General David Petraeus did a fine job as a general. He did what he was supposed to do as a lifelong soldier. His predecessors did the very same thing when they were in charge of a "war". He led the surge in Iraq and became widely known for his leadership no matter what the eventual outcome of the military's efforts might be.
The only other "wars" we have been involved in without a declaration of war were in Korea and Vietnam. The wars of: 1812, Mexican-American, Spanish-American, WWI, and WWII were declared wars done in accordance with the constitution. Since WWII, our armed interventions, or police actions, or freedom movements, or whatever our military sojourns into foreign countries might be called, have been authorized by the use of the "War Powers Act". The constitution states that only the Congress has the power to levy wars, but does not limit how that might be accomplished - the intent was quite clear, but the brilliant Washington minds found a way to pass that power to the President with the War Powers Act and then in 1973 a "joint resolution of Congress". These empowered the President to act without further consent from the elected officials and blast away at will.
I'm really digressing into another subject, but shall return to Petraeus in a short.
Generals are supposed to win, but to win they have to wage war-that is the ultimate test of their dedication and leadership. How many peacetime generals have found their way into headlines, or news broadcasts, or can be remembered by the average person? In Korea, over 33,000 Americans died at a cost (in 1950's dollars) of over 54 billion. Vietnam left us with over 58,000 dead Americans and an expense (in 60's and 70's dollars) of over 111 billion dollars. How about the results-lives and dollars well spent? Please define the winners. Now, the Iraq "war" has cost some 4500 American lives along with over 30,000 seriously wounded with a price tag over a trillion dollars. Have the generals won? Has America won? The names of generals MacArthur, Westmoreland and Patraeus became famous as a result of those wars. Oh yeah, Bush, the one whose Presidential powers were used to start the Iraq "war" let us know we had won in Iraq in 2003 with his "Mission Accomplished" speech. All this leads to another blog subject such as, should Patton have marched onward, should Truman have allowed MacArthur to continue on his way, did Secretary of Defense McNamara lie and should Cheney have been believed about WMD's in Iraq? Who should control wars, generals or politicians?
General Petraeus did the same thing in Iraq as General Westmoreland in Vietnam. He asked for more troops. He was essentially the coach and he did what he was tasked to do and he did what generals want to do. The difference between a general and a football coach is the coach can't send 45 men onto the field against a team of 11 no matter who they might try to convince. Generals, with the support of the President, can win the battle. The war, however, seems to never end. Petraeus received more troops and he received great notoriety. He retired from the Army and was appointed head of the CIA. Now we begin to venture into some unknown territory. Is the CIA an intelligence organization or another branch of our military? Why would a general, accustomed to doing what generals do, lead something that is designed to provide intelligence? Once again, a subject for another writing.
All this leads to the subject of the resignation. The published reason is that the general had an extra-marital affair with his biographer. That's no doubt true, but how would that lead to some ultra-moral decision that he must resign? Certainly, there is no precedent for that even at the presidential level. Could it be that the attack in Benghazi, which left 4 Americans, including an Ambassador, dead might find a tainted trail leading to the CIA? Our President, in response to the attack, upheld the first story given the world by our government that the cause of the attack was the production of a movie offensive to Muslims. He said, "We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, but there is absolutely no justification for this type of senseless violence-none!". Now, either the President was involved in attempting to mislead the world or the President himself had been misled. What is the primary source of the "intelligence"? The CIA. Either way, there lies a host of questions about the organization under the leadership of Petraeus and numerous inquiries are underway to find out both what the CIA knew and what involvement the CIA has/had in Libya. History, whether it is learned quickly or decades from now, will surely show that just as McNamara lied about Vietnam and Colin Powell was misled into telling the world about the non-existent Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, there is a story about the CIA and Libya that will become an embarrassment to our country. So, just as any wise general would do when he realizes an unstoppable missile is on its way to his location, he ducks and runs. Smart military strategy.
The whole point of this diatribe is simple. Somewhere, really high up in the anointed city, there is a truth that the outsiders, the American people, are not supposed to learn. The anointed ones, in their city of vast wisdom too complex for plain folks to understand, will spin this like a top.
Sunday, November 11, 2012
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
Election 2012
Strange things happen in this world every day. Sometimes they are noteworthy, other times they come and go and are seldom noticed.
It seems fitting that when strange or odd things take place in public elections, the results should become highly newsworthy and the public (voters) should pay very close attention so as to avoid future oddities. The vote is a very sacred tool given to Americans in a fashion not found in other countries around the world. The vote gives the populace the opportunity to select whom they believe is the best person to represent them in a given elected position. Ideally, individuals will learn about the various candidates for whom they might vote and make their decisions based upon an informed and intelligent review of the persons seeking office.
I have to suppose that the ideal situation does not always exist. Perhaps, just slightly maybe, eligible voters actually go to the polls with absolutely no reasonable purpose and cast their vote in a fit of misguided affiliation or complete ignorance. Perhaps.….
Consider, if you will, the victory given to Alabama Republican, 77 year old Charles Beasley. Mr. Beasley regained his old seat on the Bibb County Commission in Central Alabama winning with 52% of the vote. Great job on the part of his supporters, however Mr. Beasley had passed away on October 12 - several weeks prior to the election. Well informed voters?
A much more important elected position was the Orange County Tax Collector in Orlando, Florida. Mr. Earl K. Wood, a Democrat, was re-elected to the position he had held for 12 terms, nearly half a century! He was just coming into his own and really learning the job requirements at 96 years of age. Despite the fact Mr. Wood was oft criticized for seldom coming into the office, he retained his position with 56% of the vote. Oh yeah, he too had passed away in October – weeks before the election. This might give one pause to consider that not all voters are completely prepared to make the wisest of decisions. At least in this instance only 56% of the voters who actually went to the polls voted for a dead man.
Can it be worse? What about re-electing a Representative to the United States House of Representatives who has not been in his office since summer of 2011? Democrat Jesse Jackson, Jr has held one of the highest elected offices in this nation since a special election in 1995. Among his most recent credentials are his in-patient treatments for bi-polar disorder and deep depression – some particularly worthy attributes for a U.S. Representative. Add to that resume the fact that he is being investigated by both the House Ethics Committee and the FBI for a variety of wrongdoings and criminal activities. Without him even offering a campaign, he has succeeded in retaining his elected office by winning with over 70% of the vote. Surely, the people who have kept him in this high position have some great insider information to which the general population is not privy. Educated vote? Intelligent vote? Informed vote? A vote for a person best suited for the job? A vote cast by individuals concerned about the performance of an elected official? A vote by anyone with any concern for the future of our nation?
And to top it all – Hussein Obama as president. What might I say other than ????????
It seems fitting that when strange or odd things take place in public elections, the results should become highly newsworthy and the public (voters) should pay very close attention so as to avoid future oddities. The vote is a very sacred tool given to Americans in a fashion not found in other countries around the world. The vote gives the populace the opportunity to select whom they believe is the best person to represent them in a given elected position. Ideally, individuals will learn about the various candidates for whom they might vote and make their decisions based upon an informed and intelligent review of the persons seeking office.
I have to suppose that the ideal situation does not always exist. Perhaps, just slightly maybe, eligible voters actually go to the polls with absolutely no reasonable purpose and cast their vote in a fit of misguided affiliation or complete ignorance. Perhaps.….
Consider, if you will, the victory given to Alabama Republican, 77 year old Charles Beasley. Mr. Beasley regained his old seat on the Bibb County Commission in Central Alabama winning with 52% of the vote. Great job on the part of his supporters, however Mr. Beasley had passed away on October 12 - several weeks prior to the election. Well informed voters?
A much more important elected position was the Orange County Tax Collector in Orlando, Florida. Mr. Earl K. Wood, a Democrat, was re-elected to the position he had held for 12 terms, nearly half a century! He was just coming into his own and really learning the job requirements at 96 years of age. Despite the fact Mr. Wood was oft criticized for seldom coming into the office, he retained his position with 56% of the vote. Oh yeah, he too had passed away in October – weeks before the election. This might give one pause to consider that not all voters are completely prepared to make the wisest of decisions. At least in this instance only 56% of the voters who actually went to the polls voted for a dead man.
Can it be worse? What about re-electing a Representative to the United States House of Representatives who has not been in his office since summer of 2011? Democrat Jesse Jackson, Jr has held one of the highest elected offices in this nation since a special election in 1995. Among his most recent credentials are his in-patient treatments for bi-polar disorder and deep depression – some particularly worthy attributes for a U.S. Representative. Add to that resume the fact that he is being investigated by both the House Ethics Committee and the FBI for a variety of wrongdoings and criminal activities. Without him even offering a campaign, he has succeeded in retaining his elected office by winning with over 70% of the vote. Surely, the people who have kept him in this high position have some great insider information to which the general population is not privy. Educated vote? Intelligent vote? Informed vote? A vote for a person best suited for the job? A vote cast by individuals concerned about the performance of an elected official? A vote by anyone with any concern for the future of our nation?
And to top it all – Hussein Obama as president. What might I say other than ????????
Monday, November 5, 2012
Cooperative Senate
With all my rants about the inefficiency of our elected Congress, I have to give pause and show how our Senators can actually come together for a common cause. With little fanfare and hardly any news coverage, on Sept 12,2012 the Senate was able to pass Senate Resolution 553, known as the FPAD, by unanimous consent. There were no naysayers from either party and they actually acted in concert to pass this resolution and designate September 22 as the official FPAD.
Unfortunately,neither the liberal CNN nor the conservative FOX channels provided news coverage of this momentous vote and left the vast majority of Americans without adequate knowledge of this important day.
FPAD is the acronym for Fall Prevention Awareness Day! The Centers for Disease Control has compiled statistcs for the many billions of dollars wasted annually on persons over 65 years of age who are either injured or killed by an accidental fall. Obviously, with the awareness created by FPAD, citizens over 65 will have a huge advantage in the FAF (my acronym-Fight Against Falls). Imagine, if you can, reaching the age of 65 and no one having made you aware that you might fall and injure yourself! Even worse, what if you have far exceeded 65 and never had the opportunity to celebrate FPAD. You might fall down...
I write not to diminsh the real pain and suffering which is experienced by elder folks taking a tumble, but to point out the time spent by Senators actually drafting resolutions and taking time on the Senate floor to explain and pass those resolutions. Somehow, I have to believe there are slightly more important issues with which they might spend their time.
It is refreshing to see that elected officials can agree on passing something. It is saddening to look at the voting records and realize that, on a roughly 90% average, the votes are strictly along party lines. One has to believe, despite their party affiliation, that there are some good ideas actually presented by members of both parties. The current party system is reminiscent of the relationship between the crips and the bloods-either you're with us or you're against us. No crossing lines is tolerated by either side and dire consequences follow if one steps away from their own party to vote as they please. If the importance of the party itself and the hopes for re-election were not paramount within our Congress, we might have a bit better country in which to live.
Unfortunately,neither the liberal CNN nor the conservative FOX channels provided news coverage of this momentous vote and left the vast majority of Americans without adequate knowledge of this important day.
FPAD is the acronym for Fall Prevention Awareness Day! The Centers for Disease Control has compiled statistcs for the many billions of dollars wasted annually on persons over 65 years of age who are either injured or killed by an accidental fall. Obviously, with the awareness created by FPAD, citizens over 65 will have a huge advantage in the FAF (my acronym-Fight Against Falls). Imagine, if you can, reaching the age of 65 and no one having made you aware that you might fall and injure yourself! Even worse, what if you have far exceeded 65 and never had the opportunity to celebrate FPAD. You might fall down...
I write not to diminsh the real pain and suffering which is experienced by elder folks taking a tumble, but to point out the time spent by Senators actually drafting resolutions and taking time on the Senate floor to explain and pass those resolutions. Somehow, I have to believe there are slightly more important issues with which they might spend their time.
It is refreshing to see that elected officials can agree on passing something. It is saddening to look at the voting records and realize that, on a roughly 90% average, the votes are strictly along party lines. One has to believe, despite their party affiliation, that there are some good ideas actually presented by members of both parties. The current party system is reminiscent of the relationship between the crips and the bloods-either you're with us or you're against us. No crossing lines is tolerated by either side and dire consequences follow if one steps away from their own party to vote as they please. If the importance of the party itself and the hopes for re-election were not paramount within our Congress, we might have a bit better country in which to live.
Sunday, November 4, 2012
Important Quotes - A Great Nation
I apologize for the length of the following list of quotes, but I believe them to be appropriate to the state of our nation and the direction in which it is moving. The very first one is, no doubt, the most profound. The troubling aspect of it all is reading quotations from our own president and the direct contradictions he represents to this country's great history. He takes pride in making changes to long held principles upheld by the previous 43 elected presidents. Change – you betcha, we've got it like we haven't had in 236 years of freedom. It's not all the president's fault. We have been on a disastrous course for too long and he simply embodies the antithesis to the ideals of our founding fathers. Please read all the way through.
From Joseph Stalin:
-America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within
From the Communist Manifesto (Necessities for success)
-Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
-A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
-Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
-Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.
-Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
-Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
-Free education for all children in public schools.
From Adolph Hitler:
-The receptivity of the masses is very limited, their intelligence is small, but their power of forgetting is enormous. In consequence of these facts, all effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these in slogans until the last member of the public understands what you want him to understand by your slogan
-The victor will never be asked if he told the truth.
-If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.
-What good fortune for governments that the people do not think.
-I use emotion for the many and reserve reason for the few.
From Karl Marx:
-History calls those men the greatest who have ennobled themselves by working for the common good; experience acclaims as happiest the man who has made the greatest number of people happy.
-The bureaucracy is a circle from which no one can escape. Its hierarchy is a hierarchy of knowledge.
-The bureaucrat has the world as a mere object of his action.
-The slave frees himself when, of all the relations of private property, he abolishes only the relation of slavery and thereby becomes a proletarian; the proletarian can free himself only by abolishing private property in general.
-A house may be large or small; as long as the neighboring houses are likewise small, it satisfies all social requirement for a residence. But let there arise next to the little house a palace, and the little house shrinks to a hut. The little house now makes it clear that its inmate has no social position at all to maintain.
From Hussein Obama:
-You know, my faith is one that admits some doubt.
-Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek.
-America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles of justice and progress, tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.
-It was not a religion that attacked us that September day. It was al-Qaeda. We will not sacrifice the liberties we cherish or hunker down behind walls of suspicion and mistrust.
-We are not at war against Islam.
-I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.
-I think when you spread the wealth around it's good for everybody
-And we have done more in the two and a half years that I've been in here than the previous 43 Presidents to uphold that principle, whether it's ending "don't ask, don't tell," making sure that gay and lesbian partners can visit each other in hospitals, making sure that federal benefits can be provided to same-sex couples.
-The thing about hip-hop today is it's smart, it's insightful. The way they can communicate a complex message in a very short space is remarkable.
-We can't have special interests sitting shotgun. We gotta have middle class families up in front. We don't mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back.
-We all remember Abraham Lincoln as the leader who saved our Union. Founder of the Republican Party.
-I cannot swallow whole the view of Lincoln as the Great Emancipator.
-I mean, I do think at a certain point you've made enough money.
-We've protected thousands of people in Libya; we have not seen a single U.S. casualty; there's no risks of additional escalation. This operation is limited in time and in scope.
-The leader of genius must have the ability to make different opponents appear as if they belonged to one category.
From Howie Irwin:
I love this country – these United States of America. I was able to serve in both the Army and the Air Force. My time spent in those organizations was not always pleasant, but despite any adversities and idealogical differences there was an underlying patriotism within me that, if necessary, I would sacrifice so much as my own life to preserve the freedoms, principles and morals so dear to the population of this Nation.
What now? How might we define any principles and morals upheld by our very own government? Sure, we can attend the churches of our choice, we can have open conversations with friends and acquaintances about our personal values, but political correctness seems to obstruct the free expression of feelings by anyone seeking political office. Special interest groups have so amassed themselves with their outspoken agendas that politicians are afraid to speak whatever they might truly stand for or believe.
How can a country with the foundations of this one have allowed a select few to prevent prayer in schools, invocations at ballgames and even the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in school? We send young men and women into foreign countries to defend the fundamentals of democracy, yet the very country for which they battle has turned from a democratic society to one frequently governed by a court system. Yes, there are provisions for our Congress to overturn decisions made by our courts that are totally contrary to the foundation of our Nation's beliefs; however, the positions of the two parties representing the people are so polarized that they refuse to work together to accomplish anything of substance for the good of all.
It appears that Joseph Stalin was prophetic in his pronouncements of collapse from within. How might someone with great wisdom define "the Republic for which it stands" as stated in the Pledge of Allegiance? For what do we stand? Shall we increase the amounts taken from those who are determined to educate themselves and work hard and give more to those who choose to allow the "government" to provide for them? As we are forced to remove any references to God from public places along with tributes representative of faith from public locations because they are "offensive" to a tiny minority, shall we not have to ultimately destroy our churches to pacify those same malcontents? Is it to be incumbent upon our society to give privilege to those who classify themselves as minority – whether defined as race, sexual preference, or gender? Shall we allow a federal government, whose powers are specifically limited in our constitution, to determine what freedoms we may exert and to control every facet of our lives despite the fact we have the alleged power to vote?
How I wish there would come a groundswell of enthusiasm to find individuals willing to espouse their true feelings, willing to run for public office and actually able to succeed in becoming elected. Stalin's predictions can be overcome. I hope that within my lifetime the ground begins to quiver from other than a quake!
Saturday, November 3, 2012
Obamacare and the Supreme Court
It was a sad day for all citizens of the United States when the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Roberts, ruled that Obamacare, as it is known, is constitutional. It was highly anticipated that the liberal side of the court would blindly kowtow to the wishes of this administration, but equally expected was that the justices endowed with some level of good sense would recognize the unconstitutional aspects of a ridiculous law. Justice Roberts, in a grand display of idiocy, sided with the liberals on the court and actually wrote the opinion for the majority upholding the law as constitutional. I have to wonder if he, or any of the other justices, has ever read the constitution. The interesting part of this whole debacle comes from his Honor's own majority opinion. From the written opinion: "If an individual does not maintain health insurance, the only consequence is that he must make an additional payment to the IRS when he pays his taxes." He adds "the mandate is not a legal command to buy insurance. Rather, it makes going without insurance just another thing the government taxes, like buying gasoline or earning an income".
The Obamacare bill, which was passed by Congress, is a healthcare bill which provides (amongst many other absurdities) penalties for people not having health insurance – it is not a taxation bill and it does not address the penalties as being a tax and was not passed as a tax law. (This bill and its implementing regulations contain over 2,100,000 words. The Bible has approximately 830,000 words. Did the justices read that?)
The reason I find this so interesting is that only the Congress is empowered to levy taxes. Not the Supreme Court! With good reason. The Congress is elected by, and supposedly mandated by, the populace to represent them in all matters. The justices are appointed and haven't the same oversight afforded the people as with the Congress. A direct quote from the constitution states: "The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"
How do these majority justices, led by Roberts, feel the Supreme Court can mandate a tax on anyone for anything? By the way, the taxation on gasoline to which he refers is, by the court's own rulings and definitions, considered an "indirect" tax. In that light a taxable consequence is only generated by the action of the ultimate taxpayer (i.e., the purchase of gasoline or goods and services, etc.) and the tax is collected by an intermediary, such as a gas station or retail outlet, and it is paid to the government by the one collecting the taxes. An "indirect tax" is completely different from a "direct" tax. A direct tax, such as the income tax, is levied upon the individual and paid directly to the government. The Supreme Court, with fewer liberals who don't know or care about the constitution on the team, has repeatedly ruled that "direct taxes" must be levied on an equal basis (albeit different brackets within the income tax system are allowed) and never in U.S. law has there ever been allowed a direct tax levied disparately upon different individuals. Justice Robert's written opinion makes it obvious that he, and the majority justices, believe they can determine the need for, and mandate a direct tax on the distinct group of citizens who do not have health care insurance. A direct taxation levied by any government must meet exceptionally high standards or risk becoming the very thing which caused the founding of the United States.
"The unconditional, inexorable aspect of the direct tax was a paramount concern of people in the 18th century seeking to escape tyrannical forms of government and to safeguard individual liberty. An 18th century writing about this kind of taxation explained:
“ The power of direct taxation applies to every individual ... it cannot be evaded like the objects of imposts or excise, and will be paid, because all that a man hath will he give for his head. This tax is so congenial to the nature of despotism, that it has ever been a favorite under such governments. ... The power of direct taxation will further apply to every individual ... however oppressive, the people will have but this alternative, either to pay the tax, or let their property be taken for all resistance will be vain. [2]"
If Chicken Little were to gaze upward today, he might be correct in his pronouncement of the falling sky. The sky over this Nation is in the worst situation since its inception. Conditions have not been created overnight and the politicians from both parties have, for years, contributed to the current financially burdened, sloppy State of the Union, which has far exceeded all limits imagined by the brilliant Founding Founders.
This Obama administration, with an ultra liberal (read -socialist) president lacking credentials, experience and respect for boundaries of government and fraught with inexperienced, young, misguided advisors and workers, is attempting to socialize and essentially destroy the greatest Nation in history. The power of the pen and the vote remain the only tools for Americans to use to try to lighten the sky which has so brilliantly illuminated a Nation founded, under God, offering freedom and democracy to its people. It only takes a few minutes to write Congressmen and Senators and no matter how long it takes, vote your convictions. (Please!)
Howie
The Obamacare bill, which was passed by Congress, is a healthcare bill which provides (amongst many other absurdities) penalties for people not having health insurance – it is not a taxation bill and it does not address the penalties as being a tax and was not passed as a tax law. (This bill and its implementing regulations contain over 2,100,000 words. The Bible has approximately 830,000 words. Did the justices read that?)
The reason I find this so interesting is that only the Congress is empowered to levy taxes. Not the Supreme Court! With good reason. The Congress is elected by, and supposedly mandated by, the populace to represent them in all matters. The justices are appointed and haven't the same oversight afforded the people as with the Congress. A direct quote from the constitution states: "The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"
How do these majority justices, led by Roberts, feel the Supreme Court can mandate a tax on anyone for anything? By the way, the taxation on gasoline to which he refers is, by the court's own rulings and definitions, considered an "indirect" tax. In that light a taxable consequence is only generated by the action of the ultimate taxpayer (i.e., the purchase of gasoline or goods and services, etc.) and the tax is collected by an intermediary, such as a gas station or retail outlet, and it is paid to the government by the one collecting the taxes. An "indirect tax" is completely different from a "direct" tax. A direct tax, such as the income tax, is levied upon the individual and paid directly to the government. The Supreme Court, with fewer liberals who don't know or care about the constitution on the team, has repeatedly ruled that "direct taxes" must be levied on an equal basis (albeit different brackets within the income tax system are allowed) and never in U.S. law has there ever been allowed a direct tax levied disparately upon different individuals. Justice Robert's written opinion makes it obvious that he, and the majority justices, believe they can determine the need for, and mandate a direct tax on the distinct group of citizens who do not have health care insurance. A direct taxation levied by any government must meet exceptionally high standards or risk becoming the very thing which caused the founding of the United States.
"The unconditional, inexorable aspect of the direct tax was a paramount concern of people in the 18th century seeking to escape tyrannical forms of government and to safeguard individual liberty. An 18th century writing about this kind of taxation explained:
“ The power of direct taxation applies to every individual ... it cannot be evaded like the objects of imposts or excise, and will be paid, because all that a man hath will he give for his head. This tax is so congenial to the nature of despotism, that it has ever been a favorite under such governments. ... The power of direct taxation will further apply to every individual ... however oppressive, the people will have but this alternative, either to pay the tax, or let their property be taken for all resistance will be vain. [2]"
If Chicken Little were to gaze upward today, he might be correct in his pronouncement of the falling sky. The sky over this Nation is in the worst situation since its inception. Conditions have not been created overnight and the politicians from both parties have, for years, contributed to the current financially burdened, sloppy State of the Union, which has far exceeded all limits imagined by the brilliant Founding Founders.
This Obama administration, with an ultra liberal (read -socialist) president lacking credentials, experience and respect for boundaries of government and fraught with inexperienced, young, misguided advisors and workers, is attempting to socialize and essentially destroy the greatest Nation in history. The power of the pen and the vote remain the only tools for Americans to use to try to lighten the sky which has so brilliantly illuminated a Nation founded, under God, offering freedom and democracy to its people. It only takes a few minutes to write Congressmen and Senators and no matter how long it takes, vote your convictions. (Please!)
Howie
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)