Making It In America

Wow!  Have you read all the blogs about the tea parties on April 15?  And then, have you read all the blog reader’s comments?  After reading them, I decided I needed to add my two cents!

First, for or against the tea parties, I stand by the right of others to have the tea parties.  They weren’t a bunch of violent protesters making trouble, just a bunch of folks expressing their idea.  It seems that that is one of the fundamentals Americans have always enjoyed.  We even let the KKK have their rallies despite how unpopular they are!

Second, since when is it so necessary to get nasty and call names for people who express a differing opinion?  I saw tea party attendants  called racists,compared to Timothy McVey and verbally torn apart by those who are “right” in their own mind.  I question the need to call names and sling mud when people hold legal meetings to express their point of view.

Third, it seems that the previous president gets brought into the picture when the stimulus package he signed was within months, not eight years, of when he left office.  Therefore, it seems that the folks meeting must be racist, because they protest now and not during Bush’s time in office.  I am still trying to get my mind around that one.  Just a few days ago my daughters called me to thank me for raising her to believe in the good of all people and to not be a racist.  She’s right, I’m not, so what does it say when I tell you that I do not like all of the decisions of the current administration any more than I did with the previous administration?  By the standards of some, if I question anything President Obama says or does, it is only due to his color.  What a crock of malarkey!

Fourth, I didn’t attend a tea party, but I do understand the frustration of many who did attend.  So many writers said that we (95% of us) were just given a tax break and should be happy.  Unfortunately, many look at the big picture and we know that there is going to be financial pain when all those stimulus dollars come due.  To those of you yelling at folks stressing their point of view now, I will be interested in what you have to say two years down the road!

The greatest fear I have in homeland security right now is the inability of Janet Napolitano to call an act what it is!  If she cannot tell the difference between a man-made disaster and a terrorist act, please President Obama, replace her with someone who can!

On the news today, Napolitano was quoted as saying that she would no longer permit the fear brought by the words terrorist acts be used to frighten us and be used politically.  She then said she would use the term man-made disaster.  I beg to differ, but the dam that breaks is a man-made disaster.  When a crane falls over and causes death because someone did not care for it properly you might say it is a man-made disaster.  The way New Orleans was handled before, during and after Katrina was a man-made disaster.

Purposely blowing up innocent people is not a man-made disaster.  It is an act of terror.  It is a terrorist act.  The act, not the words, is performed to strike terror into the hearts of those affected.  According to dictionary.com, a terrorist is one who terrorizes or frightens others or a political group meant to demoralize the government through the use of terror.  An attack by a terrorist would, therefore, be a terrorist attack.  A man-made disaster, by any other name, would not include terrorism.

It seems to me that the stimulus package has brought out the child in so many people.  Republicans are being accused of “playing politics” because they don’t like the stimulus package as given.  Democrats are accused of wanting bipartisan support so they can blame the Republicans later.  Everybody seems to be pointing fingers and name-calling while so few actually discuss the package!

As Americans, it would behoove us to look over the package carefully.  It would be wise to cut out anything that spends money without maximum benefit for each dollar.  If it doesn’t have a large, broad application, drop it.  Pare it down until it will work but not waste.

Bare in mind that I am not a professional in this area.  I am just someone like you but here are a few of my ideas for a stimulus package:

1.  Don’t give stimulus checks to everyone.  Give all the taxpayers a tax cut.  Let them keep the money they are earning.

2.  Only spend money to create jobs that will last for years.  Temporary jobs only offer temporary solutions to a big problem.

3.  Give companies tax breaks and other incentives if they create new jobs.

4.  Make it feasible to create products in our country.  When we buy new products, we are supporting almost every country but our own.

5.  Demand immediate repayment from any company that squanders money given to them in a bail-out bid.  Don’t allow them to file bankrupcy in lieu of paying the money back.  Make the companies, even beyond CEO monies, accountable for every penny they take.

6.  Put a deference on programs that are unnecessary at this time.  I love art, but the stimulus package amounts given to them and a few other pet projects goes beyond what is necessary.  Maybe the artists could make a living by selling the art, fundraising, benefactors, etcetera-like they used to in centuries before.

The stimulus package was not, in theory, created to fill in the holes in the country’s budget.  It concerns me that such a wasteful bill should be considered so important that it has to pass now, before people really consider what it  contains, before it is too late to turn back!

I try to be fair.  I read.  I listen.  I decide for myself.  Today I listened to two tapes of President Obama’s voice.   On the first tape he is talking about the government and how only government action can turn around the crisis we are in.  On the second tape, when he is talking to business leaders he says government can’t do it, that it must be done by local people and businesses.  These two statements seem to be absolute opposites.  I wonder, “which one did you mean President Obama?”

As I read the news, it seems that everyone thinks that we should pass the bill now.  President Obama said that it is inexcusable and irresponsible to not just pass the pork-laden bill before Congress now.  What will happen if it is not passed until March first?  I know that the powers that be want to say this president got more done in less time than any other president.  I know that they want the bill passed by February sixteenth.  But I would also like to know that the bill that is passed is the best it can be!

I am not a Republican, but I am tired of how the articles I read, either through comments made by interviewees or by the authors of the article, make the Republicans out to be the bad guys.  We are not talking chump change here and I gladly support anyone who will look at this bill and refuse to vote for it until it reflects what it should be.  It is not a stimulus package.  It is a package full of pet projects and funds to make up for ‘budgets that were lean during the Bush years.’  I am sorry.  Maybe they were lean because they needed to be.  Maybe now is not the time to fund them fully.

People are losing their jobs.  The package creates temporary jobs.  When those are done, what will the workers do?  How will the endowment to the Arts stimulate a better economy?  How will more than half of the items in the package truly change anything?  Odds are, they won’t.  Maybe Republicans (I hope and pray) want a real change.  A lasting change.  A change this stimulus package clearly will not deliver.

Seriously, which one did you mean President Obama?

Our country is in dire straits.  The economy is in disparate shape and the government wants to “help” us out.  If you take any time to discover what kind of help they are trying to give us, you too would say, “No thank you!”  Sadly, too many of us are looking at the tiny part of the package that might benefit the individual and then we think ‘good idea.’  The American people need to find out what is going on and then let their elected officials know how they feel and what they are willing to do if they aren’t listened to yet again!

For example, why do we, at this time in our history, need $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts?   Then $150 million to cover the repair backlog at the Smithsonian-do they need the entire amount now?  How about a mere $10 million to get them started and later we’ll give them  more when the government can actually afford it.  As an individual, I am told that I should budget and learn to live within my means.  Wouldn’t that be a good rule of thumb for the government too?

Okay, I love the national parks, but $1.8 billion?  We are being asked to tighten our belts and support national fish hatcheries? Does it take $300 million for a job services to upgrade and be efficient?  Really?

I read over much of what is being pushed through in the name of stimulating the American economy.  There were some great ideas (though I’m not sure they will do what is expected of them).  But, heaven’s to Betsy, there were some items that the people who formed the plan should be embarrassed for, that do nothing to stimulate the economy.  All I can say is please, senators, vote no.  If we have to have a stimulus plan, cut the pork, get serious and develop a package that will do all you say it can and nothing more.

I just read one of the stupidest blogs I have read in a long time.  The blogger claims that Barack Obama hates white people because FEMA and he left people to die in Kentucky because it was a red state full of white people.  I’m sorry, but this is as stupid as claiming Bush was to blame for Katrina.

I kind of hoped the new administration would bring a slow down to crazy expectaions of the American people.    I kind of hoped that commentators like Glenn Beck were wrong and Americans did not expect everything to be taken care of- that they had ceased to be self-sufficient.  It appears to be true, at least for some folks.  They were complaining that some folks in rural Kentucky were having to get water from the stream in a bucket.  Shouldn’t they be rejoicing that they have access to water?  Our early settlers were greatful if and when they could find water.  They were more than happy to chop a hole in the ice and pull out water.  They didn’t expect the government to come and do it for them!

Come on America!   Depending on the government and governmental agencies to save you is a dangerous thing to do.  Bring back the old can-do attitude.  Obama says “yes you can!”  Apply that to your daily living.  Take care of yourself and rely on others only when it is not within your abilities to do anything.  Get off your well-rested laurels and take care of yourself.  The people in Kentucky are in need, true.  But it seems a dangerous thing for the state to sit back and wait for others to take care of their people.  Complaining and finger pointing won’t do nearly as much as action.  Get busy Americans!

The economy is in dire straits; the war in Iraq rages on.  Most of the country is covered in ice and snow and there are political problems all over the place.  So what are the states of Ohio, Kentucky and the Army Corps of Engineers doing?  Fighting over an eight ton rock.  You heard me, a rock!

It seems that historian Steve Shaffer decided that he had to find a rock that he had heard about since his childhood.  As a fact, it was first made known in 1847.  The graffiti-covered rock has a name, Indian Head Rock.  Now, this infamous rock hasn’t been seen since the 1920s and has, in fact, been covered by water.  The rock was removed from the water where it could now become the center of a fight.

The rock was given to the city of Portsmouth, Ohio.  The city offered the rock to South Shore, Kentucky but the offer was refused. Now Kentucky wants i; Ohio claims it; the Army Corps of Engineers says it is theirs.  On top of all this, Steve Shaffer has been charged with a felony for removing the rock from the water and trying to place it where the world could enjoy it.  While no one knows what the final fate of Indian Head Rock will be, today it sits in the municipal garage in Portsmouth.

Aren’t there any real issues these states can fight about today?  If the rock was so important, why was it left buried in the river.  I read news like this and just shake my head.  When kind of priorities do these three have anyway?

After ending yesterday’s little rant about the atheists and their desire to control the presidential inauguration, I realized that the tip of the iceberg is just appearing!  Think about it.  If the atheists win this battle what next?

Will they attack the songs we sing about our country?  Will “God Bless America” ever be heard again or will it be considered too offensive?

Will all money have to be changed so God isn’t mentioned? Will history books be altered to exclude any religion history? Will you have to guard everything you say in public?  Where is the stopping point?

When will they start suing to make churches pay taxes?  They already try to control things that come from the pulpit.  I do not understand their extremely blatant inability to deal with any situation that is not pleasing to them.  The atheists doing this care not about the country or the right or wrong.  They care about having things their own way.  It is kind of like the little brother who threw the temper tantrum and you got in trouble.  It is time to stop it before it takes on a life of its own.

There is nothing more irritating, in this world of political correctness, than people who sue to get their own way!  I wrote before about the problem atheists were having with the inauguration prayer.  Now they want to control what the president-elect says as he is sworn into office.  Give me a break!

If atheists want to run the inauguration, then they should run for the position.  They have rights and they have the right not to accept the existence of a God who created them.  Their choice.  They don’t have to pray in Jesus’ name.  They don’t ever have to say “so help me God”, but they do not, should not have the right to tell others what they may say!

In all honesty, I hate cursing.  I go out into public and I hear people cussing left and right.  Not just God’s name, but it is ‘f’ you this and the ‘b’ that.  It is on bumper stickers, tee-shirts, movies, political tapes, and so on.  I do not want to hear people say it so I will do my best not to subject myself to it.  I move me.  If they do not want to hear all these things stay home, leave off the television and don’t read about it in the newspaper.  Problem solved.  And you didn’t have to sue anybody!

Once upon a time, greedy, self-centered people hired others to work for their businesses.  They paid them poor wages, made them put in long hours and providing working conditions that were harsh and unsafe.  If the workers did not like it they could quit and join the ranks of the unemployed.  Since there were so many people leaving the farms to find work in the cities or arriving off the foreign boats hoping to have a new life in America, the chances of finding a better job with better conditions was not too good.  An idea arose.  If the workers banded together and formed a union, they could insist on better pay and improved working conditions.  Over the next few decades, they did just that.  The power of the unions led to an improved life for many American workers.

As time passed, the unions became more powerful.  Many of them were taken over by less than savory characters.  Strong-arm tactics tried to force everyone to join the union.   Union dues increased.  Many were denied jobs because they did not like the union.  It almost seemed that the union replaced the greedy, self-centered business owners of the early and previous centuries.

When new companies didn’t unionize, the unions tried to get employees to start a union.  Sometimes they succeeded.  Sometimes they failed.  The workers had the benefit of a secret ballot.  Today, the union is working to have the right of a secret ballot removed.  It seems like another strong-arm tactic to force individuals to conform to their standards.  Makes me wonder!

I am not naive enough to think that there are no longer any greedy, self-centered people that own businesses.  But I wonder, if the workers didn’t have to pay such high union dues, would they need a raise?  If companies didn’t have to pay wages that exceed the value of the job and were able to fire or release bad or unnecessary employees, would so many businesses fail?  Sometimes I wonder, if the expenses of the car companies (courtesy of the unions) weren’t so high and  they could sell their cars for less, would the car companies need a bail-out?  It almost seems now that the power of the unions is working against a better life in America!