Commentary

November 10, 2006

The Realities of the Political Marketplace

1.  The country is majority conservative.  They know that something for nothing is wrong, but like it anyway.  In the deep dark recesses of the ballot box this attitude rises and takes over in a lot of people.

2.  Republicans have to get over it and accept the reality that they have to overcome the main stream media. Treat them like they are; the enemy and appeasement never works.

3.  Every politician likes money and the ability to bring home the bacon at the expense of others.  Laws against this will work somewhat, but the only correct way to deal with this is to have every dime they receive open and available to everyone.  Also, every earmark identified by politician and available to all.

4.  In the end, money thrown at a problem will not solve it in any long term fashion, but the real solutions are hard to sell and money is so easy.  given the choice the politician will go for the quick fix.

So what is the way forward?  That will be my next post.

September 25, 2006

How Dumb Can We Be?

Many feel that there should be no identification when you go to vote.

The world is facing a world war from Muslim extremists.  Why don't we go on a full scale war approach?

Some feel that we should give lawyers to prisoners of war and they be given a trial.

August 1, 2006

The Twin Terrors

The world is facing two terrors; one we know, one we don't really realize.  Really, we know neither well.

These two problems are:  Radical Islam and Creeping Socialism. 

First Radical Islam.  We know the radical Islam problem as the war on terror.  It is not a war on terror, that is just their tactic, the real war is on radical Islam.  I am tempted to say Islam, but there is enough evidence to question that.  The problem is that the radial element is so strong that the more moderate are intimidated into silence.  We tend to think that this is a mid-east problem....but no, it is well underway in Europe as they blindly let immigrants come, not for opportunity, but they are bent on dominance with no interest in assimilation.  Don't take comfort in the fact that it is in the middle east or Europe.... it is well under way here.  With big oil money Muslims are making extensive inroads in our country, again with the same aim as in Europe.  The real question for the United States is:  Can a religion that has the tenets of Islam coexist is a nation of religious freedom?  I don't think so... but what to do?

The next problem is socialism.  Here you might say "poo poo" or something like that.  But it is rising around the world and in the US with such subtleness, much like the frog in water as it is heated to boiling and he will stay in the water.  Such things as "minimum wage", "free" healthcare, Living wage" are the foundation of socialism. 

Around the world socialism is taking hold.... Again, Europe is at the forefront with seemingly endless vacations, of course, FREE healthcare with all the limitations that entails.... BUT it is FREE!!!!  Chavez in Venezuela is a growing influence for dictatorship and socialism.

Time and time again socialism fails, but gee, it feels so good... and it puts a comforting coocoon around us.... as the heat rises to boiling and we stay in the water.

July 4th 2006

A new war, a new challenge and we need a new way to fight it!

Independence was declared in 1776 and over the last 230 years we have been fighting to make it so, to defend it and to assure it for our children and grandchildren.

We faced the British, we faced Hitler, we faced Japan and were able to keep our freedom.  Now we face a new challenge, a religion so fanatical that it routinely has followers strapping on a bomb and killing themselves and other innocent people.  This is new.  This is bold.  This in dangerous!

Can we fight it the same way as before?  Can we maintain the standards we have established?  I think not.  A terrorist that thinks nothing of killing hundreds of innocent people, thinks nothing of killing himself in the process is a new and dangerous threat to society.

We have freedom of religion...and freedom from religion.  A Christian can worship, he can tell the Christ story, he does not kill another for not believing.  Many Muslims believe it is their duty to kill an "infidel", one that does not believe as he.

Can we tolerate that in our society?  I think not.

So do we maintain all the protections for this enemy as in the past?  I think not

To many want to go on as before.  All rights, all Geneva Convention Rights, etc.  Naieve!

We must think new.  We must devise ways to fight that might trample some of our long held beliefs.  I would suggest that we put together a group from congress, the supreme court and the President to seek way to fight this new war.  For a time some of the conventions must be laid aside, we must try new things, we cannot fight this war as in the past. 

If we do, we endanger future Fourth of July celebrations!

May 25, 2006  Of Mob Rule and Appeasement

I have just read an interesting and frightful book, "While Europe Slept - How radical Islam is destroying the West from within" by Bruce Bawer.  It chronicles the thinking of the elite of Europe where war is unnecessary and it can be accomplished with "dialog".  IT seems they never learn from the past (Think Hitler) so they are being bested by militant Muslims.  There are many key passages but one of the most damaging is about the fear of the Muslims and enforcing the country's laws on the Muslims.  The Muslims band together, do not assimilate and they demand "their law" and are getting it. 

This is further exemplified by the story of the Dutch politician (Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a former Muslim) who helped van Gogh in his film on militant Muslims.  Van Gogh was murdered for this and a note on the body said this politician was next.  She lived in a large apartment building and the tenants were fearful that because she lived there they might have violence.  Their solution.... If she would just move the "problem would go away".  She is doing that.  She has been driven out of the country and will live in the US.  That solved the short term problem, but fueled the long term problem.  Europe will be haunted for years with this problem, because they did not confront it!

This is the result of not enforcing a country's laws.  Maybe it is not as serious, but aren't we doing the same thing?  "There are just too many illegal aliens to deport".  We can't or wont enforce our laws... so lets change them.  Low wage, low skill Hispanics are flooding our country and we accept it, while high skill immigrants wait in line for years to come in. 

Mob rule and appeasement.  In the long run it never works.  My hope is the the House stands up to the Senate and does the right thing for our country.

May 2, 2006 Just Thinking...

The Mexican March took place yesterday, and I guess the aim was to influence legislation to all all to come and all to stay as they please.  There is always unintended consequences and there are many if we embrace this policy or lessen the hurdles to immigration.

1.  It will degrade the respect for laws.
2.  It will greatly increase the social welfare costs.
3.  It will raise wages and costs to employer and consumer.  As these illegal aliens achieve status to stay here and not under the gun of fear they will not be able to be manipulated by employers and demand more money.  If indeed we need low cost workers, if we legalized this group would not employers look to another source of less powerful workers to hire at lower wages?
4.  We allow Mexico to continue it's corrupt government that depends on citizens sneaking across the border, working and sending money back to Mexico.

Just thinking.

October 31, 2005  The Power of A Lie

Think back to when you heard a lie about you and how you felt.  Usually the first reaction is unbelief and then outrage.  When something so wrong gets said, sometimes you do not do the right thing.

A lie did that to a high governmental official.  Just what was that lie?  Ambassador Joe Wilson took to print and said in a New York Times op-ed piece told a lie about the results of his trip to Niger concerning whether or not Iraq tried to buy "Yellowcake" to assist their nuclear ambitions.  On coming back from Niger the report to the CIA was that there was no conclusive proof, but also it is very much possible that Iraq did just that... Try to buy "yellowcake" to enhance their nuclear possibility. 

The lie came into play when he contradicted himself in the New York Times... saying their was NO evidence and Iraq did not try to do just that.  One of the reports is a lie... Which is true... the one to the CIA or the one to the American people in the New York Times?

Evidence points to the truth of the report to the CIA.  It is backed by other intelligence operatives in other countries, including Great Britain.

The power of a lie had the usual power.  Unbelief and outrage... AND the overreaction of a governmental official.  Lewis Libby is charged with lying about the lie.

The point...  Back of when you hear  a lie about you!  The actions taken immediately are sometimes worse that letting the lie lay.

October 27, 2005

The word is now that the state of Florida did not get ice and water quick enough to the "Wilma" huricane area.  The story is "How did the government agencies perform in taking care of the citizens".  The story avoided was how did citizens prepare.  They had time, then they had extra time as "Wilma" slowed.  They were told to have 3 days of water and food on hand, fill up your gas tanks... but the story is the long lines for ice and water... those lines are made of of people who did not prepare, did not take personal responsibility.... just waited for someone else to care for them. 

Having gone through three hurricanes with power outages up to a week, I know whereof I speak.  The refrigerator will keep food for a day or two and you can live on bread and peanut butter. 

So as you see the lines and the frustration on those in line... the frustration should be about them.  "Look at me, I did not prepare"!

October 24, 2005

The quote by Albert Einstein ("I lived in solitude in the country and noticed how the monotony of a quiet life stimulates the creative mind." ) got me to thinking....  Have you noticed that all the TV is infected with the need for action and noise.  I noted it over the last few years, but it came to the forefront as I watched the World Series.  First of all the introductions to the broadcasts are tooooo long, but they are all action, noise, flash pictures and moving graphics. 

The younger generation needs their music wherever they go and of course they have to have the videos.  Is this the denial of quiet solitude and in this world can the younger generation ever know the advantages of quiet solitude... no action, no noise....  just thinking and perhaps creating. 

I wonder if Einstein would have been as successful with ear buds in his ears all the time.

September 17, 2005

After watching much of the Roberts hearings I was struck by the total emphasis by the democrats on the abortion issue.  This issue, settled many years ago, has survived many assaults on it and still stands, but it is still at the forefront of their thinking.  Why?

I think there are several reasons. 

1.  It is the issue that glues the party together.  The number one issue is the preservation of the right to abortion.  How sad that a great party is reduced to that. Oh, they make references to the black community and civil rights, but they are not real on that issue for if they were the would have done something to change things... but they continue to champion things that preserve the status quo.

2. There is much legal thinking that it was decided wrongly. This is why there was so much emphasis on "stare decisis".  This means that it has been settled for so long we can't change it.  Thus, even if it was decided wrongly, it has been the law of the land so long that it (the decision) deserves respect.

But a more distinctive view of the liberals and the democrats is there emphasis on alleviating the consequence rather than addressing the behavior that caused the problem.

September 13, 2005

We all saw and deplored the looters in New Orleans as they carried off TV's and other items... just because they could.  To often, I am afraid, we saw the blacks do this and in our mind condemned the black race.  Boot looters come in all colors and income status.  All you have to do is look at some of the corporate looting that has taken place and the UN.  Where money and man are mixed with opportunity too often the evil sprits flair up.  Just a thought

September 10, 2005

Elections Matter  The election of Mayor or New Orleans and the election of a governor in Louisiana have had consequences... and for many of their constitutions... deadly consequences.  Even the election of President of the United States has tremendous consequences.

For Mayor, Governor and President... We need LEADERS!  We should elect people who have successfully led something...  a state, a business, a department! 

Compare New York City with mayor Guilianni after September 11th to New Orleans after Katrina.

Compare Florida with Governor Jeb Bush after 4 hurricanes with Louisiana after Katrina.

There is a difference... there is huge difference.  Leaders Lead, Losers lose.

As we look to elect mayors, governors and Presidents... Let's ask... Have they led successfully.  Have they taken their organization in the right directions even if it was not popular, have they succeeded against high odds... but in the end, the real question... Have They Led and How successfully?

May 12, 2005

The beat goes on!  Some fat and happy retirees of large companies are sweating it out on the status of their fat pensions "promised" to them over the years.  The company said we will take some of you pay and in return will give you a pension plan.  Now we find that they did not take care of that money and may not be able to keep the "promise".  Where have we heard that before....oh, yes... Social Security! 

When will we learn... we have to take care of our own money... Pay me and I will do the job...  You (compaines and government) have proven that they are not reliable!

May 4, 2005

Sometimes I marvel at the irrational behavior of people.  But if you sit down and examine the behavior it is not irrational al all, they are just acting to project their agenda. 

Recently I saw two examples.  First, the Terri Shiavo case.  From all the polls, it seems that the President and Congress took a hit from poking their nose where they shouldn't have.  Government should stay out of our lives.  So, where is the irrational behavior.  Well, the government has been involved in this case from the very beginning.  They made the laws that governed the actions or Mr. Shiavo.  The judge carried out that law and Terry died.  I guess government is in our private lives after all.

So here comes the President and Congress with a perfectly rational action.  We are killing a citizen, perhaps the judiciary should just take another look at this to make sure.  It is hard to rescind death!  Again very rational.

So where is the agenda?  The folks that wanted Terri to die were happy with the actions of government.  They were getting the result from the government poking into private lives that they wanted.  Let's stop there!

The President and Congress were not getting the result they wanted, so they wanted a little more governmental action. 

Both parties acted on their beliefs and agenda.  Both parties acted rationally.  The question we have to ask is what happened the right thing to do as we more forward.  That is what you have to think about.

The other case is the new Pope.  I would say that generally the "Left" acted in their interest, hoping that the Pope "would be more in the 21st century".  Get with the program on abortions, gay rights, etc.  But lo and behold, the Pope turned out to be Catholic!  The "Left" acted in their best interest... they want all the support for their agenda as they can get.  I would have been nice if the Pope turned out to be a member of Moveon.org rather that holding to Catholic doctrine. 

April 15, 2005

I hear in many places that Wal-Mart doesn't pay their employees enough...They don't "give" benefits.  If they do give benefits they are not enough!

Hmmmm.  Seems that these employees have been hog tied and put into those blue aprons and made to work at the awful Wal-Mart.  I thought they did it on their own... I thought they went into Wal-Mart and said "I want a job".  The discussed the situation and came to an agreement that they would hire the person and be willing to pay X amount.  Both parties agreed and then they put on the blue apron.

If they weren't dragged into Wal-Mart against their will, it seems that they have no complaint.  But non the less the complains continue.  But many of the complaints come from people that do not work for Wal-Mart.  They want more benefits...health care, etc. 

If you are not happy with Wal-Mart, I have a suggestion.  If you are an employee.... Get another job!  If you don't work for Wal-Mart and complain; Shop someplace else. 

So that is my say... and now excuse me... I have to go to Wal-Mart!

.

...April 6, 2005

People Make a Difference

As we celebrate the life of Pope John Paul II we can learn from him.  There are many lessons.  The first is that people can make a difference.  I have read that in the selection of this Pope, Karol Wojtyla (his real name) was a compromise candidate.  Two others seemed to have the inside track, but neither was elected.  They turned instead to the Polish Cardinal...and the world was changed!

The people of Poland know the power of this Pope.  They suffered under the communists, the Pope came, he spoke forcefully and the communists did not have the fortitude to stand up to the words of this man...  and the world was changed.  The adversaries on the issue of abortion, homosexuality, women priests know the power of this man.  You knew where he stood!  He was candid.  He know how he felt and said it forcefully... and the world was changed.

I have just finished reading books about Washington, John Adams, Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt.  These men acted and the world was changed.  Unfortunately we have the likes of Hitler, Saddam Hussein and Castro.  These men to acted, and the world was changed.  But fortunately they are transitional.  Their truths are soon wiped away. 

The power of a good man cannot be underestimated.  There is power behind his words... power that changes the world.

Yes, these men in high places do change the world... but each one of us can too.  Do good and you too will have the wind behind your back.  If you do not think you can make a difference, think back over your life this day.  You have had interaction with many people.  The person that got you that cup of coffee on the way to work can do a lot to make or break you attitude and you day.  Little people doing good can make a difference.

Do good today... you may never know the outcome, but it will be good.

March 28, 2005

The unknowable answer. I served on the board of Good Shepherd Hospice in Polk County for 6 years.  For the last two years I was chairman of the board.  With all the news about hospice with the Terri Shiavo case it brought back many thoughts.  But one is the continual line that she is not experiencing pain or anxiety from the starvation and dehydration. 

There is two situations.  When a patient is dying from a disease they do go into a state where they have no desire to eat or drink and obviously feel little pain or anxiety from lack of food or water. 

But we have a different case here.  She was not dying, but now she is dying from the lack of food and water.  In the first case the disease prompts the desire not to eat or drink, but here she is dying from the lack of food or water.  Is it the same?  I do not know and after talking with many in the field, they don't know either. 

Is she able to improve with therapy?  Probably not, but no one really knows.

Does she recognize people?  Some say yes, some say no.  But they don't really know.

In the end there is so much that we do not know.

We just don't know.  It seems to me that when we do not know we had better not destroy the evidence.  That evidence may tell us a story worth reading.  If she is gone, we really don't know!

March 16, 2005

I think I have found a paradox in the anti-Christian (deeply offended) group...  Maybe not, but let's see.  The secularists, atheists and agnostics have an ongoing battle to eradicate anything Biblical or Christian from the marketplace and especially if it is associated with government. 

The institution of "Marriage" is biblical.  Government has taken this biblical ceremony and added it's blessing thus effectively marrying church and state in this basic tenet of our society.  You would think that the anti-Christian, deeply offended group would be apoplectic!  But no, they actually embrace this biblical ceremony and attempt to expand it to include gay marriage.

You have to question their thinking.  We cannot have a display of the birth of Christ, a display of the 10 commandments but they embrace marriage?  There must be a motive.  Probably the answer is that they have not thought of this paradox and as soon as they do they will go on the warpath (oooops, that might offend the Indians.... ooooops, "Native Americans").  Perhaps it is too much to ascribe a complex motive to undermining a Biblical event, but watering it down with gay and lesbian marriage... or any other marriage that may come along.

Just thinking.

February 18, 2005

One of the main things on the national agenda is Social Security.  First of all, isn't that great!  We are not fretting about a terrorist attack, the Iraq situation may be improving.  I have been thinking about these government programs and I think I have come up with two requirements.  They are:

1.  In the end, define where you want to be after we have "created" or "fixed" a government program.

2.  Define the amount of money that will be allocated to this program and make this the limiting factor.  We have always created the "benefit" and then estimated the cost, with that cost invariable going well beyond the estimate.

So for Social Security I would say that in the end we would like a self funded, self owned retirement program and get the government completely out of this area of our lives.  If we had a clear goal it seems that the debate would be on the route and not how far or how much to tweak the program.  There is no doubt that we can extend the solvency of the program by a little here and a little there, but in the end the program is still broken and another fix will be required. 

Now my second law (define the amount, not the benefit) does not easily translate to this problem.  But if we had this mindset, we would be mandated to be conservative on the benefit so as not to come up short. Now they boast of the benefit, underestimate the cost and it is very pleasing to the voter and the politician proposing. 

But I think if we had to define the goal and limit the cost a lot of government thinking would quickly change.

January 18, 2005

Any society, be it a family, a town, a state, a country or, Yes, a world needs a sheriff. The society in question is always in some chaos when there is no effective sheriff in residence.  Yes, there can be good sheriffs and bad sheriffs, but if he is on the job, there is little chaos.  In Iraq with Saddam in charge, the classic strong bad sheriff was on duty.  The result was little chaos, but much pain to the people.  The world always should be looking for a good sheriff.

As we look at the world today, we do have a sheriff, (the USA) but in many ways he is not very effective.  Partially because of the fact that he was rushed in when the last great sheriff went away.  That sheriff was the combination of Russia and the USA.  As they remained strong, the sheriff was in charge and we had little chaos.  You can argue that that was a poor sheriff, but he was effective.  But as Russia melted away it left the USA. 

Over the time since the end of the Berlin Wall, there has been a vacuum and the emergence of the USA as the world's sheriff.  Many do not like the sheriff, many just don't like the idea of a single nation sheriff.  Also, there is a competition for the sherrif office from the UN.  They too would like to be the sheriff.  But they have proven totally ineffective, but that does not matter to some.  They want the UN to be a weak sherrif, and with that comes many opportunities for mischief, just the right prescription for mischief makers.

So it is the USA to step up and take the mantle of the "Good Sheriff".  It may take some time for that to come true and it may never happen, but realizing that there WILL be a sheriff, is there a better choice?  I think not.

December 30, 2004

"That wise Men have in all ages thought government necessary for the good of mankind; and, that wise governments have always thought religion necessary for the well ordering and well-being of society, and accordingly have been ever careful to encourage and protect the ministers of it, paying them the highest publick honours, that their Doctrines might thereby meet with the greater respect among the common people." --Benjamin Franklin

Our founding fathers had a different view of religion and government that some segments of our society today.  But then they did not have to deal with a radical religion that encourages the killing of non-believers.  The question today is whether we can abide by the thoughts of Franklin in the light of radical Islam.  Or even can we be a government that protects religion and the right to practice it when these evils are considered part of the religion.
I think we are being tested on a basic tenants of our founding documents; the right to practice or not to practice your faith without hindrance.  If we are to preserve that tenant. we must eliminate the radical elements of Islam.  But then you say, that doesn't allow the practice of the faith.  A conundrum.  It will take wise leadership to navigate that troubled water.  We will see.

December 8, 2004

A delightful follow-up on the below commentary...  A letter to the editor in the Lakeland, Florida Ledger brought up an interesting viewpoint...  The gist of the letter was this... "If indeed we must separate Religion from Government then the government should not take any holiday that is related to a religious celebration!  "I want my mail delivered on Christmas Day, on Good Friday.  All Government offices should be at work on these religious holidays!"  Oh, when you get into days off, religion and government are one!

December 3, 2004

As we accelerate toward Christmas, the one thing in our society that seems to be overwhelming is the bent of some to take God out of our society.  One school even said a teacher could not use one of our country's founding documents because it had the word "God" in it.  There is example after example of eliminating Christmas from the Christmas season and celebration.  The word Holiday substituted for Christmas as in the term "Christmas Tree".  Many "Christmas" parades are stripped of any religious or Christmas references. What to make of this?

Should believers strike back?  Should we fight?  Or, should we let it go?  I think we should delight it it!  For what is it saying...  I think it is saying that there is a genuine fear of the Lord and God.  If a non-believer really were a non-believer he would not worry whether or not God or Christmas was used... for there is no God or Christmas!  But no, they DO worry and worry a lot!  They fear the Lord!  I do believe that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of understanding... and Believing!

So take heart, so be of good cheer, the Lord is winning and we should rejoice!  Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

November 23, 2004

The making of a Mandate.  The commentators are all talking about whether or not Bush has a mandate.  The Republicans say yes, the Democrats say no.  The ballot box does not dictate whether or not the winning candidate has a mandate.  Unless it is that unique situation where one has a lopsided victory, there will always be a huge percentage that voted for the other guy.  So the losers can always claim that the winner does not have a mandate.

So who does determine if the winner has a mandate?  The winner, that's who!  The President by his actions will determine if he has a mandate and if he can act on it.  Bush seems to be above the fray about a mandate... he is just going about his business just like he was elected President!  Not a worry about the New York Times, not a worry about the fretful leftist commentators...he is just doing it!

Can you believe it... he put "his" man at the CIA.  He put "his" man at State.  (in this case, "his" woman!)  Woe is me... the detractors seem to think he should put someone from the other side!  Get real!  Both State and the CIA need a major shakeup... and will get it.  The CIA is already squealing like a stuck pig!  When Condi gets in the big office on the seventh floor... the bureaucrats at State will join the chorus.

President Bush has a historic opportunity.  He is re-elected, his vice president is not running to succeed...  Also he know that you have to sieve the initiative in a second term and he is not letting grass grow under his feet!

So the President will make the mandate... the public, the congress will either go along or not.  The mandate will be determined over the next few months.  But the President seems to act like it a foregone conclusion!

November 1, 2004

So it has come to this as it always does... in elections or in life...  We have to choose.  Usually in the important things of life when we must choose there is always a downside and upside.  We have to choose the better.

In this election you can choose:

To what extent we will try to spread liberty and freedom for the benefit of all..

How we will deal with health care.

How we will deal with the UN.

How we will deal with our allies and potential allies.

How we project the qualities we want in a leader to the rest of the world.

How will be taxed.

How we will treat the unborn.

How and when we will go to war.

We can go on an on... but you will choose...and the choice will have consequences... both upside and down.

But it strikes me the Jack Welch had it about right in his analysis of making the decision...

He had 5 questions"

Is he real?

Does he see around corners?

Who is around him?

Does he get back on the horse?

Is he Pro-Business.  (I know that tilts the playing field, but his thinking is that if your employer is doing well, you will too.  It is hard for you to be doing well if your employer is not.)

October 17,2004

The Case Against Kerry 

In the debate Senator Kerry said that he could not legislate an article of faith.  His church and his God tells him that life begins at conception, that abortion is wrong.  But he says that he can’t work toward that end as a United State Senator or President.  If your God tells you something and you believe it…  what better use of Senatorial or presidential power? 

One of his God’s commandments is “Thou shall not murder”.  That, senator Kerry, has already been legislated,

As President, we are not talking about a dictator, we are talking about leading.  As senator or as President, he cannot dictate that abortion be against the law.  But he can lead, he can persuade, he can argue.  But Senator Kerry abdicates.  I think he bows to a political dictate of the Democrat party rather than to his God.  Need we ask more?  But there is more.

In a televised debate he was asked if going into war in Iraq was the right thing.  His answer was;  “If it turns out ok.”  For the last year, Senator Kerry has been yapping at the heels of the President in time of war…. “The wrong war, the wrong time…. etc.”  It used to be that we had one President in time of war.  But not now.  Can you imagine what Kerry would have done during the dark days of World War II as the soldiers faced the very difficult Battle of the Bulge where 19,000 Americans were killed, or as thousands or American boys were lost on the beach at Normandy?   The question for the American voter is; Faced with a similar circumstance, would a President Kerry have the courage to forge ahead in the light of these huge losses?

Presidents don’t have all the answers when they make a decision.  They don’t have perfect intelligence before a decision is made.  To wait for all the answers and the perfect intelligence and to wait to be assured that it will come out “OK”, he may have waited too long.

With President Bush we know where he stands.  He has an unchanging core and courage.  Does Kerry have either?

September 7, 2004

I just read a letter to the editor lamenting the fact that some companies are "reneging" on their retirement "promises".  For a small part of my retirement, I too are dependent on "others" promises.  I do have a small pension from a large company that I worked for many years ago.  It should be enough to cover the electric bill each month!  Also, Social Security is another "promise" I will depend on. 

But the nice part, I am not dependent on others for most of my retirement... other than ME!  For the last 23 or so years, I have worked for myself.  What ever retirement I have will depend on what I have done over those last 23 years.  For those 23 years I have depended on no one else for my health care... I bought health care... either by paying cash or by buying insurance!

So many people depend on others.  They complain about what is happening, but they go on an ask for more intervention from third parties. It is nice to not do that.  When will people learn, depend on yourself.... it works much better.

August 31, 2004  The Swift Vets vs. Kerry

Since the last comment (see below) a lot has happened.  Hurricane Charley intruded on our lives, took out power AND TV so I was not so fully informed.  But it did not take long to catch up!  One would think that the Swift Boat Vets for Truth was the only thing going on in the Presidential campaign... and it is!  For several weeks Kerry ignored the issue, the major media ignored the issue... but under the surface it started to warm up and now it is boiling!  You might complain about this.... I hear all the time... "Let's talk about the real issues; healthcare, jobs, etc."  But the way we select Presidents is THIS system.  We don't get it to the details of health care and the intricacies of "jobs" and the economy.  We deal with surface issues and it does work.... fairly well.

What does it tell us about the candidates?  Well, for one, as this issue boils, it IS important to the electorate!  The book will be the number one best seller in the upcoming NY Times survey.  AND it is vitally important to Senator Kerry as his frenzy indicates!  He has spend the entire year working "Vietnam" in to almost every sentence in the campaign, now he does not want to be examined on this issue. 

With a "black hole" of a senate career he has to fight to the finish on the murky creeks and rivers of Vietnam... that tells us why he is fighting so hard on this issue... and in the end he will live or die on those river banks.

Let the campaign continue!

August 11, 2004  The Vet against the Vets

The campaign by the Swift Boat Vets against the Vet, Senator Kerry has just been launched.  For several months Senator Kerry has brought up the fact that he served in Vietnam at every opportunity.  In fact, the most telling argument for him as President was that he served, he defended our country in Vietnam.  There is an 18 year black hole during his senate career.  He mentions it little or not at all.  Every election he has used the Vietnam card and won with it. 

Now a group of his contemporaries in Vietnam come with the story that the story that Kerry tells is not the real story.  They come with facts, affidavits and more that seem to discredit Kerry.

The battle is joined... not over the issue of the charges, but the issue of the charges vs. the charges!  The defenders of Kerry have not argued the validity of the charges, but have nit picked the fact that they "Weren't on the boat", they are Republicans, they are bigots.  But are the charges true?  No comment...yet. 

So what are we to do?  The media will not investigate, they just like to report on the fight (Charge vs. Credibility of the Charges)

Assume that the charges are true... it happened 30 some years ago...is it relevant?  Probably not had not Kerry made it a centerpoint of the campaign.  He made charges and indicted others and himself on war crimes when he came back from Vietnam.  Is that relevant now?  Obviously he embellished the story to get on TV and report to the congress.  He was young... He did not have the test of time to back him up. 

Is all of the above disqualifying him from the Presidency?  No, in may be in some peoples mind, but what will disqualify him is what he does now.  Does he talk truthfully about the charges or does he take the Clinton tack of "Trashing the Bimbos".  It worked for Clinton, it may work for Kerry... We will see.  It is our job to make a decision.

August 1, 2004 We did not find WMD's in Iraq... that is the constant refrain and the conclusion is that Saddam did NOT have WMD's and we went to war for a lie... Bush lied.  What will be the legacy of this incident.

First, we should examine the premise.  The logic that because we did not yet find WMD's in Iraq does not preclude the fact that he may indeed have had WMD's... but logic is not taught in our schools and is not used widely in attacking political opponents.  So, there may indeed BE WMD's in Iraq... But what are the lessons learned?

Unfortunately, the lesson learned by the snake bit politician is to be absolutely sure of what ever he says.  The lesson will be to "Wait" and be sure.

In today's world, that is a bad lesson.  In protecting America a leader will have to take risks.  With the lesson learned he will probably pause longer than he should when he sees danger gathering. 

July 31, 2004  When there is indication everywhere that the conservative message is the predominate voice in America... Talk radio is dominated by conservative, liberal slanted host just cannot get an audience...  CNN the first is now a distant second to the Fox News Channel... My question is how come when it comes to elections we are split down the middle?

I'll take a stab at answering that question.  My take is that the conservative message, self reliance, less government, lower taxes... etc. is the message that makes sense to most people.  The problem is that that message is much harder to articulate than the liberal, we will raise taxes on the rich to give you.... health care, better education, or you name it.  When it comes down to where the rubber meets the road the voter shrinks from self reliance to "free" health care, higher minimum wages, "free" child care... and on and on.

It sounds so good especially when the real consequences are hidden.  An example.  We (my wife and I) are small business people.  Guess who pays for health care... guess who pays for health insurance.  We do, we write the checks.  This week my wife had to have some blood work.  Her regular doctor has recently severed himself from the clinic he started and went on his own AND dropped malpractice insurance!  Yep, we can sue, but the likelihood of getting the big bucks is gone.  But guess what?  A regular doctor visit went from $75 to $35!  So every time you went to the doctor you paid $40 to have the right to sue and have the big bucks of an insurance company to demonize. 

Also, the blood work costs $15.  One of her friends had the same, (she is insured by the school system) and it cost her $15 too, but that was the co=payment... the total bill was over $100.

The Democratic campaign message is so easy... We are going to fight for healthcare, higher minimum wages and on and on...  No details, no explaining what the real cost will be... it just sounds so good.  It gives many people pause... after all don't we all want something for nothing?, or what seems nothing.