So many things to say that I have left unsaid,
So many tears to cry that I have left unshed,
So many dreams I have lived while lying asleep in bed,
All the secrets that I keep will be lost when I am dead.
Thursday, August 4, 2011
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Can you really hate the country you love?
I read a comment that someone gave on Facebook last night, and it sparked some serious thought. It read as follows:
"Teabaggers hate America."
I don't know if the writer of this comment was serious or not, but the meaning seemed clear to me. This is the old argument that if you aren't in support of any policy the government puts forward, no matter how ridiculous or dangerous it seems, you are un-patriotic and an enemy of your own country.
I don't claim to be part of the Tea Party. In fact, I think it is a movement which started with good intentions and has since been infested with neo-conservatives who will play along with the idea to win election, but will fall back on more traditional GOP policies once they are out of the cross-hairs of public scrutiny.
That being said, maybe it's true that I do hate America. The comment was not directed towards me, but in thinking about it I realized that it's possible that I don't like what this nation has become. We now have a bloated and over-reaching central government that is fueled by media speculation and voter apathy. We have governmental departments and regulations that stifle liberty and productivity. We have citizens who are convinced that the only path to safety and prosperity is to give our government control and let them choose what we get in return.
It sets up an interesting position. I love this country, and I think it has the potential to become the pinnacle of liberty and freedom once again. For the moment, however, I hate what America has evolved into. We can do better, and I see the potential for a return to a more limited government and greater personal liberty.
"Teabaggers hate America."
I don't know if the writer of this comment was serious or not, but the meaning seemed clear to me. This is the old argument that if you aren't in support of any policy the government puts forward, no matter how ridiculous or dangerous it seems, you are un-patriotic and an enemy of your own country.
I don't claim to be part of the Tea Party. In fact, I think it is a movement which started with good intentions and has since been infested with neo-conservatives who will play along with the idea to win election, but will fall back on more traditional GOP policies once they are out of the cross-hairs of public scrutiny.
That being said, maybe it's true that I do hate America. The comment was not directed towards me, but in thinking about it I realized that it's possible that I don't like what this nation has become. We now have a bloated and over-reaching central government that is fueled by media speculation and voter apathy. We have governmental departments and regulations that stifle liberty and productivity. We have citizens who are convinced that the only path to safety and prosperity is to give our government control and let them choose what we get in return.
It sets up an interesting position. I love this country, and I think it has the potential to become the pinnacle of liberty and freedom once again. For the moment, however, I hate what America has evolved into. We can do better, and I see the potential for a return to a more limited government and greater personal liberty.
Saturday, July 30, 2011
An open letter to President Obama
Mr. President,
I, like many other Americans, understand that we are running out of Treasury funds to pay our obligations. I understand that raising the current debt ceiling will allow us to make those payments, even though doing so requires us to put our country further in debt.
I wish you would just be straightforward with us. We have a problem that comes from you and the previous Presidents budgeting in an irresponsible fashion. We have a problem with our Legislature authorizing expenses beyond the budgets that puts us in a position where our income can't cover our expenses.
Saying that we have done this before doesn't mean anything unless you are committed, as the executor of our government, to stop it from happening again. Saying that we always pay our bills doesn't mean much either, since it's clear from this whole situation that we don't have the money, and have to borrow it from others. I also don't believe that raising the limit now will not result in more money being spent. While it's true that we've already committed the money that we don't have, I have no faith in the U.S. Government to keep from pushing budgets and spending to the next debt ceiling we create.
If we are to accept any raising of the debt ceiling, and especially if you think we are going to agree to let you take more of our income through taxation, you need to guarantee this will not happen again. Work with Congress and establish the framework for all future Presidents and Legislators to never allow our budget to be this out of control again. This problem is not entirely the fault of the American people; stop telling us you are going to punish us by not paying us before you pay contractors and foreign debt holders. Admit to the problem, own it, and fix it. This country will thank you for it.
I, like many other Americans, understand that we are running out of Treasury funds to pay our obligations. I understand that raising the current debt ceiling will allow us to make those payments, even though doing so requires us to put our country further in debt.
I wish you would just be straightforward with us. We have a problem that comes from you and the previous Presidents budgeting in an irresponsible fashion. We have a problem with our Legislature authorizing expenses beyond the budgets that puts us in a position where our income can't cover our expenses.
Saying that we have done this before doesn't mean anything unless you are committed, as the executor of our government, to stop it from happening again. Saying that we always pay our bills doesn't mean much either, since it's clear from this whole situation that we don't have the money, and have to borrow it from others. I also don't believe that raising the limit now will not result in more money being spent. While it's true that we've already committed the money that we don't have, I have no faith in the U.S. Government to keep from pushing budgets and spending to the next debt ceiling we create.
If we are to accept any raising of the debt ceiling, and especially if you think we are going to agree to let you take more of our income through taxation, you need to guarantee this will not happen again. Work with Congress and establish the framework for all future Presidents and Legislators to never allow our budget to be this out of control again. This problem is not entirely the fault of the American people; stop telling us you are going to punish us by not paying us before you pay contractors and foreign debt holders. Admit to the problem, own it, and fix it. This country will thank you for it.
The debt debate.
One thing I keep hearing is that if we don't allow an increase in the debt ceiling, we will lose our AAA credit rating and, perhaps most importantly, we will be seen as failing to uphold the "full faith and credit" of the U.S. Government. Here's what I don't understand:
Our President creates a budget, with some help from his advisers.
Congress takes the budget, puts it into action, adds earmarks and other appropriations that inflate our expenses beyond the projected revenues.
Every year that we reach the point where the Treasury cannot pay the obligations we've created, they are allowed to take a loan from whomever trusts our Government enough to let us have it.(Read: These people aren't too bright.)
So now we have exhausted all of the money that the Government has taken from us, and are now living on borrowed money. At the same time interest is being added on to what we owe, which there is no money available to pay that or the money we borrowed because we've spent on our programs already. When the next budget is released, they will misappropriate again and the cycle will add to our already astronomical deficit.
Now we are at the point where we are, by our own arbitrary definition, not allowed to assume any more debt in order to cover the mistakes Congress has made in authorizing spending beyond what was budgeted. Some think the solution is to raise the ceiling, allowing us to take on more debt, and then we'll talk about how to keep this from happening again.
I don't believe it. We've been raising the debt ceiling for decades to cover up the failures of our Legislature, and by extension our Presidents, who have failed to budget responsibly and spend within those limits. I don't understand how there is any faith left in the credit of the United States. We have a proven history of taking loans because we can't manage money. We have a horrendous track record of failure. We have a legislature that refuses to learn its lesson.
If we raise the ceiling again, the next budget will be passed with spending that we can't afford. Congress will once again authorize spending beyond our income. We cannot do this again.
If we do not raise the ceiling, the concern is that this next Tuesday we will reach a point where the Treasury is only able to pay about 60% of our outlays. The secondary debate is over what will have to go unpaid. What infuriates me is the game of scare tactics that is being played over that 40%. President Obama wants us to believe that if we have to make those decisions, it will result in payments that are owed to American citizens not being made. As I understand it, that will be a decision that he and Tim Geithner will make together. If our President chooses to pay foreign debt holders before American citizens, I will not accept the argument that this was Congress' fault by not giving them more fake money to cover this up. That decision will rest on the executive office alone.
We have reached a point where we cannot allow our government to think that they can be irresponsible ever again. We have an opportunity to make them face the consequences of the mistakes they have been making, some of them for several decades. The bills currently being proposed don't make any real cuts because they make reductions in predicted levels of spending, not in any actual budgeting. I want to force the President to be the leader that he should be in the first place, and require him to pay us first before we pay any foreign lenders. Congress needs to learn that further mismanagement of our money will not be allowed.
Our President creates a budget, with some help from his advisers.
Congress takes the budget, puts it into action, adds earmarks and other appropriations that inflate our expenses beyond the projected revenues.
Every year that we reach the point where the Treasury cannot pay the obligations we've created, they are allowed to take a loan from whomever trusts our Government enough to let us have it.(Read: These people aren't too bright.)
So now we have exhausted all of the money that the Government has taken from us, and are now living on borrowed money. At the same time interest is being added on to what we owe, which there is no money available to pay that or the money we borrowed because we've spent on our programs already. When the next budget is released, they will misappropriate again and the cycle will add to our already astronomical deficit.
Now we are at the point where we are, by our own arbitrary definition, not allowed to assume any more debt in order to cover the mistakes Congress has made in authorizing spending beyond what was budgeted. Some think the solution is to raise the ceiling, allowing us to take on more debt, and then we'll talk about how to keep this from happening again.
I don't believe it. We've been raising the debt ceiling for decades to cover up the failures of our Legislature, and by extension our Presidents, who have failed to budget responsibly and spend within those limits. I don't understand how there is any faith left in the credit of the United States. We have a proven history of taking loans because we can't manage money. We have a horrendous track record of failure. We have a legislature that refuses to learn its lesson.
If we raise the ceiling again, the next budget will be passed with spending that we can't afford. Congress will once again authorize spending beyond our income. We cannot do this again.
If we do not raise the ceiling, the concern is that this next Tuesday we will reach a point where the Treasury is only able to pay about 60% of our outlays. The secondary debate is over what will have to go unpaid. What infuriates me is the game of scare tactics that is being played over that 40%. President Obama wants us to believe that if we have to make those decisions, it will result in payments that are owed to American citizens not being made. As I understand it, that will be a decision that he and Tim Geithner will make together. If our President chooses to pay foreign debt holders before American citizens, I will not accept the argument that this was Congress' fault by not giving them more fake money to cover this up. That decision will rest on the executive office alone.
We have reached a point where we cannot allow our government to think that they can be irresponsible ever again. We have an opportunity to make them face the consequences of the mistakes they have been making, some of them for several decades. The bills currently being proposed don't make any real cuts because they make reductions in predicted levels of spending, not in any actual budgeting. I want to force the President to be the leader that he should be in the first place, and require him to pay us first before we pay any foreign lenders. Congress needs to learn that further mismanagement of our money will not be allowed.
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
I post, once again, perhaps my favorite part of Washington's Farewell Address.
The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their Constitutions of Government. But the Constitution which at any time exists, till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish Government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established Government.
17 All obstructions to the execution of the Laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation, the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels, and modified by mutual interests.
18 However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people, and to usurp for themselves the reins of government; destroying afterwards the very engines, which have lifted them to unjust dominion.
19 Towards the preservation of your government, and the permanency of your present happy state, it is requisite, not only that you steadily discountenance irregular oppositions to its acknowledged authority, but also that you resist with care the spirit of innovation upon its principles, however specious the pretexts. One method of assault may be to effect, in the forms of the constitution, alterations, which will impair the energy of the system, and thus to undermine what cannot be directly overthrown. In all the changes to which you may be invited, remember that time and habit are at least as necessary to fix the true character of governments, as of other human institutions; that experience is the surest standard, by which to test the real tendency of the existing constitution of a country; that facility in changes, upon the credit of mere hypothesis and opinion, exposes to perpetual change, from the endless variety of hypothesis and opinion; and remember, especially, that, for the efficient management of our common interests, in a country so extensive as ours, a government of as much vigor as is consistent with the perfect security of liberty is indispensable. Liberty itself will find in such a government, with powers properly distributed and adjusted, its surest guardian. It is, indeed, little else than a name, where the government is too feeble to withstand the enterprises of faction, to confine each member of the society within the limits prescribed by the laws, and to maintain all in the secure and tranquil enjoyment of the rights of person and property.
20 I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the state, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally.
21 This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.
22 The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.
23 Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind, (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight,) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.
24 It serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.
25 There is an opinion, that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the Government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of Liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in Governments of a Monarchical cast, Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And, there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.
26 It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution, in those intrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just estimate of that love of power, and proneness to abuse it, which predominates in the human heart, is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position. The necessity of reciprocal checks in the exercise of political power, by dividing and distributing it into different depositories, and constituting each the Guardian of the Public Weal against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern; some of them in our country and under our own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them. If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way, which the constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for, though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can at any time yield.
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Why I do not support the President.
I have many issues with the speech Obama gave about the debt ceiling. Here they are:
He began by saying that for the last decade our country has spent more than we have taken in. He should remember that 2 1/2 years of that have been while he has been President.
He took the time to shift the blame back on President Bush, which seems to be his only defense tactic when explaining the failures of our entire government.
He referred to tax cuts as "spending." I fail to see how having less revenue has required our government to spend money.
He blamed the wars, again, even though he has refused to end them and bring our troops home.
He brought up the prescription drug costs, while failing to mention that he has altered our health care to make us all pay more for each other. That must be one of those "tax cuts" that are the same as spending.
He mentioned that cuts need to be made to defense and welfare, but that the cuts asked for are too deep. I say they are not deep enough.
He tried to scare us by saying that social security and veteran payments will not go out. I don't believe that, and the SSA administrator has said that current SS tax receipts are enough to cover current outlays.
He tried to intimidate Congress, and us, by saying that if we only temporarily increase the ceiling we will face default in six months. If we permanently raise the ceiling we will face default when our reckless spending policies headed by Obama himself push us against the ceiling anyways.
He blamed Republicans for being the ones that are unwilling to sacrifice, claiming that we need to ask the rich to surrender more of their income to pay for the failures of government. He had the nerve to call rich people who wouldn't give their "fair share" unpatriotic. There is nothing less patriotic than letting your government steal from you.
He claimed that we did not vote for a dysfunctional government. That's all our two parties have been for the last 100 years.
He called us a democracy.
Mr. President, this is a constitutional republic where our elected officials swear an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. The purpose of that document was to protect us from the panicked actions of an excitable majority. It was a great concern of our founders that partisanship would attempt to frighten and mislead large numbers of our population into supporting the erosion of liberty. Since at least the early 1900's they have been very successful, and you are trying to further that fear and panic. I am proud of every single member of Congress who is opposing your attempts to push us into another bad decision. It is time we take a stand against the oppressive and tyrannical central government. We the people will have our liberty.
He began by saying that for the last decade our country has spent more than we have taken in. He should remember that 2 1/2 years of that have been while he has been President.
He took the time to shift the blame back on President Bush, which seems to be his only defense tactic when explaining the failures of our entire government.
He referred to tax cuts as "spending." I fail to see how having less revenue has required our government to spend money.
He blamed the wars, again, even though he has refused to end them and bring our troops home.
He brought up the prescription drug costs, while failing to mention that he has altered our health care to make us all pay more for each other. That must be one of those "tax cuts" that are the same as spending.
He mentioned that cuts need to be made to defense and welfare, but that the cuts asked for are too deep. I say they are not deep enough.
He tried to scare us by saying that social security and veteran payments will not go out. I don't believe that, and the SSA administrator has said that current SS tax receipts are enough to cover current outlays.
He tried to intimidate Congress, and us, by saying that if we only temporarily increase the ceiling we will face default in six months. If we permanently raise the ceiling we will face default when our reckless spending policies headed by Obama himself push us against the ceiling anyways.
He blamed Republicans for being the ones that are unwilling to sacrifice, claiming that we need to ask the rich to surrender more of their income to pay for the failures of government. He had the nerve to call rich people who wouldn't give their "fair share" unpatriotic. There is nothing less patriotic than letting your government steal from you.
He claimed that we did not vote for a dysfunctional government. That's all our two parties have been for the last 100 years.
He called us a democracy.
Mr. President, this is a constitutional republic where our elected officials swear an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. The purpose of that document was to protect us from the panicked actions of an excitable majority. It was a great concern of our founders that partisanship would attempt to frighten and mislead large numbers of our population into supporting the erosion of liberty. Since at least the early 1900's they have been very successful, and you are trying to further that fear and panic. I am proud of every single member of Congress who is opposing your attempts to push us into another bad decision. It is time we take a stand against the oppressive and tyrannical central government. We the people will have our liberty.
Monday, July 25, 2011
A thought about charity...
One dollar. Forget for a moment the reckless policies of our government and the Federal Reserve that are weakening it's value. One dollar isn't much. The smallest paper value in the American monetary system. If someone were to give you a dollar, there isn't too much you could do with it.
But what if 10,000 people were to give you one? Or 100,000? Or even 1,000,000?
There are, without question, many more than one million Americans who could give one dollar away and still be financially stable. How much could one person's life be changed if they focused that charity in their direction?
Unfortunately, there are probably government restrictions against this kind of charity. I would love to see what could happen if one person were given this great gift, then joined with others the next month to give another million to someone else. How many lives could we change in this country if we voluntarily shared a small and insignificant portion of what we have with each other? I know the money is out there; we donate hundreds of millions just to political campaigns each year.
But what if 10,000 people were to give you one? Or 100,000? Or even 1,000,000?
There are, without question, many more than one million Americans who could give one dollar away and still be financially stable. How much could one person's life be changed if they focused that charity in their direction?
Unfortunately, there are probably government restrictions against this kind of charity. I would love to see what could happen if one person were given this great gift, then joined with others the next month to give another million to someone else. How many lives could we change in this country if we voluntarily shared a small and insignificant portion of what we have with each other? I know the money is out there; we donate hundreds of millions just to political campaigns each year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
