tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-56019230538218647782024-03-05T15:00:44.772-08:00Keane ObservationsKeane observations about life, politics and sports.LargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.comBlogger519125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-46671364446784500192017-05-25T19:44:00.000-07:002017-05-25T19:44:03.531-07:00Mother Teresa<span style="font-size: large;">Anyone who is able to read Mother Teresa's writings without getting somewhat uncomfortable is not listening very well to what she is saying. Consider this passage from a collection of her teachings released under the book titled <i>No Greater Love</i>:</span><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"None of us has the right to condemn anyone. Even when we see people doing bad and we don't know why they do it. Jesus invites us not to pass judgment. Maybe we are the ones who have helped make them what they are. We need to realize they are our brothers and sisters. That leper, that drunkard, and that sick person are our brothers because they too have been created for a greater love. This is something that we should never forget. Jesus Christ identifies Himself with them and says, "Whatever you did to the least of my brethren, you did it to me." Perhaps it is because we haven't given them our understanding and love that they find themselves on the streets without love and care."</blockquote>
<span style="font-size: large;">It is very difficult to follow the news and not find ourselves condemning those we see doing evil to our fellow man.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;">It's not easy being a follower of Christ. </span>LargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-37353050622296013402015-12-09T18:16:00.003-08:002017-11-24T07:03:40.474-08:00Gender Confusion Nonsense<span style="font-size: small;">Latest sign we are heading somewhere in a hand basket awfully fast. They changed the blood donor screening form (again!) and this time they changed the wording of the gender block. Block used to just be titled "Gender." Now the block is titled "Gender <b>AT THE TIME OF BIRTH</b>." </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">I felt like informing the nurse that someone's gender today is their gender at time of birth. You can't change your gender. It is encoded in your DNA. You can dress differently than most in your gender. You can change your name. You can even pay a doctor to mutilate your genitals. However, you can not change your gender. </span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: small;">Societally, we have harmed millions by sending the message that a scalpel is the tool to use when psychological counseling is the appropriate treatment. If a young girl insisted she were Napoleon Bonaparte we wouldn't dress her in old French military attire after doing various surgeries. No, we would commit her for mental health treatment. Sadly, if same young girl insisted she thought she was a boy, without naming which one she believed herself to be, we've decided over last few decades that it's appropriate to play along with her delusions and do surgery. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-size: small;">How barbaric a practice.</span></span>LargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-63245072193106722122014-06-13T15:04:00.001-07:002014-06-16T15:45:41.951-07:00What a Difference 40 Years Makes - Or Could the Difference be the Political Parties Involved?40 years ago President Nixon was hounded from office by the media partly due to unbelievable story regarding 18 minutes of erased tape. Now, an administration claims they lost two years of emails to and from the President Obama's lead IRS henchman (henchwoman?) and media yawns and says "Yeah, that could happen."
<br />
<blockquote>
<a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/380378/irs-says-it-lost-two-years-lerner-e-mails-eliana-johnson" target="_blank"><span style="font-size: large;">IRS Says It Lost Two Years of Lerner E-mails</span></a>
</blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote>
House Ways and Means Committee chairman Dave Camp has hit a roadblock in his investigation of the Internal Revenue Service’s targeting of conservative groups: The IRS says it has lost over two years’ worth of e-mails sent by former agency official Lois Lerner, the one of the chief subjects of the committee’s investigation.
</blockquote>
But don't worry, we were assured there's "not a smidgeon of corruption" in the IRS targeting scandal by the president himself during an interview on Superbowl Sunday which was intended to fool the average person who doesn't have time to follow the many scandals of this corrupt administration. Sadly, the current Congress is too cowardly to impeach the president out of fear of being labeled racist which apparently is worse than being known as cowards unwilling to do their duty.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/SWQ6UiEnDj0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
UPDATE: Finally got around to finding this iconic picture. Did Lois Lerner stretch like Rose Mary Woods for two years?
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/screenhunter_1303-may-18-07-27.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/screenhunter_1303-may-18-07-27.jpg" /></a></div>
LargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-87702262658172191412014-05-07T05:48:00.001-07:002014-05-07T05:48:10.366-07:00Term Limits Are Long OverdueMy libertarian leanings have previously lead me to believe that term limits for congress are wrong. My old argument was that the voters should have no arbitrary limit placed on who they can choose to represent them. My opinion was great in theory, but didn't hold water in practice. The power of incumbency coupled with gerrymandered districts means most congressmen once first elected can be in office nearly for rest of their life. The founders original intention was that our congressional representatives would be accomplished citizens who would visit the capital a couple times a year to provide oversight to the federal government and protect their home state from government tyranny. Now, for good or bad (I obviously believe it is bad), congress is a full time job with sufficient compensation to entice them to stay and make a career out of what used to be public service. This has to change for there to be any hope of government reform. Congressional lifers are too much a part of government to seriously be expected to reform the current bloated mess. The chart below shows some of the worst of the worst. The majority of them were probably decent, idealistic people when first running for office. However, decades in DC corrupted them or brought out the worst in them. Regardless, it is very clear that we'd be better served by selecting tax payers at random from each district to serve for a single term than by continuing the current perverse system of electing congressmen and senators basically for life. Please consider signing the petition to enact term limits. I would also recommend an Amendment to the Constitution to repeal the 17th Amendment. Direct election by popular vote of U.S. senators was an awful idea which has directly lead to a much stronger federal government as senators are more beholden to monied backers than to the states who sent them to DC. If you agree with me on term limits for congress and ending direct election of senators, contact your state representatives and push the idea. These changes have to come from the people. Congress will never be part of fixing congress and nothing else will get reformed (tax code, whatever) without fixing congress first.
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bm6bl-hIUAAnSSS.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bm6bl-hIUAAnSSS.jpg" /></a></div>LargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-65152024860056534192014-02-28T05:37:00.001-08:002014-02-28T05:37:34.419-08:00Is Barry Switzer Racist? Or is He Just Stupid?Discussing the upcoming NFL draft in general and specifically Johnny Manziel, Barry Switzer was quoted saying: <br />
<blockquote>
I love his ability; Johnny can play," Switzer said. "<b>I've always said I'd never recruit a white quarterback.</b> The only way I'd ever recruit a white quarterback to play for me was if his mom and daddy would have to both be black, and that's the only way I would do it."</blockquote>
In his defense, he went on to explain that it is because of the style of offense he plays. However, I think his explanation merely added fuel to the fire. <br />
<blockquote>
"My offense is a quarterback-fullback offense," Switzer continued. "I'd have to have a Jamelle Holieway, J.C. Watts [or] Thomas Lott. Those guys are gonna be my quarterbacks, they're great runners, they're great ball carriers and ... able to pass, complete some, and those guys could. Those guys could throw and run."</blockquote>
My rule of thumb on determining if something is racist is to turn the races around and ask how the statement would then be viewed. His qualifying statement about wanting running quarterbacks does not rehabilitate the comments. Years ago when there was uproar about lack of black quarterbacks in the NFL, coaches often explained it away by saying that black QB's coming out of colleges were not pocket passers, etc. Here is an idea. Ignore everyone's race and hire them or select them in the draft based on their talents and whether they can help your organization achieve its goals. Pretty simple huh?
Want to end racism? Stop talking about race as if it is germane to every conversation. People are people. I'll end with this youtube clip of Morgan Freeman on 60 Minutes from a few years back.
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/LGEDxS5Q4W4?feature=player_embedded" width="640"></iframe>LargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-7020096760963243172014-02-24T14:15:00.000-08:002014-02-24T14:15:49.845-08:00The Argument for Post Birth Abortion and Our Cultural DeclineBrit Hume tweeted a link to a Slate.com article which discusses a paper published in the <a href="http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/03/01/medethics-2011-100411.full">Journal of Medical Ethics</a> titled "<i><b>After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?</b>"</i><br />
<br />
This disgusting notion has several angles to discuss:<br />
<br />
First, I notice that Hume's tweet expressed surprise: <br />
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en">
There are now people seriously arguing for abortion AFTER BIRTH. <a href="http://t.co/iisZuaWc3Q">http://t.co/iisZuaWc3Q</a><br />
— Brit Hume (@brithume) <a href="https://twitter.com/brithume/statuses/437764552890265600">February 24, 2014</a></blockquote>
<br />
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script><br />
<br />It can be difficult to clearly express yourself within Twitter's 140 character limit. However, it is safe to say Hume was shocked by the fact that we have serious discussion of murdering children after they are born. Hume is a smart guy, but I can not share his surprise at this development. It is actually very predictable. Many people have connected our passive acceptance of abortion with an overall diminished valuing of human life. Also, since the Roe v Wade decision we have seen a greater acceptance of euthanasia which is just another side to the same coin - deciding some human life has less value than others.<br />
<br />
Then when you read <a href="http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_nature/2012/03/after_birth_abortion_the_pro_choice_case_for_infanticide_.html" target="_blank">Slate's article</a> you realize they are on the side of evil and are actually worried that the "doctors" openly advocating abortion after live delivery from the womb will instead advance the pro-life argument. Consider this segment: <br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">"
But it isn’t pro-lifers who should worry about the Giubilini-Minerva proposal. It’s pro-choicers. The case for “after-birth abortion” draws a logical path from common pro-choice assumptions to infanticide. It challenges us, implicitly and explicitly, to explain why, if abortion is permissible, infanticide isn’t."</blockquote>
The problem for pro-aborts is, if they attempt to be intellectually honest with themselves they can't help but realize there is no difference between an in-womb murder (abortion) and a post partum murder besides location and age. I concede we are unlikely to influence the extremists. However, we may see this influence the mildly pro-aborts (that includes those who are indifferent and the "personally opposed but who am I to tell others not to murder their kid?" crowd) When mildly pro-aborts are able to see that their arguments also apply to a new born they in turn should realize there is no difference between killing a two day old child and killing a two year old. Only a completely morally depraved person could remain in favor of continuing down this path.
Last item this drive home to me is the question: where are we culturally that we have reached a point that doctors are debating the merits of murdering children.In a decent society the authors of that paper would be shunned and unwelcome in any respectable setting. Sadly, I strongly doubt they will face any negative feedback professionally. Instead they are likely celebrated for being avant-garde and unshackled by conventional positions.
We can continue the March for Life, and can support pro-life politicians and what not, but most important thing to do is to pray that people's hearts and minds change on this subject. Slavery wasn't ended because a politician passed a law or issued a proclamation. Instead what happened was a few people recognized that owning human beings is wrong and they made that case in many different ways and convinced more and more people to share their view. In time the few became a majority. In further time that majority demanded an end to an evil they could no longer abide continuing. LargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-87586238269719611692014-02-24T11:12:00.000-08:002014-02-24T11:12:41.907-08:00Rep Dingell to RetireA little good news out of DC today with the word that Congressman <a href="http://news.msn.com/us/dingell-longest-serving-congressman-to-retire">John Dingell (D-MI) is finally retiring</a>. Dingell exemplified all that is wrong with our federal government. Career politicians fight for continual growth of government and he is the longest serving congressman at 60 years in office. We can add a touch of nepotism to his list of sins since he became a congressman when he basically inherited his daddy's district in 1955. Good riddance several decades too late!
Disgustingly, <a href="http://www.freep.com/article/20140224/NEWS06/302240077/john-dingell-congress-retire-next">his wife Deborah Dingell (born year before he was first elected to congress) is the early favorite to replace him.</a>LargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-39389937093504650702013-07-28T11:57:00.001-07:002013-07-28T11:57:15.498-07:00We Lost Another Hero - Rest in Peace Col Bud Day, USAF(ret)Colonel Bud Day who was awarded the <b>Medal of Honor</b> for his actions as a Prisoner of War during the Vietnam War died yesterday at the age of 88.<br />
<br />
Day served our nation during World War II, the Korean War and the Vietnam War and was the most highly decorated American since Douglas MacArthur.<br />
<br />
After getting out of the Marines when World War II ended, Day finished high school then attended college and law school on the GI Bill. While attending school he stayed military as a member of the Army Reserves eventually getting a commission as a reserve Air Force officer and orders to flight school. He was called up for the Korean War and afterwards remained on active duty. He was shot down in Nam and broke his arm in three places when he ejected from his plane. He was quickly captures by enemy forces and was tortured and interogated. When his captors let their guard he escaped and evaded re-capture for 12 days and had actually made it back to South Vietnam when a Viet Cong unit shot him twice and took him back to North Vietnam. He was held as a Prisoner of War for over five years. His first cellmate was a near dead John McCain who Day helped nurse off death's door.<br />
<br />
After release from prison, Day fought for veterans benefits particularly health care for disabled vets. He was often asked why he didn't go into politics and he would answer it was same reason he never made general - because he spoke his mind and didn't sugar coat things. He wasn't kidding about that. There was nothing "politically correct" about Colonel Day. You never had a doubt about the sincerity of his opinions. His strong comments in 2004 about John Kerry being a traitor and his more recent comments regarding Islam are testiment to his candor.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;">Colonel Day, Thank you for your service and may you Rest in Peace.</span><br />
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: x-large;">Medal of Honor</span> </div>
<br />
Citation: On 26 August 1967, Col. Day was forced to eject from his
aircraft over North Vietnam when it was hit by ground fire. His right
arm was broken in 3 places, and his left knee was badly sprained. He was
immediately captured by hostile forces and taken to a prison camp where
he was interrogated and severely tortured. After causing the guards to
relax their vigilance, Col. Day escaped into the jungle and began the
trek toward South Vietnam. Despite injuries inflicted by fragments of a
bomb or rocket, he continued southward surviving only on a few berries
and uncooked frogs. He successfully evaded enemy patrols and reached the
Ben Hai River, where he encountered U.S. artillery barrages. With the
aid of a bamboo log float, Col. Day swam across the river and entered
the demilitarized zone. Due to delirium, he lost his sense of direction
and wandered aimlessly for several days. After several unsuccessful
attempts to signal U.S. aircraft, he was ambushed and recaptured by the
Viet Cong, sustaining gunshot wounds to his left hand and thigh. He was
returned to the prison from which he had escaped and later was moved to
Hanoi after giving his captors false information to questions put before
him. Physically, Col. Day was totally debilitated and unable to perform
even the simplest task for himself. Despite his many injuries, he
continued to offer maximum resistance. His personal bravery in the face
of deadly enemy pressure was significant in saving the lives of fellow
aviators who were still flying against the enemy. Col. Day's conspicuous
gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the
call of duty are in keeping with the highest traditions of the U.S. Air
Force and reflect great credit upon himself and the U.S. Armed Forces.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bud_Day#cite_note-22"><span></span></a>LargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-56417672961508904082013-07-21T05:00:00.000-07:002013-07-21T05:00:06.035-07:00Undefended Freedom Doesn't Exist<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgVGr_V7inmU_e3_xgeZwvqDCPjAyMOlBnrc8fZnYGvdRbu_iPlSAzDN-0TxoCOaox0IVJyNnmG4YUbxICRbWd1V5HG67w7yMSxQu-PEIwa65h7X1XwMGSey4R4xN-9LwZCCXO0-UUWogQ/s1600/4th+Amendment.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="425" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgVGr_V7inmU_e3_xgeZwvqDCPjAyMOlBnrc8fZnYGvdRbu_iPlSAzDN-0TxoCOaox0IVJyNnmG4YUbxICRbWd1V5HG67w7yMSxQu-PEIwa65h7X1XwMGSey4R4xN-9LwZCCXO0-UUWogQ/s640/4th+Amendment.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}" data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0].[0]">Defense of the 4th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is not just about the Patriot Act and whatnot. No, the biggest violators
of our constitutional rights are law enforcement at local, state and federal level looking for short cuts. Our courts have allowed law
enforcement to do bad things because societally "we" generally agreed
some crimes were so bad extraordinary measures should be taken to
protect us. </span></span></span></span><br />
<br />
<ol>
<li><span style="font-size: large;"><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}" data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0].[0]">Stopping a car for no reason to see if the driver is
intoxicated? Clearly unconstitutional, but we didn't scream because
drunk driving is bad and blah, blah, blah. </span></span></span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: large;"><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}" data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0].[0]">"Stop and frisk" where cops
can go up to people on the street and search them? No chance that is
really constitutional, but crime is high in some areas so we'll allow
cops to spit on the constitution if it temporarily lowers crime rates in an area. </span></span></span></span></li>
<li><span style="font-size: large;"><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}" data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0].[0]">Fill in the blank __________________ with what ever high profile crime so horrified people that they demanded "something oughta be done." </span></span></span></span></li>
</ol>
<span style="font-size: large;"><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}" data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0].[0]"><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}" data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0].[0]">When
do police violate our rights? When we beg them to. No, people don't
directly and openly ask law enforcement to violate our rights. No, </span></span></span></span></span></span><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}" data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0].[0]"><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}" data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0].[0]"><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}" data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0].[0]">people screamed at politicians to "ensure ______ never happens again" and politicians in turn write legislation unlikely to ensure bad people won't do bad thing but will sound good on the campaign trail. </span></span></span></span></span></span>Allowing infringement of our rights does nothing but give a false sense of security. There
are probably hundreds of other examples where we gave away our
constitutional guarantees of freedom thinking we were only giving away
the freedoms for crooks. <b>Wrong!</b> Gone for the "crooks" also means gone
for you. </span></span></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}" data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0].[0]">I am not anti-law enforcement. However, law enforcement like any government bureaucracy is prone to excess. An "ends justifies the means" mentality quickly develops and often is encouraged in how we reward and promote in law enforcement. </span></span></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}" data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0].[0]">Any right not zealously guarded will not long last and that includes every right delineated in the Bill of Rights. Also, we can not pick and choose to defend only those portions of the Constitution we like. Allow today's hack politician to crap on a right you don't exercise (2nd Amendment, maybe?) and you forfeit the rights you care strongly about. </span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}" data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0].[0]"><br /></span></span></span></span>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-size: large;"><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}" data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0].[0]">I'll finish with a great quote from President Reagan: </span></span></span></span><br />
<h1 class="quoteText">
“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.
We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought
for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we
will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's
children what it was once like in the United States where men were
free.”
</h1>
<span style="font-size: large;"><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}" data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0].[0]"> </span></span></span></span></blockquote>
<span style="font-size: large;"><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}" data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0].[0]"><br /></span></span></span></span>
<span style="font-size: large;"><span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}" data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0].[0]"><br /></span></span></span></span>
<span data-ft="{"tn":"K"}" data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0]"><span data-reactid=".r[2ywis].[1][4][1]{comment571717176199856_2184106}.[0].[right].[0].[left].[0].[0].[0][2].[0].[0]"><br /></span></span></span>LargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-42236774013824727212013-05-27T06:56:00.003-07:002013-05-27T06:56:57.681-07:00Enjoy Memorial DayOn Facebook, Twitter and other mediums there are many posts along the lines of "Memorial Day isn't National Grilling Day. Today we remember those who gave the ultimate sacrifice." or "I know mediocre department store sales are great but they didn't sacrifice everything so you could buy mediocre stuff at a mediocre store.". Lighten up folks. I guarantee you the vast majority of those who we mourn today would enjoy a barbeque or a ball game if they had made it home. They did not serve and fight in anticipation of people being miserable. No, they fought for many reasons but primarily to protect the American way of life. So, celebrate their service and sacrifice today. March in or watch a parade, if you want. Say a prayer for the fallen, if you want. Bottom line is do what you want and remember those who sacrificed so you have that right. Lastly, let me end with a quote that comes close summing up my feelings on this issue.<br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-size: x-large;">"It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived."</span> <span style="font-size: large;">Gen George S. Patton, Jr</span>. </blockquote>
LargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-78897825915105078242013-05-17T10:52:00.002-07:002013-05-17T10:55:31.602-07:00The Power to Tax is the Power to DestroyThe quote used as the title of this post has gotten a lot of play lately with the issue of the Internal Revenue Service targeting non-profit groups with conservative sounding names for extra scrutiny. It originally was said by Daniel Webster in arguing McCullough v. Maryland before the Supreme Court and paraphrased by Chief Justice Marshall in explaining the ruling on that case. That saying was true then and is just as true today. Abuses by the IRS are serious and must be investigated diligently. However, as conservatives we must be careful not to allow liberals to turn this issue around and label us anti-tax extremists. Since the beginning of the Tea Party movement liberals and their allies in the media have tried to marginalize the movement by taking their positions to extreme levels by portraying them as against ALL taxes and ALL government. Nothing could be further from the truth. We understand that there are necessary responsibilities of government and some form of taxation is necessary to fund those responsibilities. The choice is not between an unlimited constantly growing government and no government. Likewise when discussing the title quote the choice is not between the current tax system and no taxes. Once we get past the extremes of all or none we should be able to actually discuss the issue. This concern should be universal. Whether one falls on the right or left of the political spectrum, we should be able to agree there are problems with the current taxation system and it is ripe for abuse. The income tax system is nearly a century old and every session of congress has added rules, regulations and complexity to the system. We now have a system that is very personally invasive and strikes fear in tax payers. While this IRS misbehavior doesn't revolve around individual tax returns or the tax code, this is an issue that resonates with people who may not normally be politically active. Republicans need to take this cause on with more than just lip service. Don't make it only about the malfeasance of the Obama administration. Make abolishing the IRS and re-writing our tax code the primary product we are selling to voters. Every GOP candidate in 2014 should be running on government reform and tax simplification! Push legislation through the House of Representatives regardless of whether it has a chance in the Senate. Make Senate Democrats explain on the campaign trail why they blocked tax simplification!
Hand in hand with selling rewriting the tax code must be a clear explanation of the danger we facing due to the burgeoning national debt. We are nearly 17 trillion dollars in debt. This is not something that is solved by taxing the rich more. The share of that debt is $188k per person and increasing every day. That isn't the share for every household. It is the share of the debt for each individual. A baby born yesterday is starting out close to 200 thousand dollars in debt borrowed on his or her behalf by politicians pretending to be generous.
There are various online debt clocks. I like <a href="http://www.usdebtclock.org/">this one</a> because it breaks it down several different ways. Prior to voting people should be shown the debt clock.
<a href="http://www.usdebtclock.org/"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhzQqK9r9haqd8h-Lhyphenhyphennl7Mee1jy0VKP9PZEN_kdWWGeFc2JkGSRoKG_JPMlHnzC2w4E4iDkovqFsk0xZvXME1eCSAirJM5W_RRpTl4ilrN-JfJ6IUA3uRpNmKWqC7PntYkhsS9o6EBAC8/s1600/US-Debt-Clock-2013-Sequester2.jpg" imageanchor="1" ><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhzQqK9r9haqd8h-Lhyphenhyphennl7Mee1jy0VKP9PZEN_kdWWGeFc2JkGSRoKG_JPMlHnzC2w4E4iDkovqFsk0xZvXME1eCSAirJM5W_RRpTl4ilrN-JfJ6IUA3uRpNmKWqC7PntYkhsS9o6EBAC8/s320/US-Debt-Clock-2013-Sequester2.jpg" /></a>
</a>
UPDATE: For the <a href="http://www.usdebtclock.org/">Debt Clock</a> click the link in last sentence. Clicking the picture just takes you to a blank copy.LargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-78322623439182942472013-05-03T11:08:00.002-07:002013-05-03T11:08:18.428-07:00Political Correctness More Important Than Accuracy?<span style="font-size: large;">From the Iowa Supreme Court we get this little bit of lunacy today: </span><br />
<blockquote>
<span style="font-size: large;"><i>Married same-sex couples have the same rights as married heterosexuals to have both parents listed on the birth certificates of their newborn children, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled this morning</i>.
</span></blockquote>
<span style="font-size: large;">Not to belabor the obvious, but a Birth Certificate is a record of information regarding someone's birth. It should list various identifying information: where, when, doctor's name, baby's name, mother's name and father's name, etc. For the father's name you basically have two choices: if mom knows who the father is then list his name, if mom can't narrow the list down to one name you can list unknown. While a child can be taught to call two different people mommy, reality is the child has only one physiological mother which is who's name should be recorded on the birth certificate. </span>
As a separate note, between this nonsense and the hyphenated name silliness good luck trying to do up family trees in the future.LargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-60886139319032020592013-04-17T13:47:00.001-07:002013-04-17T13:47:20.856-07:00Federalist 62<span style="font-size: large;">It is a sad reflection on our education system that very few people have any idea what the Federalist Papers were and even less would be able to identify the authors. The Federalist Papers were a series of responses to editorial arguments against ratifying the proposed United States Constitution. They were written primarily by Alexander Hamilton and James Madison with John Jay contributing a few. Some of the errors committed by our government over the last 100 plus years can be traced to ignorance of the reasons behind the language of our Constitution. One such area of ignorance is addressed in Federalist Paper #62 which made the case state legislatures selecting U.S. Senators. A key passage in Fed 62 really speaks to our ridiculously voluminous tax code and the monstrous Obama-care nationalization of our health care system. Here is that passage: </span><br />
<blockquote>
<i><span style="font-size: large;">It will be of little avail to the people, that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows what the law is to-day, can guess what it will be to-morrow. Law is defined to be a rule of action; but how can that be a rule, which is little known, and less fixed?</span></i></blockquote>
Here is a link to all the <a href="http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/fed.asp" target="_blank">Federalist Papers </a>from Yale Law SchoolLargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-81792921123572244782012-02-27T14:49:00.001-08:002012-02-27T14:49:46.942-08:00Daily Spiritual Thought or Quote of the Day - 2/27/2012There was a shooting at Chardon High School today that left one child dead and four more injured. The only immediate response to that event that makes any sense is what my sister posted on Facebook later in the day: <blockquote>Got home today and gave my boys big hugs. My prayers go out to all of the people in the Chardon community.</blockquote>
Later on when the dust is settled people can argue about what, if anything, can or should be done to prevent future school shootings. There will be time for the legal system to deal with the shooter. Today people should take a moment to say "I love you" and give a hug to your kids. <b>None of us</b> are guaranteed tomorrow or another opportunity to say something.LargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-88024227918297145322012-02-22T06:32:00.000-08:002012-02-22T06:32:35.195-08:00Daily Spiritual Thought or Quote of the Day - 2/22/2012<span style="font-size: large;"><a href="http://fallibleblogma.com/index.php/why-do-we-wear-ashes-on-ash-wednesday/">Why do we wear ashes on Ash Wednesday</a>?</span> <br />
<blockquote>
Many people, including Catholics themselves, have no idea why we walk around on Ash Wednesday with dirty black smudges on our foreheads.
First, it’s not a smudge. It’s supposed to be a cross drawn with ash. However, some of the people administering the ashes are a little better artists than others. Either way, it gets the job done.
Second, the ashes represent our mortality and are an outward sign of our sinfulness.
But why would anyone want to be reminded of this?</blockquote>
Click the <a href="http://fallibleblogma.com/index.php/why-do-we-wear-ashes-on-ash-wednesday/">link for the rest of the column at Fallible Blogma</a>.LargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-9677535334016199672012-02-20T14:50:00.000-08:002012-02-20T14:50:40.913-08:00Daily Spiritual Thought or Quote of the Day - 2/20/2012Sirach 2:4-5 <br />
<blockquote>
<i><span style="font-size: large;">"Accept whatever befalls you, in a crushing misfortune be patient; For in fire gold is tested, and worthy men in the crucible of humiliation."</span></i></blockquote>
<br />
None of us enjoy being humiliated. In fact the primary reason people dread public speaking is due to fear of humiliation. However, humiliation is necessary in our lives to help us achieve a humble heart. Part of the process of advancing to Chief Petty Officer in the U.S. Navy is learning to accept bad situations with humility and grace. Our CPO creed contains this paragraph: <br />
<blockquote>
So this is why you were caused to experience these things. You were subjected to humiliations to prove to you that humility is a good, a great, a necessary change which cannot mar you—which in fact, strengthens you, and in your future as a CHIEF PETTY OFFICER, you will be caused to suffer indignities, to experience humiliations far beyond those imposed upon you today. Bear them with the dignity, and with the same good grace, which you bore these today.
</blockquote>
<br />
Accept those events in life that humble you as they will help avoid the personal failing of excessive pride.LargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-14823596119369588782012-02-19T11:17:00.000-08:002012-02-19T11:17:42.836-08:00Daily Spiritual Thought or Quote of the Day - 2/19/2012Matthew 6:24 <span style="font-size: large;">"<i>No one can serve two masters. He will either hate one and love the other, or be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon</i>."</span><br />
<br />
There is much disagreement and confusion about Biblical references to money. Money by itself is not evil. Even ambition or desiring to be successful is not inherently evil. Many actions, traits, behaviors are perfectly fine in moderation but can be occasions of sin if done to excess. For example gluttony can be a sin but obviously eating isn't sinful.<br />
<br />
<br />LargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-53976432809001479382012-02-17T12:43:00.000-08:002012-02-17T12:43:47.360-08:00Daily Spiritual Thought or Quote of the Day - 2/17/2012Psalm 118:24 <span style="font-size: large;">"</span><i><span style="font-size: large;">This is the day the Lord has made; </span></i><br />
<i><span style="font-size: large;"> let us rejoice in it and be glad.</span></i><span style="font-size: large;">"</span><br />
<br />
That segment of Psalm 118 has been read to mean different things. To me, it says "stop and smell the flowers." We all can get in a hurry and start worrying about tomorrow before tomorrow's time and forget to enjoy today. An old quote includes the adage: "Today is called the present because it is God's gift to us." We should remember to fully appreciate the gift in front of us instead of pondering a future present.<br />
<br />
Another quote on this subject: "<i>Yesterday is the tomb of time, and tomorrow is the womb of time. Only now is yours</i>." R.G. LeeLargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-9446277430326371562012-02-16T16:13:00.000-08:002012-02-16T16:13:34.122-08:00Daily Spiritual Thought or Quote of the Day.I was recently asked by a friend who occasionally visits this blog if I've stopped blogging altogether. Obviously that is a sign I haven't been posting often enough. I responded with a combination of an excuse of "too busy" and just haven't seen much in the news that interested me enough to take the time to post.<br />
<br />
I've decided to start up again. I think part of the reason I slacked off was the length of some of my posts. To make it easier to post regularly, I'll mix in a <span style="font-size: xx-small;">(hopefully daily) </span>Daily Spiritual Thought or a Quote of the Day. I'll give attribution when known. A word of caution: my merely sharing/repeating a quote <b>may or may NOT equate agreement</b> with the sentiment contained therein. Might just be a quote I thought worth sharing to demonstrate the fallacy of the idea expressed. Here is the first.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;">"</span><span style="font-size: large;"><i>I have been suspected of being what is called a fundamentalist. That is because I never regard any narrative as unhistorical simply on the ground that is includes the miraculous.</i>"</span><br />
<br />
C. S. LewisLargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-68906063551043563512012-01-18T07:08:00.000-08:002012-01-18T07:10:21.161-08:00Regarding Romney's TaxesIn the recent debates trailing candidates attempting to trip up the front runner asked/demanded that he release his tax returns and since then it has been a growing issue. Whether it is bored media looking for something to fill air time or supporters of other candidates, there has been a a lot of discussion of whether Gov. Romney should release his past tax returns. Romney in response has shifted his position from "<i>nothing to see here</i>" to briefly discussing his tax situation and saying he'll release the returns at a later date.
My feelings on this issue are mixed. I am not a Romney supporter because based on considerable research by a couple people (<a href="http://www.bizzyblog.com/index.php?s=Romney&search=Search">Tom Blumer</a> & <a href="http://baseballcrank.com/archives2/2012/01/politics_the_ro_2.php">Dan McLaughlin</a>) whose opinions I've learned to trust he is not someone we can rely upon to do the right thing and moreover his main selling point of "most electable" is clearly a myth.
However, I can not get on board with the "Release the Tax Records" line of attack for several reasons.
Primarily, I'm opposed to this as it reeks of the leftist nonsense of demonize this guy because his returns show he's rich or they reveal that his accountants properly applied current law to minimize his tax burden. As conservatives, do we want to attack someone for being successful? Do we want to criticize him for correctly following the law? Hopefully, your answer to both is a resounding NO!
Secondly, what do we expect to learn from Romney's tax returns? Will we find out he is rich? Nope, that is already known. Will we find out that he pays a lower rate of tax based on the majority of his income being dividends, long term capital gains and other investment income as opposed to regular wages paid on a W-2. Nope, that also is already known.
<b>All Romney's tax returns should do is confirm that our tax system is a horrific mess which needs to be greatly simplified or abolished.</b> Beyond that, the fact that everyone is clamoring for his returns shows what a gross violation of our privacy the mandatory income tax return entails. People over the last decade have denounced the Patriot Act over manufactured fears of loss of privacy yet they voluntarily provide all sorts of information to the government every year in hope of getting a tax refund. In recent years, I'll admit I joined in the laughter as released tax returns from various politicians confirm that most liberals (<span style="font-size: x-small;">who believe charity starts and ends with government taxation</span>) give very little to charity while those greedy conservatives turn out to be veryy generous. Thing is, it is none of my business whether my neighbor or a political candidate tithes to their church or gives to the Salvation Army, etc. Yet, because our income tax system has gotten so ridiculous all of that information is considered fair game. It is wrong. We should elect candidates based on their policy positions and readiness to perform the duties of the office they are seeking.LargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-56605218201058764622012-01-14T07:23:00.000-08:002012-01-14T08:54:00.271-08:00The USMC Urination KerfluffleAs you're likely aware a video was made public this week that shows some Marines peeing on what looks to be bodies of deceased enemy. Predictably, some people are rushing to pass judgment and condemn those Marines. In my opinion too much is being made of this and we will soon be excessively punishing these guys. Let me make a few points we should be able to agree upon:<br />- War is Hell. That is not just an old saying, but a profound truth. <br />- Our soldiers and Marines have made multiple war zone deployments since the start of the War on Terror. We have asked them to endure incredible hardships.<br />- They have killed the enemy and seen friends die and suffer severe injuries. That affects a person in ways the rest of us can not fully appreciate.<br />- During every war, combatants relieve stress in ways that would be abhorrent to those of us back in civilization.<br />- Desecrating a corpse is clearly bad, disgusting and wrong and they shouldn't have done it.<br />- Just as we didn't need to hear every misdeed in wars past (and don't doubt for a second that the war fighters in the "Greatest Generation" relieved war fatigue or stress in horrific ways as well), we did <span style="font-weight:bold;">NOT</span> need to find out about this minor transgression.<br />- In the 21st century anyone with a cell phone is a potential camera man ready to document the good and the bad.<br />- The video should never have been uploaded to the internet.<br /><br />Having said all that, we are left with the fact that the video got shared online and you can't put that genie back in the bottle. Our politicians are certainly breathing down the military's neck demanding swift and dramatic justice. In a just world, the "buddy" who put the video online would be the only one facing any retribution as he not only betrayed his comrades, but also clearly helped Taliban recruiting and gave them justification for future actions on their parts. We don't live in a just world and this traitor will be hailed as a courageous whistle blower. BS! If he wanted to blow the whistle he could have gone up the chain of command and reported this misbehavior. If he had done the right thing those men would likely have been chewed out and given appropriate punishment (restriction to barracks, loss of pay or rank, etc) and they also would have been afforded counseling to see if they were adjusting properly to returning to civilization. Now, they will probably face career ending Courts Martial level punishment as the Generals will sacrifice these men to appease angry and appalled civilian "leadership." Our politicians will go over board to make the case that what these guys did is not in accord with our value system. well, no kidding. Guess what? Shooting people is not in accord with our value system either. We send our military people off to foreign lands to do ugly stuff and then act horrified to find out they did ugly stuff we didn't specifically ask them to do.<br /><br />Lastly, so no one thinks I'm justifying war crimes and excusing any and all behavior let me be clear I definitely am not. There are of course rules of war to preclude raping, plundering and pillaging and to protect innocent civilians. Our soldiers should be re-instructed on those rules before deploying and violations should be dealt with when identified. However, I maintain this is not similar to My Lai where civilians were slaughtered. This was nothing more than stressed out men relieving themselves on dead enemy combatants.LargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-39092798329297599292012-01-06T09:01:00.000-08:002012-01-06T09:41:39.128-08:00Recess AppointmentsThe last paragraph of Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution states: <blockquote>"The President shall have the Power to fill up all <span style="font-weight:bold;">Vacancies that may happen during</span> the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.</blockquote><br />President Obama is clearly misusing and abusing this authority with his recent appointments to the National Labor Relations Board and the appointment of Richard Cordray to head the newly created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. None of these appointments were made to fill vacancies that happened during a Senate recess. <br /><br />Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution says of the president: <blockquote>Before he enter on the Execution of the Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:-"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."</blockquote><br />By his recent usurpation of congressional powers by ignoring the requirement of obtaining advise and consent of the Senate for these appointments is obviously in violation of the Constitution. These actions warrant serious response from the legislative branch. Making a few speeches denouncing this action is insufficient. The leaders in the Senate and House of Representatives need to make an unequivocal demand for President Obama to back down with the clear message that failure to obey the Constitution will result in initiation of impeachment proceedings.LargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-28385016672946733002011-08-20T03:26:00.000-07:002011-08-20T07:53:11.872-07:00Is There a Deadline for Entering the Presidential Race?Recently people have been agitating about Sarah Palin. "Why won't she declare that she is running?", they ask. "Why doesn't she bow out and endorse someone in the race?", they demand. I sense what "they" mean is why doesn't she get out of the way of my preferred candidate. To all of the various plaintive cries for her to decide immediately, I say what's the rush? Why are all these people rushing in to a race that is so far off? Other than Gov. Rick Perry who just declared last Saturday, all of the GOP candidates jumped into the fray way too early. At this point in 1951, Gen. Dwight Eisenhower was still serving as Supreme NATO Commander in Europe. When did we start making a presidential campaign a two year process? If my memory serves me, it is a recent phenomenon of starting active campaigning prior to January of the election year. Why are candidates deciding to enter the fray earlier? In the 2008 campaign Fred Thompson was criticized for supposedly starting late. The complaints about Thompson's entry into the race centered on the notion that money had already been committed to other candidates. I could be wrong, but the money issue may not be as critical to a potential Palin campaign. A lot of campaign funds go towards staff and administrative concern (travel, etc), but by far the largest expenditure is on advertising to get the candidate's name out to potential voters. With her strong base of support and very active presence in social media Palin may be able to overcome some of those concerns. If Palin chooses to enter the race for the GOP nomination I have no doubt that even if she makes her announcement in October she will quickly raise enough money to wage an effective primary campaign.
<br />
<br />Bottom line: people need to just relax. Sure, we all want Obama out of office. However, starting the primary season earlier doesn't bring the election or the next inauguration any sooner. Clearing the field for a nominee immediately just allows the extreme left wing media more time to undermine our nominee. Look how Perry has been treated since his announcement. Media attacks the one in best shape to beat Obama. Notice the media is not attacking Romney as he is their preferred candidate against Obama.
<br />
<br />Regardless of who ends up our nominee, we need to ensure we have properly and fully vetted the candidate well ahead of the general election. Dem's and their complicit allies in the media will be doing opposition research and we don't need any October surprises (Bush DUI for example). Right now Palin is the only GOP candidate who has been vetted. Thoroughly check out the rest. They are applying for an important job so we need to give them a serious review.LargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-23213445409221445012011-08-13T10:19:00.000-07:002011-08-13T13:16:45.109-07:00A Vigorous Examination of Candidates During a Primary is a Good ThingRecently, I've heard a lot of comments on Twitter and at various blogs that run along the lines of condemning any criticism of someone else's preferred candidate as a sin of Republicans eating their own. There is some element of validity to that sentiment. It would be nonsensical for me to call anyone not 100% in agreement with me on the issues a RINO. I also think there are lines that shouldn't be crossed and things that shouldn't be said in an attempt to run down someone in your own party to bolster your preferred candidate. Having said that, there is nothing wrong with an open, honest fight for the nomination. You are not trashing Gov. Rick Perry by bringing up his stance on immigration as shown by the Texas version of the DREAM Act. You are not unfairly trashing Mitt Romney by bringing up the similarity of his health care plan to Obama-care. A candidates voting record is fair game. If that makes things difficult for people with long legislative careers, so be it.
<br />
<br />There are some things that should not be regular parts of your case against a candidate. A candidate's religion or ethnicity should be off limits. I'd also say lay off Huntsman's service as Ambassador to China in Obama's administration. If the president asks you to serve our country and you can do so without compromising your values you should answer that call. A candidate's weight or appearance shouldn't be a disqualification and obsessing on it reflects poorly on those who do. For the most part the candidate's family shouldn't be fair game.
<br />
<br />The better informed the electorate is about the candidates hopefully the better outcome we will get from elections. Let the people decide at the ballot box how relevant things are to fulfilling the duties of the office. Some may believe Perry's college grades are a big deal. Personally, if I'm hiring a 60 year old man for a job I'm looking at his accomplishments not his college grades from decades ago. Every knock on a candidate should be weighed in that manner. Each voter has to decide for themselves what matters most to them and vote accordingly. After the primary season is over the differences must be forgotten.
<br />
<br />Please use the comment box to elaborate on this subject. What is appropriate or inappropriate in your opinion?LargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5601923053821864778.post-17706498097262136122011-08-01T13:37:00.000-07:002011-08-01T14:21:40.010-07:00Who Exactly are the Terrorists here?After the attacks of 9/11 some apologists of Islamic extremists fought against certain people being labeled terrorists. Some repeated the cliche "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" which was coined decades prior during the conflict between British forces and the Irish Republican Army. Since then some on the left have used that phrase to excuse supporting murderous thugs like Che Guevara. The general gist of the phrase is meant to imply that if the people we are calling terrorists were on our side we wouldn't be denouncing their actions, but would rather celebrate their successes. Obviously, intelligent people can see through that flawed logic and dismiss it as nonsense. What brings the question up now? Well, today Vice President Joe Biden said the following: "They have acted like terrorists" in reference to Tea Party congressmen. So, let me get this straight, we have to be very careful about using labels like terrorist and must not rush to judgment in regards to <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/us/2009/11/06/army-fort-hood-gunman-custody-killed-injured-rampage/">crazy Muslims who kill people</a>, but it is perfectly fine to equate citizens concerned with our national debt exceeding 14 TRILLION dollars with terrorists. No, Mr. Biden, it is slimy politicians of your ilk who have spent other peoples money to bribe voters with promises of never ending government largesse that are terrorizing our grandchildren with debt they'll never be able to realistically pay down with out creating an economy that will put the great depression to shame. Mr Vice President by once again refusing to deal with our nations debt problem, you and your colleagues in DC have only assured the problem will get much worse. Anyone who has ever paid for anything with credit knows full well that debt is not like wine or cheese it does NOT get better with age. The entrenched political hacks in DC failed again and some like Biden are attacking the only people who wanted to actually address the problem. Pathetic!LargeBillhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13231452147187641675noreply@blogger.com0