I have no idea whether the following story is true or not. I read it attached to a picture of some soldiers on someone's Facebook page. I have no way of verifying whether or not it's true but the way things are going in this country today I find it more believable than not. After all the bonehead things I've seen and read about the TSA and their actions around the country, this would not surprise me at all. If it's true I don't know whether to scream in complete disgust or cry in despair about the complete lack of common sense our government now seems to have. And no - this isn't a shot against the current administration. The TSA was initiated under President Bush after 911 and in theory wasn't a completely terrible idea. But the TSA has grown and evolved into a ridiculous (to the point of stupid) creature that seems to have disallowed common sense and decency. If this story is true, on behalf of a grateful nation I would like to apologize to these men and women who were treated so poorly by the TSA in Indiana. It's truly pathetic.
Sgt. Mad Dog Tracy ~ As the Chalk Leader for my flight home from Afghanistan , I witnessed the following:
When we were on our way back from Afghanistan , We flew out of Baghram Air Field. We went through customs at BAF, full body scanners (no groping), had all of our bags searched, the whole nine yards. Our first stop was Shannon , Ireland to refuel. After that, we had to stop at Indianapolis , Indiana to drop off about 100 folks from the Indiana National Guard. That's where the stupid started.
First, everyone was forced to get off the plane - even though the plane wasn't refueling again. All 330 people got off that plane, rather than let the 100 people from the ING get off. We were filed from the plane to a holding area. No vending machines, no means of escape. Only a male/female latrine.
It's probably important to mention that we were ALL carrying weapons. Everyone was carrying an M4 Carbine (rifle) and some, like me, were also carrying an M9 pistol. Oh, and our gunners had M-240B machine guns. Of course, the weapons weren't loaded. And we had been cleared of all ammo well before we even got to customs at Baghram, then AGAIN at customs.
The TSA personnel at the airport seriously considered making us unload all of the baggage from the SECURE cargo hold to have it re-inspected. Keep in mind, this cargo had been unpacked, inspected piece by piece by U.S. Customs officials, resealed and had bomb-sniffing dogs give it a one-hour run through. After two hours of sitting in this holding area, the TSA decided not to re-inspect our cargo - just to inspect us again: Soldiers on the way home from war, who had already been inspected, re-inspected and kept in a SECURE holding area for 2 hours. Ok, whatever. So we lined up to go through security AGAIN.
This is probably another good time to remind you all that all of us were carrying actual assault rifles, and some of us were also carrying pistols
So we're in line, going through one at a time. One of our soldiers had his Gerber multi-tool. TSA confiscated it. Kind of ridiculous, but it gets better. A few minutes later, a guy empties his pockets and has a pair of nail clippers. Nail clippers. TSA informs the soldier that they're going to confiscate his Nail clippers.
The conversation went something like this:
TSA Guy: You can't take those on the plane.
Soldier: What? I've had them since we left country.
TSA Guy: You're not suppose to have them.
Soldier: Why?
TSA Guy: They can be used as a weapon.
Soldier: [touches butt stock of the rifle] But this actually is a weapon. And I'm allowed to take it on.
TSA Guy: Yeah but you can't use it to take over the plane. You don't have bullets.
Soldier: And I can take over the plane with nail clippers?
TSA Guy: [awkward silence]
Me: Dude, just give him your F**K**G nail clippers so we can get the F**K out of here. I'll buy you a new set.
Soldier: [hands nail clippers to TSA guy, makes it through security]
To top it off, the TSA demanded we all be swabbed for "explosive residue" detection. Everyone failed, [go figure, we just came home from a war zone], because we tested positive for "Gun Powder Residue". Who the F**K is hiring these people?
This might be a good time to remind everyone that approximately 233 people re-boarded that plane with assault rifles, pistols, and machine guns - but nothing that could have been used as a weapon.
Can someone please tell me what the hell happened to OUR country while we were gone?
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Friday, February 17, 2012
Divorce Agreement
I've seen this before but it's always fun to read and share. It's obvious that a lot of thought went into it and whether you agree with the sentiment or not, it's humorous. Kudos to Mr. Wall for his wit and humor.
Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, regressive, Marxists, and Obama supporters, et. al.:
We have stuck together since the late 1950s for the sake of the kids, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has clearly run its course.
Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right for us all, so let's just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way.
Here is a model separation agreement:
1. Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by land mass, each taking a similar portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be relatively easy. Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides had such distinct and disparate tastes.
2. We don't like redistributive taxes, so you can keep them.
3. You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU.
4. Since you hate guns and war, we'll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA, and the military.
5. We'll take the nasty, smelly oil industry and you can go with wind, solar, and bio-diesel.
6. You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore, and Rosie O'Donnell. You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all three of them.
7. We'll keep capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wal-Mart, and Wall Street.
8. You can have your beloved lifelong welfare dwellers, food stamps, homeless homeboys, hippies, druggies, and illegal aliens.
9. We'll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, greedy CEO's and rednecks.
10. We'll keep the Bibles and give you NBC and Hollywood .
11. You can make nice with Iran and Palestine and we'll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us.
12. You can have the peace-niks and war protesters. When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we'll help provide them security.
13. We'll keep our Judeo-Christian values.
14. You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism, political correctness, and Shirley McLain. You can also have the U.N., but we will no longer be paying the bill.
15. We'll keep the SUV's, pickup trucks, and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Subaru station wagon you can find.
16. You can give everyone healthcare if you can find any practicing doctors..
17. We'll continue to believe healthcare is an earned luxury and not a right.
18. We'll keep "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" and "The National Anthem."
19. I'm sure you'll be happy to substitute "Imagine", "I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing", "Kum Ba Ya," or "We Are the World".
20. We'll practice trickledown economics and you can continue to give trickle up poverty your best shot.
21. Since it often so offends you, we'll keep our history, our name and our constitution and our flag.
22. Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along to other like-minded liberal and conservative patriots and if you do not agree, just hit delete. In the spirit of friendly parting, I'll bet you answer which one of us will need whose help in 15 years.
Sincerely,
John J. Wall
Law Student and an American
P.S.: Also, please take Ted Turner, Sean Penn, Martin Sheen, Barbara Streisand, and Jane Fonda with you.
P.S.S..: And you won't have to "Press 1 for English" when you call our country.
Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, regressive, Marxists, and Obama supporters, et. al.:
We have stuck together since the late 1950s for the sake of the kids, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has clearly run its course.
Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right for us all, so let's just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way.
Here is a model separation agreement:
1. Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by land mass, each taking a similar portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be relatively easy. Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides had such distinct and disparate tastes.
2. We don't like redistributive taxes, so you can keep them.
3. You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU.
4. Since you hate guns and war, we'll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA, and the military.
5. We'll take the nasty, smelly oil industry and you can go with wind, solar, and bio-diesel.
6. You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore, and Rosie O'Donnell. You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all three of them.
7. We'll keep capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wal-Mart, and Wall Street.
8. You can have your beloved lifelong welfare dwellers, food stamps, homeless homeboys, hippies, druggies, and illegal aliens.
9. We'll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, greedy CEO's and rednecks.
10. We'll keep the Bibles and give you NBC and Hollywood .
11. You can make nice with Iran and Palestine and we'll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us.
12. You can have the peace-niks and war protesters. When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we'll help provide them security.
13. We'll keep our Judeo-Christian values.
14. You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism, political correctness, and Shirley McLain. You can also have the U.N., but we will no longer be paying the bill.
15. We'll keep the SUV's, pickup trucks, and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Subaru station wagon you can find.
16. You can give everyone healthcare if you can find any practicing doctors..
17. We'll continue to believe healthcare is an earned luxury and not a right.
18. We'll keep "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" and "The National Anthem."
19. I'm sure you'll be happy to substitute "Imagine", "I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing", "Kum Ba Ya," or "We Are the World".
20. We'll practice trickledown economics and you can continue to give trickle up poverty your best shot.
21. Since it often so offends you, we'll keep our history, our name and our constitution and our flag.
22. Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along to other like-minded liberal and conservative patriots and if you do not agree, just hit delete. In the spirit of friendly parting, I'll bet you answer which one of us will need whose help in 15 years.
Sincerely,
John J. Wall
Law Student and an American
P.S.: Also, please take Ted Turner, Sean Penn, Martin Sheen, Barbara Streisand, and Jane Fonda with you.
P.S.S..: And you won't have to "Press 1 for English" when you call our country.
Friday, February 10, 2012
Thinking Of You Today, Christopher...
Ten years. Ten long years. Ten short years. Where did they go? How could they have passed? How could the agony of my grief fade away? How could it not?
In 1996 I had a dream that Christopher’s mother called me, early in the morning, and told me he’d been killed in a car accident. I woke up crying real tears and feeling the pain of loss even though I knew it was just a dream.
On February 10, 2002, that dream became a reality. With only a few minor details different, the dream came true that morning. At the same time of the morning as in my dream, Christopher’s mother called and told me he’d been in an accident and that the doctors did not expect him to live. She told me I needed to get there to say goodbye.
Was my dream a premonition? I’m thinking it was but who knows? Can we ever really be sure of that? All I know is that about 95% of the dream was re-lived that morning. And the ultimate outcome was the same.
It’s been ten years today since that terrible, heart-breaking phone call. I got to Oklahoma before the doctors finished the last of the numerous tests they did on him to determine if he could survive. I was there when the doctor came in for the final time to tell us his brain was gone; the arteries which supplied blood to his brain had been severed in the accident and, between the lack of blood and the initial trauma, his brain had died almost instantly. There was no chance for him to survive, merely for his body to continue its existence on life support. The doctor told us he didn’t suffer and most likely never even knew anything happened. After offering his condolences, the doctor left us alone to make our decision of how to proceed.
How do you make that decision??
It took less than a minute. We looked at our 17 year old son, the boy we both loved more than life itself, and knew he wouldn’t want his body to be kept alive on a machine if he wasn’t in it. And his mom and I didn’t want that either. I went out and gave the doctor our decision. Friends and family members were in the Emergency room waiting area and we gathered them around him to say our goodbyes. It was the most difficult thing I’ve ever done in my life. And it was the right decision. I hated that we had to make it and I hated that he didn’t wear his seat belt that night and I hated that he was out of the house at all. And I still do. But reality is reality.
Like most parents who have lost a child (and I know far too many of them these days) I tell my story today for two reasons, neither of them sympathy. First - to remind everyone how very fragile life can be and how quickly it can be taken away. Second, and most important – to remind everyone that because of reason number one we should all be more appreciative of those we love (and those who love us) and let them know on a regular basis. The last time I talked to Christopher I had no idea it would be my last. I told him, at the end of our conversation, that I loved him. Those were my last words to him while he was alive and conscious and cognizant of everything around him. The last time his mom talked to him, before he left the house that night, they had an argument and he left with both of them angry at each other. Can you imagine the guilt she must have felt over that? I can, because she shared it with me on more than one occasion.
The night as we said our goodbyes in that quiet, sterile place of life and death, we both told him we loved him. His brain was dead. Did he hear us? We liked to think that his spirit did. I’ll ask him when I see him.
Parents, please, please remind everyone you love of the importance of seat belts when in a car, regardless of where they sit. Christopher was thrown from the back seat because he wasn’t wearing a seat belt. The car didn’t roll over or anything that dramatic. It spun around a couple of times. He went out the window and never knew it. The other two people in the car walked away. They were wearing seat belts. Please ensure those you love wear them as well.
I miss you, Christopher. I miss you every day. I’ve learned to live with it and move on, as you wanted, but not a day goes by that I don’t think of you. You will always be my baby boy and I’ll love you forever.
In 1996 I had a dream that Christopher’s mother called me, early in the morning, and told me he’d been killed in a car accident. I woke up crying real tears and feeling the pain of loss even though I knew it was just a dream.
On February 10, 2002, that dream became a reality. With only a few minor details different, the dream came true that morning. At the same time of the morning as in my dream, Christopher’s mother called and told me he’d been in an accident and that the doctors did not expect him to live. She told me I needed to get there to say goodbye.
Was my dream a premonition? I’m thinking it was but who knows? Can we ever really be sure of that? All I know is that about 95% of the dream was re-lived that morning. And the ultimate outcome was the same.
It’s been ten years today since that terrible, heart-breaking phone call. I got to Oklahoma before the doctors finished the last of the numerous tests they did on him to determine if he could survive. I was there when the doctor came in for the final time to tell us his brain was gone; the arteries which supplied blood to his brain had been severed in the accident and, between the lack of blood and the initial trauma, his brain had died almost instantly. There was no chance for him to survive, merely for his body to continue its existence on life support. The doctor told us he didn’t suffer and most likely never even knew anything happened. After offering his condolences, the doctor left us alone to make our decision of how to proceed.
How do you make that decision??
It took less than a minute. We looked at our 17 year old son, the boy we both loved more than life itself, and knew he wouldn’t want his body to be kept alive on a machine if he wasn’t in it. And his mom and I didn’t want that either. I went out and gave the doctor our decision. Friends and family members were in the Emergency room waiting area and we gathered them around him to say our goodbyes. It was the most difficult thing I’ve ever done in my life. And it was the right decision. I hated that we had to make it and I hated that he didn’t wear his seat belt that night and I hated that he was out of the house at all. And I still do. But reality is reality.
Like most parents who have lost a child (and I know far too many of them these days) I tell my story today for two reasons, neither of them sympathy. First - to remind everyone how very fragile life can be and how quickly it can be taken away. Second, and most important – to remind everyone that because of reason number one we should all be more appreciative of those we love (and those who love us) and let them know on a regular basis. The last time I talked to Christopher I had no idea it would be my last. I told him, at the end of our conversation, that I loved him. Those were my last words to him while he was alive and conscious and cognizant of everything around him. The last time his mom talked to him, before he left the house that night, they had an argument and he left with both of them angry at each other. Can you imagine the guilt she must have felt over that? I can, because she shared it with me on more than one occasion.
The night as we said our goodbyes in that quiet, sterile place of life and death, we both told him we loved him. His brain was dead. Did he hear us? We liked to think that his spirit did. I’ll ask him when I see him.
Parents, please, please remind everyone you love of the importance of seat belts when in a car, regardless of where they sit. Christopher was thrown from the back seat because he wasn’t wearing a seat belt. The car didn’t roll over or anything that dramatic. It spun around a couple of times. He went out the window and never knew it. The other two people in the car walked away. They were wearing seat belts. Please ensure those you love wear them as well.
I miss you, Christopher. I miss you every day. I’ve learned to live with it and move on, as you wanted, but not a day goes by that I don’t think of you. You will always be my baby boy and I’ll love you forever.
Thursday, February 9, 2012
Political Correctness vs Truth
I’ll probably get slammed by a few people for this but it’s something I’ve mentioned before about the lack of honest reporting by the main stream media. Leaving out details, as the New York Times did, which are important to the story (such as the religious affiliation of the defendants which has been shown, in many cases, to be directly related to these types of crimes) is not valid, honest reporting. Calling this case one of simple domestic violence is as ludicrous as calling the atrocity committed by Major Hasan at Fort Hood a simple case of “workplace violence.” And that skewed thinking came from our current administration.
Those of you who disagree with me may spin it however you will but Bill O’Reilly nails the truth down in this article. The Fort Hood massacre was an act of Islamic jihad rather than simple workplace violence. And these murders in Canada were Islamic honor killings, not simple domestic violence. Overlooking the truth in the name of political correctness will lead to the destruction of America.
POLITICAL CORRECTNESS AND MUSLIMS
by Bill O’Reilly
The story is grisly: a husband and wife murdering their three young daughters, ages 19, 17 and 13, by drowning them along with their stepmother. The couple was assisted by their 21-year-old son. All were found guilty of first-degree murder in Ontario, Canada. They were sentenced to life in prison.
Mohammad Shafia and his wife, Tooba, immigrated to Canada from Afghanistan in 2007. Being Muslims, they believe in Sharia law, which in some cases allows so-called "honor killings" -- that is, if a family member deviates from strict Muslim teachings, other family members can execute them. Of course, that's insane. But under the Taliban in Afghanistan and in some other parts of the world, "honor killings" are allowed.
In his eyes, Shafia's three daughters were guilty of becoming westernized, wearing nontraditional Muslim clothing and associating with the dreaded Christians. So this demented father ordered the girls killed, as well as his first wife, whom he believed was aiding them in their alleged transgressions.
Reporting on the story in America has been scant and strange. According to the Media Research Center, the initial Associated Press report made no mention of the fact that the convicted murderers are Muslim. They were described as "Afghan." In fact, the only theology mentioned in the AP dispatch is Christianity, used while describing the boyfriend of one of the daughters.
On NBC's "Nightly News," anchor Brian Williams said this: "A verdict has been reached in a murder case that's gotten a lot of attention because it involved so-called honor killings of family members. In this case, an Afghan family living in Canada. It is a culture clash getting a lot of attention to our north."
Culture clash? Between whom? Afghans and Canadians? What is Williams talking about?
The reporter on the story, Kevin Tibbles, also avoided using the word "Muslim." He described the motivation for the violence as "a strict religious family that felt it had been disgraced."
What religion? Incredibly, the reporter didn't say.
This is no coincidence. The politically correct U.S. media are frightened by Muslim violence. They avoid the issue whenever they can.
Just think about what would happen if a Catholic father murdered his daughter for having an abortion. Would the AP and NBC News not have mentioned the religion involved? I think we all know the answer to that question.
Political correctness is dangerous because it obscures the truth. It allows certain people and groups to avoid scrutiny for destructive actions. Today, the press in America is dominated by liberal editors who believe they are protecting "minorities" by failing to mention facts that might cast them in a negative light. Thus, honest reporting is becoming almost obsolete when certain groups are involved.
Shafia, his wife and his son are Muslim fanatics who believe they have the right to commit murder in the name of their religion. Somebody get that dispatch to the media.
Those of you who disagree with me may spin it however you will but Bill O’Reilly nails the truth down in this article. The Fort Hood massacre was an act of Islamic jihad rather than simple workplace violence. And these murders in Canada were Islamic honor killings, not simple domestic violence. Overlooking the truth in the name of political correctness will lead to the destruction of America.
POLITICAL CORRECTNESS AND MUSLIMS
by Bill O’Reilly
The story is grisly: a husband and wife murdering their three young daughters, ages 19, 17 and 13, by drowning them along with their stepmother. The couple was assisted by their 21-year-old son. All were found guilty of first-degree murder in Ontario, Canada. They were sentenced to life in prison.
Mohammad Shafia and his wife, Tooba, immigrated to Canada from Afghanistan in 2007. Being Muslims, they believe in Sharia law, which in some cases allows so-called "honor killings" -- that is, if a family member deviates from strict Muslim teachings, other family members can execute them. Of course, that's insane. But under the Taliban in Afghanistan and in some other parts of the world, "honor killings" are allowed.
In his eyes, Shafia's three daughters were guilty of becoming westernized, wearing nontraditional Muslim clothing and associating with the dreaded Christians. So this demented father ordered the girls killed, as well as his first wife, whom he believed was aiding them in their alleged transgressions.
Reporting on the story in America has been scant and strange. According to the Media Research Center, the initial Associated Press report made no mention of the fact that the convicted murderers are Muslim. They were described as "Afghan." In fact, the only theology mentioned in the AP dispatch is Christianity, used while describing the boyfriend of one of the daughters.
On NBC's "Nightly News," anchor Brian Williams said this: "A verdict has been reached in a murder case that's gotten a lot of attention because it involved so-called honor killings of family members. In this case, an Afghan family living in Canada. It is a culture clash getting a lot of attention to our north."
Culture clash? Between whom? Afghans and Canadians? What is Williams talking about?
The reporter on the story, Kevin Tibbles, also avoided using the word "Muslim." He described the motivation for the violence as "a strict religious family that felt it had been disgraced."
What religion? Incredibly, the reporter didn't say.
This is no coincidence. The politically correct U.S. media are frightened by Muslim violence. They avoid the issue whenever they can.
Just think about what would happen if a Catholic father murdered his daughter for having an abortion. Would the AP and NBC News not have mentioned the religion involved? I think we all know the answer to that question.
Political correctness is dangerous because it obscures the truth. It allows certain people and groups to avoid scrutiny for destructive actions. Today, the press in America is dominated by liberal editors who believe they are protecting "minorities" by failing to mention facts that might cast them in a negative light. Thus, honest reporting is becoming almost obsolete when certain groups are involved.
Shafia, his wife and his son are Muslim fanatics who believe they have the right to commit murder in the name of their religion. Somebody get that dispatch to the media.
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
I Was Raised
One of my friends posted this on Facebook the other day and I liked it so much I had to copy it. I don’t know who wrote it initially and I deleted the part at the end that said “If you agree, repost” because I don’t do that. If I post something I leave it up to those who read it (or view it if it’s a picture) to repost it if they so choose. I do the same thing with religious or spiritual e-mails and posts on Facebook. No matter how good the saying or the picture is, if it says something like “If you agree with this, repost it” or “If you repost this (and/or send it to 7 friends in the next 10 minutes) you will receive a blessing from God” I don’t do that either. I don’t believe God reads our Facebook pages and e-mails to see if we’re forwarding things as we’re instructed to do by the poster/sender. See http://www.accordingtoglen.blogspot.com/2011/02/god-jesus-and-internet-dating.html for more details on that subject.
Anyway, I liked the sentiment and wisdom of the below post so wanted to share it with others. You are not required to forward it or repost it and if you do I can’t tell you you’ll receive any kind of blessing from God or anyone else. But I can tell you that some others will agree with you about being raised and taught correctly. And, like many of us, they’ll wonder when that stopped happening in America. I wonder if it still goes on today?
‘I was “raised”. I didn’t just grow up. I was taught to speak when I enter a room, say please and thank you, to have respect for my elders, to get up off my lazy butt and let the elder in the room have my chair, say “Yes, Sir” and “No, Sir”, lend a helping hand to those in need, hold the door for the person behind me, say excuse me when it’s needed, and to love people for who they are not for what I can get from them. I was also taught to treat people the way I want to be treated.’
Anyway, I liked the sentiment and wisdom of the below post so wanted to share it with others. You are not required to forward it or repost it and if you do I can’t tell you you’ll receive any kind of blessing from God or anyone else. But I can tell you that some others will agree with you about being raised and taught correctly. And, like many of us, they’ll wonder when that stopped happening in America. I wonder if it still goes on today?
‘I was “raised”. I didn’t just grow up. I was taught to speak when I enter a room, say please and thank you, to have respect for my elders, to get up off my lazy butt and let the elder in the room have my chair, say “Yes, Sir” and “No, Sir”, lend a helping hand to those in need, hold the door for the person behind me, say excuse me when it’s needed, and to love people for who they are not for what I can get from them. I was also taught to treat people the way I want to be treated.’
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Job Creation Obama Style
You know – I’ll freely admit I’m not the smartest man in the world. Not even close. I’m not even sure what I’m doing half the time, let alone what others are doing. But I pay attention to politics and what’s going on in the country, and get involved in discussions mostly as a hobby. I get lots of good stuff for the blog that way. A couple of things happened last week that have me scratching my head and thinking “Huh?”
First of all the Obama administration nixed the Keystone oil pipeline from Canada, at least for now. Citing a need for more environmental studies, even knowing the number of jobs the project will create in our slow and floundering economy, the President seems to be bowing to environmentalists (part of his base) in refusing to make a final decision until after the November election. The pipeline construction, maintenance and operation is estimated to create around 20,000 jobs. Yes, that’s 20 thousand.
The bottom line is that the Unites States does not have available, at this time, any reasonable, affordable alternative energy source for oil. Our vehicles run on oil and oil products. Certainly there are electric vehicles out there but there are none affordable for the average American at this time, particularly in light of the current economy. We are going to be dependent on oil for the next ten to fifteen years regardless of what other energy sources are developed. Sure, we need alternative energy sources. I have no problem with that. But in the meantime continuing our dependence on Middle Eastern oil rather than getting it from Canada (and developing our own) is simply ridiculous. Yet we slap ourselves in the face over and over by refusing to do things for ourselves.
Secondly, the Defense Department recently awarded a $345 million contract for military light attack aircraft to Sierra Nevada Corporation who, in turn, will be working with a Brazilian company, Embraer, to produce the planes. According the Hawker Beechcraft Corporation the government didn’t even allow their company to bid on the contract and therefore the awarding of the contract was unfair. They also claim that their AT-6 aircraft performed better than the Brazilian made counterpart and that it was more popular with the pilots that tested the planes.
Awarded to a stateside company the contract would have provided at least 1400 jobs, mostly union jobs, and would have kept the money and employment in the United States. Instead the planes will be fabricated mostly in Brazil and those jobs will not materialize here in the U.S.
In 2010, there was an accident on the Deepwater Horizon oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico that caused millions of barrels of oil to be released into the Gulf. All offshore drilling and oil production was halted by the President pending cleanup of the spill and research into how to prevent it from happening again. Even after the spill was capped, offshore oil production was left dormant for six months, leaving thousands of people out of work in an economy that was already hurting. New offshore drilling is questionable at best due to pressures from environmentalists yet, last year the President approved a $2 billion loan to Brazil to help them implement their offshore oil program. Rather than open new wells in our own waters and explore new oil fields (such as ANWR) the President is helping other countries develop their oil programs and assisting them with job creation. (And by the way – if offshore oil drilling is too dangerous to the environment why are we assisting other countries in the development of their own offshore oil program?)
So my simple mind is having difficulty understanding how these decisions to keep Americans out of work are being made. (I'm sure some of you are agreeing with the "simple mind" part.) Alaska has a pipeline. It was condemned by environmentalists, during construction, as being dangerous to the environment and wildlife yet it’s been in operation for decades with very few problems. So I’m having trouble understanding what the problem is with the new pipeline. It seems environmentalists merely like to prevent humans from progressing forward and, in some cases, from surviving at all. Take the case in the San Joaquin Valley in California. In 2009, the irrigation systems were closed by the government because a 2 inch minnow living in the canal has been placed on the endangered species list and it occasionally gets caught in the irrigation pumps. Environmentalists, in their love to protect animals of all types, completely disregarded the people living in the area in favor of the fish. The farmers were out of work and their families were hungry yet the environmentalists, aided by the government, told the farmers they and their families are irrelevant. One has to wonder about the sanity of those who place animal life over that of human families.
A large part of President Obama’s State of the Union address had to do with jobs and the economy for working class Americans. He paraded figures that were supposed to indicate a recovering jobs market. He promised middle class America that more jobs would be coming their way. He told them to rely on him and the government to help create jobs so that families could keep their homes and recover from the economic funk the nation is in.
Obviously, while the President was standing before Congress and the nation telling them one thing, he was actually doing the opposite. President Obama had the opportunity to create nearly 22,000 jobs which would have been a step forward in his promise to the American people. Instead he and his administration have proceeded to deny jobs through their actions and, in the case of our new military aircraft, send jobs overseas. Change we can believe in? Maybe not…
First of all the Obama administration nixed the Keystone oil pipeline from Canada, at least for now. Citing a need for more environmental studies, even knowing the number of jobs the project will create in our slow and floundering economy, the President seems to be bowing to environmentalists (part of his base) in refusing to make a final decision until after the November election. The pipeline construction, maintenance and operation is estimated to create around 20,000 jobs. Yes, that’s 20 thousand.
The bottom line is that the Unites States does not have available, at this time, any reasonable, affordable alternative energy source for oil. Our vehicles run on oil and oil products. Certainly there are electric vehicles out there but there are none affordable for the average American at this time, particularly in light of the current economy. We are going to be dependent on oil for the next ten to fifteen years regardless of what other energy sources are developed. Sure, we need alternative energy sources. I have no problem with that. But in the meantime continuing our dependence on Middle Eastern oil rather than getting it from Canada (and developing our own) is simply ridiculous. Yet we slap ourselves in the face over and over by refusing to do things for ourselves.
Secondly, the Defense Department recently awarded a $345 million contract for military light attack aircraft to Sierra Nevada Corporation who, in turn, will be working with a Brazilian company, Embraer, to produce the planes. According the Hawker Beechcraft Corporation the government didn’t even allow their company to bid on the contract and therefore the awarding of the contract was unfair. They also claim that their AT-6 aircraft performed better than the Brazilian made counterpart and that it was more popular with the pilots that tested the planes.
Awarded to a stateside company the contract would have provided at least 1400 jobs, mostly union jobs, and would have kept the money and employment in the United States. Instead the planes will be fabricated mostly in Brazil and those jobs will not materialize here in the U.S.
In 2010, there was an accident on the Deepwater Horizon oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico that caused millions of barrels of oil to be released into the Gulf. All offshore drilling and oil production was halted by the President pending cleanup of the spill and research into how to prevent it from happening again. Even after the spill was capped, offshore oil production was left dormant for six months, leaving thousands of people out of work in an economy that was already hurting. New offshore drilling is questionable at best due to pressures from environmentalists yet, last year the President approved a $2 billion loan to Brazil to help them implement their offshore oil program. Rather than open new wells in our own waters and explore new oil fields (such as ANWR) the President is helping other countries develop their oil programs and assisting them with job creation. (And by the way – if offshore oil drilling is too dangerous to the environment why are we assisting other countries in the development of their own offshore oil program?)
So my simple mind is having difficulty understanding how these decisions to keep Americans out of work are being made. (I'm sure some of you are agreeing with the "simple mind" part.) Alaska has a pipeline. It was condemned by environmentalists, during construction, as being dangerous to the environment and wildlife yet it’s been in operation for decades with very few problems. So I’m having trouble understanding what the problem is with the new pipeline. It seems environmentalists merely like to prevent humans from progressing forward and, in some cases, from surviving at all. Take the case in the San Joaquin Valley in California. In 2009, the irrigation systems were closed by the government because a 2 inch minnow living in the canal has been placed on the endangered species list and it occasionally gets caught in the irrigation pumps. Environmentalists, in their love to protect animals of all types, completely disregarded the people living in the area in favor of the fish. The farmers were out of work and their families were hungry yet the environmentalists, aided by the government, told the farmers they and their families are irrelevant. One has to wonder about the sanity of those who place animal life over that of human families.
A large part of President Obama’s State of the Union address had to do with jobs and the economy for working class Americans. He paraded figures that were supposed to indicate a recovering jobs market. He promised middle class America that more jobs would be coming their way. He told them to rely on him and the government to help create jobs so that families could keep their homes and recover from the economic funk the nation is in.
Obviously, while the President was standing before Congress and the nation telling them one thing, he was actually doing the opposite. President Obama had the opportunity to create nearly 22,000 jobs which would have been a step forward in his promise to the American people. Instead he and his administration have proceeded to deny jobs through their actions and, in the case of our new military aircraft, send jobs overseas. Change we can believe in? Maybe not…
Saturday, January 28, 2012
Insidious
/inˈsidēəs/ Adjective: Proceeding in a gradual, subtle way, but with harmful effects
During his State of the Union address the other night, President Obama said “The executive branch also needs to change. Too often, it’s inefficient, outdated and remote. That’s why I’ve asked this Congress to grant me the authority to consolidate the federal bureaucracy so that our Government is leaner, quicker, and more responsive to the needs of the American people.”
What exactly does that mean, I wonder? Is the President trying to change the way our government is set up, with a balance of power, so that all the power falls under the Executive Branch? If that happens the President will have the authority to do anything and everything without the consent of the Congress or Senate, thus making them obsolete and making him, in all reality, a dictator.
Our Constitution delineates a system of separation of powers in which the three branches of government can check and balance each other. The men who wrote the Constitution, intelligent as they were, spread the powers of government among these three branches to keep any one branch of government from becoming too powerful. Now the President is calling that system “obsolete and outdated”, which is another reason it was set up that way. By design, the President cannot lay claim to all the power in our government. If the Legislative Branch gives its authority to the President we no longer have a democratic republic but an authoritarian government. Hopefully this will be another request from the President that goes unheeded.
In other news, the President spoke of “fairness” the other night when it comes to taxes and everyone paying their fair share. This seems interesting in light of the following story…
“A new report just out from the Internal Revenue Service reveals that 36 of President Obama’s executive office staff owe the country $833,970 in back taxes. These people working for “Mr. Fair Share” haven’t paid any share, let alone their fair share.
Previous reports have shown how well-paid Obama’s White House staff is, with 457 aides pulling down more than $37 million last year. That’s up seven workers and nearly $4 million from the Bush administration’s last year.
Nearly one-third of Obama’s aides make more than $100,000 with 21 being paid the top White House salary of $172,000, each.
The IRS’ 2010 delinquent tax revelations come as part of a required annual agency report on federal employees’ tax compliance. Turns out, an awful lot of folks being paid by taxpayers are not paying their own income taxes.”
Another example of “Do as I say, not as I do”, perhaps? If Mr. Obama is so interested in everyone paying their fair share why are his own staff not doing it? Anyone want to bet that next year’s IRS report does not include White House staff? Just sayin’…
During his State of the Union address the other night, President Obama said “The executive branch also needs to change. Too often, it’s inefficient, outdated and remote. That’s why I’ve asked this Congress to grant me the authority to consolidate the federal bureaucracy so that our Government is leaner, quicker, and more responsive to the needs of the American people.”
What exactly does that mean, I wonder? Is the President trying to change the way our government is set up, with a balance of power, so that all the power falls under the Executive Branch? If that happens the President will have the authority to do anything and everything without the consent of the Congress or Senate, thus making them obsolete and making him, in all reality, a dictator.
Our Constitution delineates a system of separation of powers in which the three branches of government can check and balance each other. The men who wrote the Constitution, intelligent as they were, spread the powers of government among these three branches to keep any one branch of government from becoming too powerful. Now the President is calling that system “obsolete and outdated”, which is another reason it was set up that way. By design, the President cannot lay claim to all the power in our government. If the Legislative Branch gives its authority to the President we no longer have a democratic republic but an authoritarian government. Hopefully this will be another request from the President that goes unheeded.
In other news, the President spoke of “fairness” the other night when it comes to taxes and everyone paying their fair share. This seems interesting in light of the following story…
“A new report just out from the Internal Revenue Service reveals that 36 of President Obama’s executive office staff owe the country $833,970 in back taxes. These people working for “Mr. Fair Share” haven’t paid any share, let alone their fair share.
Previous reports have shown how well-paid Obama’s White House staff is, with 457 aides pulling down more than $37 million last year. That’s up seven workers and nearly $4 million from the Bush administration’s last year.
Nearly one-third of Obama’s aides make more than $100,000 with 21 being paid the top White House salary of $172,000, each.
The IRS’ 2010 delinquent tax revelations come as part of a required annual agency report on federal employees’ tax compliance. Turns out, an awful lot of folks being paid by taxpayers are not paying their own income taxes.”
Another example of “Do as I say, not as I do”, perhaps? If Mr. Obama is so interested in everyone paying their fair share why are his own staff not doing it? Anyone want to bet that next year’s IRS report does not include White House staff? Just sayin’…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)