|
Kevin D. Roberts
2006 Graduate - University of Connecticut - B.A. Journalism/Political Science
Torrington, CT 06790
January 27, 2008
With the retirement of Norman Mineta from the Department of Transportation we see a new nomination to be approved by the Senate. President Bush has nominated Mary Peters. But is she the best woman for the job? Some say they do not like her stance on toll-ways, as they hurt the economic vitality of our nations transportation and distribution infrastructure. Where as I tend to agree with that in a broad sense, I do believe that Mary Peters makes sense for other reasons.
You see I am against toll-ways owned by the government, but have no problem with corporate infrastructure built for return on investment being built and financed over time thru tolls. So, why do I like Mary Peters? Well I have watched the Arizona Department of transportation deal with their excessive growth over the years and have been in impressed with they way they had handled the transportation needs there with the 202 and 101 loops, as well as the I-10 expansion projects. And how all these worked with regional airports and Sky Harbor in PHX.
Additionally the transportation hubs, corporate distribution centers and airports are all working good together. All in all Arizona has done a good job of retro-fitting old infrastructure with the new demands of the exploding population growth there. So this is why I am pro-Mary Peters. And think this is a very good choice. Consider all this in 2006.
|
‘Lance Winslow’ - Online Think Tank forum board. If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; www.WorldThinkTank.net/. Lance is a guest writer for Our Spokane Magazine in Spokane, Washington
January 24, 2008
‘If I were president, we could eat dessert every day,’ says a friend who answered this question for a Kids Talk About God Arts Festival.
To balance out the ticket, perhaps the dessert president could have a vice president who could tell us how to lose the added weight from this daily indulgence.
Ricky, 7, would make a good running mate for the dessert president: ‘I would make it so we don’t have to eat broccoli and green beans.’
If kids could vote, the dessert/anti-broccoli-and-green-bean ticket would win in a landslide.
‘If I were president, I would scream! Then I would get rid of all the bad guys,’ says Lilli, 6.
Some of the bad guys like water, says Quinn, 5: ‘I would catch the sharks and put them in an aquarium. Then I would get a snack for the sharks.’
Perhaps the dessert president could help choose your shark snacks.
‘If I were president, I would let kids pray once before recess and once after recess,’ says Coleton, 6.
I’ve always assumed the fences around some schools kept bad guys out. Perhaps they protect innocent passers-by from kids at recess.
‘I would pray for God to give me the wisdom to know what to change,’ says Marissa, 7.
Knowledge increased exponentially during the 20th century. If we could travel back in time just 100 years, no one would believe our description of modern life. While knowledge has increased, many would argue that wisdom has decreased.
Have you ever wondered what you would ask for if God granted you a wish? This actually happened to a king named Solomon. Like Marissa, he asked for wisdom. Impressed by his request, God gave him riches and power as well. Perhaps we should pray that our presidents follow King Solomon’s example.
Those who have wisdom know how to live life to the fullest. Many traps await us as we struggle to decide which of life’s paths to travel. The wise person knows how to navigate past the pitfalls that ensnare the fool. God waits to provide wisdom to those who want to live in harmony with him.
‘If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach, and it will be given to him’ (James 1:5).
Many readers probably didn’t realize that God is liberal, not in the political sense but in giving wisdom liberally to all who humble themselves to ask.
‘I would tell the workers at the White House that they don’t need to be afraid to ask God to help them fix it,’ says Mariah, 8.
Our nation’s leaders can’t rely solely on military might when facing terrorists or opposing armies. History shows us repeatedly that the best plans of brilliant generals sometimes fail.
‘I would tell everybody who’s afraid of monsters, which aren’t real, that God is with you,’ says Noah, 6.
Most of the things we fear never happen. God wants us to cast our cares upon him (I Peter 5:7).
‘For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind’ (II Timothy 1:7).
Besides telling us to not fear monsters, President Noah would do something else: ‘I would worship God.’
Is it too early to print campaign buttons that read ‘Noah in 2036′?
Think about this: Regardless of the person serving as president, we need to pray that he or she would seek God’s wisdom in making decisions.
Memorize this truth: ‘If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach, and it will be given to him’ (James 1:5).
Ask this question: Am I praying that government leaders would seek God’s will and wisdom in all matters?
|
Carey Kinsolving is a syndicated columnist, producer, author, speaker and website developer. To see Carey’s Kid TV Interviews and more, visit http://www.KidsTalkAboutGod.org/ The Kids Talk About God website contains free, online content for children and families. Print free lessons from the ‘Kids Color Me Bible’ and make your own book. Watch for free the adventures of an 11-year-old girl traveling around the world, visiting missionaries in the Mission Explorers Streaming Video. Print Bible pictures drawn by kids that illustrate Scripture verses. Receive a complimentary, weekly e-mail subscription to our Devotional Bible Lessons. Bible quotations in this column are from the New King James Version.
Copyright 2006 Carey Kinsolving
January 20, 2008
As 2007 fast approaches, with Germany in command of the rotating presidency of the European Union for the first half of the year, Germany is setting the stage to perform thunderous acts and stun their audience with lightning speed and awesome ability.
The German accelerant to European unification will seize the moment and ignite the imagination to consolidate the continent in their no-nonsense manner, getting down to business and wasting no time, serious that the Islamo-fascist threat targets Rome and Vienna - ‘Western Christian Civilization’ - and that only the cross can repel the crescent. Germany will invoke and wield assistance from both industrialists and politicians, ministers of state and religion, especially the Vatican who champions Germany as the ‘Defender of the Faith.’
Offering a stark glimpse of where Germany will lead Europe, the world’s most powerful woman (according to Forbes), Angela Merkel, following a private meeting with the Bavarian pope - weighed in:
‘We spoke about the role of Europe and I emphasised the need for a constitution and that it should refer to our Christian values,’ she said. ‘I believe this treaty should be linked to Christianity and God because Christianity was decisive in the formation of Europe.’
Such calculated comments led to charges that Merkel resurrects ?holy? EU constitution row, as can be expected, but to her credit she didn’t shy away from the controversy or conceal her convictions. However, much more is at stake in the heart of Europe than first meets the eye. The German chancellor’s endorsement is only the tip of the iceberg.
Catholic politicians are going on the offensive against secular resistance to mention of Christian heritage in the Preamble of the European Constitutional Treaty with their Association of the Europe Foundation. Giorgio Salina, president of the new organization, states its purpose is to counter the ‘widespread and manifest hostility that Christian culture — considered a subculture — meets within European institutions, specifically, in Parliament’.
Salina is also the vice president of the Convention of Christians for Europe, who plan on meeting once or twice a year with ‘deputies, Christians and those sensitive to Christian, national and European values.’
Mario Mauro, vice president of the European Parliament, has stressed the importance of the foundation’s mission of building a Christian identity in Europe.
Germany’s foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier has revealed that Germany has every intention of making the EU constitution a priority next year, telling German diplomats ‘We need a constitution as soon as possible.’ The heat is on. The politicians have received their marching orders.
We can expect the Bavarian pope and his politico-religious puppets to forge ahead with their plans to remodel Europe after the ‘holy Roman Empire of the German Nation.’ Sound far-fetched? Not at all. Laying the foundation for it in fertile minds, helping to shape public perception and policy, just in time for Germany’s ascension to the throne, Germany hosts An Empire Revisited 200 Years After Its Demise. Germany’s information services describes it as ‘two major retrospectives featuring historic documents and artifacts in Berlin and Magdeburg, along with several related exhibits in Frankfurt and other cities, aim to bring this empire back to life 200 years after it was declared dead in Vienna by Kaiser Franz II in the Europe of Napoleon.’
Yet some, failing to connect the dots, or unable to believe that truth is stranger than fiction or Germany capable of backsliding, lament The clothes have no emperor, that Europe ‘does not, it cannot, seem to speak with one voice: it cannot even agree to speak through one person…to speak collectively with a single voice…the advantages of speaking and acting authoritatively with the collective weight of the world’s largest trading bloc are so self-evident and overwhelming …’.
Germany will get down to the brass tacks and prepare the way for the emperor to fill the clothes that yet hang limp. Europe’s strong man, with the pope’s promotion, will emerge as the grand design demands. However, Europe is not only taking a monumental risk that such a leader will always adhere to its ideals, it is gambling with world peace. Is a world dictator about to appear? Based upon both the Bible and history, I would say, yah.
|
David Ben-Ariel is a Christian-Zionist writer and author of Beyond Babylon: Europe’s Rise and Fall. With a focus on the Middle East and Jerusalem, his analytical articles help others improve their understanding of that troubled region. Check out the Beyond Babylon blog.
January 9, 2008
With Campaign 2006 gaining momentum, the situation in Iraq is likely to be a focal point of the crossfire between candidates and political parties. Among the centerpiece items could be whether or not the U.S. should withdraw from Iraq. After the election, the rhetoric will diminish and an approach that differs little from the status quo will continue.
Near-term withdrawal from Iraq might gain votes, but it could lead to an even more dangerous situation in Iraq and the Middle East. Following any near-term U.S. withdrawal, sectarian strife would continue or increase, at least for a time. In response, Iraq’s Shia-dominated government would accelerate its evolution down an illiberal path. It would likely grow increasingly authoritarian and anti-Western.
In addition, Iran’s influence would increase rapidly and Iraq might potentially become a de facto Iranian satellite. Already, Chatham House, a leading British think tank has declared that Iran ?has now superseded the U.S. as the most influential power? in Iraq. With an enlarged influence in Iraq, Iran would then be in a much better position to dominate the Persian Gulf. In the absence of a credible energy policy that moves the U.S. away from oil dependency, that development would create new lines of vulnerability for the U.S.
Even as the U.S. persists in seeking to produce some kind of better outcome in Iraq than had been the case under Saddam Hussein?s rule, the U.S. experience in Iraq has been troubling from a geopolitical standpoint. Far from the early expectations that there would be ’shock and awe’ from a demonstration of U.S. power, on account of the experience to date, America’s enemies are more in shock over how impotent the U.S. Military appears to be in spite of its enormous technology/manpower advantages, and in awe of how far the Sunni and radical Shia insurgencies have progressed.
On account of the U.S. experience in Iraq, Iran’s confidence to pursue its interests?which are largely at odds with critical U.S. ones?has been bolstered. Iran has gained significant influence relative to the U.S. in Iraq through just a small investment of money, manpower, and arms. The facts that Iraq’s Prime Minister all but backed Hezbollah in the recent combat in Lebanon in defiance of U.S. strategic interests and Moqtada al-Sadr operates with impunity in building an ever larger radical pro-Iranian movement (which undermines the leverage of Shia moderates such as Grand Ayatollah Sistani who are more sympathetic to U.S. interests) speak for themselves.
Barring a meaningful U.S. effort to devise a coherent strategy for ‘retaking’ Iraq and a willingness to inject the substantial manpower to do so (it won’t happen given political realities), and U.S. willingness to stand up for a UN Security Council follow-up resolution that paves the way for the disarming of Hezbollah as an alternative to allowing the situation in Lebanon to slide back to the status quo ante, the stark reality is that the balance of power in the region is tilting toward Iran and away from the U.S. Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, was a counterweight to Iran. That counterweight is gone. Worse, it is now evolving in a direction that expedites Iran’s ability to achieve its regional aspirations.
The uninspiring U.S. performance in Iraq?a multitude of reasons are responsible including, but not limited to, a lack of planning, lack of understanding of Iraq’s history, lack of military capacity to deal with guerrilla warfare, strategic errors, for example, not apprehending Moqtada al-Sadr when an arrest warrant had been issued and the United States? failure to ensure a liberal constitution for Iraqis, unlike what General MacArthur did in Japan?has created perceptions that can only embolden would-be aggressors and terrorists.
Against that backdrop, Iran is sufficiently bold to call UN Security Council Resolution 1696 (aimed at achieving Iranian compliance with the international community’s demands to halt its nuclear activities by August 31) ‘unlawful.’ It has continued to push ahead with its program and pledged to accelerate its activities. It has openly supported Hezbollah and its President has continued to call for Israel’s elimination.
Iran has calculated that the West cannot harm it. The West won’t curb Iran’s ability to sell oil, even as oil revenue accounts for 80% of Iran’s export income and generates 50% of its federal revenue. The West is too weak to sacrifice is Iran’s thinking. As Iran sees it, if the U.S. can’t handle Iraq’s insurgency, it most definitely can’t deal with a much larger one should it try to invade Iran, hence there won’t be any invasion.
If Iraq is beyond fixing or, more accurately, the U.S. lacks the will, desire, or ability to ‘fix’ the already bad situation there, then withdrawal would arguably be a viable approach. Such a move would be highly popular among the American public per recent polling. However, it would also send powerful confirmation to Iran that its calculations are, in fact, correct. In addition, it would signal to the broader radical Islamist terrorist movement that the U.S. has become the ‘paper tiger’ they long believed it is. Weakness invites aggression and that scenario could be quite ugly for U.S. interests.
Therefore, the decision on that issue has become one of pitting critical U.S. interests against U.S. public desires. The public has lost faith in the U.S. ability to carry out the task successfully and may well be beyond persuasion. It feels betrayed that it was led to believe things were going much better in Iraq and the kind of outcomes that would then be expected to materialize from such progress are never achieved. The recent data showing 100+ deaths per day in Iraq during July shattered any illusions that the country is becoming more stable. A newly-released Pentagon assessment warned, ?Conditions that could lead to civil war exist in Iraq.? On September 6, 2006, Mr. al-Mashhadani, Speaker of Iraq?s Parliament, warned, ?We have three to four months to reconcile with each other. If the country doesn’t survive this, it will go under.?
As a result, charges of Media bias or that the Media is ignoring good news are not credible. The bad on-the-ground situation in Iraq is reality. The American public is now frustrated and in an increasingly anti-incumbent mood. This could indicate that it seeks big change, including with present policy in Iraq.
The Bush Administration is now aware of the constraints that limit its decisionmaking, which will grow even more formidable if one or both houses of Congress switch hands to the Democratic Party, and it knows the large stakes involved in the outcome in Iraq. Even as it believes it cannot significantly increase manpower in Iraq, it also recognizes that it cannot concede major U.S. interests there. Moreover, it is also unwilling to engage in Realpolitik with Iraq’s sectarian groups in a late bid to change the outcome there. Therefore, it will take an approach that largely resembles the current path. Troops will be relocated e.g., to Baghdad as recently occurred, U.S. goals will be tempered even further, and policy deviations by Iraq’s new leadership will go largely ignored even as they cut more and more against U.S. interests in the region. After the 2008 Presidential election, the U.S. Government will make difficult policy choices (and odds strongly favor disengagement and a dramatic reduction in reconstruction or other funding in the face of likely international complaints that the U.S. should continue to finance Iraq’s reconstruction) and try to put the best face on it.
The new U.S. policy in the Middle East will likely be one of ‘consolidation’–a strengthening of relationships with a handful of moderate states that may still have the chance to be friendly to U.S. interests and those with which it must maintain relations to avoid full Iranian domination of the Persian Gulf. Under ‘consolidation,’ such states would include Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, and the Gulf emirates. Efforts to achieve political reform at the expense of stability will be greatly downplayed with Realism supplanting Neoconservatism in American foreign policy circles. Israel will remain a strategic ally, albeit an even more important one, in the shrinking pool of U.S. influence that the Middle East will have become.
Meanwhile, then and afterward, Iran and radical Islamist terrorist movements will push ahead with their own ambitions. They have already reached conclusions about U.S. capabilities. All said, an already ‘tough neighborhood’ is likely to grow even tougher in coming years. A quick and full U.S. withdrawal from Iraq would hasten that process, and is not likely. However, the process of a realignment of the balance of power in the Middle East is already underway.
|
Don Sutherland has researched and written on a wide range of geopolitical issues.
December 11, 2007
I can’t speak for the other forty-nine states, but I know at least one whose citizens have no one else to blame for $3.00 gas prices but themselves. That state is Florida. Time and time again, Florida voters and politicians have made clear their opposition to offshore drilling near their beaches. This opposition is self-defeating in nature.
Florida politicians are right to be concerned for the preservation of their environment. The beaches are the main draw for tourists, and tourists are the driving force of the Florida economy. As Florida Republican gubernatorial candidate Charlie Crist has suggested, Florida’s environment is its economy.
However, as with all things, concerns about the environment must be weighed against other factors.
- Tourists either drive to Florida or rent cars while they visit. In that way, high gas prices stand as a detriment to tourism.
- Florida’s net population grows by 750 people each day. With the rising costs of housing, all of Florida’s workers are finding it more and more difficult to buy a house in a good neighborhood and still be able to afford gas to get them to work.
- Cuba, with the help of China, has recently sought to commence drilling for oil just 45 miles away from Key West.
Florida’s ambivalence to offshore drilling has been the epitome of the ‘not in my backyard’ philosophy. So long as the state maintains this attitude, its residents have no one to blame but themselves for high gas prices and the detrimental effects they have on tourism, the very industry purportedly being saved by opposition to drilling. As stated, if Florida does not tap into the bounty of the Gulf, Cuba will. The communist country can only be expected to redouble its efforts in light of recent finds by Chevron and other oil companies of vast pools of oil in the Gulf. It is ironic that a communist government will choose to profit from natural resources where a capitalist state dare not.
It is a mistake for Florida to turn its back on oil drilling. Such contracts would be profitable and, presuming precautions are taken and oversight is provided, would not be a detriment to the environment. Oil drilling can be and is done every day in a safe and responsible way with minimal risk of accidents.
In light of the strong opposition Florida politicians mount against oil drilling, it is doubtful that much of the untapped resources of the Gulf will be exploited anytime soon. Will the state and the country get by OK without it? Of course. But Floridians will have no one else to blame for $3.00 per gallon gasoline but themselves.
As they shell out more and more for fuel, one hopes that Floridians will truly take the time to appreciate the environment they believe they are preserving. In the end, they may not be able to afford to drive, but at least they will have pristine scenery to look at.
|
Josh Smith is a telecommunications data analyst and aspiring writer. He is a regular contributor to the political debate on http://www.PolitiPoll.net.
December 8, 2007
I am grateful.
I am grateful that I am able to speak not only as a human, but an American. I am grateful that I am part of ?We the People.? For the most part, I am proud to be an American!
I am grateful that for the past four decades I have been able to live my life without a care concerning my government.
I am grateful I have the opportunity to make my voice heard through the Internet, editorials in local papers, and thousands of other ways to share my opinion. I can do this against my own government with every confidence that I won?t be silenced. If I have any doubt of this, it is important to test this belief by exercising my voice until I am certain that that freedom still rings.
I am grateful that our culture may be at a place where we recognize our moral compass may be pointing in the wrong direction, and is vital for life to sustain itself. Now that the fruit has matured, can I see what was planted. As I look out over the harvest, it must be time to plow the field! The seeds of sour grapes can grow bitter the next time around.
I am grateful that our education system has enabled me to read and write. Now that I am grown, the endless wealth of knowledge available to me over the Internet and in our libraries enables me to discover everything! I can do anything I ever dreamed! What a gift!
I am grateful that my water comes from ?somewhere other? than the lake behind our house that collects the runoff from the surrounding manicured, perfect lawns. I wonder if our public water plant board of trustees buys bottled water for their families?
I am grateful for documents like the Declaration of Independence. It reads like prophecy to Americans today?nearly 225 years after it was written! The question is, WWJD? What Would Jefferson Do if he were here today?
I am grateful that in a time when things may not be going so well that we may recognize our need to change, and that change begins with every single one of US. Only when the pain of staying the same exceeds the pain of change can we begin the process of reform.
I am ashamed of myself for not paying attention in history class. I wish I had learned more when someone else was laying out the lessons and the stakes weren?t so high.
I am ashamed of how many hours my children?s lives have been squandered in front of the television set. How are teachers supposed to teach children with commercial conditioned attention spans?
I am ashamed that my home could house 20 families by most of the world?s standards, and that would significantly improve the lives of those 20 families.
I am ashamed of the amount of energy it takes to power my house. I consume more of the world?s resources through my decadent lifestyle (by the world’s standards) than I will ever be able to intelligently justify.
I am ashamed that I have missed more than just a couple opportunities to participate in our country?s elections. Even when I bothered to vote, I really didn?t know all that I should have about the issues and candidates. I used the excuse, if god had wanted me to vote, He would have sent me a candidate. That excuse just doesn?t fly.
I am ashamed of not blowing the whistle on unfair elections because at the heart of it all, I just took our noble nation for granted. I felt I could lock Lady Liberty away in a governmental institution in Washington, and I could let the public servants dismantle her ideologies one line at a time while I looked away. I paid her my respects on the Fourth of July, but didn?t really pay attention to her struggles. I enjoyed plentiful picnics in her parks, and showed her just how much I cared when I wiped my dirty mouth on a napkin with her stars and stripes.
I am just so ashamed?and grateful that I finally see it that way.
|
Sherry Clark is a charter member of the Society of Decorating Professionals, Associate member of the Builders Industry Association, and an Associate member of the Interior Design Society. She tries to find creative solutions to living in a disposable society. She is the president of Help-U-Out, America’s first full-service, real-estate auction house. Customers go through a predictable process from the first phone call to getting their money. The people who work there call themselves Lifesavers, and that’s the way they look at their job. They know their job is important, life-giving and stress relieving. The Help-U-Out selling experience is like none you have ever experienced before. Learn more about how redesigners, stagers, auctioneers, and event planners are doing more in their careers than they ever did before…at http://www.HelpUOut.US
December 6, 2007
Matthew 7:5 ?You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.?
New York State is legend for the corruption of its government. Some New Yorkers might prickle at that but they know it is all too true. In some instances in other places corruption is incidental, arising from one individual or a small number of individuals who abuse their power.
But in New York the story is more complex. That corruption has been enabled by the political structure built mostly by those who identify themselves as Democrats. The abuse of power in New York City, through the court system, legislatively, and woven into every other imaginable avenue, is just a part of life there.
It was not always this way; and many good people have worked to change this from all political perspectives, but they have failed. The power that comes with corruption, like a gold ring grabbed from a wooden horse on the carousel, became an accepted part of life in the Big Apple. No amount of clean up by either party has done much to change that.
Corruption is everywhere government touches the lives of the people, placing all of us at risk both by that system and even more gravely by those who are taking advantage of the opportunities such corruption makes possible.
What starts in places like New York; ends at the doors of the White House and Congress. The NeoCons are the most efficient crooks but New York lead the way.
The Garson case in Brooklyn revealed not just one case of judicial corruption but a system of corruption that tied back to the appointment of judges by, surprise, the Democratic Party. Not a NeoCon was in sight ? but the reliance of women and children on a dispassionate and judicial oversight for their lives had been converted to a market in pull. The tapping of a judge, carrying on business as usual by extorting cash from a desperate mother, was carried out by one courageous woman, Frieda Haminov. She had been discouraged and threatened by authorities and carried out her expose despite the official hostility. Her acts resulted in one cover up after another; little changed in spite of the overwhelming evidence.
Good people are still at risk when circumstances force them into the court system.
The legislature is no different. Ada L. Smith, Democratic State Senator for Queens, continues her battering and vitriol, showering abuse down on her office staff while she continues to rake in the monetary benefits from her position. No NeoCon handed her the phone she flung at her last victim.
New Yorkers know their system is corrupt. In New York there is nothing that is not for sale from the bench or the legislature. But there is nothing that the people can do to enact change as things stand today. Systemic corruption means that those in control have become part of a system that uses the government to funnel wealth into their own pockets. Greed trumps goodness every time.
Those elected to Federal office from New York came up through that system and to succeed played that system successfully, thus picking up the same nasty habits and destructive values that hopefully will limit Old Ada’s career. The most successful of these go on to Washington D. C.
Therefore, those who secured their power in New York now serving mostly themselves in Congress, are not, shall we say, the kind of people who can afford to throw stones at the NeoCons.
Congress is a glass house.
If the Democratic Party is to save itself and offer a solution to the growing Nazism of the NeoCons Democrats with the balls and determination need to take action and the first item on that agenda should be cleaning up their own house. They need to change the Democratic Party. Do they have the courage? The jury is out; Las Vegas might refuse to make odds on that one.
Corruption in one place transfers everywhere.
There is a reason why the Democratic contingent of Congress spends its time watching the steady roll of fascism through America’s Institutions, silent where you would expect outrage. Several generations of stealing less and a solid addiction to the benefits of power has made them vulnerable to the charges that would be leveled at them if they dared speak out. Some of them probably wonder what the NSA picked up in its tapings or what kind of home movies Bush gets from his operatives. Not all of them have that kind of worries, but enough to make it impossible for any counter move to be successful. Enough is all the NeoCons need.
If an individual Congressman has dirty laundry he is vulnerable. He can be depended on to be quiet on those issues that really matter. Otherwise he is free to benefit from his position. The NeoCons don’t mind a little sharing.
At an elemental level this is not a partisan problem ? but the divides of politics have worked well to build that perception.
There is no question that Republicans also need to act; they need to clean up their own party as well. But for them this is far more difficult. None NeoCons lack any control over their political infrastructure, Many of them, now still stuck in denial, are experiencing a deer-in-the-headlights moment. The Democrats, on the other hand, must deal only with the more mundane, garden variety kind of corruption. Sort of homey after watching the NeoCons operate, isn’t it?
Are Democrats up to that challenge? Their grass roots, peeling away just like many Republicans, are giving up hope. The courage must come, as always, from individuals. For a moment imagine what might be possible. What if those who are controlled by guilty secrets came forward and simply admitted what has been hidden? What if they offered to make amends for any wrongs they have done? Confessed to those they had harmed? Asked forgiveness? That would be a powerful statement that would leave them feeling better about themselves and on a firmer footing with everyone around them ? and with God. Their fellow members could support and encourage them. Many would find that much would be forgiven them. It would be a revival of American trust, something much needed ? and not just in New York.
New York, and all of America, needs Clean, Open, Politics and the means for ensuring that the government we pay for does not become the government that owns us.
Clean, open, politics is not rocket science. In fact, it need not be difficult. During the last two hundred years Americans have created all of the tools needed to accomplish that goal. Those tools are the accountability and enforceability we expect from insurance agents, dog walkers, house cleaners, brokers and other professionals. We trust those elected to legislatures and courts with things far more valuable than entrusted to any house cleaner. Why do we fail to ensure they are bonded? When elected officials steal, either directly or by holding a garage sale on our rights as Americans, there must be accountability.
We, not they, have the rights recognized by the Declaration of Independence. We, not they, are sovereign.
A bond should cover the cost of removing them from office by recall or other ethically appropriate method. If you lie you leave should be a basic assumption of accepting political office, and not just the next term, immediately. Tom Delay should not only be gone he should be bankrupted by liability and now working at MacDonald’s.
It is time for installing Accountability 101 in government. While the Democratic Party starts looking for the rags and cleaner for that housecleaning job on itself Americans need to dig in and ensure the job gets done in every possible way. Coming clean is one way, the other is coming together. We must close the political divides between right and left, keeping in mind that we are one people.
Some of us are already working on that.
Coalition for Clean, Open, Politics, a growing group of fed up Americans is forming, determined to return control to the people by exacting accountability for those in government. Promises made must be promises kept. To do that we need to extract enforceable promises from hopeful candidates and we need to bond them, ensuring the means for removal are available.
When real control is again vested directly in the people the moral hazard of government as it is today will be less of a temptation to the ethically challenged, and that will be a good thing.
John Cadwalder has a solution that costs little, takes practically no upkeep, and makes America secure. Cadwalder has answers you need to know ? for all of us.
Last winter nearly a million and a half homes in California went without electric power for as long as two weeks.
The cost of electricity rose steadily because of the policies adopted by the present administration. Today, the cost of electric power in the United States is tied in to the cost of oil like two Siamese twins joined at the hip and head.
Last month California was hit by a wave of heat that killed the elderly. I In California the total was one hundred and thirty. The mostly elderly died at home, some of them had air conditioners that were kept turned off. The elderly, on fixed incomes, could not afford the cost of the electricity to run their units. These elderly and not so elderly died along with their pets.. It was an ugly way to go.
Bodies were stacked two to the gurney because the hospitals could not handle the numbers of dead.
A few days ago, Americans who finally managed escape from Lebanon are trickling back home. Americans were last out because our embassy there ignored their need while such countries as England, Italy and Japan made free emergency transport available for their citizens. Our country had to be dissuaded from charging Americans fleeing for fear of their lives. This also delivered a very different message than we as American expect to hear from those in government.
Your electric company will be quick to tell you they are not liable, and they will be right. Government allows electric companies quasi-governmental status because it deems their interests as superior to those of the people. Government accepts no liability itself and extends that benefit to its friends.
What you demand from your house cleaner or your contractor you cannot get from those who are assumed to supply the needs that, gone unmet, will kill us. That is fundamentally wrong but at this point in time it is impossible to change.
We have learned that it does not take foreign terrorists to put us at risk, our government has done that themselves. We are vulnerable, and as was the case in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, the real answer is not government, it is facing the problem as they exists and solving them ourselves from within our communities, churches, and civic organizations.
There are many problems but at the top of the list is energy dependence, especially when the lack of affordable energy kills. Those most on the margin are at risk of their very lives.
We need to get serious about getting off the grid and ensure that our energy needs are met not through this system of tenuous and vulnerable cables but through the means now available that both lowers the cost and secures our continued needs over time. The technologies to accomplish this exist today, they are available as well as affordable, thanks to American innovators and inventors.
You will hear those in authority say this cannot be done, but notice whose interests they have been representing over the past months and years. The emergency infrastructure in New York on September 11th, 2001 completely broke down. It was volunteers who brought relief and ensured that what needed to be done was accomplished. As Californians we have seen this over and over as emergencies bring us together to ensure that our families and communities survive.
It is not rocket science, it is simple common sense to use what is available even when those who would profit from the status quo try hard to dissuade us.
The essential solar and cell technologies have come a long way since they were originally produced in 1900. My own family installed a system for heating water in their home in Hollywood in 1901. It worked perfectly. Today, the application of far more advanced technologies has made our present system a dinosaur as outdated as the levees that held the water back from New Orleans, another governmental program that cost lives because of the false sense of security that lulled people into inaction.
We expected solar to become standard in the 70s. We are still waiting ? and now the costs are bankrupting ordinary Americans and our elderly are dying.
More than eighty-one of our elderly died just in California. Grandmothers, grandfathers, Uncles, Aunts, people we knew, with whom we worshiped and lived. We can not bring them back but we can make sure it does not happen again.
This is a problem that the powers that be have ignored because it does not augment their income. It is a problem that we need to acknowledge because it can kill us or those we love. Getting off the grid matters, not just to save money, but for that, too. It matters because we need to know we are caring for our own, being responsible, and loving each other as Christ told us to do.
It will not be easy, but it can be done if we face this together and take action. We need to do it now so next summer no one is at risk.
My father was a practical guy. If there was something that needed doing he would dig out the information and get it done. He would listen to people telling him it was impossible very politely. Then he would just do it. We can do that, too. Like I said, this is not rocket science. We all know many people who have installed their own entirely independent energy systems, either spending a lot or nearly nothing. Finding the best technology means being discerning and asking hard questions.
Americans have always been the kind of people who innovate and, when the chips are down, do it for themselves. America was built on that kind of creativity and initiative. We had it once; we still have it.
Many of those technologies we heard about in the 70s did work. They could have been used. Many patents for those technologies were, surprise, bought up and sat on by petroleum companies. That weren’t a conspiracy, just market manipulation; easy for those who control the markets and government to carry out. This is an obstacle we can overcome because when you understand how it happens it can be avoided.
In the Spiritual Politician we hear from Americans with answers, from those people who find profit in taking the work of Jesus into the world through invention, business, and social action.
John Cadwalder is a good man who has an answer that solves this problem. John has spent his life studying the work of Tesla and other greats and has found solutions overlooked by industries who focused on selling petroleum products. He wants his technology used first to help the elderly and needy. There are lots of people out there who, like John, want to do the right thing and enact change for all of us. John, unlike other Americans, can tell you how we avoid the pitfalls placed by corporations. Getting off the grid is not just a good idea, it is the only idea.
November 18, 2007
It’s very interesting that Democrats are hopping mad about the new forthcoming mini-series ‘The Path to 9/11,’ produced by ABC. When ‘The Reagans,’ a grossly inaccurate biographical film about Ronald Reagan was produced by CBS, Reagan supporters were shunned by the left for expressing outrage. Here’s one example from the New York Times as displayed by NewsBusters.com,
‘His [Ronald Reagan’s] supporters credit him with forcing down the Iron Curtain, so it is odd that some of them have helped create the Soviet-style chill embedded in the idea that we, as a nation, will not allow critical portrayals of one of our own recent leaders.’–Editorial in the November 5 New York Times.
Recently, we have been hearing the same ‘Soviet-style chill’ from Clinton and Albright who demand the film script be changed. Just read this excerpt from President Clinton’s lawyer to ABC,
‘While ABC is promoting ‘The Path to 9/11,’ as a dramatization of historical fact, in truth it is a fictitious rewriting of history that will be misinterpreted by millions of Americans. Given your stated obligation to ?get it right,? we urge you to do so by not airing this drama until the egregious factual errors are corrected, an endeavor we could easily assist you with given the opportunity to view the film.’
So, Clinton is demanding to screen the film and have his changes made before it can air? Sounds like the old, cold, USSR style of governing. Wait, he doesn’t even hold official office anymore. But the Democrats that do hold office are also making demands, as reported by Reuters,
‘Reid and other leading Senate Democrats wrote to Robert Iger, president and CEO of ABC’s corporate parent, the Walt Disney Co., urging him to ‘cancel this factually inaccurate and deeply misguided program.’ ‘
That’s censorship! I thought the left is tolerant and accepts free speech for what it is. Further, remember when Fahrenheit 9/11, the movie that falsely distorts Presidents George H.W. Bush and current President Bush, was hailed as a great documentary? Many Democrats were even advocating people to see the movie. And now Democrats, including President Clinton are demanding for the script to be changed? If Cheney demanded that anything be changed from any network, liberals would be screaming about suppression of rights, 1st Amendment, fear mongering, the usual works. But they aren’t screaming about that now are they? No.
Last, Democrats have asserted that showing the movie with the current script hurts our national security. Are Democrats spewing the same fear mongering comments they accuse the President and Vice President of ? All of this silliness about the ABC drama makes it easy to point out once again, the widespread and transparent hypocrisy of the left.
|
Brett Palat is a national security analyst and holds a Master’s Degree in Public Policy from George Mason University School of Public Policy. His blog, Current Times, can be found at http://current-times.blogspot.com Current Times is an information outlet that seeks to foster discussion about the critical issues facing America domestically and abroad. The focus here is broad, ranging from tax policy to national security. These issues are examined academically, practically and politically.
Newer Posts »
| | | | | | | | | |