The Republicans are barking at the moon again. They want a war... Any war. Romney is even criticizing Obama for not having enlarged the Army by enough troops. He wants another 100,000.
But he doesn't want to pay for the troops, their training, or housing.
We don't have anyplace to put a hundred thousand soldiers in peace time. Except in other countries.
I guess I'm very afraid that the people who think Obama is really an African Muslim will prevail in the next election, dooming our soldiers to more endless guerrilla wars.
The last time we defeated a dedicated native militia was the Indian Wars of the 1800s. And then we had to kill their families, steal their children, steal their land and starve them into submission.
We haven't had the stomach, thank the Lord, for that kind of dedicated slaughter since.
Except we are pushing our soldiers to the breaking point. Like the SFC that went amok in Afghanistan. Whatever justification he gives for his actions we're going to execute him. And it will be our fault for having allowed these wars and these endless deployments to go on.
So I really don't want another armchair general starting more wars and rattling his sabre. We've had enough. We can fight a decisive year long conflict with any army in the world. But we can't fight sand which is the nature of the guerilla war.
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Saturday, March 03, 2012
Christian Values
Rick Santorum is promoting himself as the true conservative and the faith based candidate. People are telling reporters they support him because he represents their 'Christian Values'.
Being a self professed Christian I began to compare the conservative platform to my Christian Values.
Let's look at point number one: Birth Control and legalized abortion.
Jesus tells us: Judge not, lest we be judged. To forgive others as we would have God forgive us and to love each other as we love ourselves. So what would Jesus say about this issue? I'm sure he would council young mothers not to have abortions. I'm also sure he would hold their hand through the procedure and comfort them afterwards. It's not our place to make laws to control women. Our only responsibility is to love and support them through whatever trials they must pass.
Let's look at point number two: Government supported and mandated health care: Jesus said, whatever you do for the least of my brothers you do for me. Jesus also healed the ill and the destitute, asking nothing from them. So what would Jesus do about Obama care? He would probably say that the plan is a good thought but has been corrupted and needs to be made simple. Throw the money changers (the insurance companies) out of the temple and let the people (We the People of the United States) of the constitution support their own mutual health care.
Let's look at point number three: Taxes.... Jesus was very clear about taxes. Render unto Caeser what is Caeser's. We pay taxes, though in the United States the Government is of the People and For the People as long as we vote the bought and paid for hypocrites out of congress (like Boehner and his ilk).
Let's look at point number four: Welfare and unemployment insurance. As I mentioned before, Jesus holds us accountable for the poorest of our neighbors and responsible for their welfare. How can we advocate turning these people out in the street? Jesus would feed them and house them and clothe them, that's what Jesus would do.
Let's look at point number five: Encouraging the wealthy and the powerful to contribute to the welfare of our society both through paying their fair share of the bill and through the creation of jobs. Jesus addressed both of these issues. On the first he reminds us that the wealthy can't take their possessions with them into heaven any more than a fully laden camel can pass through the smallest gate into the old city of Jerusalem without shedding all that it carries. Therefor the rich man should share with his less fortunate brothers here and now. And Jesus tells the story about the brothers and the talents where the one who buried (hoarded) his talent was the one who was wrong. So what would Jesus do? Tell the rich and powerful to share their good fortune in ways that makes life better for their less fortunate brothers, through Jobs and other programs.
Let's look at point number six: The maintenance of the environment. God gave man stewardship of the Earth. It's a poor steward that soils and desecrates that which he was given responsibility for .
And let's not forget the last point: The claim of Rick Santorum and the others to be 'faith based' candidates: Mathew Chapter 6: Jesus tells us not to be like those who proclaim their faith in public for public approval but to pray in private, and when he or any of the others cynically appeal to the religiosity of the voters.
So what would Jesus do?
Being a self professed Christian I began to compare the conservative platform to my Christian Values.
Let's look at point number one: Birth Control and legalized abortion.
Jesus tells us: Judge not, lest we be judged. To forgive others as we would have God forgive us and to love each other as we love ourselves. So what would Jesus say about this issue? I'm sure he would council young mothers not to have abortions. I'm also sure he would hold their hand through the procedure and comfort them afterwards. It's not our place to make laws to control women. Our only responsibility is to love and support them through whatever trials they must pass.
Let's look at point number two: Government supported and mandated health care: Jesus said, whatever you do for the least of my brothers you do for me. Jesus also healed the ill and the destitute, asking nothing from them. So what would Jesus do about Obama care? He would probably say that the plan is a good thought but has been corrupted and needs to be made simple. Throw the money changers (the insurance companies) out of the temple and let the people (We the People of the United States) of the constitution support their own mutual health care.
Let's look at point number three: Taxes.... Jesus was very clear about taxes. Render unto Caeser what is Caeser's. We pay taxes, though in the United States the Government is of the People and For the People as long as we vote the bought and paid for hypocrites out of congress (like Boehner and his ilk).
Let's look at point number four: Welfare and unemployment insurance. As I mentioned before, Jesus holds us accountable for the poorest of our neighbors and responsible for their welfare. How can we advocate turning these people out in the street? Jesus would feed them and house them and clothe them, that's what Jesus would do.
Let's look at point number five: Encouraging the wealthy and the powerful to contribute to the welfare of our society both through paying their fair share of the bill and through the creation of jobs. Jesus addressed both of these issues. On the first he reminds us that the wealthy can't take their possessions with them into heaven any more than a fully laden camel can pass through the smallest gate into the old city of Jerusalem without shedding all that it carries. Therefor the rich man should share with his less fortunate brothers here and now. And Jesus tells the story about the brothers and the talents where the one who buried (hoarded) his talent was the one who was wrong. So what would Jesus do? Tell the rich and powerful to share their good fortune in ways that makes life better for their less fortunate brothers, through Jobs and other programs.
Let's look at point number six: The maintenance of the environment. God gave man stewardship of the Earth. It's a poor steward that soils and desecrates that which he was given responsibility for .
And let's not forget the last point: The claim of Rick Santorum and the others to be 'faith based' candidates: Mathew Chapter 6: Jesus tells us not to be like those who proclaim their faith in public for public approval but to pray in private, and when he or any of the others cynically appeal to the religiosity of the voters.
So what would Jesus do?
Thursday, February 09, 2012
The Manifesto
Over the last several years I've tried to enumerate the points of the New Manifesto but always with some hesitation.
The purpose of the Manifesto is to succinctly enumerate those points we believe in and which we should hold our elected officials to as guidance for all their decisions and actions. Basically I want to state what we believe in as a country. This is very difficult because we are myopic and schizophrenic at times.
But I'm going to try one more time:
We, the People of the United States of America, hold the following ideals and beliefs:
1: We are exceptional. There are things to change in this country, but its still the best bet in the world.
2: We believe in fairness: This means the same rules need to apply to everyone.
3: We believe in making it big: Everyone needs to know they can become one of the 1% if they work hard enough.
4: We believe in gain through personal effort: Handouts are bad whether to the poor or the rich or to foreign nations.
5: We believe in helping our neighbor: Sometimes, despite our best efforts, either we need help or our neighbors need help. Then we help.
6: We believe in honesty: Tell us the truth. Honesty beats unrealistic perfection. We all have faults, we all make mistakes. Just don't lie about it.
7: We believe in equality: Absolute equality. The lady serving your food at the 5 star restaurant doesn't do that because that's her place, she does it because its her job. Things COULD be reversed just as easily.
8: We believe our way of life is perfect. It isn't, but we believe it anyway.
9: We believe some shadowy power, corporations, shadow government, has manipulated our economy and taken over the reigns of power. We're not wrong. We can change that.
There are more points probably. I wish the six or seven people who read this (G) would offer suggestions. The manifesto should describe how we can work together to set our own goals with out the buzzwords and gaming of the election year propaganda.
Just my thoughts.
The purpose of the Manifesto is to succinctly enumerate those points we believe in and which we should hold our elected officials to as guidance for all their decisions and actions. Basically I want to state what we believe in as a country. This is very difficult because we are myopic and schizophrenic at times.
But I'm going to try one more time:
We, the People of the United States of America, hold the following ideals and beliefs:
1: We are exceptional. There are things to change in this country, but its still the best bet in the world.
2: We believe in fairness: This means the same rules need to apply to everyone.
3: We believe in making it big: Everyone needs to know they can become one of the 1% if they work hard enough.
4: We believe in gain through personal effort: Handouts are bad whether to the poor or the rich or to foreign nations.
5: We believe in helping our neighbor: Sometimes, despite our best efforts, either we need help or our neighbors need help. Then we help.
6: We believe in honesty: Tell us the truth. Honesty beats unrealistic perfection. We all have faults, we all make mistakes. Just don't lie about it.
7: We believe in equality: Absolute equality. The lady serving your food at the 5 star restaurant doesn't do that because that's her place, she does it because its her job. Things COULD be reversed just as easily.
8: We believe our way of life is perfect. It isn't, but we believe it anyway.
9: We believe some shadowy power, corporations, shadow government, has manipulated our economy and taken over the reigns of power. We're not wrong. We can change that.
There are more points probably. I wish the six or seven people who read this (G) would offer suggestions. The manifesto should describe how we can work together to set our own goals with out the buzzwords and gaming of the election year propaganda.
Just my thoughts.
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
The Role of Government
Normally I start these rants with a more colorful attention getting phrase but this essay is about educating.
Traditionally the role of government has been to maintain order and support the interests of the wealthiest members of society.
The Declaration of Independence changed that. Between our demand for separation from Mother England and the Constitution that frames the structure of our government was the idea that an educated and comfortable middle class could govern a nation decently and fairly.
There is a certain naivety and absurdity in that pronouncement, especially since special interests and the corrupt politico have gone hand in hand from Valley Forge until today, but that doesn't change the ideal of our government or country.
Consider the effects of the Arab spring.
There has been armed revolt needed to change regimes in various countries. Some successful some not.
In our country we have the chance for regime change every four years.
Now I am happy with President Obama. I despise the obstructionist Republicans and their commitment to server their corporate masters, but that's just my opinion. If enough people agree that some bought and paid for conservative should be president and preside over the dismantling of the protections Obama is trying to institute against corporate greed and aggression then we should by all means try the regressive approach to managing our economy.
OK I'm a little grumpy about the idea of another Republican president. All the ones we've had have built a corporate sponsored government that has sucked the life from the middle class in this country.
The role of the American Government isn't to keep order and support the wealthy. The role of the American Government is to protect the weak from the strong, and to blunt the strength of the rich and powerful. If our government isn't doing these things then we need to vote in a regime change that will do it...
But make sure you know who you're voting in and what they really represent.
They had better be representing you and me.
Traditionally the role of government has been to maintain order and support the interests of the wealthiest members of society.
The Declaration of Independence changed that. Between our demand for separation from Mother England and the Constitution that frames the structure of our government was the idea that an educated and comfortable middle class could govern a nation decently and fairly.
There is a certain naivety and absurdity in that pronouncement, especially since special interests and the corrupt politico have gone hand in hand from Valley Forge until today, but that doesn't change the ideal of our government or country.
Consider the effects of the Arab spring.
There has been armed revolt needed to change regimes in various countries. Some successful some not.
In our country we have the chance for regime change every four years.
Now I am happy with President Obama. I despise the obstructionist Republicans and their commitment to server their corporate masters, but that's just my opinion. If enough people agree that some bought and paid for conservative should be president and preside over the dismantling of the protections Obama is trying to institute against corporate greed and aggression then we should by all means try the regressive approach to managing our economy.
OK I'm a little grumpy about the idea of another Republican president. All the ones we've had have built a corporate sponsored government that has sucked the life from the middle class in this country.
The role of the American Government isn't to keep order and support the wealthy. The role of the American Government is to protect the weak from the strong, and to blunt the strength of the rich and powerful. If our government isn't doing these things then we need to vote in a regime change that will do it...
But make sure you know who you're voting in and what they really represent.
They had better be representing you and me.
Saturday, December 24, 2011
The Facts About Opinons
We groan when someone in the group starts a sentence with 'I think' or 'You know' because we know this means our friend is going to share his or her opinion on what ever the topic de jour is. And we all know the old adage: "Opinions are like A@@holes. Everyone has one and they all stink."
But opinion is a fact of life. We have to interpret information presented to us. Is a statement true or false? How does the statement affect me? Does it change how I perceive the world? In fact opinions become tied up with our identities. If someone disagrees with my opinion does that affect my self worth? Does it say the other person is criticizing my ability to form opinions?
An opinion is more a statement about how we perceive the information given than a statement about the truth of the information.
For instance, let's take a statement: "The President of the United States is a black man."
First: Is the statement true? Literally no. President Obama's skin color is more of a brown than black. He is a man. His father was a native of an African country. His mother was an American citizen living in the state of Hawaii. So President Obama is provably an African-American. African Americans are colloquially referred to as 'Black' even though skin color varies. So the initial statement can be taken as being 'True'.
Of course we could legitimately say : "The President of the United States is a Hawaiian."
Or we could say: "The President of the United States is an American."
Or : "The President of the United States is a Lawyer, and a father, and an Author....."
The point here being not what the fact is but which facts we choose to acknowledge when we form an opinion. Or should I say, which facts we allow ourselves to acknowledge based on our preconceived opinions.
Wait a second: Aren't opinions supposed to be formed from the facts, not the other way around?
Lately in Washington we see the effects of opinion trumping facts. The Republican's hold the opinion that President Obama is an ineffective leader. There fore they refuse to create the jobs he asks for, roll back the taxes he asks for, and authorize the income producing measures (taxes on the rich) that he asked for. Why? Because they don't want to 'give him the win'?
John Boehner said that taxing the wealthy and corporations prevents the wealthy and corporations from creating jobs. His logic is: If the government takes money from the entities that have accrued the wealth, then they aren't free to create jobs to make more wealth for themselves. On the surface this seems to have some logic, until you look at the results.
As restrictions and taxes have been decreased on these entities they have moved jobs to other countries that don't have our strong middle class or our messy safety and ecological rules. The jobs they create in this country are at the lowest possible wages because they are non productive jobs and don't create wealth.
The facts are that a strong middle class expects a fair economy where small businesses can flourish and not be destroyed or bought out by massive corporations. Where the health and welfare of the people matter more than the health of massive soulless non physical entities like Citibank or Chrysler. A strong middle class will demand fairness and a chance to form their own opinions instead of being told what to think.
What set this particular chain of thought off on me was the argument over the extension of the tax cut for the working class.
Fact: The tax cut was on the Social Security Tax which is paid only on the first $110,000 of income.
Fact: 85% of the people in this country make less than $110,000.
Fact: The original proposal was to pay for the 2% tax rate decrease by increasing the tax on unearned income which would effect the wealthiest 1%.
Fact: The tax on the rich had to be taken OFF THE TABLE for the Republican's to agree to any tax cut for the majority of Americans.
Now what's your opinion?
But opinion is a fact of life. We have to interpret information presented to us. Is a statement true or false? How does the statement affect me? Does it change how I perceive the world? In fact opinions become tied up with our identities. If someone disagrees with my opinion does that affect my self worth? Does it say the other person is criticizing my ability to form opinions?
An opinion is more a statement about how we perceive the information given than a statement about the truth of the information.
For instance, let's take a statement: "The President of the United States is a black man."
First: Is the statement true? Literally no. President Obama's skin color is more of a brown than black. He is a man. His father was a native of an African country. His mother was an American citizen living in the state of Hawaii. So President Obama is provably an African-American. African Americans are colloquially referred to as 'Black' even though skin color varies. So the initial statement can be taken as being 'True'.
Of course we could legitimately say : "The President of the United States is a Hawaiian."
Or we could say: "The President of the United States is an American."
Or : "The President of the United States is a Lawyer, and a father, and an Author....."
The point here being not what the fact is but which facts we choose to acknowledge when we form an opinion. Or should I say, which facts we allow ourselves to acknowledge based on our preconceived opinions.
Wait a second: Aren't opinions supposed to be formed from the facts, not the other way around?
Lately in Washington we see the effects of opinion trumping facts. The Republican's hold the opinion that President Obama is an ineffective leader. There fore they refuse to create the jobs he asks for, roll back the taxes he asks for, and authorize the income producing measures (taxes on the rich) that he asked for. Why? Because they don't want to 'give him the win'?
John Boehner said that taxing the wealthy and corporations prevents the wealthy and corporations from creating jobs. His logic is: If the government takes money from the entities that have accrued the wealth, then they aren't free to create jobs to make more wealth for themselves. On the surface this seems to have some logic, until you look at the results.
As restrictions and taxes have been decreased on these entities they have moved jobs to other countries that don't have our strong middle class or our messy safety and ecological rules. The jobs they create in this country are at the lowest possible wages because they are non productive jobs and don't create wealth.
The facts are that a strong middle class expects a fair economy where small businesses can flourish and not be destroyed or bought out by massive corporations. Where the health and welfare of the people matter more than the health of massive soulless non physical entities like Citibank or Chrysler. A strong middle class will demand fairness and a chance to form their own opinions instead of being told what to think.
What set this particular chain of thought off on me was the argument over the extension of the tax cut for the working class.
Fact: The tax cut was on the Social Security Tax which is paid only on the first $110,000 of income.
Fact: 85% of the people in this country make less than $110,000.
Fact: The original proposal was to pay for the 2% tax rate decrease by increasing the tax on unearned income which would effect the wealthiest 1%.
Fact: The tax on the rich had to be taken OFF THE TABLE for the Republican's to agree to any tax cut for the majority of Americans.
Now what's your opinion?
Tuesday, August 02, 2011
Burn Down the House or the Corporate Conspiracy Theory
When I hear 'conspiracy theory' my ears pop up like a hound dog. I know I'm either going to hear a great truth or a great lie, but in either direction I'm going to hear something that isn't supposed to see the light of day.
Today's topic came from an interview on NPR. Someone, I tuned in and have no context, said that the idea that republican run corporations were banding together to shut the economy down was 'ludicrous' or something similar in meaning. Companies, of course are in the business of making a profit and they can't see a clear profit from spending money in the US with all these rules about fair treatment of workers and health insurance... Why that's just not good business.
The secret here is that there is no secret. The American economic system has always been a street fight with the toughest winning and the weaker getting fed to the pigs. As we developed more humanistic rules in an attempt to protect the workers and the people surrounding factories the corporate boards and the schools that train them focused on minimizing their costs and finding off shore opportunities in 'business friendly' environments (ones where the corporations could pay a fixed price to the powers that be to build and run their factory and didn't have to worry about the health and welfare of the employees.)
I worked for one of these companies in the 80's. They spent a lot of money making sure the people in my town didn't make money. I didn't understand this desire of corporations to destroy the people who contribute to their wealth. I also told the Vice President of Engineering, not too politely, that this was an immoral act, to offshore jobs. He told me it was my job. And it was. My career there was over.
Fortunately it was the 80's and the economy supported even the people they were trying to destroy.
I suppose that's why I think there is a conspiracy. When the corporations got rid of the manufacturing jobs, we went back to the drawing boards and came up with virtual products that were created with brain power. Then they (corporations are always THEY) went on a feeding frenzy to buy smart people to make them lots of money from dumb people.
Until they found they could by pretty smart people in other countries where the government hadn't been taken over by panty wearing liberals that wanted there to be a comfortable and stable middle class. I can imagine the smile on the wealthy people's faces when they realized they could return all of the social climbing want to be well off middle class to the edge of poverty. Keep us where we belong. After all aren't we just the children of immigrants driven (or stolen) from every decent country in the world by wealthy landowners or traders who just didn't think our ancestors mattered as much as the dirt they stood on.
You see there has always been a conspiracy of the rich and powerful to hold down everyone else. It's what populated this country and is what is impoverishing us today. If I sound a little radical when I say 'Burn down their' house please forgive me. I hate being lied to, and the economic powers in this country have manipulated the economy and the laws to bring the gains made by the middle class after world war 2 down.
So we the people of the United States need to stand up, live up to the education our parents and grandparents fought and died for, and use our minds and our freedom, while we have it, to bring down the evil shielded by corporate America. You want jobs. We need to make our own. Don't like the price of food? Grow your own. Gas too expensive, go electric and go off the grid. Find a way to live that doesn't rely on the corporate ideology. If we built our economy around THOSE ideals we might have a chance to give our children a better life and a more robust society.
But we must establish control over the government. It is a government that has been undermined by corporate money and propaganda. Why else would the supposed 'People's Voice' Tea Party members support tax breaks for the wealthy. Why would they refer to these Vampires as 'Job Creators' when the only jobs they create are in Indochina?
Reason first.
Then Burn Down Their House.
Today's topic came from an interview on NPR. Someone, I tuned in and have no context, said that the idea that republican run corporations were banding together to shut the economy down was 'ludicrous' or something similar in meaning. Companies, of course are in the business of making a profit and they can't see a clear profit from spending money in the US with all these rules about fair treatment of workers and health insurance... Why that's just not good business.
The secret here is that there is no secret. The American economic system has always been a street fight with the toughest winning and the weaker getting fed to the pigs. As we developed more humanistic rules in an attempt to protect the workers and the people surrounding factories the corporate boards and the schools that train them focused on minimizing their costs and finding off shore opportunities in 'business friendly' environments (ones where the corporations could pay a fixed price to the powers that be to build and run their factory and didn't have to worry about the health and welfare of the employees.)
I worked for one of these companies in the 80's. They spent a lot of money making sure the people in my town didn't make money. I didn't understand this desire of corporations to destroy the people who contribute to their wealth. I also told the Vice President of Engineering, not too politely, that this was an immoral act, to offshore jobs. He told me it was my job. And it was. My career there was over.
Fortunately it was the 80's and the economy supported even the people they were trying to destroy.
I suppose that's why I think there is a conspiracy. When the corporations got rid of the manufacturing jobs, we went back to the drawing boards and came up with virtual products that were created with brain power. Then they (corporations are always THEY) went on a feeding frenzy to buy smart people to make them lots of money from dumb people.
Until they found they could by pretty smart people in other countries where the government hadn't been taken over by panty wearing liberals that wanted there to be a comfortable and stable middle class. I can imagine the smile on the wealthy people's faces when they realized they could return all of the social climbing want to be well off middle class to the edge of poverty. Keep us where we belong. After all aren't we just the children of immigrants driven (or stolen) from every decent country in the world by wealthy landowners or traders who just didn't think our ancestors mattered as much as the dirt they stood on.
You see there has always been a conspiracy of the rich and powerful to hold down everyone else. It's what populated this country and is what is impoverishing us today. If I sound a little radical when I say 'Burn down their' house please forgive me. I hate being lied to, and the economic powers in this country have manipulated the economy and the laws to bring the gains made by the middle class after world war 2 down.
So we the people of the United States need to stand up, live up to the education our parents and grandparents fought and died for, and use our minds and our freedom, while we have it, to bring down the evil shielded by corporate America. You want jobs. We need to make our own. Don't like the price of food? Grow your own. Gas too expensive, go electric and go off the grid. Find a way to live that doesn't rely on the corporate ideology. If we built our economy around THOSE ideals we might have a chance to give our children a better life and a more robust society.
But we must establish control over the government. It is a government that has been undermined by corporate money and propaganda. Why else would the supposed 'People's Voice' Tea Party members support tax breaks for the wealthy. Why would they refer to these Vampires as 'Job Creators' when the only jobs they create are in Indochina?
Reason first.
Then Burn Down Their House.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Illegal Immigration or Where did the Mayflower go through Customs
To all the self righteous 'Americans' out there screaming to send the illegals home, let us remember that the Pilgrims didn't check in at Customs either when the landed. It wasn't like the land was uninhabited. We always need to look first at history so we know whether we are being reasonable or selfish.
America is a big country.
American's, in general, seem to have small minds.
In reality we are all illegal immigrants. I know my great grandparents slipped the border to come here for work. To raise a family. My great grandfather married a local girl and died in a construction accident. And no one cared except for his wife, because he was just another Irishman. Another illegal who would work where decent folk wouldn't.
Not a lot different from today. Illegals aren't taking good jobs, because they can't get hired with no papers. They aren't getting welfare, because they don't dare raise their heads that high for fear of being sent home. They work for a living and pay taxes they can't file for refunds on and Social Security they can't ever receive, and pay for Medicaid they can't ever get.
Sure we need better immigration laws. Why are they coming across illegally? Decent hardworking families? Are our rules too restrictive? Is the system working against them? Fix the process and the rules that cause them to be illegals FIRST. Then talk repatriation or amnesty.
Don't get the cart before the horse, or you'll end up pulling the cart. .
America is a big country.
American's, in general, seem to have small minds.
In reality we are all illegal immigrants. I know my great grandparents slipped the border to come here for work. To raise a family. My great grandfather married a local girl and died in a construction accident. And no one cared except for his wife, because he was just another Irishman. Another illegal who would work where decent folk wouldn't.
Not a lot different from today. Illegals aren't taking good jobs, because they can't get hired with no papers. They aren't getting welfare, because they don't dare raise their heads that high for fear of being sent home. They work for a living and pay taxes they can't file for refunds on and Social Security they can't ever receive, and pay for Medicaid they can't ever get.
Sure we need better immigration laws. Why are they coming across illegally? Decent hardworking families? Are our rules too restrictive? Is the system working against them? Fix the process and the rules that cause them to be illegals FIRST. Then talk repatriation or amnesty.
Don't get the cart before the horse, or you'll end up pulling the cart. .
Wednesday, February 09, 2011
Thomas Jefferson, Mao Zedong, and Ed Osborne walk into a bar...
And the first question that comes to mind is "Who's Ed Osborne?"
He's my father, and possibly one of the most opinionated people I ever met. During the 60's (about my earliest recollection) and the '70s he was virulently outspoken against communism in all it's forms from Maoist China (he had a copy of Mao' s Little Red Book hid up on his shelf next to his bible because he believed in knowing his enemy) to social reform in this country (like welfare and civil rights).
Mao, as we all know, was the Chinese leader that is responsible for creating modern China out of the ashes of World War II, and making it a 'Workers Paradise' or the last hold out as a 'Communist' country. The reason Mao supported Communism is because the Russians (but not the American's or English) supported his People's Army that drove the Japanese out of China.
Thomas Jefferson, as we all know, articulated a particular view of social political structure where the people have the greatest right to command the government. He also advocated violent revolution against the established authorities.
What do these men have in common? They all advocated violent change as a medium of controlling social policy.
I'm sure I don't have the thorough knowledge of Mao's policies or Jefferson's writings that I need to really pull off this thesis but it seems to me that my father's ideas for social change/control in this country were more in line with the authoritarian actions of the People's Leader (Mao) than the writings of the aristocratic Jefferson.
In many ways this contrast is between the semi anarchy that is the United States with our gun rights and murders, and vigilantes and freedom of speech and freedom of assembly and the mild to strict authoritarian systems in place in other countries where the people either revolt against the government in total anarchy or run from the government in fear for their lives.
Here we can't run from our government because we are the government. Take a look around. You and your neighbors elect the hell hounds in Washington and Albany. Don't like what they're doing? Recall them. Elect someone else. Run yourself. Sure its a tough fight but it needs to be fought. Just don't sell your soul to the company store.
He's my father, and possibly one of the most opinionated people I ever met. During the 60's (about my earliest recollection) and the '70s he was virulently outspoken against communism in all it's forms from Maoist China (he had a copy of Mao' s Little Red Book hid up on his shelf next to his bible because he believed in knowing his enemy) to social reform in this country (like welfare and civil rights).
Mao, as we all know, was the Chinese leader that is responsible for creating modern China out of the ashes of World War II, and making it a 'Workers Paradise' or the last hold out as a 'Communist' country. The reason Mao supported Communism is because the Russians (but not the American's or English) supported his People's Army that drove the Japanese out of China.
Thomas Jefferson, as we all know, articulated a particular view of social political structure where the people have the greatest right to command the government. He also advocated violent revolution against the established authorities.
What do these men have in common? They all advocated violent change as a medium of controlling social policy.
I'm sure I don't have the thorough knowledge of Mao's policies or Jefferson's writings that I need to really pull off this thesis but it seems to me that my father's ideas for social change/control in this country were more in line with the authoritarian actions of the People's Leader (Mao) than the writings of the aristocratic Jefferson.
In many ways this contrast is between the semi anarchy that is the United States with our gun rights and murders, and vigilantes and freedom of speech and freedom of assembly and the mild to strict authoritarian systems in place in other countries where the people either revolt against the government in total anarchy or run from the government in fear for their lives.
Here we can't run from our government because we are the government. Take a look around. You and your neighbors elect the hell hounds in Washington and Albany. Don't like what they're doing? Recall them. Elect someone else. Run yourself. Sure its a tough fight but it needs to be fought. Just don't sell your soul to the company store.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)