Disclaimer

This blog represents my views and opinions and not necessarily those of the US Government or US Military.

Quote Worthy:

Worthy quotes:

"We have nothing to fear but fear itself." -Franklin D. Roosevelt

"Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country." -John F. Kennedy

"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to stand by and do nothing." -Sir Edmund Burke

"Those who would trade essential liberties for temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security." - Benjamn Franklin

The foundation of liberty is those willing to defend it. The structure of liberty is having the education to excercise it. -Dan E. Goforth

"We choose to go to the moon and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard." -John F. Kennedy

"If we love our country, we should also love our countrymen." -Ronald Reagan

"Of the four wars in my lifetime, none ever came about because the US was percieved as being too strong." -Ronald Reagan
Enter your email below to follow this blog by email.

Monday, June 27, 2011

A long month, with something really pissing me off now

U.S. Veteran Faces Legal Action for Flying American FlagA retired U.S. Army chaplain is being threatened with legal action for flying the American flag in his front yard, the Daily Mail reports. Fred Quigley, 77, of Macedonia, Ohio, a minister who served active duty during the Vietnam War, has been told by the homeowners’ association that his flag violates the property rules. The association has offered to fly the flag at the entrance of the building development, but Quigley refused the offer. “If they can dictate to me that I cannot fly an American flag in America, then, to me, the country is lost,” Mr. Quigley told the paper.  Quigley's lawyer Gerald Patronite said the association has no right to stop his client. (Read more from Fox News)

  Now, I'm pissed.  Mr. Fred Quigley served his country as a chaplain in Vietnam and his community as a minister.  There is no excuse for him to be told he can't fly a flag in his yard.  I serve my country.  If I want to fly my nation's flag, I damn well will.  If the HOA sues, and any judge sides with them, then that judge should be disrobed.

  As far as homeowners' associations go, I now firmly believe they should be outlawed.  There is no excuse for other people telling me how to present my house, unless it poses a clear safety hazard to other people.  I'm sick of this nanny state bullshit.  There is no reason for anyone to try and dominate other people in this manner.

Thursday, May 26, 2011

Tea Party Patriots

  After a few years of consideration, I've decided to join the Tea Party Patriots.  While I consider myself a centrist, and the organization does lean right, I do wholeheartedly agree with the core principles of limited government, minimal spending, and a return to the US Constitution.  For those who've seen the chart at the bottom that lists me as leaning a little left, I don't entirely agree.  I may be socially liberal in many areas, but I'm pro gun rights, anti big government, and very keen on civil liberties.  I am a social liberal, but a fiscal and political conservative.  I'm very fond of just using taxes to enforce those laws that need to be enforced, but I'm against some of the many laws we have because they just create problems, they don't actually solve any.  I urge anyone who reads this to consider the core values of the Tea Party Patriots and consider joining.

Monday, May 23, 2011

Anti Trust vs. Anti Big Business

  Just to set the record straight, I'm Anti Trust, not Anti Big Business.  The key difference is that I know that some big businesses are necessary to a thriving economy.  It takes a large business to operate critical infrastructure.  Some things, like automobiles, can't be efficiently produced and maintained by a small business.  Moving freight across the country and around the globe requires large corporations.
  That being said, I am anti trust.  What that means is that when a business begins to grow so large that they can prevent competition, I have a problem with that.  When Joe Doe Shoemaker can't compete with Nike because Nike can all too easily undercut him, there is a problem, and business regulations need to address that. The whole purpose of free market enterprise is that competition breeds improvement.  Walmart underselling Ma and Pa down the road doesn't breed improvement, it breeds cheap goods from China and Mexico that are of lower quality.  And Walmart's business ethics are much in question to me, because they actively train employees how to gain public benefits so they don't have to fund them.  So not only are they destroying the American Dream, they are making the rest of the country pay for their billions of dollars in annual profits.
  Now, there are communities like Red Bluff, CA, that have benefited from the presence of a Walmart distribution center, but that is beside the point.  One dc serves several stores that pay barely more than minimum wage, and degrade the total commercial value of several communities.  That is a problem.  There are towns and cities now where entire shopping areas sit vacant because the last occupants couldn't compete with Walmart.  This devalues entire sections of cities and contributes to crime.
  Now, I'm not entirely anti Walmart, I just have a problem with some of their business practices.  One problem is that they import a lot of Chinese made goods.  China strictly regulates the value of the Yuan compared to other currencies,  and so prevent other nations' currencies from falling below theirs' in value, thus keeping Chinese manufactured goods cheaper.  This is not fair or free trade, this is China using aggressive economic warfare to conquer the world with.  It's that simple.
  My solution to the problem is to use tariffs where free trade is impinged upon.  Let Chinese made goods be jacked up in price by 30% until China backs off its' aggressive economic policies.  Let other goods be taxed at 30% until the nations they are produced in pay a decent living wage to their laborers.  We need to level the playing field with these nations, which don't have the regulations we have.
  There is another problem in that we have too much regulation here at home.  California ranks dead last, not just in the country, but in the world as a place to have a business.  One tenth of the population of the US resides in California.  That says something, that we can't even support our own population because of bad regulation.  We need to reduce regulation and balance economic and environmental needs.
  Another source of bad regulation is unions.  I'm not afraid of union busting.  The fact is, they create excessive regulation, require jacked up wages, and have driven many of the middle class blue collar jobs out of the US.  There was a time that unions did serve a purpose.  That was when there were no laws on the books guaranteeing a living wage for entry level employees.  If unions don't want to get on the same page as those who want to improve our competitive edge with other countries, they need to go.
  Yes, we need regulations that control the negative effects of greed, but we need desperately to lure decent jobs back to the US.  Yes, we should have a minimum wage in place that guarantees that someone will make a decent living even in entry level jobs, but we need to make it possible to conduct business.  I've stated before that I'm in favor of regulating what the top employee or owner of a business can make in ratio to the lowest paid employee, provided they meet minimum wage and can provide decent benefits to their employees.  Too much profit goes to people who do too little, and too much work goes to other nations.

Sunday, May 22, 2011

2012 Presidential Race

  We need to hear more from the prospective candidates for next year's race. The fact is, our nation is in turmoil, and we need to do something to change the current status quo.  So far, I'm throwing my support behind Herman Cain.  He may be listed as a "long shot" candidate, but I think that the liberal media is scared.  I'm going to check with the Tea Party repeatedly on this.  If he is the candidate that can bring fiscal responsibility to the White House, while negotiating measures that would actually improve our current situations at home and abroad, Then I urge people to consider him for President.
  In the meantime, we need to see who else the viable candidates are.  I urge those who do read my blog to look into who might be running, and to list their names and where they stand in comments.  It's up to the people to take back our great nation from the people who care about nothing less than their own well being.

Thursday, May 19, 2011

Israel and Egypt

  So the day after I rant about the amount of foreign aid we give out, I hear that Pres. Obama has promised a billion dollars in aid to Egypt, to build infrastructure and create jobs.  Ok, what about our infrastructure and jobs at home???  It's a billion dollars we didn't have to begin with. It's not there, and there's nothing we can do to make it be there.  I'm encouraging people, write your Congressperson about this.  Tell them, we don't have the money to give away, we don't even have the money to run our own affairs.  The sad part of all this is that as a soldier, I can only afford to vote against a proven leader if another good leader steps up to the plate. So far, it looks like my vote is going to Herman Cain.
  As for Israel, there is no reason to support Israel going back to the 1967 borders.  No matter what, hardline jihadis will continue to attack Israel as long as it exists.  And make no mistake, I believe Israel has a right to exist.  And I believe Israel has every right to possess  the West Bank and Gaza Strip.  These lands are the ancestral homeland of the Jews.  And everyone who calls themself a Christian has a duty to support Israel.  With the current situation in the Middle East, there is no way to start giving land to terrorist organizations, and that is exactly what would happen if Israel gave land to the "Palestinians", who, by the by, are Levantine Arabs.
  We, the United States, should assist Israel in pushing back the Arab population to across the Jordan River, and help establish a strongly defended national border for Israel.  Muslims have their holiest site, it is the Masjid al-Haram in Mecca.  Christians maintain possession of their holiest sites, such as the Church of the Annunciation, the Church of the Nativity, and the Church of Calvary.  Why can't the Jews have one little mountain, and put their temple on it.  Why is it that hardline Muslims have to destroy the things of other religions.  Don't they realize they're hurting their own cause of spreading the teachings of Muhammad by blatantly ignoring other peoples' rights?
  Would several of the Muslim nations attack Israel and the US if such a situation arose?  Yes, they most certainly would, but such a war would devastate the Muslim world.  The fact is, we're now at the crossroads, where such a war would be better fought sooner rather than later.  If Iran gained possession of a nuclear arsenal, and North Korea were to become involved, the death toll of such a war would be horrendous, and several large swaths of the Middle East would be green glowing glass.  And once we turned our attention from the Middle East to North Korea, China would be unable to support N. Korea, because of the ethical concern of siding with one of the nations that started a nuclear war.  Many nations would stay out of a war if it was just the US and N. Korea, but if China were to join, we'd have the full support of NATO and India.  The fact is, we're in a much stronger position politically than a lot of liberals would have you believe.
  We can't have our leadership playing Neville Chamberlain to the Terrorists Adolf Hitler.  It's that simple.  The US has made all the concessions we should have ever made to these people, and they continue to seek ways to attack us.  Those Muslims who would live in peace and practice their religion in a peaceful manner, we should leave alone as much as possible, but it's time to deal with terrorists as what they are, outright war criminals and human rights violators.

Wednesday, May 18, 2011

Foreign Aid and Domestic Problems

  The copy and paste status going around FaceBook right now is about the amount of Foreign Aid we spend each year, and all the current domestic issues.  Lately in the news, the aid we give to Pakistan has been receiving a lot of flak.  The fact is, we're trying to buy friends, and the problem with that is many parts of these foreign cultures want nothing to do with us.
   We send over three billion dollars a year to Pakistan.  A nation that has been playing both ends against the middle.  The ISI actively supports Taliban operations in Afghanistan, and American service members die because of it.  Even though the civilian government acts pro American, they are unable to stem the support from Pakistan's defense forces to the Taliban.  We just shouldn't give them the money.  It's being used to hurt us.  There are many who worry about Pakistan having nuclear weapons.  Well, so does India, and they wouldn't hesitate to obliterate Pakistan from the face of the earth if they started getting out of line or fell to an oppressive hardliner jihadi regime.  There has to be a certain point where it's just not our problem.  If we ceased aid to Pakistan, the Taliban would fall in Afghanistan.  It's that simple.
  There are several African nations we send billions of aid to every year.  We face a budget shortfall, and we don't even bother cutting that cancer out of our budget.  Most of that money never even reaches the people.  We could cut it down to one fourth and give it directly to the Christian Children's Fund, and get a hundred fold effect from the aid money.  Sanctified Fecal Matter Batman!!  We funnel the money through governments and it gets used in every way but the manner in which it was meant to be used, but a private organization could accomplish a lot more with a lot less.  Our nation is trillions of dollars in debt, facing serious crises, and we hemorrhage money to other nations that can't even use it properly.  There's where the biggest budget cuts need to come from.  And let's get rid of all the bureaucracy that is a waste of even more money.  Heavily bureaucratic nations have a top heavy economy, and the little guys under them get crushed, it's that simple.
  Along with my other ideas about welfare reform, getting rid of the huge government agencies and letting private nonprofit organizations do the work would greatly improve the economic efficiency of such programs.  President Bush's Faith Based Initiative was brilliant really.  Give money to religious organizations that provide social welfare and support services.  We should shut down the agencies that do this work, and give half the money to nonprofits who do the work.  We'd get twice the effect for half the money.  And that's not counting the second and third order effects if you utilize my other ideas.
  Another big offender in my eyes is the United Nations.  We practically fund the whole UN, and yet they stand as a roadblock to many of the things we need to do to protect our national interests and security.  NATO is one thing, NATO is a mutual defense treaty organization comprised mostly of Democratic societies that have something in common with us.  The UN, however, is comprised of a lot of different nations, many which are dictatorships.  They actively seek to block pro democratic initiatives in many forms, actively target smaller Democratic nations with sanctions, and slow the processes by which mankind can advance fully.  I'm sick of it.  The US should withdraw from the UN, cease all funding, and kick every UN organization and headquarters off of our sovereign soil.  And we should encourage our allies to do the same.  Without the support of the First World Nations, the UN could not stand on its' own two feet.  No dictatorship could support the UN, they have too much to worry about at home, and would quickly lose their seats if they contributed the level of troops that the US, UK, France and Germany do.  Even China couldn't afford to support the troop levels of the UN, they would actually have an uprising within months if they deployed a significant portion of their forces.
  There is another place we could make up for lost revenue.  The trade treaty with China is almost expired.  In order to renew it, we as a country should require China to hold constitution referendums, democratic elections, and address the serious lack of human rights in China.  If not, no more 3% tariffs.  They can be taxed at 25%.  Or higher.  Let them feel the economic pinch or fix their system.
  And while we're at it, no more 3% tariffs for anyone, unless they're goods are already at a competitive price to ours.  Enough of these third world sweatshops undercutting manufacturing costs and putting hard working Americans out of work.  I'm certainly sick of "Made in China" and "Heche en Mexico" on everything.  We can have decent tariffs on competitively priced goods.  We can employ Americans to makes our stuff otherwise.  And we can use taxes and tariffs to make it happen.
  The fact is, we can no longer fail to put America first.  Our people are out of work, sleeping on the streets, and not receiving the services they should be.  Our schools are consistently sinking in rankings.  Our youth are being failed, by us.  It is up to us to stand up and say enough is enough, and vote our leaders out of office, even if it means enacting recalls at the congressional level.

Political and Gender Stereotyping in Modern Entertainment

  This has been a bit of a pet peeve of mine for a couple of decades now.  You turn on an American Sitcom, and you see a fairly intelligent wife, and the husband, in order to be intelligent has to be a liberal "intellectual" (I laugh, and I fart in their general direction), or the husband is often overweight, big on football and dumb.  Plainly said, that's been the truth.  With "Home Improvement" in the 90s it was funny.  Tim Allen as Tim Taylor was hilarious.  Fast forward, and you have "King of Queens", "Family Guy", and various other cock-and-bull shows with the same premise, dumb man and smart wife.  It's old, Hollywood.  I'm a fairly conservative person, and I'm in the top 2% for IQ.
  Shows I like are ones like "NCIS", where the characters run all stripes.  Not all Muslims are terrorists, not all terrorists are Middle Eastern, and everyone's intelligence runs the gamut.  The blatant politicizing is what gets me, how all the intelligent males in a lot of modern entertainment are far left.
  "Family Guy" has gone way over the edge in this regard.  I can't stand to watch it anymore.  Every time I turn around, the show is making blatant fun of "Red" states, Conservative Personalities, and religion.  "South Park" goes over the top sometimes, and is definitely not for children, but at least they play fair, and everyone gets their fair share of being made fun of.
  Guys like Jon Stewart and Glenn Beck, I can handle.  Yes, their views are to the extreme, but you know that going in.  It's their job to give you their opinions and political views.  You turn on CNN, you know you're getting a more liberal bent.  FOX News favors a conservative view.  That is well known.  When I turn on TV to prime time television and sitcoms, I want to be entertained.  I don't want the shows' creators' political views crammed down my throat.  And I don't want to see how women are "so much smarter than men, unless men are liberals".  Period.  I want a gamut of characters.  If I see a History Professor, I want to see an intelligent man or woman, who may be a little conservative or liberal, who's views are based on actual history, not on the predilections of the show's creator.  Let the art teacher be liberal.  Or maybe a conservative even.  It's possible.  Political debates and opinion shows are the place for politics.  Sitcoms and dramas are the place for non biased entertainment.

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

Parenting

  Ok, one complaint I have is that many parents don't want to take responsibility for raising their children.  They want new safety regulations, and new censorship rules, and other people to be responsible for the content their children view.
  Ok, there are some situations like the Janet Jackson/Justin Timberlake Super Bowl halftime show.  Obviously, that is not the place for public nudity.  And it's not unreasonable to expect schools to maintain reasonable standards.  Kids should not be listening to Gangsta' rap at school.  Nor should they be dressed in a provocative manner.  But I get tired of hearing about parents protesting musicians, movies, video games, and so forth, just because they don't want to put the effort into raising their children themselves.
  I also am sick of the overuse of drugs on children.  Some of the long term effects of these drugs on children are pretty severe.  Popping pills into your child so you can avoid having to actually put effort into disciplining them and raising them isn't worth the possibility you are doing permanent damage to your child.  You are also reducing the effect of antibiotics when you overuse or fail to use them properly.  The simple answer is do some research and put some effort into raising your child.
  So how about we keep these parenting groups off Capitol Hill and out of the news, and get these parents to start putting in the effort themselves.

Saturday, May 14, 2011

The American Dream

  One of the things that brought so many people from so many lands over the course of now nearly four and a half centuries was the "American Dream", the idea that with a little luck and some hard work, you could have some land of your own with a house, maybe some crops, and a decent, free life.  Over time, as technology has progressed, other items have been added to the list.  We now have cars and trucks, tvs, xboxes and playstations, laptops, ipods and iphones, and so on.  Nowhere in our Constitution, Declaration of Independence, or any older mention of the American Dream, was it mentioned that everyone should have everything, no matter what.
  The entire idea of the American Dream is that we earn what we have.  Sure, there are some things that are necessary to survival, and I do believe in making sure the bare essentials are available to everyone, but I don't believe in supporting systems that give luxuries to those who don't work.  If you don't work, you don't deserve to have a bunch of nice things.
  Now, there are exceptions, such as those who are physically or mentally disabled.  Obviously, I believe they should have more than just the essentials.  These are people who for whatever reason aren't able to work and earn luxuries.  Do I believe that someone who is disabled should be able to buy ten acres of land with a 2000 square foot house?  No, I believe that they should be entitled to something reasonable, with decent luxuries, and a decent running vehicle.
  When I know of someone who is barely able to pay rent on his apartment and raise his children when he is clearly physically disabled, it drives me nuts because within a one block radius of him, there are plenty of able bodied individuals who could hold a job who get twice what he gets in welfare, and they sell drugs on top of it.  That's why I don't believe in our current welfare system.  It lends itself to abuse too easily.
  It's simple, you want a nice house with a yard, a nice car, and luxuries to take up your off time, you earn it.  Otherwise, I believe you should be given the bare essentials, and allowed to get by.

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

Immigration Reform

  So the topic of immigration has once again hit the news.  Obviously, the bulk of it is about illegal immigration.  This is not an easy subject to deal with, because many illegal immigrants are here working.  Hard.  In crappy jobs.  However, it does cause problems, because many of these aren't getting paid even minimum wage.  I'm not anti-amnesty, but I'm not entirely pro-amnesty either.  My problem with a general amnesty is that it doesn't take many things into account.  If we are to give amnesty, it needs to strictly be to those who can verify they have been gainfully employed.  And the threshold of acceptable proof needs to be fairly high.  It can't just be "find any two witnesses who say you've been working at this job", it needs to be US citizens who can speak to who does what.  That's to prevent those who are here for criminal enterprise from abusing the situation.  Also, there are many who have above board jobs that pay taxes.  They obviously entered legally at some point, but they kept coming back or stayed and couldn't or haven't renewed their visas.  Make them legal.  Give them documentation.  If the job they do is above board anyway, why deport them, make them legal.
  On the other side, we need to look at employers who employ illegal aliens.  We need to be very careful about who we target, but we need to find those people who are employing illegal aliens, and don't even abide by current labor law.  There are agribusinesses that employ thousands of people.  Expecting them to verify every employee individually is unreasonable.  For an agribusiness, by the time they finished the process, it would be too late, and the season for which they hired would be over.  So we don't want to fine them, when everything else they do is above board.  We want to cooperate with them to find the otherwise honest illegals and get them a green card.
  We need to target those who underpay and overwork, with no regard for human life, and we need to fine them to the point they have nothing left.  And we need to actively search for them.  There are plenty of legal ways to find out who is running illegal labor in a lot of places. 
  I'm also in favor of tightening up border security.  We need to apprehend and turn these people around.  We also need to have the military on the border.  Make no mistake, those that are running drugs, weapons, and sometimes human cargo are heavily armed, and a few civilians with beanbag shotguns aren't sufficient.  And we treat those who cross our borders under such circumstances as terrorists, which is what they are.  It is unacceptable that we have such a huge breach of national security, when we have forces that are more than capable of remediating the situation.  I would gladly do a two year tour on the border, with reasonable rotations of patrol duty, training, and low density.  As this is in regards to an international border, there is no reason we couldn't have soldiers and marines in humvees dealing with the open deserts, while border patrol deals with the lawful crossings.
  Border security needs to be a much higher concern, or the next 9/11 will be in one of our southernmost cities.

Sunday, May 8, 2011

Republican Candidates

 The South Carolina debates was recent, and with it, we get a first look at the playing field for Republicans.  There is a lot on the GOP's plate this Presidential election season, a bad economy, a war that has dragged on for nearly a decade, and government run health care.  Herman Cain came out as a front runner from the debate.  I want to know if he is the type of leader that can be Commander in Chief.
  Yes, there is much in common with running a country and running a business, but running the military is a different animal.  Can Herman Cain make the hard decisions from a military standpoint.  I will be more than willing to vote for him, if he is that type of leader.  But I need to know he is.  The other potential candidates seemed more of the usual politicians to me.
  We face a very critical election season next year.  We the people need proven leadership we can trust.  We can't hand the most powerful office in the free world to just anyone, and I for one would prefer to keep Pres. Obama over someone who can't in any way demonstrate the ability to make a hard call, one that my life and the lives of other service members rides on.
  Gentlemen, don't play politics, don't be egotistical about this.  If it isn't about serving your country, drop out now.  If it's about you being the center of attention, I don't want to hear it, there are serious candidates worth my consideration.  Figure out who is best for our country, and throw your support behind him.  Don't waste our time and money otherwise.

Spiritual America part 7

Judaism in the US.  The first important note is that while there have been periods of antisemitic sentiment in the US, such sentiment never reached the levels of Central and Easter Europe.  There has been a Jewish presence in the US since Colonial times, and Jews made a rather significant contribution to the founding and growth of our nation.
  The Jewish population of the Colonies, while a small group, played a large part in financing the Revolution.  The fact is, antisemitism never played as much a role and American society as it did in European.  Most of the time, Jewish populations were actually accepted into society at large, although there were periods of restriction of political power.  The initial Jewish population was Sephardic, of Spanish and Portugese ancestry, where they would have faced severe discrimination, especially during the Inquisitions.  Therefore, it is no surprise that John Locke would have specified their freedoms and tolerance when he wrote the charter for South Carolina.
  Negative stereotypes were common in the arts of the day, however, Jewish populations were often the financiers of westward expansion, with strong family ties to the East.  They were often the leaders of the textiles retail sector.  While predominantly middle class, they were largely responsible for establishing the important business centers in the growing US.
  The largest immigration periods were in the mid 19th century, coming from Central and Eastern Europe, where antisemitism made pogrom life undpredictable and dangerous.  In the 1830s and 1840s, most of the Jewish immigrants were German Jews (Ashkenazi), who were often well educated.  They established their strongest population center in New York, NY.  Beginning in the 1880s, it was from Eastern Europe and Russia that large groups immigrated from.
  There were antisemitic immigration policies from 1921 to 1965.  However, in the interim, US Jews fought in two world wars.  In World War II, nearly half of all male Jews between 18 and 50 fought in World War II.  Even though Jews comprise a small percent of our population, they're contribution to our society and culture cannot be understated.

Saturday, May 7, 2011

Spiritual America part 6

  Part 6 is about Catholicism in America.  Have no doubt, Catholicism has played an important role in the foundation and building of the US.  At least one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence and two of the framers of the Constitution were Catholic.  Many of our country's oldest cities were founded by Catholics, such as those built around the Spanish Missions.  And the immigration of Catholics played a large part in our modern diversity.
  The obvious place to start is with the Spanish, and we need to include the French in this as well.  Two driving forces brought Spanish Franciscans and French Jesuits to North America, secular greed and a religious obligation to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  As Catholicism was the religious power in both nations, where ever the people went, so did the Priests and Monks.  As new settlers arrived in new places, they would have a contingent of Priests as well as soldiers.  St. Augustine FL, New Orleans LA, and San Francisco and Los Angeles CA were all built around Catholic Missions and Spanish or French forts.  It is important to remember the territories including Texas and Louisiana changed hands a few times between the Spanish and French.  This laid the foundation for many of the modern Dioceses in the US.  With the Louisiana Purchase and the Mexican Cession, millions of people became Americans, and would simply retain their Catholic faith.
  When Henry VIII split the Church of England from Rome, there were some Britons who retained belief in Papal Authority.  As the Colonies began to thrive, certain of them such as Maryland became good places for Catholics to escape the internal strife of England.  They would still find religious strife on this side of the pond, however for the most part they were able to live peaceful lives.  There was anti-Catholic sentiment in the predominantly Protestant Colonies, however as early English Catholics kept themselves to certain enclaves and were not a significant portion of the population, strife was kept to a minimum.  Five Colonies did at one time or another have anti-Catholic laws, but all such legislation was ended upon the enactment of the First Amendment.  During the Revolution, the Catholic Bishop of London cut all ties with those priests who supported the American Revolution, allowing for the Pope to create a Diocese in the US.  This would set the stage for later immigration.
  In my last blog, I mentioned the Potato Famine in Ireland, however that was one of many factors which contributed to the immigration of Catholics to the US in the 19th century.  A large portion of Catholic Immigrants were Irish, but food problems and political strife also brought us Poles, Germans, and other Central European Catholic immigrants during the 19th century.  From Portugal, Italy, and Sicily, overpopulation and political strife also sent many across the sea in search of new opportunities.  This would see an increase in anti-Catholic sentiment in the US, creating political strife and causing riots.  However, in 1960 the US would elect its' first Catholic President, John F. Kennedy, which finally saw a downturn in anti-Catholic sentiment.
  The major contributing factor to the Northern and Central European immigrations would be what is now known as the Little Ice Age, a period of approximately 850 years in which global cooling reduced food supply in much of Europe.  One of the worst of these periods was the Maunder Minimum, which was a period of minimal solar activity.  It created food shortages with bitterly cold and long winters.  This was shortly followed by the Dalton Minimum.  During these periods food shortages grew critical, which is what placed political strain on nations that were politically Catholic and directly contributed to the French Revolution.  The negative effect was also felt in other nations.  Eventually, many of those that could find a way left Europe for the US, where even if they weren't readily accepted in most of the rural areas, they would be able to find work and food.  Catholic immigration to the US greatly contributed to the Industrial Revolution, filling factories with laborers who worked hard to feed their families.  And while the Climates of the northern states in which Catholics took up their residence was just as bitter as the homes they left, the Southern and Midwestern states were producing enough food to feed the masses.
  From Spain, Portugal and Italy, the opposite is true.  While the Little Ice Age meant cooler and longer winters, it did not have an adverse effect on food production.  Overpopulation and political strife brought on by the Napoleonic Wars and the corruption of many high ranking Church officials brought about the need for many to leave their homelands.  These were the people who would settle much of the Midwest and West during the gold rushes, finding that the Spanish Mission/Mexican culture was very similar to their own.  Many would settle in the East, finding abundant industrial jobs and supportive Dioceses, but being they were more likely to have the financial ability to spread out, they quickly established presences all over the US.
  The most recent period of immigration has been predominantly Filipino and Latin American.  This has been brought about by those immigrants who come to the US in search of jobs or to escape the political turmoil still ongoing in their homelands.  Since the founding of our nation, Catholics have grown from less than two percent of the population to 22 percent.  They have contributed much culturally to our nation.  Catholic Social Services serve hundreds of thousands of people every year with unmet needs.  Catholic schools educate more than 2 million students every year.  Catholics fight in our armed forces and serve as police officers and fire fighters.  They hold political offices and own businesses.  They are very much a part of America's Spiritual Landscape.

Friday, May 6, 2011

Spiritual America part 5

  America has always known its' times of turmoil.  The 19th century is certainly no exception.  And religion has always played a key role in American culture and politics.  One of the first periods to cover is the Louisiana Purchase.  The United States already had territory butting against the Mississippi River, though much of that was the territory of Native American tribes,  and the Louisiana Purchase doubled the territory of the US.  It also added a new dynamic to the nation's spiritual topography, because the residents of the area around New Orleans was of French citizenship, and many of them were Catholic.
  While Catholicism was present in the US prior to that, it was nowhere near a driving force.  Now Catholics represented a sizable portion of our demographics, with further such gains to come.  The Louisiana Purchase also represents the beginning of Westward Expansion.  One of the driving forces behind Westward Expansion was a philosophy known as Manifest Destiny, in which many people believed they had a Divine calling to take possession of much if not all of the North American Continent.  As you can see, it was spiritual idealism driving the push west, while the series of gold rushes were the fuel.
  American expansionism constantly drove people out to new frontiers.  With them living lives almost constantly in danger, it is only natural that religious forces would follow.  On top of that, immigration from Europe began to grow rapidly.  With the Napoleonic Wars, the political instability of Italy and Germany, and the oppression of peoples in Central and Eastern Europe, thousands of people set out for the new Land of Opportunity.  Anti-Semitic sentiment was growing fast in Europe, prompting hundreds of thousands of Jews to move to the US.  As the 19th century progressed, Large numbers of Chinese immigrants would move to the West Coast, bringing with them Daoism and Buddhism.
  So now a nation which had begun as a predominantly Deistic-Christian nation, mostly protestant, had new forces at play.  As I continue this, I will cover Catholicism, Orthodoxy and Buddhism, and the overall effect each of these had on the growth and development of American Culture.

Thursday, May 5, 2011

Spiritual America part 4

  -"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."-  Opening Sentence of the US Declaration of Indepence, Thomas Jefferson, 1776

  When declaring the United States to be a free and separate nation, Thomas Jefferson began with establishing that the former Colonists were well within the rights established by a Creator God to do so.  He begins his writing with a statement that it is right and just for a people to dissolve political bonds under certain circumstances, and that the cause for dissolving political bonds should be stated before God and all mankind, so that all may know the justness of separation.  This is inherently important here because it sets the tone for all our politics since the revolution.  This part of the series is regarding the Revolution and the Founding Documents, so I will cover the ongoing political aspect of American Spirituality later.
  Thomas Jefferson, as one of the principal founding fathers, the wartime Governor of Virginia during the Revolution, was actually very developed spiritually.

-"Jefferson was a deist because he believed in one God, in divine providence, in the divine moral law, and in rewards and punishments after death, but did not believe in supernatural revelation. He was a Christian deist because he saw Christianity as the highest expression of natural religion and Jesus as an incomparably great moral teacher. He was not an orthodox Christian because he rejected, among other things, the doctrines that Jesus was the promised Messiah and the incarnate Son of God."-

Thomas Jefferson would often refer to himself as a Christian.

-"To the corruptions of Christianity I am, indeed, opposed; but not to the genuine precepts of Jesus himself. I am a Christian, in the only sense in which he wished any one to be; sincerely attached to his doctrines, in preference to all others; ascribing to himself every human excellence...."-

The writer of one of our key documents was greatly inclined to a spiritual life, even if he was openly hostile to many of the organized churches of his day.
  George Washington, while also seemingly more a Deist than a Christian,  held great respect for the role of religion in American Life.  During his presidency he saluted 22 religious groups for their work.  He was often seen at various church services.  It was he who pushed for the commisioning and salaries of Chaplains in the Continental Army, establishing the precedent that not only should American Servicemembers have religious freedom, they should also have religious support from their command.
  I could go on about the other five men known as "Key Founding Fathers", but I'm not going to.  Suffice it to say that all of our founding fathers were spiritual in some manner, but devoted to reasoned theosophy as opposed to religious dogma.  The main point is to reference the second sentence of the Declaration of Independence, the most famous sentence of the Declaration:

     -"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, and they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, and that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness."-

The Declaration of Independance goes on to list charges against the government of Englad regarding the abuses inflicted upon the Americans.  This is a matter for another series entirely.  The final section of the Declaration of Independence, however, is also inestimable in value.

-"We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."- emphasis added

  Well educated reasoning men signed this document, acknowledging the references to God in it, asserting that it was the very essence of God's Justice and Mercy that men ought to be free.  It is by acknowledging our spiritual heritage, and asserting that our rights and liberties are the commandment of God, and finding that moral fiber within ourselves to obey God's laws in and of ourselves that will continue to make us a great nation.

Spiritual America part 3

  We've established that we owe our status as a highly educated nation to the Puritans.  Now we are moving onto the later Colonial Period up to the Revolution.  As established, much of the Ivy League was built by Puritans.  Other well known schools still in existence today were built by other religious groups during the Colonial Period.  Our national heritage is one of religious diversity, as many groups from Europe immigrated to the New World during the Colonial Period.
  Life was also fraught with danger in the American Colonies.  While in parts of New England, it was common for people to live into their sixties and have several children who would also live into their sixties, in the rest of the Colonies, disease and minor battles with local Native American Tribes were a way of life.  Many have heard the saying "There's no such thing as an atheist in a foxhole".  The essence of that is true regarding frontier life.  And the American Colonies were the frontier for North America in the 17th and 18th centuries.
  One cannot talk about the Colonial religious culture without talking about the Great Awakenings.  In the 1730s and 1740s, itinerant preachers such as John Edwards and George Whitefield would travel through the Colonies preaching a return to a purer form of religion.  Those who would seek religious revival in the Modern United States often refer to these two men, for all the pious success they had in preaching in the Colonies.
  By the 1760s, the stage was more than set for a philosophical showdown between the Colonists, who were mostly self made and devout in faith to a greater degree than their English counterparts, and the Aristocracy in England.  In part 4, I'm covering the religious philosophy behind the Declaration of Independence, as well as the effect of Christian Philosophy on the Articles of Confederation and the US Constitution.

Spiritual America part 2

  To start the historic aspect of America's spirituality, we actually have to go back to Germany in 1520 (then the Holy Roman Empire) and Martin Luther, and England in 1532 under Henry VIII.  We also need to reference John Calvin, whose reform work in 1536 eventually played a role in settling the New England colonies.  This is actually quite important, because without the religious turmoil of Europe in the 16th century, the American Revolution likely would never have happened.
  "Blasphemy" some of you might say, but it's very true.  While the 13 Colonies were fairly devout by the mid 18th century, the southern colonies were built on tobacco as a cash crop.  The earliest settlers were there looking for gold.  Had there been no religious reformations in Europe at the start of the Colonial Era, it is likely that we never would have had the philosophical basis to construct our complaints against the throne of England and declare ourselves as a free nation.
  It was the Protestant Reformation, which slowly grew a theology that gave rise to the group now referred to as the Puritans, by which our nation's philosophical foundation was built.  Martin Luther's protests against the Papacy for theological abuses, as well as the theological work of John Calvin, laid the foundation for many of the denominations present in the modern US.  The Puritans drew heavily on both to develop their theology.
  The Church of England also plays a role, because Henry VIII's split with Rome precipitated a period of turmoil in England where the Puritans actually rose to power in the English government.  I can hear the humanists snickering from here already.  That didn't turn out well, as the Puritans shut down all the major theater companies, pubs and taverns, and brothels, and any other institution which peddled vice.  They lasted a mere two years.
  After the downfall of the Puritan governance, a large group of the Puritans eventually ended up in the Massachusetts Bay Colony.  Now, we might look at the Salem Witch Trials shortly thereafter, but that was rather the exception instead of the rule.  The majority of the Ivy League was founded by the Puritans.  This is a major point, because the Puritans were very big on education.  All Puritans were required to be literate.  Puritans did enforce traditional roles in the household, but all women could read in Puritan New England, as it was considered proper for the wife to teach her children to read, and for her to run the household, which does require basic reading comprehension and mathematics.
  The entire foundation of our education system was on Puritanism.  If it hadn't been for the Puritan model of schooling, the entirety of the Colonies would only ever have learned enough to sell cash crops.  The scholarship of our founding fathers to contest the abuse of authority in England and write our Constitution would not have existed.  And we never would have had the moral imperative for our Revolution.

Spiritual America part 1

  I've decided I'm doing a definite series on American Spirituality.  I have no idea at this time how many parts there will be, just this isn't the only part, merely the first.
  Why I've decided to do a blog series on American Spirituality will be quite obvious once I go into detail, but the two key factors in this topic to state first are 1) several of the original British colonies were founded on a religious basis, and 2) When it came to founding our nation, the founding fathers referenced some very spiritual concepts, even though many were deists, and not Christians.  This still factors in today, with nearly 80% of our nation's population identifying themselves as Christian.  Only 16% of the population says they have no religion or are agnostic or atheist.  So, with about 84% of the nation having some sort of religion, we are a very spiritual nation, as well as very diverse in that spirituality.
  No other nation has as many denominations or sects as the US.  Nor does any other nation have as many religious institutions of higher education.  From the Puritans landing at Plymouth to found what is now the state of Massachusetts, to modern America, where it's high school football on Friday night, the local watering hole on Saturday night, and church on Sunday, religion and religious freedom has played an incalculable role in our culture and progress.  Travel to any town in America, and toward the center of that town there will be several churches within a four block radius of each other.  When it comes to world affairs, our leaders, often without regard to sect or denomination, quite frequently meet with religious leaders.
  Most Americans seem to take the idea of God very seriously.  We cannot escape the fact that across all strata of our society, we are motivated by ideas higher than ourselves.  As I continue this series, some of the topics I will cover will include America's religious history and heritage, the birth of new denominations, religious tolerance and tensions, religion in our culture and art, and religion in modern life.  I will write on any other topics as I think of them, but these topics are where I will start.

Wednesday, May 4, 2011

The Osama Pictures

  Pres. Obama has decided against releasing the pictures of Osama bin Laden.  I personally wish he would, but in regard to Islamic sensibilities, it's not a bad decision.  The fact is, the photos very well could tip those on the fence into the jihadi camp.  The Islamic world is not simply Arabs.  It is a multitude of different ethnic groups, with its' own different sects.
  The various ethnic groups who practice Islam in the Central Asian mountain regions are often very peaceable people.  However, they have a very strong warrior ethic, with very defined honor codes.  Something that could be seen as arrogant could very well tip the balance in Central Asia.
  Arabs do have a certain respect for strength, however, there are elements of the various Arab groups that would be provoked by such pictures, without regard as to whether they would have been jihadis before.  It's a fine line to walk.
  The other thing is that people have been talking about the religious elements of bin Laden's burial at sea.  I completely agree with this.  Bin Laden may have been a mass murderer, but there are many who consider him a very devout Muslim.  Pres. Obama never said he wasn't a Muslim, he said he wasn't a Muslim leader.  So again we have a fine line that is easily crossed.
  I also want to address those who say we should have cooperated with Pakistan to arrest him.  It wasn't possible.  Period.  The ISI is completely outside the control of the civil government of Pakistan, so if we had tried to coordinate with them, they would have tipped off and moved bin Laden to somewhere else.  It's that simple.  He was offered the chance to surrender before he was shot.  Whether or not we took him dead or alive was unimportant.  Osama bin Laden being taken out of the game is what was important.  He's gone.  Any documents he had in that compound are now in our possession.  The operation was a complete success.  It would not surprise me in the least if in the next year we did have half of Al Qaida shut down.  There's no saying on my end what was in the compound.  I don't need to know right now, I don't want to know until we've exhausted every last iota of valuable intelligence in those documents. 
  There might yet be a few videos of bin Laden that Al Qaida will release in the near future, but I won't believe them.  I do believe what my military leadership tells me, because if it is proven they are lying, it would destroy the credibility of the US Government and military.

Tuesday, May 3, 2011

Urban Blight

  So I have a thought on urban blight.  One of the truths of crime is violence and illegal drugs go hand in hand.  Where these problems congregate is in cheap housing areas, primarily where there are huge numbers of apartments or trailer parks.  So my idea is to have a rental income tax directly proportioned to the amount of police work that goes into a given area.
  The plan is simple, work off radius.  Start with the rental property as the center of the radius.  Determine what percentage of the residents had a criminal violence or drug related during the last quarter, and maybe year.  If the percentage reaches a reasonable threshold, then the owner of that rental property is subject to a penalty tax.  Now go one block out.  If the per capita crime rate increases by another reasonable threshold, add more penalty tax.  If the rental properties in question do not meet the threshold in and of themselves, they are subject to no penalties, but the main factor you are looking at is not if the cops go to the property in question, but if the residents are the ones involved.  You only have to go out about four or five blocks at most, because by this time, the penalty will encroach upon 50-70% of the rental gross income.  There's no profit in that, so landlords will actively seek to reduce the number of criminals living in their tenements.  For the actual language of the law, I would use something that qualifies anyone who has at least four units capable of supporting a single household.  I would definitely include hotels in this, as they can be the source of some of the worst urban blight when they are run as apartments instead of temporary lodging. 
  It really is a matter of poor stewardship on the part of property owners that allows urban blight to get as bad as it does.  So the objective of this is to make them be better stewards of their investments.

Raising the budget ceiling

  I'm saying it's a bad idea, because it's already a bad habit.  Our nation is too deeply in debt.  If politicians want a small raise in the ceiling in order to facilitate the necessary shifts and condensions that will shrink our federal government to a manageable level, that's one thing, but we can't keep this up for ever.  Maybe getting spending under control is a process that will take another decade, but we have to start somewhere, and that somewhere is not spending money we don't have.
  The obvious place to start is the shear amount of pork barrel projects that do not benefit the nation as a whole, but one small congressional district.  Granted, everyone likes a museum to visit, or some natural wonder to be a state or federal park, but I've already spoken my mind to that.  Reduce the amount of money spent on parks overall, and let the actual running of parks be handled by the lowest levels.  So we could probably afford to trim a lot of the fat there and streamline operations.
  I think the same could be said for a lot of other operations.  I think the federal law enforcement should be more of a coordinating force, than a full scale law enforcement.  The only exceptions should be the military branch law enforcement.  And that's only because there are many crimes that are fairly specific to the military, and many of these crimes can involve classified information that doesn't need to be released to the lowest levels.  As far as local police departments and sheriff's offices go, why can't they have someone with a security clearance, or multiple officers with clearance working in the department.  The fact is, the tiny town out in the sticks isn't going to have the terrorist threat that a larger metropolitan area will have.  So, you would just need to have a FBI agent with a security clearance, who can coordinate with other police departments and state police, who makes a stop at that sheriff's office twice a month, as opposed to having a whole office of field agents, all working cases separate from local police, many of which don't actually require a security clearance, merely qualification to be a peace officer.  Strip that out, and move the bulk of operations to the lowest levels.
  It's a simple matter of looking at all the redundancy we have in our combined governments that isn't necessary, followed by a broken tax system, with a bureaucracy that is overgrown in and of itself on top of it all.  Let the people be strong and sort it out, and let the higher levels only provide broader oversight.  With modern technology, if we continue to grow it, it is very possible.
  Look at skype, and other such services.  It's almost not necessary for congress to fly in every representative and senator for sessions anymore.  If the congressional offices were set central to the districts and states represented, with coordinated meeting times for sessions, our government could save millions on the travel costs of our legislators.  And our legislators would be in our home states and districts more, allowing us to deal with them more often.
  The fact is, government jobs is usually not the most viable sector for an economy, because the burden has to be paid for by someone.  And the wealthiest people always find a way out of a good portion of their taxes.  So we must find a way to shrink our government overall, so that it still does the same jobs, but without the redundancy, and can still manage our country.

Sunday, May 1, 2011

Osama bin Laden is Dead!!

Pres. Obama's Speech

 
  Today is a great day, for announcing this to the world, we have claimed a significant philosophical victory in the Global War on Terror.  After nearly 10 years, we finally got that son of a bitch.  Yes I'm cussing in my blog, but there are some things that just need emphasis.  I'll say it in Pashto:
هغه دسپۍ زوی، اُسامه بن لادن، مر دی.
  Literally, that son of a bitch, Osama bin Laden, is dead.
  The video of people outside the White House is amazing.  As one who expent energy in theater in this war, it feels great to hear he is dead.  I saw good friends die, or come back seriously injured in this war, and it feels good that the figurative leader is dead.
  Let this be a warning to all those who would attack the US, we will pursue you to the ends of the Earth for the sake of justice, and have no doubt, I consider this justice.

I would have been a Democrat

  Had I been a full grown in the time before Pres. Kennedy's administration, I would have been a Democrat.  Why I would have been a Democrat is simple, the DNP principals of that era were in line with my own.  Now, like Pres. Reagan and Charleton Heston, I would have been left by the DNP.
  In the fifties and sixties, the Democrats were considered progressive for their time.  Their level of tolerance then was comparable to today.  What has happened is that some elements in the DNP has moved to the far left.  A little socialism has turned into a desire for a Soviet style communism.  Concern for major mistreatment of animals has turned into the desire to shut down any industry based upon the use of animals.  The desire to reduce overall pollutants has turned into over regulation that has contributed to our inability to compete on the global stage in the manufacturing sectors.
  The US is the largest producer of agricultural products, responsible for over half of all food raised in the world.  But because of over regulation, we are losing our foothold as our ability to control pests is slowly eroded away.  Many people are concerned with genetically modified food.  We could increase further food production through the use of genetic modification, and yet elements of our society, who proclaim to also want to feed the poor in other nations, don't want to allow the use and development of the science and technology that would expand food surplus.
  We've lost ground on the manufacturing front because of higher wages, bad retirement plans, and regulations that impinge upon our ability to compete.  Had there been better planning for retirement accounts, and more foresight regarding international competition and free trade agreements, we would still have a stronger manufacturing base to support a middle class.
  The fact is, that's the way of it.  Service jobs don't support a middle class.  Not by themselves.  Most service jobs barely pay more than minimum wage.  Not unless you speak of specialized service jobs such as event planner or caterer.  That is why I stand so close to the center now.  The US is losing out on our ability to compete internationally in many areas, and I believe that we are losing out because the most extreme elements of our politics plays games and blocks us from working toward developing our technologies to a competitive level in critical sectors.  Yes, we lead the way in medicine and computing, we are still the world's breadbasket, but we sadly lack in our ability to maintain competitive sectors that would support a reasonable lifestyle for the majority of our population.
   It is on us, then, to stand up together, and work towards solutions to our problems, by focusing on our education system and finding new sectors to develop jobs in.

Stereotypes and Race Gap

  The first question is why.  Why is there any sort of race gap in the US today?  Supposedly the policies have been in place for the last few decades to address the problems, but the problems have been getting worse.  Where there have been success, it hasn't been a matter of policies, but of grassroots efforts by the people involved to address the issues.  The Harlem Children's Zone is a great example of this.

http://www.hcz.org/

  Is that it?  Is writing a bunch of rules not the solution, but putting forth the effort in local communities the solution?  What motivates people to work harder as opposed to take the easy way out?
  I'm against our current welfare system.  It doesn't work.  It contributes to many problems, among those the race divide that exists.  I don't believe in race.  I believe in brotherhood.  So why is a program that has created more problems and solved none still in effect?
  We need to revamp the welfare system altogether.  I believe in a barracks with a mess if you're single, eight man bays, and a common room with mess access for families.  Leeway on the schedule would be provided to breastfeeding mothers.  If people want to sit on their lazy hindquarters all day and do nothing let them.  But take away the ability to have privacy without working for it and degrading the property values in a lot of neighboorhoods.  Give them a bunk and the necessary food to survive.  Don't make it good food at all.  Those that want to work will get out and get jobs or study something. 
  This becomes a racial issue because in most urban areas, the vast majority of those on welfare are racial minorities.
  The flip side of this is the stereotypes for other races.  There are white men who can jump and dance.  Not all asians have to be good at math and science.  The stereotypes like these are still negative.  I'll admit, I've worked with some hard working mexicans, but that didn't mean there needed to be stereotypes involved.  Since I've worked with them I've prayed often their hard work put their kids in a better position.  It really all is a matter of effort in.  And too many people let some facade keep them back.  Those who do succeed do so through their hard work.
  So the Harlem Children's zone is working, little by little.  Other such community initiatives are slowly being implemented around the nation.  What we need to do is quit wasting hundreds of millions annually on a program that hasn't solved a single problem, and funnel that money into guaranteeing  those don't want to work have food, clothing and shelter, and nonprofit organizations that motivate children to go to school.

Saturday, April 30, 2011

Abortion

  Ok, here's a question.  In the last forty years, the pro-life conservatives have failed to save a single child from abortion, because all they do is fight against Roe v Wade.  Why haven't they sought to put measures in place that would incentivize having a child?  I'm not saying make it possible to get rich off of having children, but if it were possible to compensate a would be mother for the medical costs, and for the loss of the child.  Have a waiting period after birth.  Make sure that these women, and even young girls have a chance to do something about the situation and how they'll really feel.
  There are thousands of couples out there that would love the chance to adopt a child, so why aren't there programs in place to encourage placing a child up for adoption instead of having an abortion.  Yeah, there are religious nonprofit organizations out there that try to steer women away from abortion, but how many more mothers would be willing to have their child if not only would they not be burdened with medical costs, but for the extra effort going into having a child they were paid.  Not too much, just a few grand to incetivize having the child.  And the post-partum waiting period would be substantial enough that a woman would be able to know she didn't want to keep a child, but not so much that the waiting adoptive parents would be strained to start raising a child that's already matured a fair amount, say three to six months.
  I'm not talking about slavery, I'm talking about incentives to steer the women who would have an abortion away from it.  I don't think there's a woman out there who would have an abortion if for the nine months of discomfort, plus the pain of labor, they were compensated some.
  The other side of the coin is why aren't there more programs to make viable birth control methods available to women who would be unable to raise a child.  What, the religious right wants to dictate that for religious reasons someone has to be burdened with such a horrible choice?  In Genesis, Onan the son of Judah was struck down for failing to obey God's and his father's command to raise up a child for his slain, childless brother.  Not because he practiced coitus interruptus and spilled his sperm on the ground.  Birth control isn't a sin for those who need to withhold having a child because they can't properly raise and support him or her.  As for the theology of sex outside of marriage, that is a sin according to many religions, but that has minimal place in a free society.
  Those that would dictate laws based upon religion are nothing more than tyrants and despots, and have no place in a democratic society.  If you want to raise your children to believe it's a sin to have sex outside marriage, that's your prerogative, but it's up to you to teach them, and be honest with them.  Trying to dictate to others how to live rubs against the grain of God's will for us, that we should be free to follow Him of our own accord.  If God did not mean for us to have free choice, he wouldn't have given man a choice to begin with.

Corporate Rights

  Actually, there are no "corporate rights".  Corporations are not people.  Neither are they states or the federal government.  Corporations are mentioned nowhere in the US Constitution.  So a corporation has an obligation to its' constituent employees and officers to uphold their rights, even in the workspace.  No matter what a court may say, the fact is there is no legal basis for a corporation to impinge on personal rights.  The supervisory body for Corporations are the US Congress, who are bound by the Constitution.

Superman

  I want to rant on this one now.  In 1932, when Jerry Speigel and Joe Shuster began writing the original comic, Superman was supposed to encapsulate the ideals of "Truth, Justice and the American Way".  Now that DC Comics has gone through several staffing changes since then, Superman is renouncing his American Citizenship.  While I have been told that Superman is a ficticion character (which he is), this matters to me because of the intent behind it, as well as the underlying message which is being passed to our nation's children:  That America is an "evil" superpower, and Superman cannot associate himself with us anymore. 
  Granted, there is no denying that Superman was used as a vehicle of propaganda during World War II and the Cold War.  But can anyone truly tell me that Soviet Commnunism and Naziism weren't evil systems that needed to collapse?  Stalin, the longest running dictator of the USSR, was one of the worst humanitarian rights violators in history, eclipsed only by Hitler and a handful of others.  So propaganda he may have been in the 20th century, but it was for good cause.
  So now I want to know why:  Why is it necessary for one of the greatest fictional characters of all time to renounce citizenship?  What about the Justice League of AMERICA?  Yes, I know that in recent years, DC has been moving toward having international teams of superheroes, but that doesn't mean they should all denounce their home countries.
  When I enlisted, and again when I reenlisted, I swore an oath.  It's an oath I take to heart.  To support and defend the Constitution of the United States, against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and to bear true faith and allegiance to the same.  It's the same oath any elected official gives upon taking a federal office.  It's an oath I will swear again.  Now, the critical element is the object of the dual verbs, the Constitution of the United States.  The ideals we swore to support and defend.  The Constitution is larger than any modern man, it is the very philosophical foundation of our laws.  So, if "Superman" (eg his writers) has a problem with what our government is doing, he has a duty to speak out about it.  And DC Comics has a public obligation to give true representation to all sides of a story they want to editorialize in their comics.  It's no different than running any journalistic organization.
  Individuals have the right to express their opinions without reservation.  Companies and other collective organizations have an obligation to the People to be fair and balanced.  It's that simple.  Superman can't just renounce his citizenship.  He is the product of decades of collective art.  DC Comics owes the people of the United States a storyline giving us the full story, representing all sides.

Tobacco Taxes

  Ok, for public health reasons, they keep tacking on more taxes to tobacco products.  I understand that.  But how about a different approach for the next round.  Here's an idea.  Taxe the individual additives.  Test the cigarettes with some of the tax revenue already generated.  Make it $.50 per additive per pack.  Considering the number of additives some brands have, I think we'll see the additives go.  Make the tax triple for known poisions like formaldahyde, cyanide, and ammonia.  Perhaps the reasonable goal here should be to get the dangerous chemicals out for now.

Partisan Politics

Disclaimer:  In this post I refer specifically to civilian political issues.  I intend no disrespect to the President who is in my chain of command (who I actually have a lot of respect for as a leader), I'm just addressing political issues.

  Well, that being said, now you know I'm going into some dangerous ground here.  Now, I'm more peeved with Congressman Eric Cantor for what he said in response to Pres. Obama's challenge to put aside the circus side shows and get down to serious business.  But, Mr. President, shouldn't you consider the implications of blatantly challenging the Republicans over something like this?  I myself vote Republican a lot, and I find that only your most conservative elements of society actually give a rat's derriere about your birth certificate. 
  I have to agree with Rep. Paul Broun of GA somewhat.  I do agree with the Pres. for shutting up the "birthers" finally.  Since they were able to enlist a big name to make a stink about it all, I'm glad this is finally out of the air.  But I do agree with others that there are more imortant issues to deal with, like the budget, energy policies, foreign issues, and the like.  I blame the hardcore birthers who dragged this issue out for so long.  That was low.
  Rep. Broun, would you be so kind as to actually sit down with the President and work out some decent compromises over the issues at hand?
Donald Trump and his medical Deferment.

  I want to know what kept him from going to Vietnam.  Donald, I willingly served in a combat zone for my country.  You apparently managed to duck the draft.  I give you credit for doing it legally, when so many would have just jumped the northern border to Canada.  But not only did you avoid the draft somehow, you also lied about it.  Why?
  For a man who wants to run for president you seem to have a lot to hide.  Better start coming clean Donald.  How are you supposed to be our president if we can't trust you?
  So a man who won't give us a political platform, who has lied now about his past, wants to be our president.  I won't vote for him.  Seriously, he talks a lot of crap about Pres. Obama, but why does he seem so determined to guarantee him another term.  Donald Trump needs to back out of this campaign, focus on "The Apprentice", and let someone decent run for office, without tying up anymore news reporting with pointless bovine fecal matter.

Friday, April 29, 2011

Frosted Flakes

  I'm peeved at the FDA over this one.  Anyone who is familiar with Tony the Tiger will know that in recent years, he's been a spokesperson for active and athletic children.  And yet the FDA has named them as an offender for advertising "Junk Food" with a cartoon mascot.  Kellog's became a responsible producer when they initiated the ad campaign to promote athletics among kids.  Had the FDA named them as an offender years ago, when the whole campaign was "They're Grrrreat!" there would have been a point.  But Kellog's began reacting to the issue of childhood obesity already.
  This is just another example of the Government sticking their fingers in the pot unnecessarily.  I don't like this Big Brother bovine fecal matter.  Hostess and Twinkie the Kid are another story entirely.  Twinkies are known as a junk food.  Twinkies are nothing but empty calories.  The whole point of these cartoon and cartoonlike characters is to get kids interested in a product.  Remember the stink over Joe Camel. 
  Now, obviously, there are good reasons in some cases to come down, but that doesn't give the federal government leeway to just going around telling people they shouldn't eat a specific food, or how a manufacturer should advertise their product.  There needs to be justifiable cause.  What about Captain Morgan?  He is an advertising gimmick for a rum, yet he has cartoonlike qualities, and pirates are popular with many kids.  I haven't heard anything about that.  Why target a cereal that isn't all that unhealthy in and of itself, and promotes general wellbeing by advertising child athletics, when they won't come down on a liquor company.

On a personal note, I am converting some of my better quotes into tshirts on cafepress.com.  I've made a link on the right side to my shop.  The Foundation and Structure quote and Bovine Fecal Matter are already designed.

Thursday, April 28, 2011

Energy

  Ok, time for energy talk.  The fact is, the solutions exist.  Seriously, if anyone who is reading this blog would click on some of the ads, I think my first first investment would be some open property in Southern California, near the Mojave and Death Valley.  I'd put up a field of solar panels.  And I'd hire people to maintain it.  It wouldn't have to make me a lot of money, just pay for itself, and fill a retirement account (Yeah, right, I've never been happier in my life).  It's all a matter of putting forth the effort to actually solve the problem.
  One of the problems with this, though, is that banks aren't making loans.  Even though the otherwise worthless land exists, the technology is fast improving, and utilizing the open space in such a manner is just sound from all sides, the necessary start up capital isn't readily available.  There's room in Nevada, Oklahoma, Texas, Kansas, just about any state has open space that generates a fair amount of continuous sunlight.
  Wind is also a viable option.  Here's a thought, combine your wind and solar power farms.  Properly built and laid out, you could solve a large portion of our energy problems, and reduce the use of fossil fuels.
  How about genetic engineering and biofuels?  We could probably produce more than enough diesel fuel if we genetically altered heavy oil producing florae to survive in more extreme circumstances.  Not to mention that the gasses emitted by burning biofuels are cleaner.  It's a matter of science.  The technology exists, just nobody actually wants to try and implement it to solve some of our problems.

Foundation and Structure

  I lay claim to this one.  "The foundation of liberty is those willing to defend it.  The structure of liberty is having the education to exercise it."  It's mine!
  No, seriously, for those who saw my facebook update earlier, I had seen one of those bumper stickers, I believe it was the cost of freedom one, when it and the thank a teacher, thank a soldier quote went through my mind, and I had an Epiphany.
  We can shout patriotic slogans all day and night, we can talk liberty and justice for all, we could all enlist tomorrow, but that still doesn't mean we are truly free.  In fact, if all we do is parrot quotes and follow the crowd around us, we aren't free, we're no better than over sized talking lemmings.  "When the blind follow the blind, they shall both fall into a ditch."  Bill O'Reilly, Bill Maher, John Stewart, Glenn Beck, they're all entitled to their opinions.  Opinions which were formed based upon their personal experiences, upbringing and education.  We the People, however, can't just listen to one or two, but need to listen to all sides, quit parroting ideology, and make sound judgments based on the facts at hand.
  Watch an hour of Fox News, then an hour of CNN, followed by an hour of BBC.  Maybe find some time for Al Jazeera English in there on the internet.  Don't just quote ad nauseum your one personal favorite opinion personality.  Listen to what they all have to say.  And quit wasting their time with emails telling them how much they suck.  If you're going to email them, state an opinion about an issue, and make it worthwhile.  I might have to start naming people who send in nasty emails that are a waste of time on this blog.

Tornadoes in the South

  I can already hear the religious pundits going off on the severe weather in the south,"It's the wrath of God, it's judgment for our sinful ways, we need to get back to <insert ultra-dogmatic sect here>."  Now, I've made it clear that I am a Christian.  However, Matthew ch. 7 vv. 1-2 are crystal clear,"Judge not, unless you are also judged.  For with what ever measure you use, it will be measured back to you."  Judgment is reserved for God, and the theological answer is that God has reserved judgment for Judgment Day.
  I honestly don't want to hear it.  God has his own plan.  It is not for mere mortals to dictate what it is for him.  And if it comes down to it, why are severe storms striking the part of the country known as the "Bible Belt".
  If we want to consider the severe weather God's Judgment, then that begs the question "What are the people of the south doing to deserve this level of punishment?"  Once again, we hit the wall of this being one of the most devout areas of our nation.  So now we know, it's not judgment, it's just the weather patterns changing, as they do.
  Now I can hear the far left going off,"Global Warming!  Global Warming!"  We do have some foundation for that.  However, we are dealing with a phenomenon that isn't yet fully understood.  So, it's a possibility, but nowhere near a certainty.  I want empyrical evidence before people start screaming for more environmental regulations.  Our economy can't handle it right now.
  Maybe what we need to spend our effort on is honest solutions to our problems, instead of perpetuating our very human and very flawed ideologies.

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

Donald Trump

Donald Trump Poll

I'm just in a mood to go off on him tonight.  If you have the AdSense link, please use that, but otherwise, please make your voice heard.  If you think he has no business running for president, or even if you like him and think he should, please cast your vote.  I personally don't like the fact he wanted to use Pres. Obama's birth certificate to launch his political platform.  That was low.  Donald, use a damn real platform to run for office, even though it's too late now.  What's the problem, are you actually more liberal than you want to let on?  What are you trying to hide by not basing your run for president on actual politics, instead you have to attack the man that has the cajones and the votes to sit in that office.

Pres. Obama's Birth Certificate

  Ok, I'm sick of it, but he finally produced a birth certificate.  Now will you people shut up!  I honestly don't believe the Democratic party would have allowed him to run as their candidate unless they had vetted and proven his viability and legality.  It would have destroyed the Democrats thoroughly.  And, I can't criticize him, not just for the legal reasons, but for the fact he is a real leader.  He hasn't shrank from the hard decisions, he doesn't shirk his duties, and he does his job to the best of his abilities.  I may not agree with all his policies, but I do respect him as a leader, and unless the Republicans actually find a better candidate, I will probably vote for his reelection in 2012.  Their, I said it.  I may be fairly conservative, but unless the Republicans can actually produce a true leader who is a true conservative, Pres. Obama has won me over.
  As for Donald Trump, he's been a businessman, and I know he knows how to run a company, but this whole sideshow BS has completely lost me.  Ok, he was actually big-name enough to make Pres. Obama produce the long form birth certificate, but it wasn't anything to base a political platform on.
  What's really bad is when Bill O'Reilly is taking Pres. Obama's side in a conflict.  Bill came down on Trump for the circus act.  Pres. Obama and Bill O'Reilly are right, there are much bigger issues on the table.  What are we supposed to do, dick around legalities while the nation is in the worst position it's been in since the 1930s? 
  These are the reasons I write this blog.  There are too many serious issues today to let some idiot who wants the spotlight and a title just stand up and play games without saying something in a public forum.
  Please, those who read the blog, make comments.  Give me something to work with.  Anyone who knows me well knows I love a good debate.  If you're having trouble, you may need a google account.

Tuesday, April 26, 2011

YouTube and social media

  Ok, this is definitely one that needs to be covered.  I'm going to cover GE's old slogan "Living Better Electrically".  After decades of the trend being to minimize the individual, the reverse is now true.  Technology has brought back the individual.  Social media has allowed us to put our work, thoughts and art out there without the approval of some corporate suit whose main concern is the bottom line.  I'm going to specify YouTube specifically.  There are YouTube videos more popular than your biggest dramas on tv.  When's the last time a single episode of "Friends" could claim a viewership of half a million.
  Living better electrically.  The truth is, with sites like blogspot.com, now even the talking heads of the news have competition.  Here I am spouting my opinions.  Maybe I don't have Bill O'Reilly's following (yet) but I can say how I feel, maybe make a little money off it, and possibly make a difference in the long run.  I remember 20 years ago your news choices were ABC, NBC, CBS and your local newspaper.  Now I have choices upon choices to gain my news sources from.  I can access Al Jazeera TV's website in English now and get the point of view of the Arab world through their news.  We as a communal whole need to utilize modern technology to strengthen every individual possible in order to move forward to the future.

Healthcare part 2

  Another major concern I have with government interference in healthcare is bogging down the system with regulations.  Seeking to fix the problem is one thing, but government systems are all too often inefficient.  The sad fact is that many bureaucracies end up seeking to grow their size without regard to the necessity.  And so we have an unnecessarily large and redundant government.  Once again, it comes down to tiering government structure.  There are places in which redundancy is necessary, primarily in the Department of Defense and intelligence networks.  These redundancies are a matter of security.  But for many things, the best way to run something is to have the most local level conduct the actual operations, while the higher levels of government focus on broader oversight and policy.
  In government, the more local control there is the easier it is for the various entities to adapt to conditions.  The truth is that someone sitting in an office in Washington, DC, Sacramento, or San Francisco has no clue what is really going on in Redding CA.  Or any other smaller town throughout the nation.  The guy in DC or Sacramento needs only to be concerned with talking to the next level down, and occasionally spot checking the local stuff.  Let the local stuff take care of itself.  We don't need redundancy in the civilian stuff.  We need local agencies in control of everything at the local level.

Healthcare

  I've been wanting to write about this matter for some time.  It honestly has me concerned.  I know there is a problem with our nation's healthcare system.  I applaud those politicians that fought to change the situation.  I don't know that I agree with some of the aspects of the law.  Personally, I think the solution to the problem should start with those businesses where the principals are making substantial amounts of money that could cover health inurance for their employees.  Someone who owns five MacDonalds stores has no business claiming the millions of dollars in profits that can generate without putting forth a halfway decent health plan to his or her employees.  I believe those that work harder have earned the right to have more, but I find it obscene when someone can make millions of dollars from other peoples' sweat and not even guarantee that full time adults can at least get a yearly physical and contend with emergency illnesses and injuries.
  I also have a problem with major companies that are declaring millions of dollars in profits, but won't find a way to employ more people.  Once again, I find it obscene that a handful of people can make millions while there are millions of people who don't even have a job.  I see no reason not to employ these people 30 hours a week doing administrative tasks and reducing the work load for those who already work for the company.  I'm not a political socialist, I just don't like that some people like to define "free market" as meaning that a very small portion of the population can control the bulk of the cash flow when there are people more than willing to work who can't find a job. 

The Quileute Nation of Washington State

  I want to give my support to the campaign of the Quileute Nation to expand their tribal territory and move their primary residences and important businesses and civic services to higher ground.  The recent earthquake and tsunami in Japan has underscored the inherent dangers of living on low-lying coastal areas.  These people should have the choice to move to higher ground, and all they need to accomplish it is a small portion of the Olympia National Forest.  This would not interfere with ONF's primary purpose because the Quileute utilize a lot of tourist commerce for their livelihoods and would seek to preserve the forest itself as much as possible.  This is merely a matter of reducing the unnecessary danger the tribe lives in.

Monday, April 25, 2011

Al Qaeda and Libya

  Libya has been in the news more than anything lately, and the war in Afghanistan has been sliding down the ladder more and more.  This is becoming a problem because many people from the NATO Coalition Countries want their nations' soldiers out.  Well, there is only one way out, and that is victory.  We need updates on the Afghan War, and not just whenever it is convenient to the major news companies.  They all have webpages, they can have someone send them reports as to what is going on and load them to the internet.  There is no reason whatsoever to not have a steady flow of information on a day to day basis.  How about a general report of IED interdictions and deaths (CF and EKIA) on a daily basis.  Give us the real lowdown on what's going on oversees.
  That also goes for Libya, Syria, Yemen, Bahrain, and anywhere else there is civil unrest.  The US may need to be involved in these nations to some level, and if we do, it's important the people of the US have a foundation of knowledge to know why.  I said that classified information needs to be kept out of the news, but there is plenty of unclassified information that Fox, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, and CBS could post on their websites.  Why is it that when I go to Foxnews.com, I often see reports that are three or four days old from Afghanistan.  I've been there.  There wasn't a single day that in one of the smallest provinces with one of the lowest population bases in southern Afghanistan didn't have something happen, usually more than one something.  Like I said, there are minimums of information that could be posted.  Why can't we get a running track of the information out of other nations of concern?
  As far as siding with the Libyan Rebels, I feel the US should.  I feel that Drone attacks of COL Gaddafi's facilities is the least we could do.  There are people worried about mission creep, and rightly so, but a little action to actually help other peoples free themselves can go a long way.  Alot of that is a matter of psyops campaigns, in which we show all the things the US is doing to improve the lives of other people.  Where is the massive Red Cross campaign to assist with the basic necessities of the various peoples affected by this unrest?  I consider all people to be my family ultimately.  That is why I do what I do, so that someday we can live in brotherhood.  So where is the effort to show that brotherhood now.