up, once again, education. The average American can rattle off winners in their favorite reality show, or statistics about "their team" in a given sport, whereas I find few that can speak intelligently about American history or our political system. In other words, we watch mindlessly as people entertain us with no practical impact on our lives, while politicians are making decisions about our money, safety, health and children without so much as a glance from the majority of us. We need to wake up and pay attention! It was once illegal to educate slaves because it was believed that education bred the desire for freedom. I believe we have collectively lost our fierce attachment for freedom as our senses have been dulled by the television. Our understanding of the system, how it works and how it came to be has grown so vague that we are allowing those in power to slowly drain our liberties away while we watch, unknowingly.
I believe that it is time to turn off the TV, find our common ground as Americans and Fight! Fight to have our politicians represent the people, not the special interests! Fight against the idea that we can spend our way out of debt! Fight against the leaders of the two political parties who believe we as Americans must sit by silently as they run roughshod over our Constitution! And fight to remain the greatest nation this planet has ever known! Together we stand, divided we fall.
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Obamas visit to Colorado PartII
This is the second part, of a 3 page piece about my experience during the protest outside President Obama's health care town hall in Grand Junction, CO. In the last piece, I wrote about what I found on the "pro-reform" side. Now I would like to cover a few issues I saw on my own side. One thing that became very evident to me very quickly, was the absolute lack of organization. Now I know there is some sort of stigma about conservatives organizing before a protest, ending in people being referred to as "astro-turf", but I don't care what people on the other side say. I saw buses, a stage, a professional sound system, dozens of pre-printed signs and several professional demonstrators leading all the festivities on the other side. These people were coordinated and well versed in setting up these types of events, and in terms of cohesion and sheer volume, they dominated. The next issue I found on our end was any common direction. People were protesting the health care bill, the stimulus package, Obama's birth-certificate, tobacco taxes and religion. While the message came across very clearly that we were very upset, the subject of said dissatisfaction seemed to come across a bit muddled. Lastly,I want to mention the passion of the people I met last Saturday. Indeed a wonderful thing when kept reigned in to some degree, this can serve to undermine any position if it gets out of hand. On more than one occasion, I witnessed individual from the "pro" side come over to engage in conversation. When this happened, instead of viewing it as an opportunity to present a clear, intelligent position to someone who seemed willing to participate in debate, people began shouting insults and demands that the person "go back to their own side". It is my belief after this experience, that the conservatives of this nation need to ignore all the "grassroots" conversations and gather together in order to organize and formulate a clear, concise message which the majority can stand behind. Simultaneously, people on both sides of this argument need to be educated in our constitution, some basic American history, simple economic ideas and, of course, this bill which threatens to unravel the intricately woven fabric of our great nation.
Obamas visit to Colorado
This weekend, I made the 3-4 hour drive to protest outside of President Obamas healthcare townhall, and I thought I would share some of my observations. In the interest of full honesty, I want it understood ahead of time that I am biased against this plan, and that I spoke to roughly 10-12 people, so this may not be representative.
I approached everyone I met from the "pro-reform" side with the same three questions, in the same order.
1- Have you read the bill? The answer to this was uniformly (with one exception which I will cover later) no. The only person I met who said yes was an obvious professional demonstrator, who could not speak intelligently aboput any portion of the bill, and would not answer ANY question in a straight foreward manner.
2- How will we pay for it? Mostly I heard "I dont Know" with occasional "Tax the rich" thrown into the mix. When confronted with the bills statement that the "surecharge" on the rich and the 8% payroll tax would only account for 1/2 of the amount stated, I recieved a look that strongly resembled a deer in headlights.
3- social security, Medicare and Medicaid are broke, the DMV is a pretty widely disliked office due to long lines and gross mismanagement, and by the Presidents own statements, the post office is getting whooped by private industry. What makes you think THIS program would be better when it will be run by the same people who have screwed up all of the afforementioned? From this question, most people chose simply to walk away.
I approached everyone I met from the "pro-reform" side with the same three questions, in the same order.
1- Have you read the bill? The answer to this was uniformly (with one exception which I will cover later) no. The only person I met who said yes was an obvious professional demonstrator, who could not speak intelligently aboput any portion of the bill, and would not answer ANY question in a straight foreward manner.
2- How will we pay for it? Mostly I heard "I dont Know" with occasional "Tax the rich" thrown into the mix. When confronted with the bills statement that the "surecharge" on the rich and the 8% payroll tax would only account for 1/2 of the amount stated, I recieved a look that strongly resembled a deer in headlights.
3- social security, Medicare and Medicaid are broke, the DMV is a pretty widely disliked office due to long lines and gross mismanagement, and by the Presidents own statements, the post office is getting whooped by private industry. What makes you think THIS program would be better when it will be run by the same people who have screwed up all of the afforementioned? From this question, most people chose simply to walk away.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Counter
