Once again the calendar has rolled over, and we’re now beginning the year of our lord 2011. It’s dating me I guess, as I can remember having trouble remembering the date when 1950 rolled around. Where does the time go!? Among other things, it’s traditional for us to make New Years Resolutions, and then promptly break ‘em. (With that, I don’t even bother making resolutions anymore.) In some ways, the "hope," "change," and "yes we can" shenanigans of the ‘08 presidential election seem like yesterday, with “hope” having shifted to despair, “change” has become a disaster, and “yes we can” appears to be stalled somewhere between “no we can’t” and “Why bother”. Still, we’re only a few days into the New Year, and a new Congress will shortly be sitting in the puzzle palace on the hill. Might there be a few New Years Resolutions we can think of that our legislators should make, and hopefully remember to abide with?
It often seems like every political news article I read manages to get in the one liner “It’s the Economy Stupid!”, and yes, nearly all our current set of national problems stem from the unpleasant economic situation we face. The national debt has most of us quite concerned, as we realize that the bottomless well is rapidly going dry. According to CNS News, "The federal government has accumulated more new debt -- $3.22 trillion ($3,220,103,625,307.29) -- during the tenure of the 111th Congress than it did during the first 100 Congresses combined." (Huh… So much for Nancy Pelosi's promise of "no new deficit spending".) Rep. John Boehner, the new House Majority Leader, has promised to roll back spending to 2008 levels. I’ve got a better idea, let’s roll it back even further, like say to about 1960 or so levels… Rand Paul (R-Ky.) recently declared, "I think that every piece of major legislation that goes forward from now on needs to have attached to it spending cuts." That’s one of the best ideas I’ve seen recently, but I have serious doubts about its viability. Politicians at all levels seem to be of a mind that they should constantly raise taxes, so they’ll have more money to spend on “services”, and whenever someone mentions cutting back on those services, we promptly hear the lament “which school teacher do you want us to fire?” Well, at the local level many of those services are a necessity I suppose, but by the time we reach the federal level about all that’s a dire necessity is the military and probably the Post Office! I will strenuously suggest that congress cut spending (and borrowing), before they bankrupt the country, and I’ll bet that’s not a long way into the future either!
ObamaCare seems to be a real hot button subject with most folks, including me. The United States has about the best medical care available in the world… if you can afford it, which is giving a lot of people economic and political heartburn. ObamaCare does little more that present us with a European style, government controlled, socialized medicine program, and drag our showpiece medical system down to a third world level. Yes, the system needs an overhaul, or at least the economic side of it does, and I’d hazard a bet that the medical industry could do a much better job of straightening things out than could congress. It's time to completely cut the funding for ObamaCare right now, and get hot on a long-term commitment to repeal this bucket of worms. If it's not funded, it won't happen.
It's time to stop worrying about what may or may not make us popular around the world, and start doing what will promote our economic and national security. That means tackling the problems of Social Security and Medicare. According to a recent CNN poll, 40 percent of us have the most confidence in congressional Republicans on major issues facing the country today, compared to 35 percent who have more confidence in President Obama. A lone 15 percent have more confidence in the Democrats. So, to the members of the 112th Congress, we're counting on you to pull our national chestnuts out of the fire. Put an end to business as usual and wishy-washy “feel good” nonsense. Give us back our states rights and stop spending money we don't have. Cut the vague promises along with the empty rhetoric, and reject “compromise” that will only hasten the destruction of our country.
Remember Mr. Congressman, the Republic will be nothing more than a chapter in the history books if you fail… and your names will be in those history books as well… accused of leading that destruction.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Saturday, January 1, 2011
Holidays
Do You Say “Happy Holidays” or “Merry Christmas” as your seasons greeting? That was the subject of a recent impromptu poll on the internet. We’re all aware of the ‘politically correct’ push to remove religion from our lives, based on the common excuse that we wouldn’t want to offend anybody. Considering that the politically correctness “movement” seems to be gaining popularity in our increasingly progressive world, the poll results were interesting, and quite revealing as well. The response was:
Merry Christmas – 88.54% (148,369 votes)
Happy Holidays -- 1.81% (3,027 votes)
Season's Greetings -- 0.21% (346 votes)
Any or all of the above -- 7.57% (12,684 votes)
Undecided -- 1.07% (1,788 votes)
Other. 0.81% (1,352 votes)
So, of the hundred and sixty-seven thousand respondents, 88% say Merry Christmas, and 11% may or may not use some other term…
If we look back at our country of fifty or so years ago, we would see a much more conservative nation that knew its values, and knew where to draw the line. But nowadays it appears we’ve become so sensitive to almost everything that no one can walk even a few inches without stepping on somebody's tender toes. So, I’ll pose the question: Has political correctness gone TOO far? Or, if it hasn't, will it soon? Where do we draw the line between basic rights and unfair advantages? Or has the fog of political correctness twisted our national character into something that would make our forefathers weep? Nor is political correctness just a matter of terminology either, its tentacles reach into every aspect of our lives. Nowdays, if your son gets an F on a school test, he hasn’t failed, he gets a “passing grade” despite not having absorbed the required knowledge. We certainly can’t have his feelings hurt. (But he still failed.) If Humpty Dumpty falls off the wall, somehow we must put him back together again so little children will not be upset. I could go on but there’s really no point, and I may offend someone by doing so.
Political correctness = thought control. Its goal is to remove individualism and homogenize society into a one-size-fits-all world, to remake us all in a common image. The question here is, why are we letting it happen? Since when did the feelings and the supposed needs of the few offended outweigh that of the many? I, along with millions of other Americans, am totally fed-up with all the tip-toeing around, trying not to "offend" anyone's tender sensibilities. We are in America after all, a Christian nation founded on the Freedom of Religion. That means, or at least is supposed to mean, that I have the right to worship in whatever manner I see fit. Or I have the right to not worship if that strikes my fancy. I don’t mind if you choose not to celebrate Christmas, as that is your right. If you prefer a "holiday" tree and you choose not to display a nativity scene, be my guest. BUT… December 25th is Christmas .. and established as a Christian celebration for quite some years now. If anyone doesn’t wish to celebrate Christmas then simply don’t participate. But on December 25th… It’s my right to celebrate Christmas in my own manner, complete with nativity scene, and wishing everyone else a Merry Christmas! I'm a Christian so I always say Merry Christmas to others. I have no problem with others saying happy holidays their own way, BUT nobody should tell me that I can not say…
Ón teaghlach Fogarty, Nollaig Shona agus Athbhliain faoi Mhaise! (From the Fogarty household, a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year) to each and every one of you.
Merry Christmas – 88.54% (148,369 votes)
Happy Holidays -- 1.81% (3,027 votes)
Season's Greetings -- 0.21% (346 votes)
Any or all of the above -- 7.57% (12,684 votes)
Undecided -- 1.07% (1,788 votes)
Other. 0.81% (1,352 votes)
So, of the hundred and sixty-seven thousand respondents, 88% say Merry Christmas, and 11% may or may not use some other term…
If we look back at our country of fifty or so years ago, we would see a much more conservative nation that knew its values, and knew where to draw the line. But nowadays it appears we’ve become so sensitive to almost everything that no one can walk even a few inches without stepping on somebody's tender toes. So, I’ll pose the question: Has political correctness gone TOO far? Or, if it hasn't, will it soon? Where do we draw the line between basic rights and unfair advantages? Or has the fog of political correctness twisted our national character into something that would make our forefathers weep? Nor is political correctness just a matter of terminology either, its tentacles reach into every aspect of our lives. Nowdays, if your son gets an F on a school test, he hasn’t failed, he gets a “passing grade” despite not having absorbed the required knowledge. We certainly can’t have his feelings hurt. (But he still failed.) If Humpty Dumpty falls off the wall, somehow we must put him back together again so little children will not be upset. I could go on but there’s really no point, and I may offend someone by doing so.
Political correctness = thought control. Its goal is to remove individualism and homogenize society into a one-size-fits-all world, to remake us all in a common image. The question here is, why are we letting it happen? Since when did the feelings and the supposed needs of the few offended outweigh that of the many? I, along with millions of other Americans, am totally fed-up with all the tip-toeing around, trying not to "offend" anyone's tender sensibilities. We are in America after all, a Christian nation founded on the Freedom of Religion. That means, or at least is supposed to mean, that I have the right to worship in whatever manner I see fit. Or I have the right to not worship if that strikes my fancy. I don’t mind if you choose not to celebrate Christmas, as that is your right. If you prefer a "holiday" tree and you choose not to display a nativity scene, be my guest. BUT… December 25th is Christmas .. and established as a Christian celebration for quite some years now. If anyone doesn’t wish to celebrate Christmas then simply don’t participate. But on December 25th… It’s my right to celebrate Christmas in my own manner, complete with nativity scene, and wishing everyone else a Merry Christmas! I'm a Christian so I always say Merry Christmas to others. I have no problem with others saying happy holidays their own way, BUT nobody should tell me that I can not say…
Ón teaghlach Fogarty, Nollaig Shona agus Athbhliain faoi Mhaise! (From the Fogarty household, a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year) to each and every one of you.
Wolf Wars IV
The latest episode of the Wolf War is heating up in Boise, and locally as well. The state legislature is reportedly working on a “Nullification Resolution” that essentially tells the Feds to take their wolves and stuff it. Nullification is the legal theory that a state has the right to nullify (invalidate) any federal law which that state has deemed to be unconstitutional, and is based on the viewpoint that the Sovereign States formed the Union, and as such have the final authority regarding the power of the Federal government. With this, the states can, and must, refuse to enforce unconstitutional federal laws. Or at least so said Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and even Patrick Henry among others. I can see where this could become a long and drawn out legal process however. If it can be brought about, it does open the door to eventually dumping the entire endangered species act, and if we’re really lucky we can get rid of the EPA while we’re at it! But… I’m sure that the enviro’s will fight that tooth and nail, with every dollar and shyster lawyer they can drum up. A lot of folks will tell you that attempts at nullification have never been successful, but two dozen American states nullified the REAL ID Act of 2005, and more than a dozen states have successfully defied the federal government over medical marijuana. Nullification initiatives of all kinds, involving ObamaCare legislation, Cap and Trade, and even Second Amendment issues, are popping up in several states including Idaho. We’ve tried just everything else that’s legal, and nothing seems to stop the relentless march of big government, so, we need the mechanism of defense that Jefferson left us, not just the odds and ends that doesn’t offend Katie Couric or the New York Times. (Which I think is even more proof that it’s a good idea.) But… it is a legal means to get something accomplished to control our wolf infestation… which will probably take several years… and I question if our wildlife or even domestic animal populations could survive that long!
On the local front, and of questionable legality, we have the proposal from “The Committee for a Safe and Wolf Free Idaho”, in that we just shoot the darn things and be done with ‘em. Personally I think that’s the best idea to come down the pike in many a year, but I have very serious doubts that we’d get away with it for long. Face it, such action would have the fairly small population of Idaho County (the possibility of Clearwater County joining in was mentioned) going head to head with the federal government. And the feds do have far greater resources that we do, which not only includes the Fish and Wildlife Service, but also the FBI, and if things got bad enough probably the US Army as well! Does anyone really believe that the feds would even hesitate to use every weapon in their arsenal against us “anti-government rednecks” if we were to seriously challenge their authority? I wouldn’t be too concerned about “Black Helicopters”, but we might see a few missile armed reconnaissance drones flying over the Nez Perce! ‘Course if everybody were to agree, we could become the modern version of Ft. Sumter I guess…
Rex Rammell, who unsuccessfully ran for governor last spring, is pushing a plan to take wolf management policy away from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and give it to the county. Rammell wants the county commission to pass an emergency ordinance giving Sheriff Doug Giddings authority to kill wolves. "The legal vehicle for removing wolves is an emergency ordinance. We already have an emergency declaration, now we need an emergency ordinance to give us the authority to actually start killing them," he said. "We think that is a legal avenue and trumps the Endangered Species Act because it's a county emergency." The Idaho Attorney General's office and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have declined to comment on Rammell's idea (probably too busy sharpening their legal knives), while County Prosecutor Kirk MacGregor said he would give the commission his legal opinion on the matter if (when) asked. County Commission Chairman Skip Brandt said the commission can not pass an ordinance that will give a citizen the ability to go against federal or state law. “Any such action would be misleading to the folks we represent. Outside the 10J rule, if a citizen shoots a wolf, ordinance or not, the shooter is on their own with the federal legal system. The constitution is very clear that there are states’ rights but it doesn’t give county rights. The counties operate under the state, period.” Skip’s quite right I’m afraid, and I certainly don’t advocate anyone’s breaking the law, nor could I afford the long and gory court case were I to do so. (A hundred thousand dollar fine, and five years of making license plates in a federal slammer doesn’t sound like a real good way to spend my remaining years!) With the federal courts in their current shape I certainly couldn’t expect any more justice than the person caught shooting a wolf, and that’s “little to none”. I do ‘spect we’d all be guilty of conspiracy or something. However, if the State of Idaho were to get fed up with the status quo, and adopt Wyoming’s wolf management plan…
But for the moment, the wolf is at the door, and the region is beginning a new and ugly chapter in the reintroduction fight. We just might see a whole new round of civil disobedience where "shoot, shovel and shut-up" is no longer a local joke, but has become the battle cry. Well, I still have my ‘ol musket and a “bad attitude”…
On the local front, and of questionable legality, we have the proposal from “The Committee for a Safe and Wolf Free Idaho”, in that we just shoot the darn things and be done with ‘em. Personally I think that’s the best idea to come down the pike in many a year, but I have very serious doubts that we’d get away with it for long. Face it, such action would have the fairly small population of Idaho County (the possibility of Clearwater County joining in was mentioned) going head to head with the federal government. And the feds do have far greater resources that we do, which not only includes the Fish and Wildlife Service, but also the FBI, and if things got bad enough probably the US Army as well! Does anyone really believe that the feds would even hesitate to use every weapon in their arsenal against us “anti-government rednecks” if we were to seriously challenge their authority? I wouldn’t be too concerned about “Black Helicopters”, but we might see a few missile armed reconnaissance drones flying over the Nez Perce! ‘Course if everybody were to agree, we could become the modern version of Ft. Sumter I guess…
Rex Rammell, who unsuccessfully ran for governor last spring, is pushing a plan to take wolf management policy away from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and give it to the county. Rammell wants the county commission to pass an emergency ordinance giving Sheriff Doug Giddings authority to kill wolves. "The legal vehicle for removing wolves is an emergency ordinance. We already have an emergency declaration, now we need an emergency ordinance to give us the authority to actually start killing them," he said. "We think that is a legal avenue and trumps the Endangered Species Act because it's a county emergency." The Idaho Attorney General's office and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have declined to comment on Rammell's idea (probably too busy sharpening their legal knives), while County Prosecutor Kirk MacGregor said he would give the commission his legal opinion on the matter if (when) asked. County Commission Chairman Skip Brandt said the commission can not pass an ordinance that will give a citizen the ability to go against federal or state law. “Any such action would be misleading to the folks we represent. Outside the 10J rule, if a citizen shoots a wolf, ordinance or not, the shooter is on their own with the federal legal system. The constitution is very clear that there are states’ rights but it doesn’t give county rights. The counties operate under the state, period.” Skip’s quite right I’m afraid, and I certainly don’t advocate anyone’s breaking the law, nor could I afford the long and gory court case were I to do so. (A hundred thousand dollar fine, and five years of making license plates in a federal slammer doesn’t sound like a real good way to spend my remaining years!) With the federal courts in their current shape I certainly couldn’t expect any more justice than the person caught shooting a wolf, and that’s “little to none”. I do ‘spect we’d all be guilty of conspiracy or something. However, if the State of Idaho were to get fed up with the status quo, and adopt Wyoming’s wolf management plan…
But for the moment, the wolf is at the door, and the region is beginning a new and ugly chapter in the reintroduction fight. We just might see a whole new round of civil disobedience where "shoot, shovel and shut-up" is no longer a local joke, but has become the battle cry. Well, I still have my ‘ol musket and a “bad attitude”…
More Gun Control
"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." - Richard Henry Lee, 1788
The United States seems to be engaged in multiple wars of late, ranging from the real thing in Iraq and Afghanistan to the so called “wars” on poverty, drugs, crime and what-have-you. Now we have the slop-over from Mexico’s drug war seriously affecting us as well. Granted that us “country hicks” in the northern tier haven’t seen much of that fuss yet, we may rest assured that before long the fun and games will soon start showing up here as well. In fact, some rural folks in the south-west are already involved, and some are dieing as a result. With the possible exception of Governor Rick Perry of Texas, no US public official will admit that the United States has a major threat developing on our southern border. Mexico’s drug war is developing into a serious threat to both the government of Mexico, and to the lives of American citizens. Mexico, with more than 28,000 murders so far, is being terrorized by the drug cartels, and the Mexican government is slipping into oblivion. Now, instead of illegals coming across our borders in search of jobs (and becoming a steady stream of recruits for the cartels), many refugees are now fleeing Mexico and Central America just to stay alive. However, if you thought that only some areas of Mexico were under the control of the cartels, an examination of the map shows that much of Mexico has been taken over by the cartels, and they are moving into the United States as well, with Florida, Alabama, Texas, Arizona, and California rapidly becoming part of the combat zone! And, despite the claims and wistful thinking of the liberal press, I don’t have a lot of hope for our law enforcement agencies to handle the situation either, considered that they’re seriously outnumbered, and heavily outgunned. The US armed forces could handle the problem quite easily, except for the fact that they’re rather busy defending our country… in the mid-east.
It’s a common Liberal strategy to create a crisis, and then present a utopian “emergency” solution. So, on the current subject, a perennial war is the ultimate crisis situation, and our government is handing us a loose-loose situation for America with the DREAM act. With our left wing government tied in knots, and the current regime in the White House bending over backwards appeasing all and sundry beyond our borders, it appears that we’re about to get into another fight, with Mexico once again! About the only thing we can hope for is that some General will finally mobilize the USMC for a live fire exercise… on our southern border! Baring that, I suspect it’s about time to rethink the hate mongering about militia organizations.
But now, things are getting even worse for Americans, if that’s possible!
“If you look at the values and the historical record, you will see that the Founding Fathers never intended guns to go unregulated”, says Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer. The author of the dissenting decision in the 2008 "D.C. v. Heller" case, Breyer said that James Madison was more concerned that the Constitution may not be ratified than he was about granting individuals the right to bear arms. Therefore Madison included the Second Amendment to appease the states. Since the Founding Fathers did not foresee how time would change individual behavior, government can impose regulations on guns, Breyer contends. "The difficult job in open cases where there is no clear answer is to take those values in this document, which all Americans hold, which do not change, and to apply them to a world that is ever changing," Breyer said.
He suggested that those values and intentions mean that the Second Amendment allows for restrictions on the individual, including an all-out ban on handguns. "We're acting as judges. If we're going to decide everything on the basis of history -- what is the scope of the right to keep and bear arms? Machine guns? Torpedoes? Handguns?" he asked. This from a Justice who probably doesn’t even know we're a Republic, and not a democracy! The founders went to painstaking trouble to detail the framework of the Constitution. They specifically ignored firearms limitations because they wanted “The People” to never lose the ability to oppose a tyrannical government. The founders well knew that they could not foresee what future weapons might become, and if they had wanted to place limits on guns, they would have limited us to flintlock muskets.
Breyer represents the interests of freedom hating socialist control freaks, and he, along with Sotomayor, Kagan, Stevens, Ginsberg, Souter – are all experts at “interpreting” our rights out of existence. His trying to reinterpret what he "thinks" Madison meant is like me trying to interpret a message from the Taliban! Now more than ever in our moralless society, thieves and liberals believe they can help themselves to whatever we own, so we need to be able to protect ourselves. If that day comes, I for one won’t have to wait for the "law" of Justice Breyer to save me, Judge Colt and I can take care of ourselves just fine.
The people should have the ability to purchase arms at least equal to those available to the US military. Sadly, the ammunition for the really nifty toys is so darn expensive...
The United States seems to be engaged in multiple wars of late, ranging from the real thing in Iraq and Afghanistan to the so called “wars” on poverty, drugs, crime and what-have-you. Now we have the slop-over from Mexico’s drug war seriously affecting us as well. Granted that us “country hicks” in the northern tier haven’t seen much of that fuss yet, we may rest assured that before long the fun and games will soon start showing up here as well. In fact, some rural folks in the south-west are already involved, and some are dieing as a result. With the possible exception of Governor Rick Perry of Texas, no US public official will admit that the United States has a major threat developing on our southern border. Mexico’s drug war is developing into a serious threat to both the government of Mexico, and to the lives of American citizens. Mexico, with more than 28,000 murders so far, is being terrorized by the drug cartels, and the Mexican government is slipping into oblivion. Now, instead of illegals coming across our borders in search of jobs (and becoming a steady stream of recruits for the cartels), many refugees are now fleeing Mexico and Central America just to stay alive. However, if you thought that only some areas of Mexico were under the control of the cartels, an examination of the map shows that much of Mexico has been taken over by the cartels, and they are moving into the United States as well, with Florida, Alabama, Texas, Arizona, and California rapidly becoming part of the combat zone! And, despite the claims and wistful thinking of the liberal press, I don’t have a lot of hope for our law enforcement agencies to handle the situation either, considered that they’re seriously outnumbered, and heavily outgunned. The US armed forces could handle the problem quite easily, except for the fact that they’re rather busy defending our country… in the mid-east.
It’s a common Liberal strategy to create a crisis, and then present a utopian “emergency” solution. So, on the current subject, a perennial war is the ultimate crisis situation, and our government is handing us a loose-loose situation for America with the DREAM act. With our left wing government tied in knots, and the current regime in the White House bending over backwards appeasing all and sundry beyond our borders, it appears that we’re about to get into another fight, with Mexico once again! About the only thing we can hope for is that some General will finally mobilize the USMC for a live fire exercise… on our southern border! Baring that, I suspect it’s about time to rethink the hate mongering about militia organizations.
But now, things are getting even worse for Americans, if that’s possible!
“If you look at the values and the historical record, you will see that the Founding Fathers never intended guns to go unregulated”, says Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer. The author of the dissenting decision in the 2008 "D.C. v. Heller" case, Breyer said that James Madison was more concerned that the Constitution may not be ratified than he was about granting individuals the right to bear arms. Therefore Madison included the Second Amendment to appease the states. Since the Founding Fathers did not foresee how time would change individual behavior, government can impose regulations on guns, Breyer contends. "The difficult job in open cases where there is no clear answer is to take those values in this document, which all Americans hold, which do not change, and to apply them to a world that is ever changing," Breyer said.
He suggested that those values and intentions mean that the Second Amendment allows for restrictions on the individual, including an all-out ban on handguns. "We're acting as judges. If we're going to decide everything on the basis of history -- what is the scope of the right to keep and bear arms? Machine guns? Torpedoes? Handguns?" he asked. This from a Justice who probably doesn’t even know we're a Republic, and not a democracy! The founders went to painstaking trouble to detail the framework of the Constitution. They specifically ignored firearms limitations because they wanted “The People” to never lose the ability to oppose a tyrannical government. The founders well knew that they could not foresee what future weapons might become, and if they had wanted to place limits on guns, they would have limited us to flintlock muskets.
Breyer represents the interests of freedom hating socialist control freaks, and he, along with Sotomayor, Kagan, Stevens, Ginsberg, Souter – are all experts at “interpreting” our rights out of existence. His trying to reinterpret what he "thinks" Madison meant is like me trying to interpret a message from the Taliban! Now more than ever in our moralless society, thieves and liberals believe they can help themselves to whatever we own, so we need to be able to protect ourselves. If that day comes, I for one won’t have to wait for the "law" of Justice Breyer to save me, Judge Colt and I can take care of ourselves just fine.
The people should have the ability to purchase arms at least equal to those available to the US military. Sadly, the ammunition for the really nifty toys is so darn expensive...
Saturday, December 11, 2010
Wolf Pack Special
It would seem that just about anything that happens in Idaho County involving wolves stirs up a lot of commotion on the internet, and nearly anywhere else you might look. When the county commissioners issued their Wolf Resolution, we suddenly became well known around the country as those “anti-environment rednecks” according to the tree hugging crowd. (For the most part those are the folks that don’t live in areas impacted by either a timber harvest or wolves, and really don’t know anything about them either.) ‘Course the Governor’s efforts to gain local control of the wolf infestation just added fuel to the fire, and now it seems that Idaho is populated by bad guys because we’re not all tree and wolf huggers. Oh-well, I never let the environut’s opinion worry me anyway.
The latest (and rather humorous) installment of the ongoing environmental saga is Sheriff Doug Giddings “.308 SSS Wolf Pack Raffle”, which has generated nearly 700 internet stories in just the last week. If you’re not already aware of it, the Sheriffs Department is raffling off a Winchester model 70 .308 rifle, with the proceeds to benefit the department’s Community Projects Fund. The hysteria comes with the name, the “SSS Wolf Pack Raffle”, and the shovel. Apparently, based on our local “shoot, shovel, and shut-up” joke about the best way to handle wolves, the wolf huggers are somewhat hysterical, and naturally Doug’s the bad guy. The first thing we hear from the environmental community is the plaintive wail that Sheriff Giddings is advocating we violate federal endangered species law by running out and eradicating all those poor misunderstood wolves. For the most part the news articles are being pretty fair about describing what the Sheriffs Dept. is trying to accomplish, and some of them do mention the “Three Ess’s” witticism, explaining that it is a joke after all. The scenario according to many self proclaimed environmental experts is a little different however: “An Idaho sheriff holds a raffle for a .308-caliber rifle and a shovel. He promotes the raffle as the “.308 SSS Wolf Pack Raffle, and he wants us to believe that the SSS stands for “safety, security and survival” in an area where the letters SSS in the wolf-plagued area stand for “shoot, shovel and shut up. Suuuuure that’s what the good sheriff means.” It would appear that these folks can’t take a joke, and misunderstand the semantics involved. “No, we’re not advocating shooting wolves,” Giddings said. “Safety, security and survival, that’s kind of an Idaho County thing. That’s who we are. It’s to get people’s attention. It means something to us up here.” I ‘spect it’s a good thing the model 70 is a bolt action rifle, were it a semi-automatic Doug would probably have the Brady Bunch claiming he was handing out assault weapons!
Anyway, if you happen to be an environut and are all upset by the issue, hear this! First off, I know all three of our County Commissioners, and I know Sheriff Giddings. Adding to that, I attend most of the weekly commission meetings, particularly those that involve wolves in any way, and occasionally I’ll even throw my two-bits worth in. Finally, I have never, ever, heard ANY county official advocate breaking any law from any jurisdiction. Certainly there are laws on the books that aren’t very popular in these parts, but nobody thinks we should just ignore them even if we’d like to. As far as I’m concerned, whoever makes such an accusation definitely needs a Plexiglas belly button so they can see where they’re going! Dave Cadwallader of the Idaho Department of Fish and Game Department said it quite well, "We are a state of law abiding citizens…” "We are frustrated, beyond frustrated, but we have to follow the rule of law." Idaho Department of Fish and Game managers no longer perform statewide monitoring of wolves, conduct investigations into illegal killings, provide law enforcement when wolves are poached or participate in the program that responds to livestock depredation. Evidence of wolf poaching is turned over to federal authorities.
Sheriff Giddings said he knew the choice of “SSS” would stir up some interest. It certainly did that, and naturally public interest is something you want if you’re going to run a raffle. Tickets are on sale for $1 each, or 11 for $10, and the drawing is planned for March 8. Money from the raffle will go to a food bank, alcohol and drug awareness programs, and local school equipment fundraisers.
The latest (and rather humorous) installment of the ongoing environmental saga is Sheriff Doug Giddings “.308 SSS Wolf Pack Raffle”, which has generated nearly 700 internet stories in just the last week. If you’re not already aware of it, the Sheriffs Department is raffling off a Winchester model 70 .308 rifle, with the proceeds to benefit the department’s Community Projects Fund. The hysteria comes with the name, the “SSS Wolf Pack Raffle”, and the shovel. Apparently, based on our local “shoot, shovel, and shut-up” joke about the best way to handle wolves, the wolf huggers are somewhat hysterical, and naturally Doug’s the bad guy. The first thing we hear from the environmental community is the plaintive wail that Sheriff Giddings is advocating we violate federal endangered species law by running out and eradicating all those poor misunderstood wolves. For the most part the news articles are being pretty fair about describing what the Sheriffs Dept. is trying to accomplish, and some of them do mention the “Three Ess’s” witticism, explaining that it is a joke after all. The scenario according to many self proclaimed environmental experts is a little different however: “An Idaho sheriff holds a raffle for a .308-caliber rifle and a shovel. He promotes the raffle as the “.308 SSS Wolf Pack Raffle, and he wants us to believe that the SSS stands for “safety, security and survival” in an area where the letters SSS in the wolf-plagued area stand for “shoot, shovel and shut up. Suuuuure that’s what the good sheriff means.” It would appear that these folks can’t take a joke, and misunderstand the semantics involved. “No, we’re not advocating shooting wolves,” Giddings said. “Safety, security and survival, that’s kind of an Idaho County thing. That’s who we are. It’s to get people’s attention. It means something to us up here.” I ‘spect it’s a good thing the model 70 is a bolt action rifle, were it a semi-automatic Doug would probably have the Brady Bunch claiming he was handing out assault weapons!
Anyway, if you happen to be an environut and are all upset by the issue, hear this! First off, I know all three of our County Commissioners, and I know Sheriff Giddings. Adding to that, I attend most of the weekly commission meetings, particularly those that involve wolves in any way, and occasionally I’ll even throw my two-bits worth in. Finally, I have never, ever, heard ANY county official advocate breaking any law from any jurisdiction. Certainly there are laws on the books that aren’t very popular in these parts, but nobody thinks we should just ignore them even if we’d like to. As far as I’m concerned, whoever makes such an accusation definitely needs a Plexiglas belly button so they can see where they’re going! Dave Cadwallader of the Idaho Department of Fish and Game Department said it quite well, "We are a state of law abiding citizens…” "We are frustrated, beyond frustrated, but we have to follow the rule of law." Idaho Department of Fish and Game managers no longer perform statewide monitoring of wolves, conduct investigations into illegal killings, provide law enforcement when wolves are poached or participate in the program that responds to livestock depredation. Evidence of wolf poaching is turned over to federal authorities.
Sheriff Giddings said he knew the choice of “SSS” would stir up some interest. It certainly did that, and naturally public interest is something you want if you’re going to run a raffle. Tickets are on sale for $1 each, or 11 for $10, and the drawing is planned for March 8. Money from the raffle will go to a food bank, alcohol and drug awareness programs, and local school equipment fundraisers.
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Veterans Day
One of the hazards of writing a weekly column is that no matter what I plan or do, I always seem to be a few days behind the times. So, keeping that in mind…
America’s armed forces, her veterans, and Veterans affairs, are a subject that I quite easily get upset about. Particularly so when I feel that Veterans are being mistreated, or just plain forgotten, in the rush of “politics as usual” in Washington. Locally, I get involved in veterans organizations, and I take part in the Memorial Day and Veterans Day ceremonies. As the high point of Veterans Day a couple of weeks ago, I attended the assembly at Grangeville High School where Pat Sullivan’s gang did their usual fantastic job of honoring our local veterans, reminding everyone that freedom is not free, and that which many Americans take so lightly was paid for with the blood of a veteran. (Thanks kids, this old soldier certainly appreciates your efforts.) As an additional item, I took it upon myself to present the County Commissioners with ‘Buddy Poppies’ on the 10th, as a reminder that the following day (Nov. 11th) was Veterans Day. Being a merciful type guy, I kept my “presentation speech” short; as I’m sure they have better things to do than listen to me rant and rave. For those of you who aren’t familiar with them, “Buddy Poppies” are those small red artificial flowers you’ll often see old soldiers handing out as they solicit donations to aid their less fortunate buddies, American veterans who did not come home whole. They originated shortly after WW I in memory of the poppy fields of Flanders, where so many young soldiers were laid to rest, and they provided a reminder of the terrible cost of that war. Today they are a symbol of the service… and sacrifice… of American veterans of all wars.
We usually celebrate Veterans Day, no less so than Memorial Day, with parades, speeches, civic ceremonies, and what have you. Usually the references are, as they should be, of WW I, WW II, Korea, Vietnam, and now Iraq/Afghanistan. But not much is said about the Cold War unfortunately. No, it was not a declared war, but it could get just as deadly, and it started right after WW II. It included such challenges as the Berlin airlift and the Berlin Wall, the U-2 incident, nearly a hundred US military aircraft shoot-downs, the Cuban missile crisis, the Quemoy / Matsu / Formosa confrontations, the KAL airliner shoot-down, and many, many, other incidents. It finally ended when the Berlin Wall came down and the Evil Empire collapsed. For forty-five years America’s cold warriors stood watch, day and night, over political borders world wide. They served hundreds of feet below the arctic ice aboard nuclear submarines. They stood alert duty at countless fighter bases, bomber bases, and missile silos. They suffered endless hours of boredom at remote radar sites around the world watching the skies for an attack that never came, or perhaps they sailed the stormy seas on seemingly endless patrols. Her warriors stood ceaseless watch over America, never knowing if, or when, the Cold War was going to turn blazingly hot. While they may, or may not, have heard shots fired in anger, they too endured mind-numbing hardship, privation, loneliness, and personal danger. They, more than anyone else, kept the Soviet bear at arms length. They too are veterans, as much so as those who fought our countries better known declared wars.
A veteran is often described as an individual who, at some point in his life, wrote a blank check to ‘The United States of America’ for an amount of ‘up to and including my life’. During these two-hundred and forty-three years of our nations’ existence, millions of young Americans have written those checks and worn the uniform, placing themselves between our homeland and war’s desolation. Well over a million of those checks have been cashed in that time, leaving many bright futures cut short, because, for one reason or another, our politicians failed in their duty.
To our elected officials at every level, I’ll say this… The Republic will always produce soldiers who will stand in her defense, risking all, and paying that terrible price, as long as we remain a nation of free men. We form a long and sometimes ragged line stretching through time from Lexington and Concord to Antietam and Appomattox Courthouse, we were at San Juan Hill, the Marne, Chateau-Thierry, and Belleau Wood. We fought at places like Midway, Iwo Jima, Normandy, and in those terrible skies over Berlin. We well remember the blood soaked ground of Pork Chop Hill, Hamburger Hill, the Ia Drang valley, and Khe Sanh. Today our Brothers and Sisters stand fast in Iraq and Afghanistan. We live by the honored motto of West Point; Duty… Honor… Country. We’re immensely proud of our history, and that of our nation. When called, we fight for an ideal, that of America being a nation with freedom and justice for all.
But do not waste our young lives on political theories, notions, or whims. Do not allow vacuous rhetoric, the politics of your election, or those of your particular party to intrude on your decisions, lest you fail your solemn duty. Remember that our lives are, as are those of all Americans, a quite precious treasure, not to be thrown away lightly. When, and after serious consideration, much soul searching, and hopefully prayer, you conclude that we must go to war, we will do your biding, we will fight your battles, we will slay your dragons. But remember too, that if the object is not to win, then the problem is hardly worth risking our lives over. We in our turn only ask that you give us the wherewithal to accomplish our assigned mission, and that you be our guardians in taking every step to avoid unnecessary loss of life, so that we might return home safe and whole.
We, America’s veterans, willingly signed those checks and went in harms way, to buy time. That is, after all, what soldiering is about; buying the precious time for you to correct the political mistakes that brings on war. We signed those checks, we gave it our best, and we paid the butcher’s bill so that you, the leaders of our nation could, in relative peace and safety, sit in your seats of power and give our people and our nation your best. I charge you, never forget all those young lives cut short, and never let that sacrifice and suffering have been in vain.
America’s armed forces, her veterans, and Veterans affairs, are a subject that I quite easily get upset about. Particularly so when I feel that Veterans are being mistreated, or just plain forgotten, in the rush of “politics as usual” in Washington. Locally, I get involved in veterans organizations, and I take part in the Memorial Day and Veterans Day ceremonies. As the high point of Veterans Day a couple of weeks ago, I attended the assembly at Grangeville High School where Pat Sullivan’s gang did their usual fantastic job of honoring our local veterans, reminding everyone that freedom is not free, and that which many Americans take so lightly was paid for with the blood of a veteran. (Thanks kids, this old soldier certainly appreciates your efforts.) As an additional item, I took it upon myself to present the County Commissioners with ‘Buddy Poppies’ on the 10th, as a reminder that the following day (Nov. 11th) was Veterans Day. Being a merciful type guy, I kept my “presentation speech” short; as I’m sure they have better things to do than listen to me rant and rave. For those of you who aren’t familiar with them, “Buddy Poppies” are those small red artificial flowers you’ll often see old soldiers handing out as they solicit donations to aid their less fortunate buddies, American veterans who did not come home whole. They originated shortly after WW I in memory of the poppy fields of Flanders, where so many young soldiers were laid to rest, and they provided a reminder of the terrible cost of that war. Today they are a symbol of the service… and sacrifice… of American veterans of all wars.
We usually celebrate Veterans Day, no less so than Memorial Day, with parades, speeches, civic ceremonies, and what have you. Usually the references are, as they should be, of WW I, WW II, Korea, Vietnam, and now Iraq/Afghanistan. But not much is said about the Cold War unfortunately. No, it was not a declared war, but it could get just as deadly, and it started right after WW II. It included such challenges as the Berlin airlift and the Berlin Wall, the U-2 incident, nearly a hundred US military aircraft shoot-downs, the Cuban missile crisis, the Quemoy / Matsu / Formosa confrontations, the KAL airliner shoot-down, and many, many, other incidents. It finally ended when the Berlin Wall came down and the Evil Empire collapsed. For forty-five years America’s cold warriors stood watch, day and night, over political borders world wide. They served hundreds of feet below the arctic ice aboard nuclear submarines. They stood alert duty at countless fighter bases, bomber bases, and missile silos. They suffered endless hours of boredom at remote radar sites around the world watching the skies for an attack that never came, or perhaps they sailed the stormy seas on seemingly endless patrols. Her warriors stood ceaseless watch over America, never knowing if, or when, the Cold War was going to turn blazingly hot. While they may, or may not, have heard shots fired in anger, they too endured mind-numbing hardship, privation, loneliness, and personal danger. They, more than anyone else, kept the Soviet bear at arms length. They too are veterans, as much so as those who fought our countries better known declared wars.
A veteran is often described as an individual who, at some point in his life, wrote a blank check to ‘The United States of America’ for an amount of ‘up to and including my life’. During these two-hundred and forty-three years of our nations’ existence, millions of young Americans have written those checks and worn the uniform, placing themselves between our homeland and war’s desolation. Well over a million of those checks have been cashed in that time, leaving many bright futures cut short, because, for one reason or another, our politicians failed in their duty.
To our elected officials at every level, I’ll say this… The Republic will always produce soldiers who will stand in her defense, risking all, and paying that terrible price, as long as we remain a nation of free men. We form a long and sometimes ragged line stretching through time from Lexington and Concord to Antietam and Appomattox Courthouse, we were at San Juan Hill, the Marne, Chateau-Thierry, and Belleau Wood. We fought at places like Midway, Iwo Jima, Normandy, and in those terrible skies over Berlin. We well remember the blood soaked ground of Pork Chop Hill, Hamburger Hill, the Ia Drang valley, and Khe Sanh. Today our Brothers and Sisters stand fast in Iraq and Afghanistan. We live by the honored motto of West Point; Duty… Honor… Country. We’re immensely proud of our history, and that of our nation. When called, we fight for an ideal, that of America being a nation with freedom and justice for all.
But do not waste our young lives on political theories, notions, or whims. Do not allow vacuous rhetoric, the politics of your election, or those of your particular party to intrude on your decisions, lest you fail your solemn duty. Remember that our lives are, as are those of all Americans, a quite precious treasure, not to be thrown away lightly. When, and after serious consideration, much soul searching, and hopefully prayer, you conclude that we must go to war, we will do your biding, we will fight your battles, we will slay your dragons. But remember too, that if the object is not to win, then the problem is hardly worth risking our lives over. We in our turn only ask that you give us the wherewithal to accomplish our assigned mission, and that you be our guardians in taking every step to avoid unnecessary loss of life, so that we might return home safe and whole.
We, America’s veterans, willingly signed those checks and went in harms way, to buy time. That is, after all, what soldiering is about; buying the precious time for you to correct the political mistakes that brings on war. We signed those checks, we gave it our best, and we paid the butcher’s bill so that you, the leaders of our nation could, in relative peace and safety, sit in your seats of power and give our people and our nation your best. I charge you, never forget all those young lives cut short, and never let that sacrifice and suffering have been in vain.
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Socialism's back
"He who is not angry when there is just cause for anger is immoral. Why? Because anger looks to the good of justice. And if you can live amid injustice without anger, you are immoral as well as unjust." --Thomas Aquinas
Socialism marches on in America, despite the wishes of our citizenry expressed at the ballot box, despite the results of opinion polls too numerous to mention, and despite the vivid lessons of history.
Karl Heinrich Marx was a well educated German philosopher (and budding communist revolutionary), whose ideas played a significant role in the development of modern communism and socialism. Marx published his thoughts in 1848, and summarized his approach to society, the economy, and politics in the first line of chapter one of The Communist Manifesto. It reads: "The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles”. Marx argued that capitalism, like all previous socioeconomic systems, would inevitably produce internal tensions which would lead to its destruction. As capitalism replaced feudalism, he believed socialism would eventually replace capitalism. The end result would be a stateless, classless society called communism. In his characteristic turgid prose, Marx determined that the means of production and exchange owned by the middle classes was highly unfair to the working classes. From this, he concluded that revolution was inevitable, and from that, once everything was owned by the people and that all work would be evenly shared, world-wide peace and niceness would result. (I wonder what he thought when, instead of armed rebellion against the “bosses”, labor unions arose, and started getting a fair shake for the working stiff.)
Unfortunately for us, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and a lot of other wanna-be communists decided that Karl’s theoretically necessary revolution would need some assistance, and the world was soon faced with the problems brought about by the rise of the USSR. Under Lenin the USSR was an interesting (although somewhat bloody) social experiment and a minor annoyance to the rest of the world. When Stalin assumed power, things changed. The planned (and command) economy did, with a lot of help from the despised capitalist world, turn Russia into an industrial economy of sorts. But “supply” (the basis of every successful economy in history) never kept up with “demand”. As I understand it, by 1960 the Soviet standard of living had yet to reach the level Russians enjoyed in 1916, the eve of the Russian revolution! Stalin demanded heavy industry as a demonstration of Soviet Power, forgetting that heavy industry is a luxury of the economically well developed nations… there’s little nutritional value in armored combat vehicles and battleships, and they make lousy agricultural tractors. The mad effort to catch up with and surpass the capitalist west cost the USSR millions of lives and untold human suffering. Eventually it also brought about the downfall of socialism’s showpiece. Now the showpiece of capitalism is trying to become a socialist nation.
Apparently our home-grown intellectuals don’t believe what they can see with their own eyes. Marxism and its associated government control of every part of social, economic, and industrial life has failed miserably everywhere it’s been tried, and still our countries progressive “leaders” insist that “government can do a better job”! Hey guys, every socialist nation in history has collapsed, changed their ways, or wound up in abject poverty! But the folks in Washington are, unfortunately, still trying to follow the game plan found in The Communist Manifesto. So far they’ve made a mockery of civil law unless they can use it to enforce “their” will on the rest of us. They are trying to convert our Constitution into so much waste paper. The Bill of Rights is completely ignored, and with the Dept. of Homeland Security they’ve turned us into a police state. The practice of one’s religion (unless it’s Islamic), has nearly become a violation of federal law. We’re taxed unmercifully, and “who knows where the money goes”. Now we have ObamaCare, and we’re taxed… “Fined” if we fail to purchase government approved medical insurance. Cap-and-trade is dead and buried I’m told… but I’ll bet a dollar to a stale donut that version 2 is waiting in the wings.
Within the notorious “individual mandate” of ObamaCare lies a grand opportunity for government. As it now stands, anyone can be forced to buy any specified product for any reason. Corporations can quit wasting their money on advertising and political fund raising while the Federal Government could balance the budget on the fines people would have to pay to get out of a purchase they don't want.
According to the Wall Street Journal, we may have to start paying for grossly inefficient wind or solar energy schemes, even if we don't have access to them! The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission apparently has a plan to spread out the costs for the transmission lines to bring wind and solar projects to the national grid. A price likely to top $160 billion, and US residents will have to pay the utility bills even if they don't even use the lines! Since Mr. Edison’s magic lamp first went commercial, users would pay for the service, and if you didn’t use it, you didn’t pay for it. But that is changing under socialism. The individual mandate removes “any meaningful limit on Congress’ power to regulate its citizens under the Commerce Clause.” The clause has already been used to capture any activity that might conceivably involve a transfer of power across state lines. Forcing individuals to buy anything inflates Congressional power to “a general police power, all but eliminating the constitutional distinction between federal and state regulatory authority in our federal union.”
Yet another gem from the dank, dark chambers of the Federal Department of Nefarious Plots and Plans… a secret Bureau of Land Management discussion paper leaked to Senator Jim DeMint and Rep. Rob Bishop labeled “Internal Draft — NOT FOR RELEASE,” confirms the federal government’s desire for physical enlargement. BLM advocates enlarging federal landholdings, and “acquiring parcels adjacent to its current holdings…” This mob of environuts argue “Should the legislative process not prove fruitful… BLM would recommend that the Administration consider using the Antiquities Act to designate new National Monuments by Presidential Proclamation.” Which means that if Congress fails to grab even more federal acreage, Mr. Obama should grab it by decree. The BLM lists “Treasured Landscapes” representing approximately 12.85 million federal acres that would shift from mixed-use to virtually untouchable status. They also cite prospective “land-rationalization” efforts to nationalize at least 1.8 million acres. And what do “we the people” get? Even more high dollar failed federal stewardship, and even less access to OUR federal lands.
Is it time to start screaming at our congressional representatives yet?
Socialism marches on in America, despite the wishes of our citizenry expressed at the ballot box, despite the results of opinion polls too numerous to mention, and despite the vivid lessons of history.
Karl Heinrich Marx was a well educated German philosopher (and budding communist revolutionary), whose ideas played a significant role in the development of modern communism and socialism. Marx published his thoughts in 1848, and summarized his approach to society, the economy, and politics in the first line of chapter one of The Communist Manifesto. It reads: "The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles”. Marx argued that capitalism, like all previous socioeconomic systems, would inevitably produce internal tensions which would lead to its destruction. As capitalism replaced feudalism, he believed socialism would eventually replace capitalism. The end result would be a stateless, classless society called communism. In his characteristic turgid prose, Marx determined that the means of production and exchange owned by the middle classes was highly unfair to the working classes. From this, he concluded that revolution was inevitable, and from that, once everything was owned by the people and that all work would be evenly shared, world-wide peace and niceness would result. (I wonder what he thought when, instead of armed rebellion against the “bosses”, labor unions arose, and started getting a fair shake for the working stiff.)
Unfortunately for us, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and a lot of other wanna-be communists decided that Karl’s theoretically necessary revolution would need some assistance, and the world was soon faced with the problems brought about by the rise of the USSR. Under Lenin the USSR was an interesting (although somewhat bloody) social experiment and a minor annoyance to the rest of the world. When Stalin assumed power, things changed. The planned (and command) economy did, with a lot of help from the despised capitalist world, turn Russia into an industrial economy of sorts. But “supply” (the basis of every successful economy in history) never kept up with “demand”. As I understand it, by 1960 the Soviet standard of living had yet to reach the level Russians enjoyed in 1916, the eve of the Russian revolution! Stalin demanded heavy industry as a demonstration of Soviet Power, forgetting that heavy industry is a luxury of the economically well developed nations… there’s little nutritional value in armored combat vehicles and battleships, and they make lousy agricultural tractors. The mad effort to catch up with and surpass the capitalist west cost the USSR millions of lives and untold human suffering. Eventually it also brought about the downfall of socialism’s showpiece. Now the showpiece of capitalism is trying to become a socialist nation.
Apparently our home-grown intellectuals don’t believe what they can see with their own eyes. Marxism and its associated government control of every part of social, economic, and industrial life has failed miserably everywhere it’s been tried, and still our countries progressive “leaders” insist that “government can do a better job”! Hey guys, every socialist nation in history has collapsed, changed their ways, or wound up in abject poverty! But the folks in Washington are, unfortunately, still trying to follow the game plan found in The Communist Manifesto. So far they’ve made a mockery of civil law unless they can use it to enforce “their” will on the rest of us. They are trying to convert our Constitution into so much waste paper. The Bill of Rights is completely ignored, and with the Dept. of Homeland Security they’ve turned us into a police state. The practice of one’s religion (unless it’s Islamic), has nearly become a violation of federal law. We’re taxed unmercifully, and “who knows where the money goes”. Now we have ObamaCare, and we’re taxed… “Fined” if we fail to purchase government approved medical insurance. Cap-and-trade is dead and buried I’m told… but I’ll bet a dollar to a stale donut that version 2 is waiting in the wings.
Within the notorious “individual mandate” of ObamaCare lies a grand opportunity for government. As it now stands, anyone can be forced to buy any specified product for any reason. Corporations can quit wasting their money on advertising and political fund raising while the Federal Government could balance the budget on the fines people would have to pay to get out of a purchase they don't want.
According to the Wall Street Journal, we may have to start paying for grossly inefficient wind or solar energy schemes, even if we don't have access to them! The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission apparently has a plan to spread out the costs for the transmission lines to bring wind and solar projects to the national grid. A price likely to top $160 billion, and US residents will have to pay the utility bills even if they don't even use the lines! Since Mr. Edison’s magic lamp first went commercial, users would pay for the service, and if you didn’t use it, you didn’t pay for it. But that is changing under socialism. The individual mandate removes “any meaningful limit on Congress’ power to regulate its citizens under the Commerce Clause.” The clause has already been used to capture any activity that might conceivably involve a transfer of power across state lines. Forcing individuals to buy anything inflates Congressional power to “a general police power, all but eliminating the constitutional distinction between federal and state regulatory authority in our federal union.”
Yet another gem from the dank, dark chambers of the Federal Department of Nefarious Plots and Plans… a secret Bureau of Land Management discussion paper leaked to Senator Jim DeMint and Rep. Rob Bishop labeled “Internal Draft — NOT FOR RELEASE,” confirms the federal government’s desire for physical enlargement. BLM advocates enlarging federal landholdings, and “acquiring parcels adjacent to its current holdings…” This mob of environuts argue “Should the legislative process not prove fruitful… BLM would recommend that the Administration consider using the Antiquities Act to designate new National Monuments by Presidential Proclamation.” Which means that if Congress fails to grab even more federal acreage, Mr. Obama should grab it by decree. The BLM lists “Treasured Landscapes” representing approximately 12.85 million federal acres that would shift from mixed-use to virtually untouchable status. They also cite prospective “land-rationalization” efforts to nationalize at least 1.8 million acres. And what do “we the people” get? Even more high dollar failed federal stewardship, and even less access to OUR federal lands.
Is it time to start screaming at our congressional representatives yet?
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Sorry
I’ve got some catching up to do, and I ‘spect some apologizing as well. I’m kinda late at getting last weeks column posted, mostly because of a serious case of stomach flu. (??) In this case, I was laid low for nearly four days by some sort of bug. I rather felt sick enough to die, and was afraid I wouldn’t! I guess I’ll live, but I wouldn’t wish this stuff on even Mr. Obama… but don’t tempt me to much, particularly in my present mood.
On Nov. 10th, I attended an abbreviated County Commissioners meeting, and presented the Commissioners with VFW Buddy Poppies. This is the mercifully short “speech” I gave ‘em with those Poppies:
“Gentlemen, let me remind you that tomorrow is Veterans Day, a day set aside to honor America’s veterans. These are “Buddy Poppies”, originally a reminder of World War One and the terrible cost of war. Today they are a symbol of all American Veterans.
A veteran is sometimes referred to as an individual who, at some point in his life, wrote a blank check to ‘The United States of America’, for an amount “up to and including my life”. In the two-hundred and forty-three years of our nations’ existence, well over a million of those checks were cashed.
Gentlemen, we willingly wrote those checks, and gave it our best, in order that you, our nations leaders, could sit here in relative peace, and give our people and our country your best. I charge you, always remember those cashed checks, and don’t let us down.”
Must have done alright, ‘cause I didn’t break down and cry, as I so quickly do when we bury another vet, and they play last ‘taps’.
Huh… didn’t get thrown out either.
On Nov. 10th, I attended an abbreviated County Commissioners meeting, and presented the Commissioners with VFW Buddy Poppies. This is the mercifully short “speech” I gave ‘em with those Poppies:
“Gentlemen, let me remind you that tomorrow is Veterans Day, a day set aside to honor America’s veterans. These are “Buddy Poppies”, originally a reminder of World War One and the terrible cost of war. Today they are a symbol of all American Veterans.
A veteran is sometimes referred to as an individual who, at some point in his life, wrote a blank check to ‘The United States of America’, for an amount “up to and including my life”. In the two-hundred and forty-three years of our nations’ existence, well over a million of those checks were cashed.
Gentlemen, we willingly wrote those checks, and gave it our best, in order that you, our nations leaders, could sit here in relative peace, and give our people and our country your best. I charge you, always remember those cashed checks, and don’t let us down.”
Must have done alright, ‘cause I didn’t break down and cry, as I so quickly do when we bury another vet, and they play last ‘taps’.
Huh… didn’t get thrown out either.
Mr. Congressman
The election’s over, and most folks are busily trying to clean up the trash and wreckage that inevitably follows. A good many loosing candidates are sitting around trying to figure out what went wrong, while an equal number of winning candidates are trying to figure out what went right I would suspect. At any rate, there are a lot of folks that were “to busy to get involved” that are now sitting around and wondering just what happened. At any rate, most of us are picking up the assorted “vote for me” signs that clutter our yards, tossing out the excess campaign literature cluttering the place, and thinking “Thank God that’s over”! The politico’s on the other hand (winners and losers alike), are busily thanking their supporters, and starting the planning sessions for the next campaign. I don’t see anything wrong with all this, remembering that it’s been part of the American political scene for the last couple of hundred years. As part of the “thank you” notes passed about I received the following e-mail from Idaho's Sen. Mike Crappo. I think it’s a form letter, as I’m sure that Mike wouldn’t remember talking to me in the past. (Funny, Larry Craig did remember speaking to me previously, on several occasions. Must have been my ugly mug that he remembered.) Anyway, Mike’s note went as follows:
Dear Robert,
Thank you for your help in our success on Election Day! Your active role in my campaign for the U.S. Senate was a big part of why I was able to win the election.
All across America, voters demanded a return to the bedrock conservative principles of limited government, lower taxes, less spending and the preservation of our Constitutional freedoms.
America is the greatest country in the world. We will get her on the right track by working together.
I can't thank you enough for your support of my campaign. I will continue to work hard for Idahoans to ensure America has a limited government and unlimited opportunity.
Thanks!
So Mike, you’re quite welcome even though I didn’t do anything to promote your campaign except grind my teeth at the Obama crowd, but I’m pleased that you won. However, as you look forward to the next six years on the hill, don’t forget why you’re there. Idaho has spoken… Or more accurately, we’ve shouted at Washington that we’ve had quite enough wasteful spending, enough over-regulation, enough vote trading, enough bills that “spread the wealth”, and certainly enough undermining the foundations of our free country. Keep in mind that Harry Reid still suffers from his “god complex”, as the morning after the election he clearly stated that tax cuts “aren’t going to happen”. Perhaps, perhaps not, but we didn’t send you back to the Senate to cooperate or negotiate with either Harry or Mr. Obama on the subject of taxes or spending. Stick to “our” guns, and if the Democrats want to call you guys the “Party of No”, so be it. I for one would rather see the forecast congressional gridlock occur, rather than see Mr. O’s plan to change America go even one step further. I’ll guess that in two years Mr. O will find out the hard way just what most Americans think of his changes, and so will another batch of congressmen who support him!
Nothing in today’s world ranks lower in the public’s esteem than Congress, and you guys are going to have to work overtime turning that around. One on-line news story came up with a pretty good list of things the new Congress might do to win the confidence of Americans, and I’d suggest that the entire Idaho delegation seriously consider them. Some of those suggestions included federal term limits, rescinding ObamaCare, reining in the EPA, and the creation of a bipartisan congressional committee to streamline the government. To those, I’ll add cleaning up the mess Homeland Security is making of our Constitutional rights, straighten out the immigration / illegal alien situation, and rewrite the Endangered Species Act. These are my suggested starting points, and while not everyone will agree with them some common sense changes will at least reassure the American public that they are once again in charge. That’s a pretty full plate I’ll agree, and while I wouldn’t expect to see it all happen in two short years, I would expect to see progress between now and 2012. So guys, don’t just talk about it, DO IT!
With the elections over, a lame-duck Congress comes back to deal with a lot of unfinished business, and the question here is how much they'll get done. Such sessions tend to be unproductive as the losers are in a bad mood and just want to go home; while the winners prefer to wait until their reinforcements arrive in January. But for the moment the Democrats still command a big majority. Mr. O said he would invite both Democratic and GOP leaders to the White House later this month to negotiate, but were I a Republican congressman, I’d remember that as the party in control for the past few years, the Democrats weren’t at all interested in negotiations, instead preferring to enact their legislation despite the stated wishes of the electorate. I don’t really expect to see that policy change over the next few weeks, and a defeated Democratic Congress could use its remaining weeks of post-election power to vote in even more of Barrack Obama's agenda for a "fundamental transformation" of America, particularly with a somewhat vindictive team of Harry and Nancy running the show.
The current Congress returns to a lot of taxing and spending issues, both dear to the Democratic heart. Both parties are ready to address the expiration of Bush-era tax cuts on Dec. 31, and none of the 12 current spending bills have passed. Some lawmakers are planning to wrap those 12 spending bills into yet another massive $1.1 trillion catchall bill, and I’d expect to see them include a lot of favored earmarks and pork projects included as well. But they might also consider that the voters did send a message in the election, and some congressmen heard it. The message? "We don't have a revenue problem. We have a spending problem." Sen.-elect Rand Paul suggested reducing the size of government, freezing federal hiring, and reducing the federal payroll by 10 percent. "The average federal employee makes $120,000 a year. The average private employee makes $60,000 a year. Let's get them more in line, and let's find savings."
I and many others can agree with him Mike, so perhaps you guys on the hill should seriously consider doing just that, starting with a lot of overpaid elected officials!
Dear Robert,
Thank you for your help in our success on Election Day! Your active role in my campaign for the U.S. Senate was a big part of why I was able to win the election.
All across America, voters demanded a return to the bedrock conservative principles of limited government, lower taxes, less spending and the preservation of our Constitutional freedoms.
America is the greatest country in the world. We will get her on the right track by working together.
I can't thank you enough for your support of my campaign. I will continue to work hard for Idahoans to ensure America has a limited government and unlimited opportunity.
Thanks!
So Mike, you’re quite welcome even though I didn’t do anything to promote your campaign except grind my teeth at the Obama crowd, but I’m pleased that you won. However, as you look forward to the next six years on the hill, don’t forget why you’re there. Idaho has spoken… Or more accurately, we’ve shouted at Washington that we’ve had quite enough wasteful spending, enough over-regulation, enough vote trading, enough bills that “spread the wealth”, and certainly enough undermining the foundations of our free country. Keep in mind that Harry Reid still suffers from his “god complex”, as the morning after the election he clearly stated that tax cuts “aren’t going to happen”. Perhaps, perhaps not, but we didn’t send you back to the Senate to cooperate or negotiate with either Harry or Mr. Obama on the subject of taxes or spending. Stick to “our” guns, and if the Democrats want to call you guys the “Party of No”, so be it. I for one would rather see the forecast congressional gridlock occur, rather than see Mr. O’s plan to change America go even one step further. I’ll guess that in two years Mr. O will find out the hard way just what most Americans think of his changes, and so will another batch of congressmen who support him!
Nothing in today’s world ranks lower in the public’s esteem than Congress, and you guys are going to have to work overtime turning that around. One on-line news story came up with a pretty good list of things the new Congress might do to win the confidence of Americans, and I’d suggest that the entire Idaho delegation seriously consider them. Some of those suggestions included federal term limits, rescinding ObamaCare, reining in the EPA, and the creation of a bipartisan congressional committee to streamline the government. To those, I’ll add cleaning up the mess Homeland Security is making of our Constitutional rights, straighten out the immigration / illegal alien situation, and rewrite the Endangered Species Act. These are my suggested starting points, and while not everyone will agree with them some common sense changes will at least reassure the American public that they are once again in charge. That’s a pretty full plate I’ll agree, and while I wouldn’t expect to see it all happen in two short years, I would expect to see progress between now and 2012. So guys, don’t just talk about it, DO IT!
With the elections over, a lame-duck Congress comes back to deal with a lot of unfinished business, and the question here is how much they'll get done. Such sessions tend to be unproductive as the losers are in a bad mood and just want to go home; while the winners prefer to wait until their reinforcements arrive in January. But for the moment the Democrats still command a big majority. Mr. O said he would invite both Democratic and GOP leaders to the White House later this month to negotiate, but were I a Republican congressman, I’d remember that as the party in control for the past few years, the Democrats weren’t at all interested in negotiations, instead preferring to enact their legislation despite the stated wishes of the electorate. I don’t really expect to see that policy change over the next few weeks, and a defeated Democratic Congress could use its remaining weeks of post-election power to vote in even more of Barrack Obama's agenda for a "fundamental transformation" of America, particularly with a somewhat vindictive team of Harry and Nancy running the show.
The current Congress returns to a lot of taxing and spending issues, both dear to the Democratic heart. Both parties are ready to address the expiration of Bush-era tax cuts on Dec. 31, and none of the 12 current spending bills have passed. Some lawmakers are planning to wrap those 12 spending bills into yet another massive $1.1 trillion catchall bill, and I’d expect to see them include a lot of favored earmarks and pork projects included as well. But they might also consider that the voters did send a message in the election, and some congressmen heard it. The message? "We don't have a revenue problem. We have a spending problem." Sen.-elect Rand Paul suggested reducing the size of government, freezing federal hiring, and reducing the federal payroll by 10 percent. "The average federal employee makes $120,000 a year. The average private employee makes $60,000 a year. Let's get them more in line, and let's find savings."
I and many others can agree with him Mike, so perhaps you guys on the hill should seriously consider doing just that, starting with a lot of overpaid elected officials!
Sunday, November 7, 2010
The Morning After
The 2010 mid-term election is over, for better or for worse, depending on your viewpoint. Personally I’m glad it’s done with, as I’m getting almighty tired of trying to write about team Obama and the Democrats without excessively elevating my blood pressure (which my Doctor seems to think is a bad thing). So, until we see what the current Congress is going to do to us in their Lame Duck session, and just how much devilment the new Congress can get into when they take over, I think I’ll just kick back and discuss some political generalities for a change.
Two years ago, the democrats pretty well seized the reins of government in this nation. They grabbed the white house, the senate, and the house, in what they mistakenly assumed was a “mandate” to change our government to something resembling Mr. Obama’s version of a democratic-socialist government. That democratic majority started hitting us with changes well enough, by driving us to the verge of national bankruptcy, cramming “ObamaCare” down our protesting throats, expanding the size of the federal government, and stripping us of many cherished freedoms, all in the name of “the common good”. In reality their 2008 win was more of a voters knee jerk reaction to the faltering policies of the Bush administration than a demand for any massive change. Now, two years later, commentators are speaking of the 2010 “tsunami” (or “landslide”) being a repudiation of those democratic efforts, and I note that many sitting politicians are agreeing with that descriptor. Nothing could be further from the truth! If the Republicans had received a mandate from Tuesday’s midterms, they’d have won a lot more than the House majority! I would hope that they understand this.
The election of 2010, momentous as it was, marks the beginning of a bigger battle — not the end. It presents, in the words of Florida's winning new Senator Rubio, "a second chance for Republicans to be what they said they were going to be not so long ago." That is, the party of smaller solutions and less spending rather than some sort of lynch mob angrily cleaning up in Washington. Certainly we need some cleaning, but going at it like the proverbial bull in the china shop isn’t the answer either.
The American voter reset our politics on Tuesday. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is no more, nor is one-party control of the Federal Government. Mr. Obama’s landslide doesn’t exist either, and I rather hope he realizes that simple fact. "Yes, we can" collided head-on with "Oh, no you don't", and the days of shoving things down our throats are about over. Well, if they aren’t over, the new crop of Republicans can be replaced as well, as every one of them had better remember. America woke up this morning with all the same problems we had yesterday, but now we have a good many more possible solutions on deck. And the 2012 presidential election campaign starts today. The voters who flocked to Obama two years ago have turned against his bright ideas, and have elected a wave of new Republicans to Congress, along with trimming the Democratic majority in the Senate to a minimum. As the House seats captured by the GOP climbed toward 60, Democrats could wonder why, but the historic loss of seats captured by the GOP suggests that anger over the government's handling of the economy fed the firestorm. That tsunami was a wave of discontent, nothing more or less than a vote of no confidence in the Democratic powers that be, with their loss in the House being the largest since 1948. Not only did the Republicans seize the House, they also moved it much further to the right, pushed by the anti-tax, anti big government, and certainly anti-compromise members of the Tea Party movement. A leader of the movement, Rand Paul delivered the message in his acceptance speech as the new Kentucky Senator, saying that "I have a message ... that is loud and clear, that does not mince words: We've come to take our government back," Paul promised his supporters "fiscal sanity," and a limited constitutional government, along with balanced budgets. I hope Paul, and our new House can deliver, because the American people are real unhappy with what's been going on in Washington of late. The Tea movement may not have won as spectacularly as many of us had hoped, but the politicians, all of them, had best remember that the movement is still there, still angry, and still quite capable of replacing everybody in Washington if they don’t see a whole lot of improvement in the immediate future. Lord high mucky-muck of the Senate Harry Reid is already indicating that he’s not going to cooperate with a Republican House, or abide with the will of the American people. If that’s the case, Harry, and Mr. O as well, might want to remember that the House controls the purse strings… and yet another group of those democratic senators come up for re-election in two years. (Not a threat Harry, just a promise.)
Exit polls pretty much confirm what we already knew, that eighty-six percent of the voters say they're worried about the direction of the economy, and forty percent say they're worse off financially than they were two years ago. About forty percent also say they support the Tea Party movement. And guess what, they voted overwhelmingly for the GOP. Twenty-six percent of those surveyed say they're angry, while another forty-seven percent are “merely” dissatisfied. As expected, about half the voters think democratic policies are hurting the country, while fifty-six percent say the government is doing too much interfering in our lives. Those are not promising numbers Mr. Reid. When John Boehner takes the speakers gavel it will seriously change the face of Congress, and result in either gridlock or a somewhat grudging cooperation. Well, at least Mr. O will have will have someone to blame when things skid to a halt! But the activist phase of Mr. Obama's term is over at any rate, and he’ll soon be fighting to preserve his health care plan.
As for the self proclaimed Democratic “majority” in this country, Tom Jefferson said: “The majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime, abuses its strength, and by acting on the law of the strongest, [which] breaks up the foundations of society.” John Adams told us: “Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” Our nations founders envisioned us with a republic, but as Benjamin Franklin warned, “When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.” None of this bodes well for the Peoples Socialist Republic of Amerika, as it’s envisioned by the “progressive” left.
Two years ago, the democrats pretty well seized the reins of government in this nation. They grabbed the white house, the senate, and the house, in what they mistakenly assumed was a “mandate” to change our government to something resembling Mr. Obama’s version of a democratic-socialist government. That democratic majority started hitting us with changes well enough, by driving us to the verge of national bankruptcy, cramming “ObamaCare” down our protesting throats, expanding the size of the federal government, and stripping us of many cherished freedoms, all in the name of “the common good”. In reality their 2008 win was more of a voters knee jerk reaction to the faltering policies of the Bush administration than a demand for any massive change. Now, two years later, commentators are speaking of the 2010 “tsunami” (or “landslide”) being a repudiation of those democratic efforts, and I note that many sitting politicians are agreeing with that descriptor. Nothing could be further from the truth! If the Republicans had received a mandate from Tuesday’s midterms, they’d have won a lot more than the House majority! I would hope that they understand this.
The election of 2010, momentous as it was, marks the beginning of a bigger battle — not the end. It presents, in the words of Florida's winning new Senator Rubio, "a second chance for Republicans to be what they said they were going to be not so long ago." That is, the party of smaller solutions and less spending rather than some sort of lynch mob angrily cleaning up in Washington. Certainly we need some cleaning, but going at it like the proverbial bull in the china shop isn’t the answer either.
The American voter reset our politics on Tuesday. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is no more, nor is one-party control of the Federal Government. Mr. Obama’s landslide doesn’t exist either, and I rather hope he realizes that simple fact. "Yes, we can" collided head-on with "Oh, no you don't", and the days of shoving things down our throats are about over. Well, if they aren’t over, the new crop of Republicans can be replaced as well, as every one of them had better remember. America woke up this morning with all the same problems we had yesterday, but now we have a good many more possible solutions on deck. And the 2012 presidential election campaign starts today. The voters who flocked to Obama two years ago have turned against his bright ideas, and have elected a wave of new Republicans to Congress, along with trimming the Democratic majority in the Senate to a minimum. As the House seats captured by the GOP climbed toward 60, Democrats could wonder why, but the historic loss of seats captured by the GOP suggests that anger over the government's handling of the economy fed the firestorm. That tsunami was a wave of discontent, nothing more or less than a vote of no confidence in the Democratic powers that be, with their loss in the House being the largest since 1948. Not only did the Republicans seize the House, they also moved it much further to the right, pushed by the anti-tax, anti big government, and certainly anti-compromise members of the Tea Party movement. A leader of the movement, Rand Paul delivered the message in his acceptance speech as the new Kentucky Senator, saying that "I have a message ... that is loud and clear, that does not mince words: We've come to take our government back," Paul promised his supporters "fiscal sanity," and a limited constitutional government, along with balanced budgets. I hope Paul, and our new House can deliver, because the American people are real unhappy with what's been going on in Washington of late. The Tea movement may not have won as spectacularly as many of us had hoped, but the politicians, all of them, had best remember that the movement is still there, still angry, and still quite capable of replacing everybody in Washington if they don’t see a whole lot of improvement in the immediate future. Lord high mucky-muck of the Senate Harry Reid is already indicating that he’s not going to cooperate with a Republican House, or abide with the will of the American people. If that’s the case, Harry, and Mr. O as well, might want to remember that the House controls the purse strings… and yet another group of those democratic senators come up for re-election in two years. (Not a threat Harry, just a promise.)
Exit polls pretty much confirm what we already knew, that eighty-six percent of the voters say they're worried about the direction of the economy, and forty percent say they're worse off financially than they were two years ago. About forty percent also say they support the Tea Party movement. And guess what, they voted overwhelmingly for the GOP. Twenty-six percent of those surveyed say they're angry, while another forty-seven percent are “merely” dissatisfied. As expected, about half the voters think democratic policies are hurting the country, while fifty-six percent say the government is doing too much interfering in our lives. Those are not promising numbers Mr. Reid. When John Boehner takes the speakers gavel it will seriously change the face of Congress, and result in either gridlock or a somewhat grudging cooperation. Well, at least Mr. O will have will have someone to blame when things skid to a halt! But the activist phase of Mr. Obama's term is over at any rate, and he’ll soon be fighting to preserve his health care plan.
As for the self proclaimed Democratic “majority” in this country, Tom Jefferson said: “The majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime, abuses its strength, and by acting on the law of the strongest, [which] breaks up the foundations of society.” John Adams told us: “Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” Our nations founders envisioned us with a republic, but as Benjamin Franklin warned, “When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.” None of this bodes well for the Peoples Socialist Republic of Amerika, as it’s envisioned by the “progressive” left.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)