Even 'the media' is beginning to figure out what the more conservative among us have been saying for the past two years. Check this out:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34103722/ns/politics-the_new_york_times/
Debt, especially this much of it, has real consequences. As if this amount of debt isn't bad enough in the absolute sense, getting out of this debt will be really, REALLY difficult. That's 'difficult' as in REAL pain for the AVERAGE American ... including the poor! 'The spenders' in Congress (and some big minority of well-meaning Americans) think they're helping the poor but the result of this will make life more difficult for the poor, not better.
After we've ruined the economy it'll be worse for the poor, not better. How does doubling the cost of all the basics of life (via inflation and a ruined economy) help the poor? How does doubling the cost of gas, food, etc help people below the povery level? How does fewer jobs and a 20% unemployment rate (because the government has sucked the productive life out of the economy) help anyone, including the poor? Why don't more people understand this? It's just the same as when an individual spends his way into excessive debt. He pays so much in interest that he cannot afford the basics in life. Hello? He'll likely go bankrupt. Hello? Going into debt may feel like fun but it has REAL consequences. Hello? This 'government money' IS NOT FREE. Hello? This cure IS worse than the disease. Hello? We need to use the brains God gave us and think through this rationally.
For the sake of our future, we need new thinking at all levels of government:
1. Government is wayyyy too big ... we cannot afford it and we're losing freedoms at an alarming rate! In fact, we need government to be reduced by at least half ... quickly.
2. Government debt is not only bad, it should be UNacceptable. We're at a point where even balanced budgets are, by far, inadequate.
I have NO respect for what our representatives call a 'balanced budget'. Their version always, ALWAYS has loopholes that allow them to create more debt anyway. They're, collectively, a bunch of lying, conniving weasels.
Just think how difficult it is to get our governments to balance their budgets every year. Then consider the FACT that we need them to do better than that. We need them to spend way less than they take in for several years until the debt is gone. Do you honestly think they're capable of that? Of course not! At least not until The People take them to the political woodshed for a thrashing to change their behavior.
Monday, November 23, 2009
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Did You Think Democrats Were Fixing The Health Care 'Bankrupting The Country' Problem? Surprise!
Reported in today's newspapers: Nancy Pelosi spokeman just said a report just released by the Medicare oversight agency "shows that our health reform bill [the democratic bill that just passed in the House] will extend the life of the Medicare trust fund by five years". We don't get it. How is that a fix?
Doesn't that mean that in five years we'll have to pass ANOTHER GIANT HEALTH CARE BILL with MORE GIANT COSTS to keep from losing ground on the remaining life of Medicare? All your cost and savings claims look out ten years but you're telling us we'll have to make it bigger and even more costly in half that time? What's the point of looking out ten years if the fix won't last more than five? Gads, what are you thinking?
Ms. Pelosi, we thought you guys said you were going to fix our nation's medical costs problem with your legislation, not kick it down the road a few years. Kicking the problem down the road is what you all have been doing for years. THAT is what we citizens have been telling you that we're tired of! You said you agreed that it was time we stopped doing that and get serious about health care reform. You all ran on a platform of "health care in America will bankrupt the country soon ... elect us [democrats] and we will fix it". We bought that argument and now you're telling us this is your version of serious health care reform geared to reigning in the costs once and for all? Are you serious? This is not a fix. It barely qualifies as a Band-Aid on the problem. Here, again, is a question I keep asking in this blog, do you think we're stupid?
The biggest leverage you had trying to convince us to support your bill and its mind-boggling cost was that you were saying you were actually going to fix it this time. Don't you get it yet? ACTUALLY FIXING IT IS WHAT WE WANT! Hello? Anyone home there on capitol hill?
Doesn't that mean that in five years we'll have to pass ANOTHER GIANT HEALTH CARE BILL with MORE GIANT COSTS to keep from losing ground on the remaining life of Medicare? All your cost and savings claims look out ten years but you're telling us we'll have to make it bigger and even more costly in half that time? What's the point of looking out ten years if the fix won't last more than five? Gads, what are you thinking?
Ms. Pelosi, we thought you guys said you were going to fix our nation's medical costs problem with your legislation, not kick it down the road a few years. Kicking the problem down the road is what you all have been doing for years. THAT is what we citizens have been telling you that we're tired of! You said you agreed that it was time we stopped doing that and get serious about health care reform. You all ran on a platform of "health care in America will bankrupt the country soon ... elect us [democrats] and we will fix it". We bought that argument and now you're telling us this is your version of serious health care reform geared to reigning in the costs once and for all? Are you serious? This is not a fix. It barely qualifies as a Band-Aid on the problem. Here, again, is a question I keep asking in this blog, do you think we're stupid?
The biggest leverage you had trying to convince us to support your bill and its mind-boggling cost was that you were saying you were actually going to fix it this time. Don't you get it yet? ACTUALLY FIXING IT IS WHAT WE WANT! Hello? Anyone home there on capitol hill?
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Bet You Didn't Know: Denying Representation To Half of Americans IS Constitutional!
A little background first ...
The president and democratic leadership in the House and Senate continue to deny elected republican representatives participation in the legislative/governing processes. The president and other democratic leadership will only talk with republicans whom they believe may be persuaded to vote for their bills.
Official requests since April by republican leadership to meet with the president and democratic leadership to discuss important legislation have been ignored or rejected ... never accepted.
Democratic leadership in the executive and legislative branches campaigned on restoring bipartisanship and also promised it in their acceptance speeches. Then, within days(!) of taking office, the president's staff and democratic leaders in the House and Senate said "We won so we get to do it OUR way!". Of course we have seen that they, indeed, did exactly that. S'up with that? Does this bother anyone else?
Here's the deal ...
I told one of our US Senators in a town hall meeting 3 months ago that this partisanship whereby nearly half(!) of the citizens' elected (chosen!) representatives are denied a voice in legislation:
He was clearly saying (at least) four things: 1) yeah, I know we're doing it ... so what?, 2) you can't stop us (nyah, nyah, nyah), 3) we're going to keep doing it (nyah, nyah, nyah), and 4) I'm ignorant of constitutional history, constitutional limitations on federal government, and The People's right to representation (ie, not just a right of those people to whom those currently in charge choose to 'grant' representation).
There are tons of powers, actions and processes not specifically excluded in the constitution but that doesn't mean they're okay. What ARE you guys (democrats in the executive and legislative branches) thinking?
Then, when The People, upset with state of affairs, began practicing their constitutional(!) right to protest and free speech via town hall meetings and Tea Parties, the president actually said ... actually said: "be quiet and get out of the way" and was dismissive of us as "teabaggers". Double OMG to that!! The president ordering those who vocally protest his actions and those of his cohorts in the legislature to be quiet? I thought all these people (leaders in the executive, legislative and judicial branches) swore an oath to protect and preserve the constitution ... for ALL the people! I suppose these guys think that's constitutionally okay too, huh? Got news for you, the Bill of Rights IS part of the constitution.
Gotta feel sorry for the current democratic leadership in one way though. For them, the constitution certainly is "An Inconvenient Document"! Declaration of Independence too. Those pesky documents sure can get in the way of a perfectly good political, power-grabbing agenda.
There is good news however ... there appears to be hope, even from within the democratic party. I asked the same question of Senator Wyden in yesterday's Grants Pass town hall meeting and he said he thinks this partisanship is wrong. He said he is working hard to involve republicans. In fact, he is the sponsor of one of the Senate versions of health care reform and has worked diligently to get equal participation by and content from republicans. To that I've gotta say OMG! too ... in a good way.
The president and democratic leadership in the House and Senate continue to deny elected republican representatives participation in the legislative/governing processes. The president and other democratic leadership will only talk with republicans whom they believe may be persuaded to vote for their bills.
Official requests since April by republican leadership to meet with the president and democratic leadership to discuss important legislation have been ignored or rejected ... never accepted.
Democratic leadership in the executive and legislative branches campaigned on restoring bipartisanship and also promised it in their acceptance speeches. Then, within days(!) of taking office, the president's staff and democratic leaders in the House and Senate said "We won so we get to do it OUR way!". Of course we have seen that they, indeed, did exactly that. S'up with that? Does this bother anyone else?
Here's the deal ...
I told one of our US Senators in a town hall meeting 3 months ago that this partisanship whereby nearly half(!) of the citizens' elected (chosen!) representatives are denied a voice in legislation:
- Ends up denying approximately HALF of American citizens(!) a voice in government. [By the way, it's called disenfranchisement!]
- Was warned against by the founding fathers. [Madison even had a term for it: "Majority Oppression".]
- Represents the ultimate in hypocracy by a party that claims a monopoly on being truly fair to Americans.
He was clearly saying (at least) four things: 1) yeah, I know we're doing it ... so what?, 2) you can't stop us (nyah, nyah, nyah), 3) we're going to keep doing it (nyah, nyah, nyah), and 4) I'm ignorant of constitutional history, constitutional limitations on federal government, and The People's right to representation (ie, not just a right of those people to whom those currently in charge choose to 'grant' representation).
There are tons of powers, actions and processes not specifically excluded in the constitution but that doesn't mean they're okay. What ARE you guys (democrats in the executive and legislative branches) thinking?
Then, when The People, upset with state of affairs, began practicing their constitutional(!) right to protest and free speech via town hall meetings and Tea Parties, the president actually said ... actually said: "be quiet and get out of the way" and was dismissive of us as "teabaggers". Double OMG to that!! The president ordering those who vocally protest his actions and those of his cohorts in the legislature to be quiet? I thought all these people (leaders in the executive, legislative and judicial branches) swore an oath to protect and preserve the constitution ... for ALL the people! I suppose these guys think that's constitutionally okay too, huh? Got news for you, the Bill of Rights IS part of the constitution.
Gotta feel sorry for the current democratic leadership in one way though. For them, the constitution certainly is "An Inconvenient Document"! Declaration of Independence too. Those pesky documents sure can get in the way of a perfectly good political, power-grabbing agenda.
There is good news however ... there appears to be hope, even from within the democratic party. I asked the same question of Senator Wyden in yesterday's Grants Pass town hall meeting and he said he thinks this partisanship is wrong. He said he is working hard to involve republicans. In fact, he is the sponsor of one of the Senate versions of health care reform and has worked diligently to get equal participation by and content from republicans. To that I've gotta say OMG! too ... in a good way.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Reality Is No Fun So Forget About It!
Oh good. President Obama wants to convene a conference of employers next month to figure out how to create jobs in a meaningful way. Uh, didn't he promise us he knew how to do that? Isn't that what the stimulus package was all about? After all, he told us to trust him and give him all that stimulus money because he promised it would result in a ton of private sector jobs such that unemployment would stay below 8% or so.
What's that? You say that private sector jobs have just kept evaporating all year and unemployment is still increasing? How can that be with all the jobs that were created? Oh, those became jobs in ... drum roll ... government! Maybe no one told those in the White House that government jobs don't contribute to growth in private sector jobs or, in turn, the GDP and don't, therefore, make a real difference in unemployment. I guess they don't teach basic economics where they attended college. Sorry if that sounds harsh but I don't see any other way to explain what they've been believing and doing.
By the way, if a conference on creating jobs is good to do now, wouldn't it have been even better to do back in March? After all, wasn't this problem becoming big enough even then to warrant doing absolutely everything to stem this tide? Why is 'community organizing' of actual employers about how to increase jobs a last resort? Seriously, if this administration is so big on community organizing, why didn't they do that with employers back in March?
What are the chances that the president is calling these people together to listen to what they want done because he's actually interested in doing that? Recent history would suggest otherwise wouldn't it? What's more likely is that they're being summoned to his house to hear what he wants them to do. He'll probably throw money at their companies with all the usual government strings attached so that he can tell them how to manage their companies and pay employees/managers. When he gets done with them we'll probably own them too! Funny ... but not funny.
By the way, it's complete nonsense to assume there's a recovery going on just because the stock market is going through the roof. The housing sector is showing signs of 'recovery' too but that's not because of an economic reality. This thinking is totally built on smoke, mirrors and hope ... not reality. There's no rational way to connect the fundamentals of our economic condition with what's going on in the stock market. The next sound you'll hear will be the dollar and stock market coming apart after The Fed and those wizards on wall street finally get in touch with reality. Think this recession has been bad? Better fasten your seatbelts because we ain't seen nothing yet!
What's that? You say that private sector jobs have just kept evaporating all year and unemployment is still increasing? How can that be with all the jobs that were created? Oh, those became jobs in ... drum roll ... government! Maybe no one told those in the White House that government jobs don't contribute to growth in private sector jobs or, in turn, the GDP and don't, therefore, make a real difference in unemployment. I guess they don't teach basic economics where they attended college. Sorry if that sounds harsh but I don't see any other way to explain what they've been believing and doing.
By the way, if a conference on creating jobs is good to do now, wouldn't it have been even better to do back in March? After all, wasn't this problem becoming big enough even then to warrant doing absolutely everything to stem this tide? Why is 'community organizing' of actual employers about how to increase jobs a last resort? Seriously, if this administration is so big on community organizing, why didn't they do that with employers back in March?
What are the chances that the president is calling these people together to listen to what they want done because he's actually interested in doing that? Recent history would suggest otherwise wouldn't it? What's more likely is that they're being summoned to his house to hear what he wants them to do. He'll probably throw money at their companies with all the usual government strings attached so that he can tell them how to manage their companies and pay employees/managers. When he gets done with them we'll probably own them too! Funny ... but not funny.
By the way, it's complete nonsense to assume there's a recovery going on just because the stock market is going through the roof. The housing sector is showing signs of 'recovery' too but that's not because of an economic reality. This thinking is totally built on smoke, mirrors and hope ... not reality. There's no rational way to connect the fundamentals of our economic condition with what's going on in the stock market. The next sound you'll hear will be the dollar and stock market coming apart after The Fed and those wizards on wall street finally get in touch with reality. Think this recession has been bad? Better fasten your seatbelts because we ain't seen nothing yet!
Friday, November 6, 2009
Huh? I Say, Huh?
Reported in the media last week: President Obama's stimulus package created or saved about 600,000 jobs and they said that half of that number were 'saved' teacher's jobs. Similar numbers came from our state's (Oregon's) leadership ... thousands of jobs saved, half of which were teacher positions. I have a couple of questions about those claims.
That means they're saying that without the stimulus package, America WOULD HAVE fired 300,000 teachers. Think about that for a minute ... 300,000 teaching positions that are filled today would have been gone now were it not for the stimulus package. 300,000! Are you kidding me? Do these numbskulls actually expect us to believe that?
In fact, any reasonable person knows that without the stimulus money states would not have cut back teaching positions anywhere near that much. They would have cut back in other areas of state/local government so they could keep most teachers employed. They would NOT have discarded anywhere near 300,000 teaching positions. Probably would have eliminated some ... I'm guessing it would be closer to 10,000. (I may be off but my number is a LOT more rational than theirs!) It's nonsense to justify the stimulus after the fact by falacious and nonsensical jobs saved claims. C'mon folks! We're not stupid, although they apparently think we are.
By the way, how exactly does steering HALF of the stimulus money into education spending help create jobs that stimulate the economy? Said another way, how exactly does keeping government big in a time of economic crisis help the economy? The ONLY sector of the economy that didn't decline this year is ... drum roll ... government. How exactly does more government contribute to the gross national product? Answer: ZERO!
On a different front, if you were to hear that one American has been an official visitor to the White House at least 22 times since Obama took office, of which 7 were one-on-one visits with the president, whose name would come to mind? Would you believe it was Andy Stern, president of SEIU? Well, believe it! If we're to believe President Obama's PROMISE to bring a new era of bipartisanship to the executive office, how come Stern gets 7 one-on-one's with him and people like Republican House and Senate minority leaders get ZERO? Where is the slightest hint of bipartisanship in that? Seriously, how exactly is that better than under Bush?
Also, Democratic leadership, including President Obama, rags incessantly on Republicans in general and Bush in particular for catering to special interests. They also said they do not do that and will not do that. It's a new day with Democrats in charge, right? Wrong! The leadership of BOTH parties gives too much access and, therefore, influence to special interests. The only thing different about Democrats is their special interests are different from Republicans' special interests. They both corrupt the democratic process in this respect ... arguably equally.
That means they're saying that without the stimulus package, America WOULD HAVE fired 300,000 teachers. Think about that for a minute ... 300,000 teaching positions that are filled today would have been gone now were it not for the stimulus package. 300,000! Are you kidding me? Do these numbskulls actually expect us to believe that?
In fact, any reasonable person knows that without the stimulus money states would not have cut back teaching positions anywhere near that much. They would have cut back in other areas of state/local government so they could keep most teachers employed. They would NOT have discarded anywhere near 300,000 teaching positions. Probably would have eliminated some ... I'm guessing it would be closer to 10,000. (I may be off but my number is a LOT more rational than theirs!) It's nonsense to justify the stimulus after the fact by falacious and nonsensical jobs saved claims. C'mon folks! We're not stupid, although they apparently think we are.
By the way, how exactly does steering HALF of the stimulus money into education spending help create jobs that stimulate the economy? Said another way, how exactly does keeping government big in a time of economic crisis help the economy? The ONLY sector of the economy that didn't decline this year is ... drum roll ... government. How exactly does more government contribute to the gross national product? Answer: ZERO!
On a different front, if you were to hear that one American has been an official visitor to the White House at least 22 times since Obama took office, of which 7 were one-on-one visits with the president, whose name would come to mind? Would you believe it was Andy Stern, president of SEIU? Well, believe it! If we're to believe President Obama's PROMISE to bring a new era of bipartisanship to the executive office, how come Stern gets 7 one-on-one's with him and people like Republican House and Senate minority leaders get ZERO? Where is the slightest hint of bipartisanship in that? Seriously, how exactly is that better than under Bush?
Also, Democratic leadership, including President Obama, rags incessantly on Republicans in general and Bush in particular for catering to special interests. They also said they do not do that and will not do that. It's a new day with Democrats in charge, right? Wrong! The leadership of BOTH parties gives too much access and, therefore, influence to special interests. The only thing different about Democrats is their special interests are different from Republicans' special interests. They both corrupt the democratic process in this respect ... arguably equally.
Monday, October 19, 2009
The Only Thing That's Transparent: He's The Demander In Chief
The president and his administration have gone off the deep end attacking conservative/Republican opposition. The extent to which he and Democrats in Congress are committed to taking our country on a hard left turn is astonishing and inconsistent with their consitutional responsibilities.
What they don't get is this. Just because we elected them does NOT mean we automatically agree with everything they want to do and therefore grant to them full authority and license to do whatever they want. Dissent is completely American now just as it was during the Viet Nam war in the 60's and the Iraq war under Bush. If they don't get that, they don't understand the constitution or the principles on which our country was founded.
The founders of our country never intended for one political party to be able to institute changes of such magnitude so unilaterally, and with malice, disdain and hostility toward opposition. Total majority rule to this extent was never intended. Our founders went out of their way to express their concern about this happening, declaring this to be a Republic (ie, full and fair representation of and participation by all Americans) in the process of creating the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
The current administration clearly wants submission to its will and obedience of its demands and laws from us. We allow this at great risk to our Republic!
What they don't get is this. Just because we elected them does NOT mean we automatically agree with everything they want to do and therefore grant to them full authority and license to do whatever they want. Dissent is completely American now just as it was during the Viet Nam war in the 60's and the Iraq war under Bush. If they don't get that, they don't understand the constitution or the principles on which our country was founded.
The founders of our country never intended for one political party to be able to institute changes of such magnitude so unilaterally, and with malice, disdain and hostility toward opposition. Total majority rule to this extent was never intended. Our founders went out of their way to express their concern about this happening, declaring this to be a Republic (ie, full and fair representation of and participation by all Americans) in the process of creating the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
The current administration clearly wants submission to its will and obedience of its demands and laws from us. We allow this at great risk to our Republic!
Monday, October 12, 2009
We're Back!
Well, we're back and we 'escaped' Montana just before freezing and snow hit the Lincoln area. I had a great time with Karen. Camping with my sweetheart in such beautiful country is fun and relaxing, not that we have anything all that stressful to relax 'from' now that we're retired in Roseburg OR! We enjoy nature and we saw a lot of it ... some a little too close for comfort!
We got to spend time with Son Matt and his wife, Heather, both at our first campground (Trout Creek near Superior MT) and for a couple of days at their house in Coeur d'Alene ID. It was our first opportunity to check out their new (first!) home, a beautiful house and property short blocks from beautiful Coeur d'Alene Lake! (I admit to being a bit jealous!)
Trout Creek campground is where we had a close encounter with a brown bear in our campsite. I was about 14 feet from him when I first noticed him and a few minutes later I got a close-up look at him from about a foot (through the trailer window). Don't care to be closer to a bear than that! FYI, according to a forest service expert, if you want to scare off a black or brown bear carry a soda can with coins in it to rattle at the bear.
Karen and I spent one week in the Trout Creek campground followed by three weeks in the Aspen Grove campground near Lincoln MT. We arrived at Aspen Grove the day they stopped collecting camping fees so our accommodations cost zero there. They turned off the main water faucets but that campground has a well (hand) pump that stays available and they kept the garbage and vault toilets open. Therefore we didn't have to 'dry camp' ... had all the amenities available that we needed to have a wonderful time. And the weather cooperated ... too well in fact for fishing. I had a really sweet time with Karen and we were sad to leave Aspen Grove a couple days early but snow was imminent so we didn't have much choice.
We saw lots of beautiful MT scenery on various 'scenic tours' and had lots of fun just spending time together playing cards ... even took in two Lincoln High School football games. Karen and I enjoy scenic tours so much ... we're so fortunate to live in this country and have such natural beauty to appreciate up close. Saw lots of wildlife which is always fun. Then we left MT just as Fall colors were setting in. While we didn't get to see the colors at their peak it was still a good display to appreciate.
For most of our time there the temps were well above normal (92 degrees on the Missouri River one day ... very warm for mid-September!) which made for lazy trout not too interested in taking the flies I tossed their way. I got to add six(!) new rivers to my list of MT rivers fished: Clark Fork, Fish Creek, Blackfoot, North Fork Blackfoot, Dearborne, and Sun River. Fished the Missouri previously.
Got Matt out on two fly fishing float trips alone with me for the first time. We had such a good time together ... soooo sweet! I love my sons and value every opportunity to spend time with them and get to know them better as adults. The fishing trip was fun for both of us but, for me, it was 'just' an excuse to spend time with Matt. I had a great time with Heather too while Karen and I stayed at their house. What a cool young lady she is! Smart, responsible, compassionate, and beautiful inside and out. She certainly blesses us. Can't close without mentioning fun time with their pup, Johnny Cash, a cute and energetic Boston Terrier.
It was a terrific trip. We're already looking forward to our next adventure in God's great outdoors!
Monday, August 24, 2009
Next month Matt and I will be getting together for some 'man time'. There are lots of reasons I'm looking forward to it, the primary one being that we two have not had many opportunities to do things together over the years. In fact I've never taken him on a fly fishing float trip for just the two of us so that's what we'll be doing for two days on the Mighty Missouri. We'll be camping too so that'll be fun. I'll have the trailer/campsite all set up for his arrival so he can just plop and relax.
As I commented earlier in the year about this planned trip, fishing isn't the point of this get-together although I hope it adds some fun to it. Time with Matt is its own reward regardless what we're doing.
Life for Matt and his sweet wife, Heather, has settled down considerably. Matt has a really good job now and Heather just started her first full-time job since graduating with her Master's Degree about three months ago. And they bought their first house last month. These two vagabonds are putting down roots now and they're near enough (more permanently) that we can do more together.
A couple of weeks before Matt and I take off on our fishing trip, he and Heather (with pup Johnny Cash in tow) will join Karen and me for a couple days of camping. That'll be so fun too! Family time together is way cool!
Sunday, August 23, 2009
Trippin' W/Karen
I'm planning to do some camping with my wife, Karen. I'm getting excited about spending time with her in God's great outdoors! We always have such a good time together wherever we go so it'll be fun. What a blessing it is that we share a love of the outdoors and that we still have good enough health to enjoy camping. Now if only we could get a break in the price of gas!
We're planning to spend a little time in Montana in areas where we haven't spent much time yet. Our usual routine is fanning out around the area where we camp and see whatever sights there are. We'll just hang out a lot too. We'll play a lot of games, especially rummy. Maybe I'll win a few games ... for a change! Whadda ya think, Hon?
I hope to have opportunities to get in some fly fishing, one of my favorite activities. Not many places one can go and have such an abundance of good fishing rivers available as in Western Montana.
Son Matt and his wife, Heather, with their Boston Terrier pup, Johnny Cash, are planning to join us for some camping together. We enjoy all the time we're able to have with them but we haven't done this together yet. We're really looking forward to it. In addition, Matt and I are planning a guided fly fishing trip on one of Montana's many good streams. It'll be sweet just to have one-on-one time with him regardless how the fishing goes.
By God's grace we're able to enjoy retirement this way. Time away together. Time with family. Sweet!
We're planning to spend a little time in Montana in areas where we haven't spent much time yet. Our usual routine is fanning out around the area where we camp and see whatever sights there are. We'll just hang out a lot too. We'll play a lot of games, especially rummy. Maybe I'll win a few games ... for a change! Whadda ya think, Hon?
I hope to have opportunities to get in some fly fishing, one of my favorite activities. Not many places one can go and have such an abundance of good fishing rivers available as in Western Montana.
Son Matt and his wife, Heather, with their Boston Terrier pup, Johnny Cash, are planning to join us for some camping together. We enjoy all the time we're able to have with them but we haven't done this together yet. We're really looking forward to it. In addition, Matt and I are planning a guided fly fishing trip on one of Montana's many good streams. It'll be sweet just to have one-on-one time with him regardless how the fishing goes.
By God's grace we're able to enjoy retirement this way. Time away together. Time with family. Sweet!
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Obama's Hostility Toward Those Who Oppose His Solution(s)
From the President's mouth last week: "I don't mind cleaning up your mess but be quiet and get out of the way". This is an extraordinary notion and even more extraordinary demand.
I know that comment sounds all authoritative, confident, leadership-like, and presidential to those who support him but consider this.
Basically, he has no business saying such things to the people for whom he works. There are three points in his 'command' to us that beg a response so this is for him.
First, you say you're burdened with cleaning up a mess that we who are protesting created? It's OUR mess? To that I can only say HUH? Mr. President, who exactly created the Medicare system as it stands today? Ans: YOU ALL on capitol hill, sir, not us! Who exactly failed to provide proper oversight to prevent fraud, waste and mismanagement since it's inception? Ans: YOU ALL on capitol hill, sir, not us! Who exactly failed to change the system when it became clear (many years ago) that it was unsustainable on its current course? Ans: YOU ALL on capitol hill, sir, not us! How EXACTLY is this mess of our creation? WE don't make laws and run the country YOU ALL do, sir. You all on capitol hill (Congressmen and Presidents, Democrats and Republicans) created this mess and proceeded to mismanage it over the years. You have a lot of nerve blaming us for it and getting all indignant about having to fix it. WE are the ones who have a genuine right to be indignant ... you all created this mess and WE citizens are the ones who are going to have to pay for cleaning up YOUR mess.
Second, telling(!) us to "be quiet" flies in the face of constitutional guarantees of free speech. The President has no right to demand we be quiet. In fact, you have a sworn duty (check your oath of office sir) to protect that right. This is a fundamental violation of your responsibility to stand up for freedom(s) as well as a technical violation of your oath of office.
Third, telling(!) us to "get out of the way" flies in the face of our constitutional right to and guarantee of fair proportional representation and participative government. You are obviously telling us to let you and the liberals in Congress do whatever you all want without vocal or significant opposition from us. You and Democrats in Congress have shut down Republican opposition and you want Republican citizens to be quiet as well? You want to pass all this important legislation without Republican participation. How is that not one-party rule sir? This "get out of the way" comment is a fundamental violation of your constitutional responsibilities to protect our democratic form of government. You may as well declare that only registered Democratic citizens will be allowed to vote in Congressional elections. That's in effect what you want, is it not? Worse, that's in effect what we HAVE, is it not, since Democrats are ignoring what Republicans want done in/with legislation?
So, sir, I respectfully demand that you get out of our collective face with such hostile comments to us and honor (a word/concept kinda foreign to you apparently) your oath of office as well as the implied/documented duties/responsibilities of your office.
Yes Republicans in Congress failed to do things but so did Democrats. After all, Democrats have held a veto-proof majority in one or both houses of Congress for 30(!) of my 60 years while Republicans have NEVER had that in my lifetime. Doesn't that make it a little harder to justify this is Republicans' fault? Another reason you have to NOT blame us who oppose your plan is that many of us helped put you in office because we were fed up with our Republican representatives. So what do you do to respect the support we gave you? You tell us to go away when we express disagreement with you.
One last thing Mr. President. You and your Democrat friends in Congress seem to think that because we elected you, that gives you complete license to do whatever you want. We sent you to Washington to work FOR us, on OUR behalf in just and due consideration of our express wishes ... issue by issue! Just because you were elected does NOT mean we automatically agree with everything you believe and want to do and therefore grant to you full authority to do whatever you want. Getting elected is NOT license to do whatever you want. If you don't get that you don't understand the constitution or democracy nearly so well as you claim. It's really, really difficult to believe that you actually taught constitutional principles as an educator. Gads!
I know that comment sounds all authoritative, confident, leadership-like, and presidential to those who support him but consider this.
Basically, he has no business saying such things to the people for whom he works. There are three points in his 'command' to us that beg a response so this is for him.
First, you say you're burdened with cleaning up a mess that we who are protesting created? It's OUR mess? To that I can only say HUH? Mr. President, who exactly created the Medicare system as it stands today? Ans: YOU ALL on capitol hill, sir, not us! Who exactly failed to provide proper oversight to prevent fraud, waste and mismanagement since it's inception? Ans: YOU ALL on capitol hill, sir, not us! Who exactly failed to change the system when it became clear (many years ago) that it was unsustainable on its current course? Ans: YOU ALL on capitol hill, sir, not us! How EXACTLY is this mess of our creation? WE don't make laws and run the country YOU ALL do, sir. You all on capitol hill (Congressmen and Presidents, Democrats and Republicans) created this mess and proceeded to mismanage it over the years. You have a lot of nerve blaming us for it and getting all indignant about having to fix it. WE are the ones who have a genuine right to be indignant ... you all created this mess and WE citizens are the ones who are going to have to pay for cleaning up YOUR mess.
Second, telling(!) us to "be quiet" flies in the face of constitutional guarantees of free speech. The President has no right to demand we be quiet. In fact, you have a sworn duty (check your oath of office sir) to protect that right. This is a fundamental violation of your responsibility to stand up for freedom(s) as well as a technical violation of your oath of office.
Third, telling(!) us to "get out of the way" flies in the face of our constitutional right to and guarantee of fair proportional representation and participative government. You are obviously telling us to let you and the liberals in Congress do whatever you all want without vocal or significant opposition from us. You and Democrats in Congress have shut down Republican opposition and you want Republican citizens to be quiet as well? You want to pass all this important legislation without Republican participation. How is that not one-party rule sir? This "get out of the way" comment is a fundamental violation of your constitutional responsibilities to protect our democratic form of government. You may as well declare that only registered Democratic citizens will be allowed to vote in Congressional elections. That's in effect what you want, is it not? Worse, that's in effect what we HAVE, is it not, since Democrats are ignoring what Republicans want done in/with legislation?
So, sir, I respectfully demand that you get out of our collective face with such hostile comments to us and honor (a word/concept kinda foreign to you apparently) your oath of office as well as the implied/documented duties/responsibilities of your office.
Yes Republicans in Congress failed to do things but so did Democrats. After all, Democrats have held a veto-proof majority in one or both houses of Congress for 30(!) of my 60 years while Republicans have NEVER had that in my lifetime. Doesn't that make it a little harder to justify this is Republicans' fault? Another reason you have to NOT blame us who oppose your plan is that many of us helped put you in office because we were fed up with our Republican representatives. So what do you do to respect the support we gave you? You tell us to go away when we express disagreement with you.
One last thing Mr. President. You and your Democrat friends in Congress seem to think that because we elected you, that gives you complete license to do whatever you want. We sent you to Washington to work FOR us, on OUR behalf in just and due consideration of our express wishes ... issue by issue! Just because you were elected does NOT mean we automatically agree with everything you believe and want to do and therefore grant to you full authority to do whatever you want. Getting elected is NOT license to do whatever you want. If you don't get that you don't understand the constitution or democracy nearly so well as you claim. It's really, really difficult to believe that you actually taught constitutional principles as an educator. Gads!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)