I would like to address the problem we are having with the economy. There has been much too much socializing of our country over the past couple of decades and the problems that have arisen this past couple of weeks is just the latest part of that socialization process.
The government has slowly been inserting its tentacles into every part of the lives of the American people and now it has started the process of socializing the corporations as well. Most people would have scoffed at the idea of the government taking over private corporations, saying things like you are a conspiracy theorist or worse. I am here to tell you that it is not a conspiracy, it is being done right out in the open.
Would anyone ever have thought that taking over a private mortgage company or a private Insurance company or a private Bank would have ever been possible in this country? Not I!! But, that is exactly what has happened over the past couple of weeks and it is not even close to being over. Wait and see, the 700 Billion the government is talking about "loaning" AIG is nowhere near the amount that is needed to handle the magnitude of the problem we are facing. This country has gotten fat and happy on debt, and the check has come due. But, what does the government do when the check comes? It puts the check on a credit card to pay later.
The government got us into this mess with the formation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two largest mortgage purchasers in the country. Then it went a step further in the demise of the mortgage market by forcing these two companies to ease the loaning requirements so that low income earners could afford to purchase a home. I don't know about you, but there is a reason they are called low income earners. Because they don't make enough to make ends meet, not to mention afford a mortgage. Then what does the government do, they guarantee these same mortgages with your and my money. And just to play partisan politics for a moment, yes, this was a Democratic implemented idea. The two top financial advisers for Obama come for these two companies. Just some food for thought!
Now, on to my idea for solving this problem with the least pain possible for all concerned. I am not saying that there will be no pain because the people who took out these bad loans need to feel the hurt so they will learn the lesson that comes with poor decisions. But there should not be any rewards for the heads of the companies who knowingly participated in the present crises.
First, all the loan that are presently in default or in the process of bankruptcy should all be temporarily suspended of legal action. Second, all homes associated with these loans, those in legal status as well as those current on their payments should have new appraisals done. Third, all loans should then be rewritten at the present market value at an interest rate 0f 6.5% or less if the home is still current in it's payments. Fourth, the banks that hold these loans will take a substantial paper loss due to the fall in the value of the homes vs. the amount owed on present loans. These banks should then show the government the amount of the loss and justification for the loans approved in the first place. Upon verification of the loss being due to no negligence of the bank, the government will agree to reimburse the banks the amount of the loss with the agreement that as the bank starts to make profits, part of their profits are returned to the government for the reimbursement of their loss. This would not be a bailout, but a loan that would be required to repaid.
Concerning AIG, this company is way too large and has its tentacles in too many areas of the world to allow to fail all at once. I think the government should apply the same strategy as with the banks but with added security in place to ensure the repayment of the loan. I think it will be much more than 700 Billion to help AIG, but by having the mortgages they presently hold in their portfolio renegotiated, we can lower the amount of their debt substantially. We would then have a board of financial overseers from the private sector approve all money being loaned to AIG for the relief cause. They would be responsible the ensure that the money being approved for AIG is going to the best use to ensure the stabilization of the company. AIG would then be required to start sell parts of its assets so that it can repay the loan to the government. This loan will have an interest rate of no less than 8.5% above prime and would have a repay clause of no more than five years. This will give AIG the breathing room necessary for the company to get itself back on track.
The government should immediately cancel the Capital Gains tax. It should also immediately lower the Business tax to somewhere around 9 percent. In addition, it should also lower the Federal Income tax for the next three to five years. By implementing these tax relief efforts as well as utilizing the above mentioned assistance for the mortgages companies, banks, and Insurance companies, we will see an immediate influx of wealth into our economy. This influx will stimulate growth and will also attract Business back to the United States with the promise of a more business friendly atmosphere. Yes there will be a time of pain between the time the plan is implemented and the effects are felt, but, has there ever been a time when a lesson was learned that there was not some effects felt. I say no!
This crises we are in can be solves and we can come out of it stronger than when we started, but, the government has to allow the economy stabilize and correct itself as it has always done. We do not need bigger government or socialization of our country, we need to government to start doing the people's work instead of working for its own self interest.
As always, thank for reading and I look forward to your comments. Earl
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Friday, August 22, 2008
Saddleback Debate
Today I want to discuss the differences of view that the candidates themselves displayed when answering questions during their first debate.
The first question I want to address that was asked is "When does life begin"? This was a question that showed where a candidate stood on the right to life issue. The first person asked was Obama. His reply was he has no answer to that question because it is not his decision to decide that. He was then asked to name one time when he voted against a pro-abortion issue either in the House or the Senate. Again he did not have an answer. Then the question was asked when would he ever object to an abortion being done. His answer was that if the mother's life was at stake during a "Late Term Abortion" he would then question the validity of the procedure.
( A personal sidenote concerning this question. Obama has voted in the past to legalize the policy of Post-Birth abortion. This means that if a baby was supposed to be aborted in a late term abortion but it was born before the procedure was done, then that baby would be allowed to be discarded and die)
Now McCain's answer. He immediately answered that life begins at conception. When asked about his history and policies. He answered that he has a 25 year pro-life voting history and if elected President, his policies and Presidency would reflect his pro-life stance.
The next question is "Define marriage". Obama answered that a marriage is between a man and a woman. He was then asked if he would support a constitutional amendment to make marriage a man-woman event and no other. His response was he would not support such an amendment, then went on to say that he support same sex unions.
McCain's answer. A marriage is between one man and one woman. When asked about the Constitutional amendment, he said he would not support one to the extent that the rights of the states continued to be allowed to determine the issue for individual states. IF at any time a Federal Court mandated same sex marriage be recognized throughout the country, then he would support a Constitutional Amendment to ensure that marriage remained between one man and one woman.
Next, Obama was asked if evil existed and if so can it or should it be destroyed. His answer, evil does exist and that evil has been committed in the name of good. He went on to say that we have committed great evil in the name of good. He did say that evil should be destroyed but did not comment on the could it be destroyed part of the question. (Sidenote- When he was saying we in the answer, I read that as if he feels the United States has committed great evil, referring to the war in Iraq that he has opposed since the beginning.
McCain's answer. Evil does exist and people everywhere have a responsibility to destroy evil wherever they encounter it. He went on to say that eliminating evil would not be an easy chore nor does he know if it could ever be completely defeated, but to do nothing was not an option.
Next, Obama was asked if he could have voted for the Supreme Court Justices, which ones would he not have appointed. This was answer along party lines, he named three that he would not have appointed because their views directly oppose his.
McCain's answer, He too answered along party lines, saying their were four judges he would not have appointed because they have taken from interpreting the law to instituting law. He went on to say he would appoint judges that were more in line with the constitution and would interpret the constitution, not try and rewrite it.
Next- Obama was asked to define Rich. He defined rich as anyone who makes over $250,000.00 a year. These would be the people who he would look to for the raise in taxes to pay for all the programs and initiatives he has proposed. Obama went on to say that this type of taxation would be "balanced and fair".
McCain's answer, He does not have a definition for how much is rich, he went on to say that one should not be punished because they are successful, he stated that he would not raise taxes but try and lower them because anyone who has studied economics knows that in a down economy, you lower taxes to put more money back into the consumers hands so that they can then go out and spend to stimulate the economy. (sidenote, this was the same theory with the tax rebates that President Bush recently did, and it worked).
Next, Obama was asked what was his worst 'Moral Failure" and what in his view is the county's worst moral failure. He answered his worst moral failure was that he was too selfish as a youngster, that he did not give more thought to what his parents were going through. He went on to quote Matthew, in the bible. The quote was and I am paraphrasing here " Those who help the least of us, helps me. Referring to god in the bible. His meaning was that the country's worst moral failure was that we do not do enough to help our fellow man. (sidenote- I have heard enough of Obama's speeches to know what he really means when quoting that verse of Matthew. He means that if you make more that someone else, you should be required to give that other person a part of yours so that everyone is equal. I not a biblical scholar, but I am a thinker. I believe that that verse was meant to inspire people to help one another out of love for one another, not out of government force or policy. Just saying)
I will add some more questions later. I just wanted to get some of these out here so people can see the stark differences between the two.
As always, I look forward to your responses. Earl
The first question I want to address that was asked is "When does life begin"? This was a question that showed where a candidate stood on the right to life issue. The first person asked was Obama. His reply was he has no answer to that question because it is not his decision to decide that. He was then asked to name one time when he voted against a pro-abortion issue either in the House or the Senate. Again he did not have an answer. Then the question was asked when would he ever object to an abortion being done. His answer was that if the mother's life was at stake during a "Late Term Abortion" he would then question the validity of the procedure.
( A personal sidenote concerning this question. Obama has voted in the past to legalize the policy of Post-Birth abortion. This means that if a baby was supposed to be aborted in a late term abortion but it was born before the procedure was done, then that baby would be allowed to be discarded and die)
Now McCain's answer. He immediately answered that life begins at conception. When asked about his history and policies. He answered that he has a 25 year pro-life voting history and if elected President, his policies and Presidency would reflect his pro-life stance.
The next question is "Define marriage". Obama answered that a marriage is between a man and a woman. He was then asked if he would support a constitutional amendment to make marriage a man-woman event and no other. His response was he would not support such an amendment, then went on to say that he support same sex unions.
McCain's answer. A marriage is between one man and one woman. When asked about the Constitutional amendment, he said he would not support one to the extent that the rights of the states continued to be allowed to determine the issue for individual states. IF at any time a Federal Court mandated same sex marriage be recognized throughout the country, then he would support a Constitutional Amendment to ensure that marriage remained between one man and one woman.
Next, Obama was asked if evil existed and if so can it or should it be destroyed. His answer, evil does exist and that evil has been committed in the name of good. He went on to say that we have committed great evil in the name of good. He did say that evil should be destroyed but did not comment on the could it be destroyed part of the question. (Sidenote- When he was saying we in the answer, I read that as if he feels the United States has committed great evil, referring to the war in Iraq that he has opposed since the beginning.
McCain's answer. Evil does exist and people everywhere have a responsibility to destroy evil wherever they encounter it. He went on to say that eliminating evil would not be an easy chore nor does he know if it could ever be completely defeated, but to do nothing was not an option.
Next, Obama was asked if he could have voted for the Supreme Court Justices, which ones would he not have appointed. This was answer along party lines, he named three that he would not have appointed because their views directly oppose his.
McCain's answer, He too answered along party lines, saying their were four judges he would not have appointed because they have taken from interpreting the law to instituting law. He went on to say he would appoint judges that were more in line with the constitution and would interpret the constitution, not try and rewrite it.
Next- Obama was asked to define Rich. He defined rich as anyone who makes over $250,000.00 a year. These would be the people who he would look to for the raise in taxes to pay for all the programs and initiatives he has proposed. Obama went on to say that this type of taxation would be "balanced and fair".
McCain's answer, He does not have a definition for how much is rich, he went on to say that one should not be punished because they are successful, he stated that he would not raise taxes but try and lower them because anyone who has studied economics knows that in a down economy, you lower taxes to put more money back into the consumers hands so that they can then go out and spend to stimulate the economy. (sidenote, this was the same theory with the tax rebates that President Bush recently did, and it worked).
Next, Obama was asked what was his worst 'Moral Failure" and what in his view is the county's worst moral failure. He answered his worst moral failure was that he was too selfish as a youngster, that he did not give more thought to what his parents were going through. He went on to quote Matthew, in the bible. The quote was and I am paraphrasing here " Those who help the least of us, helps me. Referring to god in the bible. His meaning was that the country's worst moral failure was that we do not do enough to help our fellow man. (sidenote- I have heard enough of Obama's speeches to know what he really means when quoting that verse of Matthew. He means that if you make more that someone else, you should be required to give that other person a part of yours so that everyone is equal. I not a biblical scholar, but I am a thinker. I believe that that verse was meant to inspire people to help one another out of love for one another, not out of government force or policy. Just saying)
I will add some more questions later. I just wanted to get some of these out here so people can see the stark differences between the two.
As always, I look forward to your responses. Earl
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
V.P. Selection
I wanted to emphasize the stark contrast between the two candidates Vice President selection criteria. I think it tell a lot about the candidate by how he chooses his Vice Presidential running mate. Let's start with Obama.
When listening to the news this morning, there were several campaign advisers for Obama who were telling how he is going about selecting his Vice Presidential running mate and let me tell you, it is telling. To a One, all of them were saying that Obama is making his selection based on the amount of votes the selectee can bring to the table. Now, I am not naive. I know that it is an important consideration when making your selection, but, I don't think it should be the primary consideration. I think there are other criteria that would be and are more important.
Now on to McCain. On the same broadcast they had campaign advisers for McCain on also. One stated that McCain was weighing the different candidates voting history when it came to important issues. Another advisor stated that McCain was weighing part of his decision on the principles and morals of the different candidates and yet another advisor was saying that McCain was looking at the experience level a candidate could bring to the office, someone who could be President if the need arose.
With the two different selection techniques just explained above, don't you think it speaks volumes as to the type of President each of the candidates are going to make by the way they are choosing their Vice Presidential running mates? I personally think that the contrasts are startling and should open voters eyes as to the type of person they are considering electing. The position of the President of the United States is the most important Job on the planet, and it should be thought of as such. The Presidency was once the most sacred position one could hold, I hope that we can put a person into it's office that can once again raise it to the heights of greatness it once held prior to the Clinton era.
Please listen to the candidates policies, not just hear their voices. Listen to the statements they are making. Forget about your party affiliation and consider what is best for the Country. Which candidate is putting the Country first. Which candidate is willing to take the tough stances on terrorism, the economy, the energy crises and so on. Think about what is best for the country when you go and place your vote. Forget all the hype about the candidates race, religion, color, etc. That also goes for the Vice Presidential selectee also. Who will be the one that puts America on the track to greatness again, I am not saying which candidate will make us liked the most. I am saying which candidate will take the steps necessary to build our military so that no country would dare challenge us. No country would dare try and use economical blackmail against us. No country would dare try and use energy blackmail against us. When you put the Country first, there is only one true candidate!!!!!!!!!!
As always, I look forward to your responses. Earl
When listening to the news this morning, there were several campaign advisers for Obama who were telling how he is going about selecting his Vice Presidential running mate and let me tell you, it is telling. To a One, all of them were saying that Obama is making his selection based on the amount of votes the selectee can bring to the table. Now, I am not naive. I know that it is an important consideration when making your selection, but, I don't think it should be the primary consideration. I think there are other criteria that would be and are more important.
Now on to McCain. On the same broadcast they had campaign advisers for McCain on also. One stated that McCain was weighing the different candidates voting history when it came to important issues. Another advisor stated that McCain was weighing part of his decision on the principles and morals of the different candidates and yet another advisor was saying that McCain was looking at the experience level a candidate could bring to the office, someone who could be President if the need arose.
With the two different selection techniques just explained above, don't you think it speaks volumes as to the type of President each of the candidates are going to make by the way they are choosing their Vice Presidential running mates? I personally think that the contrasts are startling and should open voters eyes as to the type of person they are considering electing. The position of the President of the United States is the most important Job on the planet, and it should be thought of as such. The Presidency was once the most sacred position one could hold, I hope that we can put a person into it's office that can once again raise it to the heights of greatness it once held prior to the Clinton era.
Please listen to the candidates policies, not just hear their voices. Listen to the statements they are making. Forget about your party affiliation and consider what is best for the Country. Which candidate is putting the Country first. Which candidate is willing to take the tough stances on terrorism, the economy, the energy crises and so on. Think about what is best for the country when you go and place your vote. Forget all the hype about the candidates race, religion, color, etc. That also goes for the Vice Presidential selectee also. Who will be the one that puts America on the track to greatness again, I am not saying which candidate will make us liked the most. I am saying which candidate will take the steps necessary to build our military so that no country would dare challenge us. No country would dare try and use economical blackmail against us. No country would dare try and use energy blackmail against us. When you put the Country first, there is only one true candidate!!!!!!!!!!
As always, I look forward to your responses. Earl
Saturday, July 12, 2008
Lone Survivor, read this book!
I just finished the book Lone Survivor by Marcus Luttrell for the second time, it got me to thinking that I have not addressed soldiers in particular in any of my previous postings. I would like to do so now.
Most people take soldiers for granted. They just assume that there are people out there who will be willing to lay down their lives for the good of the country. In this assessment they are correct, what they fail to realize is that these people do this without fanfare or reward.
I am a former soldier, I served for almost 11 years with the U.S. Army. I was not a Navy Seal as Marcus Lutrell is, but I served my country none the less. I believe that soldiers are born and not made. I believe there has to be something in you that makes you desire the soldiers life over anything else, for why else would someone choose to put their life in harms way on a daily basis. It has to be a higher calling. Period! Anyone who serves in the military deserves to treated with respect throughout his or her days for doing what not a lot of people would or are willing to do. With that being said, there is a difference between someone who goes into the military for the college benefits that the military offers or someone who goes into the military because it is their calling. Just as Marcus Lutrell knew that he was going to be a Seal from age 12, I knew from even a much younger age that I would be a soldier. All through my childhood and teenage years, everything I did was directed towards achieving my goal of being a soldier. I never wavered in my beliefs that I would be a soldier and would be one until I retired. Little did I know that God had other plans for me. Sure, he gave me the opportunity to serve my country and live my dream but staying in was not in the cards. after eleven years I was discharged from the military because of my knees, having blown both of them out earlier in my career and not being able to get them back to 100%.
I salute every soldier past and present. I give the final salute to all those who have given the ultimate sacrifice in the name of their country. For a career soldier there can be no greater honor. Don't get me wrong, no body wants to die. But a career soldier would rather die that lose, and if he dies while fighting than he has not lost. I live everyday with the thought that I could be called back into action by my country, and by God I would go. Make no mistake about it, I would gladly go back into the thick of it if, it meant I could keep someone else's son home with his family. I have a son who has already seen combat, I hope he is able to make peace with the warrior inside him as I have. He has my undying admiration and respect for he has chose to do what most others would run from. He truly is a soldier and a warrior. His name is Jonathan Beebe.
So in parting let me say, when you see a soldier at the airport or in uniform around your town. Take the time to thank him or her, they truly deserve it. Watch their faces and their mannerisms when you do this and you will find they are very uncomfortable with the recognition. They are the true professionals. You can ask my wife, I always go out of my way to say something to a soldier in uniform. I will usually buy them a drink or dinner if I see them at the airport or in a restaurant. It is not much, but it shows my loyalty and respect for all that they do. I would challenge everyone who reads this to do something similar. I means everything to the soldier although they would never admit it.
Remember, they are doing the bidding of the country and the President of the United States. Stand by them and NEVER let someone talk down about them. It is the least you can do for them, for they give everything for your freedoms.
As always I look forward to your responses. Earl
Most people take soldiers for granted. They just assume that there are people out there who will be willing to lay down their lives for the good of the country. In this assessment they are correct, what they fail to realize is that these people do this without fanfare or reward.
I am a former soldier, I served for almost 11 years with the U.S. Army. I was not a Navy Seal as Marcus Lutrell is, but I served my country none the less. I believe that soldiers are born and not made. I believe there has to be something in you that makes you desire the soldiers life over anything else, for why else would someone choose to put their life in harms way on a daily basis. It has to be a higher calling. Period! Anyone who serves in the military deserves to treated with respect throughout his or her days for doing what not a lot of people would or are willing to do. With that being said, there is a difference between someone who goes into the military for the college benefits that the military offers or someone who goes into the military because it is their calling. Just as Marcus Lutrell knew that he was going to be a Seal from age 12, I knew from even a much younger age that I would be a soldier. All through my childhood and teenage years, everything I did was directed towards achieving my goal of being a soldier. I never wavered in my beliefs that I would be a soldier and would be one until I retired. Little did I know that God had other plans for me. Sure, he gave me the opportunity to serve my country and live my dream but staying in was not in the cards. after eleven years I was discharged from the military because of my knees, having blown both of them out earlier in my career and not being able to get them back to 100%.
I salute every soldier past and present. I give the final salute to all those who have given the ultimate sacrifice in the name of their country. For a career soldier there can be no greater honor. Don't get me wrong, no body wants to die. But a career soldier would rather die that lose, and if he dies while fighting than he has not lost. I live everyday with the thought that I could be called back into action by my country, and by God I would go. Make no mistake about it, I would gladly go back into the thick of it if, it meant I could keep someone else's son home with his family. I have a son who has already seen combat, I hope he is able to make peace with the warrior inside him as I have. He has my undying admiration and respect for he has chose to do what most others would run from. He truly is a soldier and a warrior. His name is Jonathan Beebe.
So in parting let me say, when you see a soldier at the airport or in uniform around your town. Take the time to thank him or her, they truly deserve it. Watch their faces and their mannerisms when you do this and you will find they are very uncomfortable with the recognition. They are the true professionals. You can ask my wife, I always go out of my way to say something to a soldier in uniform. I will usually buy them a drink or dinner if I see them at the airport or in a restaurant. It is not much, but it shows my loyalty and respect for all that they do. I would challenge everyone who reads this to do something similar. I means everything to the soldier although they would never admit it.
Remember, they are doing the bidding of the country and the President of the United States. Stand by them and NEVER let someone talk down about them. It is the least you can do for them, for they give everything for your freedoms.
As always I look forward to your responses. Earl
Friday, July 11, 2008
Political Experience
I would like to address an item that has been crawling under my skin in this election. The issue of a candidate having or not having enough experience to serve in a public office, I.E. President of the United States.
Unless there has been a change to the Constitution, the only requirements for a person to run for President is for that person to be at least 35 years of age and be a natural born citizen of the United States. That is it, there is nothing to say that a person has to have so many years in either a state or federal office prior to running for President.
I am one of the most anti-Obama people you will run across, and this has nothing to do with his experience. There should be an awakening in the country when you continue to hear about the lack of experience a candidate has. So what!! Sometimes I think the lack of experience can serve someone better than someone who has been in politics his or her whole adult life. I feel that the lack of experience would lead someone to listen more closely to the people.
If you want to disqualify a person from your vote, don't do it on their experience. Do it on their history and what they stand for. If a person has a history of being extremely Left of your positions, then don't vote for them. If a person has stated his agenda and it conflicts with your beliefs and agenda, don't vote for them. But, to not vote for someone just because they are new to the political scene is just being ignorant.
On the same token, when there is a person who has been in political office for a time, there is nothing to say that you shouldn't look at that persons voting history to see where that person stands politically. Many times a person will say they stand for one thing but their voting history show that they stand for the opposite. This is called due diligence and it is every voters responsibility to find out to the best they can what a candidate stands for, if they have a history to investigate. On the people that have no history, you have to listen to what they say and talk to people who have known them to get a feel for who they are and what they stand for. Under not circumstances should a person be considered unqualified just because they have not served in the public arena prior.
One other thing. Anyone who thinks these candidates know all there is to know or have all the answers for problems the country is facing should have their head examined. These candidates are just as human as you and I, they have the same faults and weaknesses as you and I. I would rather have a candidate state that they are not completely familiar with a certain subject, and then go on to say who they would recommend as a Presidential Advisor to assist them in those areas in which they find themselves weak. I would rather hear that, than to hear how this person or that person has all the answers for what ails the country. I have to tell you, there is not a candidate out there that can claim they have experience in every aspect of the country, and when they do say something like that you should be vary wary.
As always, I look forward to your responses. Earl
Unless there has been a change to the Constitution, the only requirements for a person to run for President is for that person to be at least 35 years of age and be a natural born citizen of the United States. That is it, there is nothing to say that a person has to have so many years in either a state or federal office prior to running for President.
I am one of the most anti-Obama people you will run across, and this has nothing to do with his experience. There should be an awakening in the country when you continue to hear about the lack of experience a candidate has. So what!! Sometimes I think the lack of experience can serve someone better than someone who has been in politics his or her whole adult life. I feel that the lack of experience would lead someone to listen more closely to the people.
If you want to disqualify a person from your vote, don't do it on their experience. Do it on their history and what they stand for. If a person has a history of being extremely Left of your positions, then don't vote for them. If a person has stated his agenda and it conflicts with your beliefs and agenda, don't vote for them. But, to not vote for someone just because they are new to the political scene is just being ignorant.
On the same token, when there is a person who has been in political office for a time, there is nothing to say that you shouldn't look at that persons voting history to see where that person stands politically. Many times a person will say they stand for one thing but their voting history show that they stand for the opposite. This is called due diligence and it is every voters responsibility to find out to the best they can what a candidate stands for, if they have a history to investigate. On the people that have no history, you have to listen to what they say and talk to people who have known them to get a feel for who they are and what they stand for. Under not circumstances should a person be considered unqualified just because they have not served in the public arena prior.
One other thing. Anyone who thinks these candidates know all there is to know or have all the answers for problems the country is facing should have their head examined. These candidates are just as human as you and I, they have the same faults and weaknesses as you and I. I would rather have a candidate state that they are not completely familiar with a certain subject, and then go on to say who they would recommend as a Presidential Advisor to assist them in those areas in which they find themselves weak. I would rather hear that, than to hear how this person or that person has all the answers for what ails the country. I have to tell you, there is not a candidate out there that can claim they have experience in every aspect of the country, and when they do say something like that you should be vary wary.
As always, I look forward to your responses. Earl
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Religion VS. Spirituality
I was just having a discussion with my wife about religion and the effects it has had upon the world and people as a whole. I thought it might be a good idea to put some of what we discussed into a discussion forum such as this to generate thought and discussion about a subject that is considered taboo to discuss but needs to be discussed none the less. So here it goes.
I feel that religion is the cause for most of the worlds present and past problems that have ended the lives of literally tens of millions of people. I mean just look at what what done in the name of god during the middle ages, I.E. the Crusades. The millions of people who were killed in the name of Christianity perpetrated by the Catholic Church of that time. Then lets go to the was between the Christians and the Muslims to declare whose God was the most righteous. How many millions of Christians and Muslims were killed in the name of their God. How about one more recent, how about the war between the Jews and the Muslims in the middle East, the war between Israel and Palestine. These are just a few examples of people killing in the name of God.
I propose that all religion is corrupt and that people should follow their hearts and souls, not the religious propaganda of a supposed religious leader that may or may not have an alternative motive in what he is either preaching or directing in the name of God. There has never been a religion on Earth that has not committed atrocities in the name of their God. Is there anyone out there that would honestly say that their God, a God that is supposed to be all loving, all caring and all forgiving, that their god would promote or encourage death be handed out in his name. I don't think so. I think that a God is there for the purpose of people becoming better, not worse. I think that God would want man to do well by one another, not commit acts of cruelty against one another in his name.
Now this is just my own thoughts on the subject, and I don't think that I will move anyone to quit believing what they have been taught through a lifetime of indoctrination to believe. I just hope that it causes people to take a step back and consider it before doing something in the name of God that would just go naturally against what God is supposed to stand for. I think that people will make it to heaven just fine if they live their lives according to the principles of love and forgiveness. I think that God will accept people of all faiths into his arms as long as you lived your life to benefit mankind and not destroy it. I think that people will be accepted to heaven as long as they have tried their best to live a god like existence and have asked for forgiveness when they failed. I think that God is an all forgiving god and will accept those who have really tried to live the life of a good person. I don't think it matter even a little bit what religion you are or by what name you call God, God. I do believe that as long as you believe in god and live your life accordingly, that you will be accepted into heaven.
As a parting let me say, Religions come and go, but eternal life is ETERNAL.
As always, l look forward to your responses. Earl
I feel that religion is the cause for most of the worlds present and past problems that have ended the lives of literally tens of millions of people. I mean just look at what what done in the name of god during the middle ages, I.E. the Crusades. The millions of people who were killed in the name of Christianity perpetrated by the Catholic Church of that time. Then lets go to the was between the Christians and the Muslims to declare whose God was the most righteous. How many millions of Christians and Muslims were killed in the name of their God. How about one more recent, how about the war between the Jews and the Muslims in the middle East, the war between Israel and Palestine. These are just a few examples of people killing in the name of God.
I propose that all religion is corrupt and that people should follow their hearts and souls, not the religious propaganda of a supposed religious leader that may or may not have an alternative motive in what he is either preaching or directing in the name of God. There has never been a religion on Earth that has not committed atrocities in the name of their God. Is there anyone out there that would honestly say that their God, a God that is supposed to be all loving, all caring and all forgiving, that their god would promote or encourage death be handed out in his name. I don't think so. I think that a God is there for the purpose of people becoming better, not worse. I think that God would want man to do well by one another, not commit acts of cruelty against one another in his name.
Now this is just my own thoughts on the subject, and I don't think that I will move anyone to quit believing what they have been taught through a lifetime of indoctrination to believe. I just hope that it causes people to take a step back and consider it before doing something in the name of God that would just go naturally against what God is supposed to stand for. I think that people will make it to heaven just fine if they live their lives according to the principles of love and forgiveness. I think that God will accept people of all faiths into his arms as long as you lived your life to benefit mankind and not destroy it. I think that people will be accepted to heaven as long as they have tried their best to live a god like existence and have asked for forgiveness when they failed. I think that God is an all forgiving god and will accept those who have really tried to live the life of a good person. I don't think it matter even a little bit what religion you are or by what name you call God, God. I do believe that as long as you believe in god and live your life accordingly, that you will be accepted into heaven.
As a parting let me say, Religions come and go, but eternal life is ETERNAL.
As always, l look forward to your responses. Earl
Thursday, June 26, 2008
U.S. Supreme Court recent decisions
The U.S. Supreme court recently made two decisions that will make a direct impact on the lives of all gun owners and parents.
The first was the 5-4 decision that made it illegal for a child rapist to face the death penalty. The decision goes further in it's explanation by stating that it does not matter how many children or for how long a child rapist rapes a child, the penalty shall never be exceeding of the crime. What this means is that because a child did not die during a rape that the rapist can not be given the death penalty. I don't know about you, but I feel that if there was ever a call for the death penalty, it is in the defense of our children. The courts routinely place people on death row for crimes of passion or momentary insanity. I can see where if someone walks in on their spouse and finds them have sexual relations with someone else can lose their judgement temporarily. I can not see where someone rapes a child has that same defense. I know, they are mentally unstable or sick or whatever other excuses you want to make for them. The truth is, there has never been a proven case of rehabilitation of a child rapist/molester. The only rehabilitation for these people is a bullet through the head. I guarantee you if someone rapes or molest a child of mine, they will not have to worry about going to court. I will take care of them before they ever have a chance for a slimy attorney to get them off on a technicality. I hope there are more people like me than people like the Supreme Court Justices.
The decision that was released today is concerning the Washington D.C. gun ban. The Supreme Court came back with a decision of 5-4 again, but this time they ruled in favor of the second amendment. The court decided that the Washington D.C. gun ban is unconstitutional. On the surface this is a win for gun owner not only in Washington D.C. but throughout the country. What concerns me is that the Second Amendment was even being challenged in the U.S. Supreme Court. The constitution is very clear in it's meaning of the second amendment. Every citizen shall have the RIGHT to keep and bear arms. There is nothing to be decided on this issue, yet the government continues to try and challenge the interpretation of the amendment. This amendment was put in the Constitution for the purpose of the people of the country to defend themselves against a government who is corrupt, not so you would have a gun to hunt with. It is the responsibility of the citizens to stand up and defend the Constitution of the United States when it comes under attack as it did in the Supreme Court. I don't think people understand what could have happened if the court ruled in the other direction. Let me enlighten you. If the decision would have come back in favor of the City of Washington D.C. it would have opened the door for challenges to the second amendment in every city in the United States. Your right to keep and bear arms would have disappeared overnight. The local municipalities would have been able to dictate if and when a person would be allowed to own or possess a gun. That this issue was even being debated should scare the living snot out of every citizen in this country. The reason I say this is because today it was the second amendment. Tomorrow it could very well be the first amendment of the fifth amendment. Where does it stop? The people of the United States have been sleeping for far too long, it is time for them to wake up and make their voices heard. Our country is under attack, but it is not from a foreign army. It is from the extreme left of the Democratic Party. The section of the party that is controlled by George Soros. The basic democrat is just as much an American as you or I, it is the ones on the extreme edge that has hijacked their party and moved it into a Socialist Party. The Democratic Party of our fathers and grandfathers no longer exist. It is now the Socialist Party and if you need any more confirmation of what I am saying just listen to their own words. They want to take away guns for the good of the masses. That's funny, that is what Hitler said right before he confiscated all the guns in Germany. They want to socialize big oil, by socialize they use the words "government run", but it is still Socialism. They want to take windfall profits from big business and redistribute it to those who do not have as much. Socialism 1o1. I could keep going but I think you get the point. The country is indeed under attack and if people do not start standing up and demanding their rights, their rights shall surly be taken from them. I fear for my children and my grandchildren, they are in for some seriously hard times unless we start taking back our country and our government. By the way, do not think for a moment that the gun issue is dead. It will come back, it always does!
One final thought, in the beginning of each decision I gave the count of for and against in the decision. I did that for a reason. Did you catch that there were Five Judges that were for the Rapist and there were Four Judges that voted against the second amendment. That should wake you up.
As always, your comments are welcome. Earl
The first was the 5-4 decision that made it illegal for a child rapist to face the death penalty. The decision goes further in it's explanation by stating that it does not matter how many children or for how long a child rapist rapes a child, the penalty shall never be exceeding of the crime. What this means is that because a child did not die during a rape that the rapist can not be given the death penalty. I don't know about you, but I feel that if there was ever a call for the death penalty, it is in the defense of our children. The courts routinely place people on death row for crimes of passion or momentary insanity. I can see where if someone walks in on their spouse and finds them have sexual relations with someone else can lose their judgement temporarily. I can not see where someone rapes a child has that same defense. I know, they are mentally unstable or sick or whatever other excuses you want to make for them. The truth is, there has never been a proven case of rehabilitation of a child rapist/molester. The only rehabilitation for these people is a bullet through the head. I guarantee you if someone rapes or molest a child of mine, they will not have to worry about going to court. I will take care of them before they ever have a chance for a slimy attorney to get them off on a technicality. I hope there are more people like me than people like the Supreme Court Justices.
The decision that was released today is concerning the Washington D.C. gun ban. The Supreme Court came back with a decision of 5-4 again, but this time they ruled in favor of the second amendment. The court decided that the Washington D.C. gun ban is unconstitutional. On the surface this is a win for gun owner not only in Washington D.C. but throughout the country. What concerns me is that the Second Amendment was even being challenged in the U.S. Supreme Court. The constitution is very clear in it's meaning of the second amendment. Every citizen shall have the RIGHT to keep and bear arms. There is nothing to be decided on this issue, yet the government continues to try and challenge the interpretation of the amendment. This amendment was put in the Constitution for the purpose of the people of the country to defend themselves against a government who is corrupt, not so you would have a gun to hunt with. It is the responsibility of the citizens to stand up and defend the Constitution of the United States when it comes under attack as it did in the Supreme Court. I don't think people understand what could have happened if the court ruled in the other direction. Let me enlighten you. If the decision would have come back in favor of the City of Washington D.C. it would have opened the door for challenges to the second amendment in every city in the United States. Your right to keep and bear arms would have disappeared overnight. The local municipalities would have been able to dictate if and when a person would be allowed to own or possess a gun. That this issue was even being debated should scare the living snot out of every citizen in this country. The reason I say this is because today it was the second amendment. Tomorrow it could very well be the first amendment of the fifth amendment. Where does it stop? The people of the United States have been sleeping for far too long, it is time for them to wake up and make their voices heard. Our country is under attack, but it is not from a foreign army. It is from the extreme left of the Democratic Party. The section of the party that is controlled by George Soros. The basic democrat is just as much an American as you or I, it is the ones on the extreme edge that has hijacked their party and moved it into a Socialist Party. The Democratic Party of our fathers and grandfathers no longer exist. It is now the Socialist Party and if you need any more confirmation of what I am saying just listen to their own words. They want to take away guns for the good of the masses. That's funny, that is what Hitler said right before he confiscated all the guns in Germany. They want to socialize big oil, by socialize they use the words "government run", but it is still Socialism. They want to take windfall profits from big business and redistribute it to those who do not have as much. Socialism 1o1. I could keep going but I think you get the point. The country is indeed under attack and if people do not start standing up and demanding their rights, their rights shall surly be taken from them. I fear for my children and my grandchildren, they are in for some seriously hard times unless we start taking back our country and our government. By the way, do not think for a moment that the gun issue is dead. It will come back, it always does!
One final thought, in the beginning of each decision I gave the count of for and against in the decision. I did that for a reason. Did you catch that there were Five Judges that were for the Rapist and there were Four Judges that voted against the second amendment. That should wake you up.
As always, your comments are welcome. Earl
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Update on Iraq.
I have a serious problem with the country of Iraq. Our country has given over four thousand men and women in the pursuit of their freedom. Our country has given an enormous amount of money for the freedom they are starting to enjoy. Now anyone who has read my blog for any amount of time knows that I have always supported the War in Iraq. With that being said, how about a little reciprocation.
I am talking about the oil bids that were just accepted by the newly elected democratic government. The government of Iraq just gave seven oil contracts to countries other than the United States. These countries have been awarded contracts to explore and extract oil from both discovered and still undiscovered oil fields located with the country. I am seriously disappointed in that government in it's blatant lack of appreciation of the United States. I would think that the government would be bending over backward to try and thank our country for the liberation of its country.
If the government of Iraq has decided that the United States is not deserving of at the very least an oil contract, that we should withdraw our troops from the country. That goes against the views I have expressed in the past but I feel at this time the subject has changed. The American people has spilled blood for Iraq's freedom, we have given to the tune of Trillions of dollars for their opportunity to enjoy freedom for the first time. I would think that the Iraqi government would be very appreciative of what the American people have sacrificed and given for their freedom. I would think that they would have given the U.S. companies automatic contracts for a period of time as a sign of appreciation. I feel betrayed by the Iraqi government. I feel as if all that was given for their freedom has been given in vain. I only hope that the Government of Iraq will reconsider what they have done and show the the American people their gratitude for their freedom.
As always, your views and comments are welcome. Earl
I am talking about the oil bids that were just accepted by the newly elected democratic government. The government of Iraq just gave seven oil contracts to countries other than the United States. These countries have been awarded contracts to explore and extract oil from both discovered and still undiscovered oil fields located with the country. I am seriously disappointed in that government in it's blatant lack of appreciation of the United States. I would think that the government would be bending over backward to try and thank our country for the liberation of its country.
If the government of Iraq has decided that the United States is not deserving of at the very least an oil contract, that we should withdraw our troops from the country. That goes against the views I have expressed in the past but I feel at this time the subject has changed. The American people has spilled blood for Iraq's freedom, we have given to the tune of Trillions of dollars for their opportunity to enjoy freedom for the first time. I would think that the Iraqi government would be very appreciative of what the American people have sacrificed and given for their freedom. I would think that they would have given the U.S. companies automatic contracts for a period of time as a sign of appreciation. I feel betrayed by the Iraqi government. I feel as if all that was given for their freedom has been given in vain. I only hope that the Government of Iraq will reconsider what they have done and show the the American people their gratitude for their freedom.
As always, your views and comments are welcome. Earl
Preemptive Strike
Why is it wrong for people to question Obama's faults? Obama came out at the end of the week last week and said that their campaign is preparing for the Republicans to start bringing race into the campaign. I say good. Let me say before I go on that anyone who knows me knows that I am the last person you can call racist. Now, with that being said, why would it be out of bounds to address the issue of Obams's racism or that of his wife's. I think that it would only be prudent that these issues be address when someone is aspiring to run the greatest country in the world.
The media has given Obama pass upon pass when it comes to people he associates with who are very publicly Anti-American and Anti-White. When someone whose wife has made questionable statements concerning the White people who founded this country.
I have a serious question that I would like Obama to answer. Why does he qualify himself as a Black man when he has both White and Black in him? Why is it that he claims to be Black when his father abandoned him in his early youth and it was his White side of the family who took him in and raised him? Why is it that he feels he has to offend the White race that has taken him in and allowed him to pursue and indeed achieve the level of success that he presently enjoys. Why is it that when anyone who makes reference to these and the many other questionable remarks and/or associates are automatically labeled a Racist. I dare anyone to call me a racist. There is no way it came be claimed in a serious manner. I make these remarks because I am tired of people cowering at the slightest hint that they will be called a Racist if they bring these questions to light.
It is every Americans responsibility to question all the candidates on any issues that cause them concern. I for one will not cower. I for one will welcome a serious debate concerning any of the possible candidates. Bring it on, but leave your labels and accusations at the door.
As always, I welcome your comments and responses.
The media has given Obama pass upon pass when it comes to people he associates with who are very publicly Anti-American and Anti-White. When someone whose wife has made questionable statements concerning the White people who founded this country.
I have a serious question that I would like Obama to answer. Why does he qualify himself as a Black man when he has both White and Black in him? Why is it that he claims to be Black when his father abandoned him in his early youth and it was his White side of the family who took him in and raised him? Why is it that he feels he has to offend the White race that has taken him in and allowed him to pursue and indeed achieve the level of success that he presently enjoys. Why is it that when anyone who makes reference to these and the many other questionable remarks and/or associates are automatically labeled a Racist. I dare anyone to call me a racist. There is no way it came be claimed in a serious manner. I make these remarks because I am tired of people cowering at the slightest hint that they will be called a Racist if they bring these questions to light.
It is every Americans responsibility to question all the candidates on any issues that cause them concern. I for one will not cower. I for one will welcome a serious debate concerning any of the possible candidates. Bring it on, but leave your labels and accusations at the door.
As always, I welcome your comments and responses.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Conspiracy Theory
I want to go down Conspiracy Row in this article. I want to address the fact that everything that the government is doing is looking more and more like it is being done intentionally. Lets start with the Public school system. We have a system that pays a public school approximately $13,000.00 per year per student. Now, what are we getting for this money that is coming out of our taxes? We are having our children taught by teachers that are not even able to be fired if they are not performing up to par. The teachers union prevents the firing of any teacher that has tenor. In case you don't know what tenor is, it is being vested after a certain number of years. I believe that that time frame is 5 years but I am not certain. It takes approximately 2 and a half years and $150,000.00 to fire a teacher. Now above that, the teachers are not teaching the kids the necessary skills needed to succeed in life. The are no longer teaching the constitution in class, don't believe me? Ask your child! They do not know when the constitution was written, they do not know who wrote it. They do not know what the Bill of Rights is or what the bills are. They have never heard of the Federalist Papers. These are all documents that are directly related to what our country is founded on, yet the teachers are not teaching this. But ask your children what Political Correctness is, ask them what Diversity is, ask them what is the government's role in our country is supposed to be and listen to their answer. It will shock you.
The majority of teachers try and do a good job, but the number of teachers that are bad is growing and effecting the rest. We need to get more involved in the education of our children and make sure they are being taught the truth. Because of the teachers and professors are the grown up flower children of the 60's, they are teaching our children that our country is not special. They are teaching our children that the United States the the cause of the worlds problems, not the solution. They are teaching our children that they should be pacifist, always turning the other cheek regardless of what is done to them. They are told not to defend themselves if attacked but to take it and then report it. This is just some of things that are going on in our schools, but for the sake of the length of this article I will cut it here.
Why are the borders still open and not secure? Why is Mexico now requesting that victims of shootings in Mexican border towns be brought to the United States for treatment? The reason the Mexican government is giving is because the victims are now being taken to Mexican hospitals and the drug enforcers who originally shot them are following them to the hospitals and finishing them off there. Here's an idea, Close the Borders. There are two people who are the representatives for the democratic and Republican parties, and neither of these candidates are willing to close the borders. We will have to take the lead as the citizens of this country and make the politicians do OUR will. We have had 6000 people killed in border town shooting not even five mile from the border. We have had several hundred U.S. citizens disappear from U.S. border towns. We have cases of American Teenage girls being kidnapped and given to Mexican drug lords as gifts. We have hundreds of thousands of pounds of drugs come through the southern borders. He have had over 20 million illegals come through the southern borders. We are losing millions of dollars a year in medical services to illegals. We are losing millions more in Welfare to illegals. We have not even discussed the fact that 1 in 4 prisoners in states that have borders are illegal aliens who have done some sort of criminal activity. This is just the tip of the iceberg.
The lack of Drilling our own resources. We have had several bills introduced to have the ability to drill our own reserves voted down by our elected officials. We have not built a new refinery in over 37 years. We have not built a new coal plant in over 25 years. We have not built a Nuclear plant in over 20 years. Why is this? Just these three items make me think that the policies that have been implemented over the last 30 years have been designed to intentionally weaken us as a country. There are many other items that come to mind that convince me even more that this is being done intentionally. Like language. Why is it now that we do not require people coming to this country to learn English? Why is is that the Senator of Florida tried to have legislation passed through congress that would require that interpreters be provided in all government facilities so that people who couldn't speak English could be understood. Luckily, we were able to flood the fax lines and telephone lines and shut down their circuits. But the larger question is, Why would a U.S. Senator even want legislation like that.
The Political correctness crowd is trying to make our country bi-lingual. They want the country to have both English and Spanish as primary languages of the United States. No country can survive with multiple languages as primary. Any country that has attempted this has fallen, all you have to do is check your history. Language is one of the core items that unite a people together. America has many, many people from different nationalities that have helped build our country. The one thing that was common among all these different groups was that they learned English and had a common method of communication. These people were happy to learn English, they understood that they were becoming citizens of another country and were happy to assimilate into their new country.
I will be adding more to this article in the future to further show that even thought I have title this article Conspiracy Theory, it will look more and more like a face. All I am asking of you the reader is think. Do your own investigation and make you own conclusions. Just think for yourself and stop letting these politicians and media outlets twist the truth to benefit who? WE need to wake everyone up and have them get involved in our country. WE need to show the politicians in Washington that they work for us, not vice verse. We loan these clowns the power they have, we have the ability to take that power back when they abuse it. Start exercising you power!!!
As always, your comments are welcome.
The majority of teachers try and do a good job, but the number of teachers that are bad is growing and effecting the rest. We need to get more involved in the education of our children and make sure they are being taught the truth. Because of the teachers and professors are the grown up flower children of the 60's, they are teaching our children that our country is not special. They are teaching our children that the United States the the cause of the worlds problems, not the solution. They are teaching our children that they should be pacifist, always turning the other cheek regardless of what is done to them. They are told not to defend themselves if attacked but to take it and then report it. This is just some of things that are going on in our schools, but for the sake of the length of this article I will cut it here.
Why are the borders still open and not secure? Why is Mexico now requesting that victims of shootings in Mexican border towns be brought to the United States for treatment? The reason the Mexican government is giving is because the victims are now being taken to Mexican hospitals and the drug enforcers who originally shot them are following them to the hospitals and finishing them off there. Here's an idea, Close the Borders. There are two people who are the representatives for the democratic and Republican parties, and neither of these candidates are willing to close the borders. We will have to take the lead as the citizens of this country and make the politicians do OUR will. We have had 6000 people killed in border town shooting not even five mile from the border. We have had several hundred U.S. citizens disappear from U.S. border towns. We have cases of American Teenage girls being kidnapped and given to Mexican drug lords as gifts. We have hundreds of thousands of pounds of drugs come through the southern borders. He have had over 20 million illegals come through the southern borders. We are losing millions of dollars a year in medical services to illegals. We are losing millions more in Welfare to illegals. We have not even discussed the fact that 1 in 4 prisoners in states that have borders are illegal aliens who have done some sort of criminal activity. This is just the tip of the iceberg.
The lack of Drilling our own resources. We have had several bills introduced to have the ability to drill our own reserves voted down by our elected officials. We have not built a new refinery in over 37 years. We have not built a new coal plant in over 25 years. We have not built a Nuclear plant in over 20 years. Why is this? Just these three items make me think that the policies that have been implemented over the last 30 years have been designed to intentionally weaken us as a country. There are many other items that come to mind that convince me even more that this is being done intentionally. Like language. Why is it now that we do not require people coming to this country to learn English? Why is is that the Senator of Florida tried to have legislation passed through congress that would require that interpreters be provided in all government facilities so that people who couldn't speak English could be understood. Luckily, we were able to flood the fax lines and telephone lines and shut down their circuits. But the larger question is, Why would a U.S. Senator even want legislation like that.
The Political correctness crowd is trying to make our country bi-lingual. They want the country to have both English and Spanish as primary languages of the United States. No country can survive with multiple languages as primary. Any country that has attempted this has fallen, all you have to do is check your history. Language is one of the core items that unite a people together. America has many, many people from different nationalities that have helped build our country. The one thing that was common among all these different groups was that they learned English and had a common method of communication. These people were happy to learn English, they understood that they were becoming citizens of another country and were happy to assimilate into their new country.
I will be adding more to this article in the future to further show that even thought I have title this article Conspiracy Theory, it will look more and more like a face. All I am asking of you the reader is think. Do your own investigation and make you own conclusions. Just think for yourself and stop letting these politicians and media outlets twist the truth to benefit who? WE need to wake everyone up and have them get involved in our country. WE need to show the politicians in Washington that they work for us, not vice verse. We loan these clowns the power they have, we have the ability to take that power back when they abuse it. Start exercising you power!!!
As always, your comments are welcome.
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Oil Exploration and Drilling
I am tired of the Democrats and some Republicans continuing to go against the American People's wishes when it comes to Drilling and mining our own Natural Resources. In the past few years there have been numerous bills purposed to allow for drilling of our own resources in Alaska as well as off of our Atlantic, Pacific and Gulf Coast. When the rest of the world is doing everything possible to find more resources for their citizens, the U.S. congress continues to stonewall every effort to allow us to get self sufficient. The last poll taken showed the over 65% of the American people were in support of finding and drilling our own resources, yet the politicians in Washington continue to bow to the Environmentalist lobby. It does not help that both Presidential candidates have repeatedly voted in the past against drilling. It will not matter who wins the Election at the end of the year, in the end, you are still going to get a Socialist who believes that the government knows what best for the people instead of a government who does the will of the people.
Did you know that 50 miles off of the coast of Key West the Chinese are setting up drilling platforms? Did you also know that this platform employs the newest drilling technology that would allow the Chinese to Slant Drill? Do you even know what Slant Drilling is? Slant Drilling is just what it's name implies, it allows for the sideways drilling of the platform. What does that mean to you and me? It means that the Chinese are going to be able not only to drill the oil reserves found in the international Waters, but would also allow them to slant drill into reserves located inside and under the U.S. restricted waters. The Chinese are not the only country out there, but they are the largest with the largest budget available for exploration. We need to pay attention and start drilling our own before it is taken from us.
We have not built a new Oil Refinery in over 37 years and yet the government continues to deny permits to companies that are willing to build them. We have the worlds LARGEST supply of coal and we have the technology to convert coal to oil, but yet the government refuses to allow the building of any more coal to electrical plants. The government refuses to allow the building of Nuclear plants and yet when you hear these politicians on television, all you hear is how they
upset with the huge profits the oil companies are making. Here's an idea, let the oil companies keep their profits and reinvest them into the exploration and drilling our our own resources. How about letting the oil companies keep their profits and allow them to build refineries and coal plants. How about allowing them to build Nuclear Plants. Here is the best idea yet. how about WASHINGTON GETTING THE HELL OUT OF THE WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This election is one of the most important in my lifetime and people need to wake up and get involved
Did you know that 50 miles off of the coast of Key West the Chinese are setting up drilling platforms? Did you also know that this platform employs the newest drilling technology that would allow the Chinese to Slant Drill? Do you even know what Slant Drilling is? Slant Drilling is just what it's name implies, it allows for the sideways drilling of the platform. What does that mean to you and me? It means that the Chinese are going to be able not only to drill the oil reserves found in the international Waters, but would also allow them to slant drill into reserves located inside and under the U.S. restricted waters. The Chinese are not the only country out there, but they are the largest with the largest budget available for exploration. We need to pay attention and start drilling our own before it is taken from us.
We have not built a new Oil Refinery in over 37 years and yet the government continues to deny permits to companies that are willing to build them. We have the worlds LARGEST supply of coal and we have the technology to convert coal to oil, but yet the government refuses to allow the building of any more coal to electrical plants. The government refuses to allow the building of Nuclear plants and yet when you hear these politicians on television, all you hear is how they
upset with the huge profits the oil companies are making. Here's an idea, let the oil companies keep their profits and reinvest them into the exploration and drilling our our own resources. How about letting the oil companies keep their profits and allow them to build refineries and coal plants. How about allowing them to build Nuclear Plants. Here is the best idea yet. how about WASHINGTON GETTING THE HELL OUT OF THE WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This election is one of the most important in my lifetime and people need to wake up and get involved
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Oil Companies
I want to address the idea of Oil Companies being responsible for the cost of gas at the present time.
When did we change the type of country that we live in? When did we move from a Republic to a Socialist society? When did we become the type of people who blame Big Business for all our problems?
The reason I am bringing this up is because this week, the congress is calling the Executives of the Big Oil Companies in front of them to give them a chewing out over the current oil or fuel prices.
The congress is using the current fuel prices to grandstand in front of the television cameras by dragging the Executives in front of them and giving them the Fifth degree over their profits. Lets not worry about all the time when the Oil Companies were barely making a profit for all those years in the past. Lets not address the reality that we are still a country that is operated by the free enterprise system. When did it become congress's job to dictate how much an oil company can make? I thought that making money was what a Free Enterprise system was all about. When did we as a people come to the place that we now feel that it is O.K. to let the government interject itself into the business of private companies or corporations.
How is it the Oil Companies responsibility to look for Alternative Fuel sources? I mean, look at the title of the companies, I. E. Oil Companies. They are in the business of finding and producing oil. Now if they want to address that, I am sure the oil companies would be more than happy to have a legitimate discussion on that topic. I am sure that the oil companies would love to hear congress explain how they are putting the needs of some insignificant wildlife ahead of the needs of it's citizenry. I am sure the oil companies would love to have congress ask them why there have been no oil refineries built in the last thirty, yes I said thirty, years! I am sure that the oil companies would love to have congress ask them about the lack of Nuclear Power Plants that have been built to take some of the strain off of the Oil and Natural gas electrical plants. I would love to hear that discussion, wouldn't you?
We need to quit blaming companies for problems that our country is facing that they have and have had no hand in. We need to start allowing these same companies to do what they do, drill and produce oil. We have a number of sites that have been available in this country for over twenty-five years that we could start drilling today. Anwar, up in Alaska is the most popular and the most common. We have others that are not so common, not so popular but are there waiting to be drilled none the less. We have large deposits of oil off of our coastlines that we have not allowed the oil companies to drill. We have the ability to convert coal to oil, yet the elected officials in congress refuse to allow the mining of these extremely large reserves. We have two other sites in Alaska that are just waiting for us to tap, yet our elected officials refuse to allow the oil companies to do it. One of these sites would produce enough oil to provide the entire population of the United States with fuel at future usage assumptions for the next 200 years. That is just One site. We could see $1.50 a gallon gas in one year if the congress would just get out of the way of the oil companies ans allow them to do what they do best. Get the oil. Quit putting the welfare of wildlife in front of the welfare of the citizens. I could care less if some moose or bunny becomes extinct to ensure our way of life. I guess I am just some kind of hater, but I believe that people should come before animals. Period.
Send a message to congress this election cycle. Vote for only those officials that really want this country to be what it has always been, the leader of the world. Vote for those who have publicly stated that they support drilling in Anwar as well as off of our coastlines. Vote for those officials that would allow the building of new Oil Refineries as well as Nuclear Power Plants. Vote for those officials that believe in this country, not in their words, but in their voting actions. We are a great people who can do great things, if we are allowed. Help me get the government out of our way so that we can continue to be the great people we are. If we just vote on these principles, we can again be the leaders that every other country in the world has come to expect us to be.
Let me close with this question. If we are such a bad people and a bad country, why are people dying everyday to come here? Just a thought.
As always, I welcome your comments. Earl
When did we change the type of country that we live in? When did we move from a Republic to a Socialist society? When did we become the type of people who blame Big Business for all our problems?
The reason I am bringing this up is because this week, the congress is calling the Executives of the Big Oil Companies in front of them to give them a chewing out over the current oil or fuel prices.
The congress is using the current fuel prices to grandstand in front of the television cameras by dragging the Executives in front of them and giving them the Fifth degree over their profits. Lets not worry about all the time when the Oil Companies were barely making a profit for all those years in the past. Lets not address the reality that we are still a country that is operated by the free enterprise system. When did it become congress's job to dictate how much an oil company can make? I thought that making money was what a Free Enterprise system was all about. When did we as a people come to the place that we now feel that it is O.K. to let the government interject itself into the business of private companies or corporations.
How is it the Oil Companies responsibility to look for Alternative Fuel sources? I mean, look at the title of the companies, I. E. Oil Companies. They are in the business of finding and producing oil. Now if they want to address that, I am sure the oil companies would be more than happy to have a legitimate discussion on that topic. I am sure that the oil companies would love to hear congress explain how they are putting the needs of some insignificant wildlife ahead of the needs of it's citizenry. I am sure the oil companies would love to have congress ask them why there have been no oil refineries built in the last thirty, yes I said thirty, years! I am sure that the oil companies would love to have congress ask them about the lack of Nuclear Power Plants that have been built to take some of the strain off of the Oil and Natural gas electrical plants. I would love to hear that discussion, wouldn't you?
We need to quit blaming companies for problems that our country is facing that they have and have had no hand in. We need to start allowing these same companies to do what they do, drill and produce oil. We have a number of sites that have been available in this country for over twenty-five years that we could start drilling today. Anwar, up in Alaska is the most popular and the most common. We have others that are not so common, not so popular but are there waiting to be drilled none the less. We have large deposits of oil off of our coastlines that we have not allowed the oil companies to drill. We have the ability to convert coal to oil, yet the elected officials in congress refuse to allow the mining of these extremely large reserves. We have two other sites in Alaska that are just waiting for us to tap, yet our elected officials refuse to allow the oil companies to do it. One of these sites would produce enough oil to provide the entire population of the United States with fuel at future usage assumptions for the next 200 years. That is just One site. We could see $1.50 a gallon gas in one year if the congress would just get out of the way of the oil companies ans allow them to do what they do best. Get the oil. Quit putting the welfare of wildlife in front of the welfare of the citizens. I could care less if some moose or bunny becomes extinct to ensure our way of life. I guess I am just some kind of hater, but I believe that people should come before animals. Period.
Send a message to congress this election cycle. Vote for only those officials that really want this country to be what it has always been, the leader of the world. Vote for those who have publicly stated that they support drilling in Anwar as well as off of our coastlines. Vote for those officials that would allow the building of new Oil Refineries as well as Nuclear Power Plants. Vote for those officials that believe in this country, not in their words, but in their voting actions. We are a great people who can do great things, if we are allowed. Help me get the government out of our way so that we can continue to be the great people we are. If we just vote on these principles, we can again be the leaders that every other country in the world has come to expect us to be.
Let me close with this question. If we are such a bad people and a bad country, why are people dying everyday to come here? Just a thought.
As always, I welcome your comments. Earl
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Entitlement Mentality
I would like to address a serious problem that has been creeping into our society for the past 50 years. This problem is Entitlements.
The past few generations have been slowly indoctrinated into believing that they are entitled to things just because something has happened to them or because they were born without the same advantages as some others.
What causes me to address this now is what is happening to the survivors of the September 11th bombing of the World Trade Center. The families of the people who died there are getting from $250,000 to over 4 million dollars apiece. Now, I want everyone to understand that I sympathize with the families of those who died on that dreadful day, but I don't think that they should receive a dime from the government for what happened. It was not the governments fault that those nut jobs flew the plane into those buildings, not is it the governments responsibility to provide restitution to the survivors for what happened. This is just a case of people wanting to benefit anyway they can from a tragedy that no American was responsible for. This is just 1 in a long list of entitlements that some Americans have come to believe that they have a right to. I hate to burst their bubble, but they are not entitled to anything. What happened on that day was a tragedy to be sure, but it comes down to being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Nothing More.
Let me list some other Entitlement that Americans believe they have a right to, but in reality they have no such right. The Government has been giving away the candy store for so long that people actually believe that they have a right to these things.
1, Social Security- I have covered this in a previous article that you can go back and read. But, in a nutshell, This was an Insurance Program that was put in place by the government to protect a person in case they outlived the actuary tables which estimate how long a person is supposed to live.
2, Medicare- Again, see previous article, This was put in place to provide basic hospitalization for people who worked at jobs that did not provide a health plan that someone could carry over once they made retirement age, it has grown to the monster it is now.
3, Prescription Drugs, another government plan that was recently implemented solely for the purpose of obtaining the senior vote, who makes up the largest voting constituent in the United States.
4, Welfare- Originally brought about for people who had jobs but did not make enough money to meet the minimum guidelines for poverty. Most people do not know it, but you could not even apply for Welfare unless you had a job. Now look at what it has become.
These are just a few of the larger entitlement programs that are in existence. There are literally hundreds of others that are less famous but just as destructive to the growth of the individual. These programs all sound good when they are brought about, but like everything the government does, it grows into a monster that cannot be controlled. I believe that all entitlement programs started because someone really thought that there was a need for it and thought they were doing good. But, whenever you provide an entitlement to someone, you actually make them weaker because you take away the initiative to provide that item for themselves. This makes them dependent on the system and the taxpayer to continue to provide for them. Any time you give someone something for nothing, they lose a portion of their self respect. When you allow people to suffer a little, make their lives a little less comfortable, they will, for the most part, find a way to improve their situation. It is human nature. I know, there are people out there that really do need assistance. That is what charities are for, that is what the Church is for, that is what local communities are for. The government should be the last line of defense that a person seeks out, not the first.
Let me tell you about what is happening now that the government is going to pay the families and survivors of the 911 tragedy. There is now an effort being put together by the survivors and families of the Oklahoma City bombing to seek financial restitution for what happened to them. There is also an effort being put together for people who lost family in Embassy bombings to be compensated. Do you see what is happening here. Everyone is standing there with their hands out, wanting free money. Do they not understand that the money they are seeking is not free, someone has to pay it. That someone is you and I, the tax paying, hard working, god fearing, family oriented people of this great country. We are the ones who have to pay the tab whenever there is compensation being paid out for one of these events. I am not sorry, I do not believe that I should have to pay you, because some nut job killed your family member. It is tragic to be sure, but how is that mine, or the other millions of Americans responsibility. We are a nation that has been built on making our own way. Now the government wants to give everything to you, remember to old saying, "beware of the stranger bearing gifts". When the government gives you something, it takes something in return, whether it be pride of oneself, freedom once enjoyed, or rights once guaranteed. There are no free lunches. There is always a price to be paid, the question is, what is the price and who has to pay it?
I pray that our country will find it's way back to what our founding fathers envisioned for our country when the wrote the Declaration Of Independence. I pray that our people will return to the state of mind that helped build this country into the most successful and greatest country the world has ever seen. We are at a tipping point, are we going to continue to accept entitlements, thereby turning this country from freedom to socialism? Are we going to continue to give more and more of our daily responsibility to the government, thereby giving up more and more of the rights that thousands upon thousands of soldiers have died to make sure we had. The choice is yours, what will you do when something like Oklahoma or the World Trade Center happens to you and your family. Will you turn to each other for comfort, or will you turn to the government for payment for something it had no hand in? Will you take the death of a loved one and permanently shame it with the stains of profit over their death. The choice will be yours.
I am not saying that there are not times when someone or some organization should pay when they hurt or kill someone we love. I am saying that when our loved ones are killed by terrorist, the government should not be in the business of restitution for the survivors. That is not the governments role, their role is to find the ones responsible for those deaths and hand out the ultimate justice upon them.
As always, I look forward to your comments. Earl
The past few generations have been slowly indoctrinated into believing that they are entitled to things just because something has happened to them or because they were born without the same advantages as some others.
What causes me to address this now is what is happening to the survivors of the September 11th bombing of the World Trade Center. The families of the people who died there are getting from $250,000 to over 4 million dollars apiece. Now, I want everyone to understand that I sympathize with the families of those who died on that dreadful day, but I don't think that they should receive a dime from the government for what happened. It was not the governments fault that those nut jobs flew the plane into those buildings, not is it the governments responsibility to provide restitution to the survivors for what happened. This is just a case of people wanting to benefit anyway they can from a tragedy that no American was responsible for. This is just 1 in a long list of entitlements that some Americans have come to believe that they have a right to. I hate to burst their bubble, but they are not entitled to anything. What happened on that day was a tragedy to be sure, but it comes down to being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Nothing More.
Let me list some other Entitlement that Americans believe they have a right to, but in reality they have no such right. The Government has been giving away the candy store for so long that people actually believe that they have a right to these things.
1, Social Security- I have covered this in a previous article that you can go back and read. But, in a nutshell, This was an Insurance Program that was put in place by the government to protect a person in case they outlived the actuary tables which estimate how long a person is supposed to live.
2, Medicare- Again, see previous article, This was put in place to provide basic hospitalization for people who worked at jobs that did not provide a health plan that someone could carry over once they made retirement age, it has grown to the monster it is now.
3, Prescription Drugs, another government plan that was recently implemented solely for the purpose of obtaining the senior vote, who makes up the largest voting constituent in the United States.
4, Welfare- Originally brought about for people who had jobs but did not make enough money to meet the minimum guidelines for poverty. Most people do not know it, but you could not even apply for Welfare unless you had a job. Now look at what it has become.
These are just a few of the larger entitlement programs that are in existence. There are literally hundreds of others that are less famous but just as destructive to the growth of the individual. These programs all sound good when they are brought about, but like everything the government does, it grows into a monster that cannot be controlled. I believe that all entitlement programs started because someone really thought that there was a need for it and thought they were doing good. But, whenever you provide an entitlement to someone, you actually make them weaker because you take away the initiative to provide that item for themselves. This makes them dependent on the system and the taxpayer to continue to provide for them. Any time you give someone something for nothing, they lose a portion of their self respect. When you allow people to suffer a little, make their lives a little less comfortable, they will, for the most part, find a way to improve their situation. It is human nature. I know, there are people out there that really do need assistance. That is what charities are for, that is what the Church is for, that is what local communities are for. The government should be the last line of defense that a person seeks out, not the first.
Let me tell you about what is happening now that the government is going to pay the families and survivors of the 911 tragedy. There is now an effort being put together by the survivors and families of the Oklahoma City bombing to seek financial restitution for what happened to them. There is also an effort being put together for people who lost family in Embassy bombings to be compensated. Do you see what is happening here. Everyone is standing there with their hands out, wanting free money. Do they not understand that the money they are seeking is not free, someone has to pay it. That someone is you and I, the tax paying, hard working, god fearing, family oriented people of this great country. We are the ones who have to pay the tab whenever there is compensation being paid out for one of these events. I am not sorry, I do not believe that I should have to pay you, because some nut job killed your family member. It is tragic to be sure, but how is that mine, or the other millions of Americans responsibility. We are a nation that has been built on making our own way. Now the government wants to give everything to you, remember to old saying, "beware of the stranger bearing gifts". When the government gives you something, it takes something in return, whether it be pride of oneself, freedom once enjoyed, or rights once guaranteed. There are no free lunches. There is always a price to be paid, the question is, what is the price and who has to pay it?
I pray that our country will find it's way back to what our founding fathers envisioned for our country when the wrote the Declaration Of Independence. I pray that our people will return to the state of mind that helped build this country into the most successful and greatest country the world has ever seen. We are at a tipping point, are we going to continue to accept entitlements, thereby turning this country from freedom to socialism? Are we going to continue to give more and more of our daily responsibility to the government, thereby giving up more and more of the rights that thousands upon thousands of soldiers have died to make sure we had. The choice is yours, what will you do when something like Oklahoma or the World Trade Center happens to you and your family. Will you turn to each other for comfort, or will you turn to the government for payment for something it had no hand in? Will you take the death of a loved one and permanently shame it with the stains of profit over their death. The choice will be yours.
I am not saying that there are not times when someone or some organization should pay when they hurt or kill someone we love. I am saying that when our loved ones are killed by terrorist, the government should not be in the business of restitution for the survivors. That is not the governments role, their role is to find the ones responsible for those deaths and hand out the ultimate justice upon them.
As always, I look forward to your comments. Earl
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
National Debt
I want to address the problem we are leaving our children and our grandchildren. The problem I am referring to is the debt we are creating with social programs.
The country has a present future debt of 56 Trillion Dollars over the coming seventy-five years, that is the debt at today's rate. Everyday that we go without addressing this problem the debt only becomes worse. It is estimated that by the year 2016 that we will only be able to pay the interest that this debt is accumulating. I feel that this is unacceptable to do to our future generations.
The three programs that have accumulated this debt are 1, Medicare-2, Social Security-and 3, Prescription Drugs. These three programs account for the 56 Trillion dollar deficit that the country is facing over the next 75 years.
You are not going to hear about this from the three people running for election this year, the reason is, is that it is too controversial of a subject. They feel that it is better not to bring up a problem that will bankrupt the county, rather than tell the American People the truth so we can come up with a solution. They are more concerned with their power in the government rather that be the person that is willing to do the right thing and inform the people of what is coming. The politicians would rather line their own pockets and keep their little bit of power than tell you the truth.
What needs to be done is not going to be done because of exactly what was described above. We need to do one of two things in order to get ourselves out of this mess. Neither if the two items I am going to state are going to be popular to the elderly or the people who are getting ready to retire in the next 5 to 10 years. The two items I am referring to are either 1, eliminate the three programs all together. 2, lower the amount of coverage each program has allowed for each person. I will go into each further in the next paragraph
1, Elimination of the three programs. This idea is not going to even be approached by any politicians because the elderly and soon to be retired are the bulk of the voting public. The truth of the matter is, the first program- Social Security- was never intended to be a retirement account. Most people do not know that Social Security had a third word when it was first implemented. It used to be called Social Security Insurance. The program was brought into existence for the purpose to protect an elderly person from outliving the actuary tables. When Social Security was first introduced, you could not even apply for it until you were 65 years old. Here is the catch, the actuary table indicated that your life expectancy was 62 years. What social security was for, was to protect you if you lived too long. Like any Social Program, it has grown to the monster it has become.
2, Medicare. Medicare was brought about because as we progressed through the industrial age, we were seeing that most companies were stopping the policy of providing lifetime benefits for retirees. In addition to this, the government introduced the 401k qualified retirement plans which transferred the responsibility for retirement from the corporation to the individual. What they did not do, was educate the working class about investing for retirement. Even worse than that, they did not even inform the working man or woman that they were now responsible for their own retirement, not to mention health care. This lack of information and education is going to cause a flood of people who have not prepared for their elderly years. This is going to cause the Medicare industry to become unmanageable due to the bills that will be acquired. There is no way for our country to afford what is coming.
3, Prescription Drugs plan. This is a recent program that was brought about because of the elderly population as well as the Baby Boomers that are now hitting the retirement roles. Because these two sets of people are the majority of the voting constituency in the country, the politicians decided that they would pass this legislation for the sole purpose of obtaining their vote. The politicians that passed this law had no regard for the debt that this law would accumulate. They have no idea how to pay for this program, not to mention the other two already discussed.
The second choice is to instead of eliminating the programs, downsize them. What I mean by this is, let the programs continue but lower the amount of coverage each pays. This option is also going to be highly unpopular. People are going to say that they paid into the programs and they want their benefits. They are right, they did pay into the programs, but not for themselves. What most people do not know is, because the government has been taking the money that was collected for Social Security and using it to fund other social programs, that there is no money available for their retirement. What has been happening is that the money that was left in the fund was used to fund the people already on the Social Security roles. It is expected from the politicians that the next generation will pay for the Baby Boomers retirement. What was not taken into account was the Baby Boomer generation is the largest generation in the history of our country. The generation behind the Baby Boomers is about half in size of population, this means that for every Baby Boomer on the roles, it will require two or three working people at the present tax rate to pay for their Social Security. Since those numbers do not equal up, the next thing that will have to happen is the social security tax will have to double on those who are working to make up the deficit. Not a popular idea if you are in the one working. As far as Medicare and Prescription Drugs, these programs need to place limits on the coverage each recipients receives and force the families to help take up the slack. Once this is done, the government needs to transfer the funds collected to the private industry so that the money can be invested for the type of returns needed to fund these programs. I can see no other possible choice available to fix this problem.
I am not writing this to cause panic, but to inform and cause discussion on the subject.
As always, feel free to respond. Thanks. Earl
The country has a present future debt of 56 Trillion Dollars over the coming seventy-five years, that is the debt at today's rate. Everyday that we go without addressing this problem the debt only becomes worse. It is estimated that by the year 2016 that we will only be able to pay the interest that this debt is accumulating. I feel that this is unacceptable to do to our future generations.
The three programs that have accumulated this debt are 1, Medicare-2, Social Security-and 3, Prescription Drugs. These three programs account for the 56 Trillion dollar deficit that the country is facing over the next 75 years.
You are not going to hear about this from the three people running for election this year, the reason is, is that it is too controversial of a subject. They feel that it is better not to bring up a problem that will bankrupt the county, rather than tell the American People the truth so we can come up with a solution. They are more concerned with their power in the government rather that be the person that is willing to do the right thing and inform the people of what is coming. The politicians would rather line their own pockets and keep their little bit of power than tell you the truth.
What needs to be done is not going to be done because of exactly what was described above. We need to do one of two things in order to get ourselves out of this mess. Neither if the two items I am going to state are going to be popular to the elderly or the people who are getting ready to retire in the next 5 to 10 years. The two items I am referring to are either 1, eliminate the three programs all together. 2, lower the amount of coverage each program has allowed for each person. I will go into each further in the next paragraph
1, Elimination of the three programs. This idea is not going to even be approached by any politicians because the elderly and soon to be retired are the bulk of the voting public. The truth of the matter is, the first program- Social Security- was never intended to be a retirement account. Most people do not know that Social Security had a third word when it was first implemented. It used to be called Social Security Insurance. The program was brought into existence for the purpose to protect an elderly person from outliving the actuary tables. When Social Security was first introduced, you could not even apply for it until you were 65 years old. Here is the catch, the actuary table indicated that your life expectancy was 62 years. What social security was for, was to protect you if you lived too long. Like any Social Program, it has grown to the monster it has become.
2, Medicare. Medicare was brought about because as we progressed through the industrial age, we were seeing that most companies were stopping the policy of providing lifetime benefits for retirees. In addition to this, the government introduced the 401k qualified retirement plans which transferred the responsibility for retirement from the corporation to the individual. What they did not do, was educate the working class about investing for retirement. Even worse than that, they did not even inform the working man or woman that they were now responsible for their own retirement, not to mention health care. This lack of information and education is going to cause a flood of people who have not prepared for their elderly years. This is going to cause the Medicare industry to become unmanageable due to the bills that will be acquired. There is no way for our country to afford what is coming.
3, Prescription Drugs plan. This is a recent program that was brought about because of the elderly population as well as the Baby Boomers that are now hitting the retirement roles. Because these two sets of people are the majority of the voting constituency in the country, the politicians decided that they would pass this legislation for the sole purpose of obtaining their vote. The politicians that passed this law had no regard for the debt that this law would accumulate. They have no idea how to pay for this program, not to mention the other two already discussed.
The second choice is to instead of eliminating the programs, downsize them. What I mean by this is, let the programs continue but lower the amount of coverage each pays. This option is also going to be highly unpopular. People are going to say that they paid into the programs and they want their benefits. They are right, they did pay into the programs, but not for themselves. What most people do not know is, because the government has been taking the money that was collected for Social Security and using it to fund other social programs, that there is no money available for their retirement. What has been happening is that the money that was left in the fund was used to fund the people already on the Social Security roles. It is expected from the politicians that the next generation will pay for the Baby Boomers retirement. What was not taken into account was the Baby Boomer generation is the largest generation in the history of our country. The generation behind the Baby Boomers is about half in size of population, this means that for every Baby Boomer on the roles, it will require two or three working people at the present tax rate to pay for their Social Security. Since those numbers do not equal up, the next thing that will have to happen is the social security tax will have to double on those who are working to make up the deficit. Not a popular idea if you are in the one working. As far as Medicare and Prescription Drugs, these programs need to place limits on the coverage each recipients receives and force the families to help take up the slack. Once this is done, the government needs to transfer the funds collected to the private industry so that the money can be invested for the type of returns needed to fund these programs. I can see no other possible choice available to fix this problem.
I am not writing this to cause panic, but to inform and cause discussion on the subject.
As always, feel free to respond. Thanks. Earl
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Ethanol
I want to address the new (or not so new) alternative fuel that is being forced down out throats by the government, as is titled the said fuel is Ethanol.
I want to know why the government continues to consider it's citizens stupid or idiotic! Who in their right minds thinks that Ethanol is a good idea? Please let me know because as of this writing, I cannot find anyone that is outside the government who thinks that this is the answer to the alternative fuel issue.
Let me inform you as to the reasons why I think Ethanol is a bad idea. First, we are the first civilization in the history of the world that is burning their food supply. Never before on the planet has their been a people who thought that having fuel was more important than food. Does this sound even slightly rational to anyone? Second, the government is subsidizing the farmers to grow corn for the express purpose of harvesting the corn and turning it into fuel. While this may be making the farmers happy, they are finally making an incredible profit from their labor. What is not being told to you is for the first time in our nations history, we had to import wheat for consumption. We have always been referred to the worlds breadbasket because we have always been able to produce SO much more food than we needed that we were able to donate food to most other third world countries. Not any more, we can't even grow enough wheat to feed ourselves. Third, the amount of Ethanol that is being produced is not enough to even make a dent in the fuel consumption. We would need a farm the size of Texas to grow enough corn to make a 15% reduction in the use of oil (at present usage rates). Does anyone have any idea how big Texas is or how many farms it would take to equal that amount of land. I certainly don't and I don't really think anyone else has the foggiest idea either. Fourth, it costs $1.29 to produce a $1.00 worth of Ethanol. That means that we are actually losing .29 cents in it's production. Only the government could say that this is a good idea, if you or I tried to run our budget this same way, we would be thrown under the jail, never mind in it. And last, it doesn't work. Ethanol eats away at the rubber seals that are in almost all vehicles produced today with the exception of multiple fuel vehicles. What this means to you the consumer is that you are going to be forced to buy another vehicle that will sustain this type of fuel or you will be forced to pay repair fees for the damage that this fuel will do to your existing vehicle. Either way, we as the consumer lose. Think about that when you see the Ethanol signs at the fuel stations.
The government is not interested in pursuing other alternative fuel sources, it have invested too heavily in the Ethanol program to admit that it is a failure. Instead, they force us to burn our food supply to continue to proceed with this failed policy. All you need to do is listen to the presidents address that was on television today (4-29-08) and listen to how he answers questions regarding the price of oil and the pursuit of alternative fuel. He repeatedly goes to the Ethanol program and never once addresses any other viable alternative fuel sources. This is all you need to hear to know that the government is going to pursue this program at the demise of it's citizens. We are going to continue to spend more money at the pumps, we are going to continue to give billions and billions of dollars to our enemies with the purchase of oil from countries that have made it clear that they are not our friends.
Now I believe that you should not make a complaint unless you have at least an idea of how to fix the problem. My idea is Hydrogen! Hydrogen technology already exist and can be implemented now ( not in five to ten years, minimum). The hydrogen vehicles have been around for almost 20 years and the technology has only gotten better. Their were hydrogen cars that were being driven around back in the late 70's and early 80's with great results. The technology was abandoned due to Saudi Arabia slashing oil costs so low that the technology costs more to implement than staying with oil. By abandoning the Hydrogen program, our government has made slaves out of us to every oil producing county that we are now forced to buy oil from. We now work so we can afford gas, not food. The funny thing is, we are paying more for both, and will continue to do so in the foreseeable future. We have made a huge mistake that will take generations to fix (if it can be fixed at all).
Please contact your Congress person, Senator, and even the White House and let them know that you are not supporting a policy that supports burning our food supply for fuel. Tell them to seek other alternative energy sources (such as Hydrogen) instead. Let them know that we will not allow this county to be turned into a third world country by the policies they are implementing. Come election day, make your voice heard! Vote out anyone who is supporting this insane policy.
Let the free market take care of the alternative fuel problem, it always outperforms the government whenever it is allowed to proceed. Let the free market proceed. Quit subsidizing the farmers to grow corn instead of wheat. Discontinue the policy of taking kickbacks from the farming lobby to continue this insane practice. Do what is right for the country, not what is right for your pocket.
As always, I welcome your feedback or comments. Earl
I want to know why the government continues to consider it's citizens stupid or idiotic! Who in their right minds thinks that Ethanol is a good idea? Please let me know because as of this writing, I cannot find anyone that is outside the government who thinks that this is the answer to the alternative fuel issue.
Let me inform you as to the reasons why I think Ethanol is a bad idea. First, we are the first civilization in the history of the world that is burning their food supply. Never before on the planet has their been a people who thought that having fuel was more important than food. Does this sound even slightly rational to anyone? Second, the government is subsidizing the farmers to grow corn for the express purpose of harvesting the corn and turning it into fuel. While this may be making the farmers happy, they are finally making an incredible profit from their labor. What is not being told to you is for the first time in our nations history, we had to import wheat for consumption. We have always been referred to the worlds breadbasket because we have always been able to produce SO much more food than we needed that we were able to donate food to most other third world countries. Not any more, we can't even grow enough wheat to feed ourselves. Third, the amount of Ethanol that is being produced is not enough to even make a dent in the fuel consumption. We would need a farm the size of Texas to grow enough corn to make a 15% reduction in the use of oil (at present usage rates). Does anyone have any idea how big Texas is or how many farms it would take to equal that amount of land. I certainly don't and I don't really think anyone else has the foggiest idea either. Fourth, it costs $1.29 to produce a $1.00 worth of Ethanol. That means that we are actually losing .29 cents in it's production. Only the government could say that this is a good idea, if you or I tried to run our budget this same way, we would be thrown under the jail, never mind in it. And last, it doesn't work. Ethanol eats away at the rubber seals that are in almost all vehicles produced today with the exception of multiple fuel vehicles. What this means to you the consumer is that you are going to be forced to buy another vehicle that will sustain this type of fuel or you will be forced to pay repair fees for the damage that this fuel will do to your existing vehicle. Either way, we as the consumer lose. Think about that when you see the Ethanol signs at the fuel stations.
The government is not interested in pursuing other alternative fuel sources, it have invested too heavily in the Ethanol program to admit that it is a failure. Instead, they force us to burn our food supply to continue to proceed with this failed policy. All you need to do is listen to the presidents address that was on television today (4-29-08) and listen to how he answers questions regarding the price of oil and the pursuit of alternative fuel. He repeatedly goes to the Ethanol program and never once addresses any other viable alternative fuel sources. This is all you need to hear to know that the government is going to pursue this program at the demise of it's citizens. We are going to continue to spend more money at the pumps, we are going to continue to give billions and billions of dollars to our enemies with the purchase of oil from countries that have made it clear that they are not our friends.
Now I believe that you should not make a complaint unless you have at least an idea of how to fix the problem. My idea is Hydrogen! Hydrogen technology already exist and can be implemented now ( not in five to ten years, minimum). The hydrogen vehicles have been around for almost 20 years and the technology has only gotten better. Their were hydrogen cars that were being driven around back in the late 70's and early 80's with great results. The technology was abandoned due to Saudi Arabia slashing oil costs so low that the technology costs more to implement than staying with oil. By abandoning the Hydrogen program, our government has made slaves out of us to every oil producing county that we are now forced to buy oil from. We now work so we can afford gas, not food. The funny thing is, we are paying more for both, and will continue to do so in the foreseeable future. We have made a huge mistake that will take generations to fix (if it can be fixed at all).
Please contact your Congress person, Senator, and even the White House and let them know that you are not supporting a policy that supports burning our food supply for fuel. Tell them to seek other alternative energy sources (such as Hydrogen) instead. Let them know that we will not allow this county to be turned into a third world country by the policies they are implementing. Come election day, make your voice heard! Vote out anyone who is supporting this insane policy.
Let the free market take care of the alternative fuel problem, it always outperforms the government whenever it is allowed to proceed. Let the free market proceed. Quit subsidizing the farmers to grow corn instead of wheat. Discontinue the policy of taking kickbacks from the farming lobby to continue this insane practice. Do what is right for the country, not what is right for your pocket.
As always, I welcome your feedback or comments. Earl
Sunday, February 10, 2008
The Race Continues
Well, we have completed the Initial primaries and Super Tuesday for the lead up to the National conventions for both the Democrats and the Republicans. The emerging leading figures seem to be Barak Obama and John McCain.
I have to say, I am disappointed in the American People in their choice of our next leader. I really think that neither of the front runners are worth our vote. I personally think that both will be taking us to the same place, just one a little faster than the other.
I want to address a statement that keeps coming up in this election period. I have heard this statement in the past, but this year it seems to be prevalent. The statement goes, don't waste your vote on someone who can't win. I disagree with this statement most vehemently, the only way you waste your vote is not to cast it. I know that there are party loyal people out there that believe that you have to vote the party if for no other reason than to keep the other party out. I say, vote your conscious. If there is someone who you agree with and they are not the front runners or they don't have a chance of winning, so what!! This is your vote, nobody else's. Do not forfeit you beliefs just to go along with the status quo. Vote for the person you feel like most represents your views and beliefs. If that is wasting your vote, then I waste my vote every election.
Please keep in mind that this election is going to decide what direction our country goes for at least the next four years. I thought that the Republicans had a good variety of candidates this year, But because of the power the liberal media has, they were able to eliminate the best possibilities for the country's future and thus ensure that McCain won the nomination. We now are at a crossroads, what do we a independent thinkers do? I for one will vote for the person who most agrees with my beliefs, no matter if they have a chance of winning or not. I also think that we have a very serious problem right here on our own soil. Our economy is out of control. Government spending is completely out of control. We are facing a 75 year deficit of 56 Trillion Dollars and there does not seem to be anyone within the electoral process that even is considering this as we head into the general elections. We as Americans better start considering it if we want our country to exist in the next fifty years.
I know that most people feel helpless with the choices we have been left with, don't be, believe in our god, our county, and our people's ability to be good, just people. I still hold out hope that there will be someone who will come out of hiding and make a stand with the American people. I don't know who it will be, maybe Mitt Romney or Fred Thompson will agree to run with McCain. I don't know if either one would be willing to accept 2nd place to McCain, especially when they both know that they are better choices for the number one spot. My hope is that one of them will see that the American people need them to be there, and therefore place the needs of the country and the people above all else. If one of them would agree to run with McCain, I would vote for McCain because I know that he now has one of the best people with him to help get this country back on track.
Whatever your feelings are about this election, please vote. Remember, if you say nothing now, you have no right to say anything later. Men and women have died for your rights, do not let them down.
As always, I look forward to your responses. May god help our country. Earl
I have to say, I am disappointed in the American People in their choice of our next leader. I really think that neither of the front runners are worth our vote. I personally think that both will be taking us to the same place, just one a little faster than the other.
I want to address a statement that keeps coming up in this election period. I have heard this statement in the past, but this year it seems to be prevalent. The statement goes, don't waste your vote on someone who can't win. I disagree with this statement most vehemently, the only way you waste your vote is not to cast it. I know that there are party loyal people out there that believe that you have to vote the party if for no other reason than to keep the other party out. I say, vote your conscious. If there is someone who you agree with and they are not the front runners or they don't have a chance of winning, so what!! This is your vote, nobody else's. Do not forfeit you beliefs just to go along with the status quo. Vote for the person you feel like most represents your views and beliefs. If that is wasting your vote, then I waste my vote every election.
Please keep in mind that this election is going to decide what direction our country goes for at least the next four years. I thought that the Republicans had a good variety of candidates this year, But because of the power the liberal media has, they were able to eliminate the best possibilities for the country's future and thus ensure that McCain won the nomination. We now are at a crossroads, what do we a independent thinkers do? I for one will vote for the person who most agrees with my beliefs, no matter if they have a chance of winning or not. I also think that we have a very serious problem right here on our own soil. Our economy is out of control. Government spending is completely out of control. We are facing a 75 year deficit of 56 Trillion Dollars and there does not seem to be anyone within the electoral process that even is considering this as we head into the general elections. We as Americans better start considering it if we want our country to exist in the next fifty years.
I know that most people feel helpless with the choices we have been left with, don't be, believe in our god, our county, and our people's ability to be good, just people. I still hold out hope that there will be someone who will come out of hiding and make a stand with the American people. I don't know who it will be, maybe Mitt Romney or Fred Thompson will agree to run with McCain. I don't know if either one would be willing to accept 2nd place to McCain, especially when they both know that they are better choices for the number one spot. My hope is that one of them will see that the American people need them to be there, and therefore place the needs of the country and the people above all else. If one of them would agree to run with McCain, I would vote for McCain because I know that he now has one of the best people with him to help get this country back on track.
Whatever your feelings are about this election, please vote. Remember, if you say nothing now, you have no right to say anything later. Men and women have died for your rights, do not let them down.
As always, I look forward to your responses. May god help our country. Earl
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
