This post is a paraphrase of an article by Robert George entitled “Obama’s Abortion Extremism” that was published at www.thepublicdiscourse.com earlier this year. Check it out.
Pro-Choice = Pro-Abortion
According to all the “pro-choice” people in the world, no one is pro-abortion. No one wants innocent children to be murdered while in the uterus. In fact most pro-abortion proponents say they think it is wrong and would never have one themselves, but do not believe it should be made illegal. Women do not get pregnant simply to have an abortion after all. Sometimes women find themselves pregnant because of rape or incest (less than 1% of abortions are due to this), or because of poor choices they have made, and they should not be saddled with the “burden” of caring for a child.
Stick with me here; this will make sense in a minute. Many of the founding fathers of our country did not believe in slavery. In fact many of them did not own slaves at all, and some of them freed the slaves they inherited, or purchased. However, they believed that slavery was so woven into the everyday life of America, that it would not be feasible to outlaw it. The economic consequences would have been great for businesses and industries that had been built on slave labor. Therefore slavery was not outlawed by the United States Constitution. Those who opposed it, but did not outlaw it, were not monsters. Rather they were sincere and honest about their concerns. This does not make them any the less wrong in their belief. Looking back at those people, do we refer to them as pro-choice because they thought the choice to have slaves should be left to the individual? No, they are referred to as pro-slavery. It does not matter to us what their personal beliefs were; only what their actions were. Their actions allowed the slave trade to continue in the United States for nearly 100 years before a bloody civil war settled the issue permanently. Thus they were pro-slavery.
I do not see what the difference between the two is. In both instance the people are “morally opposed” to the act that is in question, yet in regards to slavery we have not problem saying they are “pro-slavery”. However if you call someone who supports Roe v. Wade pro-abortion, you best watch out.
Obama is Pro-Abortion no matter how you look at it.
Obama is on the record as saying that he will support legislation that will repeal the Hyde Amendment. This amendment protects me, and other pro-life people, from having money taken from us by the government (i.e. taxes), used to fund abortions that are not necessary to save the life of the mother and is not the result of rape or incest. The “pro-choice” group NARAL (I looked on the website and don’t know what the name stands for) has said, “(the Hyde Amendment) forces about half the women who would otherwise have abortions to carry unintended pregnancies to term and bear children against their wishes instead.” First thing to notice about that statement is that it means there are a lot of living, breathing people here on earth, that would not have been here had it not been for the Hyde Amendment. Second, let’s break down that statement. They are upset because women who made choices, and then suffered the possible consequences of those choices, were not allowed to have those consequences lifted by a medical procedure available, due to the Hyde Amendment. How unfair! Well hopefully once Obama gets his way and the Hyde Amendment is repealed I’ll be able to get that liposuction procedure that I have wanted. I never really thought I would get fat eating all those cheeseburgers. Now I am discriminated against because my shirts cost more because they are plus sizes, and I can not fit through tight spaces anymore. People, I have to live with this spare tire everyday, as a constant reminder of my poor choices.
President elect Obama has also promised that the “the first thing I’d do as President is sign the Freedom of Choice Act” (FOCA). This act creates a federally guaranteed “fundamental right” to abortion through all nine months of pregnancy. This includes a “right” to abort a fully developed child in the final weeks of pregnancy for undefined “health” reasons. Pro-abortion groups have stated that FOCA will “sweep away hundreds of anti-abortion laws [and] policies” such as the partial birth abortion ban (which he actually opposed and even condemned the Supreme Courts ruling on this issue), and parental consent. At least kids will still need a parent’s permission to get a drivers license.
Not only does he wish to promote abortion, but he plans on removing federal funding from pro-life crisis pregnancy centers. Heaven forbid a young woman goes to one of these centers and receive an ultrasound where the technician allows her to see the human life growing in her. It would be unfortunate for her to see that the baby is not a blob of tissue as she has been told, but rather a miniature human. True they can still go to planned parenthood and receive free ultrasounds, but the policy there is to not show the actual pictures to the mother since they know once the mother sees her baby, the chance of her having an abortion is much less. Obama has stated that unwanted pregnancies are a “punishment” for young mothers, and they should not need to be endured. They need to have access to abortion on demand, apparently even if that means not giving them an opportunity to do otherwise, or even be fully informed about what they are considering.
He opposed including unborn children in the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (S-CHIP), a measure that even Ted Kennedy supported. That should not be a surprise since while he was in the Illinois senate he opposed legislation that was presented to protect children who were born alive during an abortion. This legislation did not ban any abortions (something Obama’s campaign lied about until the facts were over whelming). In fact one year it was the very same legislation that passed unanimously in the US Senate with the support of pro-abortionists like John Kerry and Barbara Boxer. I believe that was the year that Obama was chair of the committee that did not allow the legislation to get to the floor of the senate.
President Bush has restricted the use of federal research money for use on embryonic stem cell lines that were already in use when he became president. He has prohibited the proliferation of this practice into the use of cryopreserved embryos that were created by in vitero fertilization for use in reproduction because it results in the destruction of the embryo. Obama is in favor of lifting these restrictions. But he wants to take it a step further. He is co-sponsor of a bill that will authorize the large-scale industrial production of human embryos specifically for this purpose. It effectively requires the killing of human embryos that were produced by cloning, and makes it a federal crime for a woman to have one of those embryos implanted into her uterus in an attempt to save it. It is my understanding the cloning of human beings is still in the somewhat distant future, however there are people working on it and once a bill becomes law, it is harder to reverse.
Maybe you buy into the misinformation out there that embryonic stem cells will allow us to cure Michael J. Fox of Parkinson’s disease (a disease that runs in my family and one I frankly would like a cure for), or could have made Christopher Reed walk again. Stem cells do hold this promise, yet the only stem cells that have shown any true evidence of working are adult stem cells (i.e. stem cells from people already born that can be found in bone marrow and other places). When a bill was presented to the United States Senate that would have allocated a modest amount of federal research money toward this research, then Senator Obama was one of five senators to oppose it. So he is in favor of federal funding for stem cell research if it leads to the destruction of a human life, but opposed to it if it actually holds promise for saving lives.
Freedom of Speech
This is not from the article I referenced at the top of the post; rather it is simply my opinion.
I first remember hearing about the reinstatement of the “fairness doctrine” several years ago when my own Senator, Tom Harkin (sorry Christopher Reed I voted for you) was wanting to reinstate it. At the time there was a Republican president and control of both houses. Now there will be a Democratic president and a control of both houses, making the possibility of reinstatement relatively good.
The fairness doctrine will require local radio stations to provide access to anyone who calls them and complains about what is being said on the radio. For instance if I were to read this post on WHO out of Des Moines, WHO will be required to provide air time to any pro-abortion group who calls to present their rebuttal to my thoughts. That seems fair, except that radio is a business. If my talk sells they should be able to play it, and not have to worry about providing free access to others. They may be boring while I am entertaining, and the ratings drop. Not to mention the sheer headache it would cause station managers. They will simple drop everything controversial, and go with a very PC and boring program format. This to me is a stifling of freedom of speech. As it is right now anyone can get on radio and say what they want, if they have an audience. It is equal opportunity.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Thursday, October 30, 2008
An email between a friend and me
Infrastructure is an easy solve. First the federal government will provide for national security, as it should based on the US Constitution. Schools should be paid for by the community as they used to be. Actually there is a fair amount of information out there that shows that private schools provide a better education, at a lower cost to student ratio, than government schools do. I really do not think we understand the bureaucracy that exists in schools and the costs associated with that. I believe teachers in general are over paid, I am a big fan of paying teachers well if they deserve it, but if they are crap we should get rid of them. The teachers union has screwed that up totally.
Don't jump all over my last comment about teachers being paid to much. I know of some teachers in our community that are making more money than I do and I have a 4 year degree as well as a professional degree. I work from 7:30 to 5 for 52 weeks a year, and if I have a late night call I do not get to come in late the next morning like the poor teachers do after they stay late for conferences. I do not get snow days, and I pay for my own professional growth. I understand they have work to do when they are not at school, but so do I. It's called reading journals to stay up on things. So I am sick of hearing about the poor teachers, and how they do not get paid enough. When I complain about them making more than me, people shoot back, "you choose your profession." Yes I did and so did they so they should not bitch about making what they would make in a free market.
The infrastructure of roads. I would be okay with the State paying for the highways, but I really think that toll roads are the way to go. That way you pay to use the road. You also have to remember that if the government is not doing all of these things our taxes will be lower, and I don't just mean our income taxes. Sales taxes, property taxes, gas taxes, the whole works will be lower or gone.
As to your point about flooding/natural disasters. The property value of that land will be less/should be less than it currently is. The reason people will put houses in areas that they know may flood, is because they know the government will bail them out. The same is true for farmers planting fields that flood all the time. Either they have not done a risk assessment, or they have decided that the risk of them loosing everything is lower than the possibility of gain. If it isn't they should not be planting the field. People will have to take the increased risk into account when they purchase things such as land and houses. Land that floods will be lower in price etc. I also believe that people will be amazed at the out flowing of support neighbors give. We are already a very generous nation on our own, and that is after we have given at work "taxes". If we have more disposable income then it will be easier for us to help our neighbors. I also believe that the church needs to step this aspect of outreach up. Because the government has taken over doing much of this people have backed off because, on a certain level, why should they help when the government is going to help out?
Remember the overall cost of everything is higher, because companies know people will pay it, because there is some assurance that if trouble happens someone, or something, will step in to pay for it. Much like the cost of healthcare has increased because of third party payers. Since they have deep pockets, companies can charge more, plus companies must charge more to make the same amount when more of what they make is being taken in taxes.
First off I am not a fan of McCain. I do think that Palin would make a good president, because I do not think that she thinks she could do it on her own. She would surround herself with people to help her, and she has the general principles that I think are more important. She has the most EXECUTIVE experience of everyone on the ticket, and it is always different when the buck stops with you than when it stops with a group that you belong to. That is why I think Senators make bad choices for presidential candidates.
Obama is not just going to cause problems for small business, he is going to cause problems for everyone. He is weak on foreign policy. Some of his economic advisors are the same people who voted to prevent regulations on FannyMae and Freddie Mac. He has even consulted the person who ran FannyMae, and found guilty of falsifying financial statements in the organization so he could get bonuses. He had to pay fines and/or give back the bonuses, but the guys at Enron did the same thing and they are in jail. He wants to write a "Second Bill of Rights" that tells us what the government owes us. For instance we all have a right to a job, and a house. That sounds like a little thing they tried in Russia called communism. What makes America great is that we have opportunity to advance ourselves. Everyone does. Why is it that every ethnic group that legally migrates to the US is able to make a good living within a generation or two yet African American's are not? I think the main reason for that is because the government has been paying them to do nothing, and telling them that they can't make it because "the man" is keeping them down. Bull! I am sure that it would be very difficult to make something out of your self if you come from an inner city. The reason being that the education system there sucks, and several people tell you that you can't make it. Clarence Thomas over came a great deal to get where he is but he is vilified by the media instead of celebrated.
An interview Obama had in 2001 when he was in the IL senate has surfaced, and in it he says that the fundamental problem with America is the Constitution because it does not say what the government can do for us. The best thing the government can do for us is to get out of the way and let us succeed.
Don't jump all over my last comment about teachers being paid to much. I know of some teachers in our community that are making more money than I do and I have a 4 year degree as well as a professional degree. I work from 7:30 to 5 for 52 weeks a year, and if I have a late night call I do not get to come in late the next morning like the poor teachers do after they stay late for conferences. I do not get snow days, and I pay for my own professional growth. I understand they have work to do when they are not at school, but so do I. It's called reading journals to stay up on things. So I am sick of hearing about the poor teachers, and how they do not get paid enough. When I complain about them making more than me, people shoot back, "you choose your profession." Yes I did and so did they so they should not bitch about making what they would make in a free market.
The infrastructure of roads. I would be okay with the State paying for the highways, but I really think that toll roads are the way to go. That way you pay to use the road. You also have to remember that if the government is not doing all of these things our taxes will be lower, and I don't just mean our income taxes. Sales taxes, property taxes, gas taxes, the whole works will be lower or gone.
As to your point about flooding/natural disasters. The property value of that land will be less/should be less than it currently is. The reason people will put houses in areas that they know may flood, is because they know the government will bail them out. The same is true for farmers planting fields that flood all the time. Either they have not done a risk assessment, or they have decided that the risk of them loosing everything is lower than the possibility of gain. If it isn't they should not be planting the field. People will have to take the increased risk into account when they purchase things such as land and houses. Land that floods will be lower in price etc. I also believe that people will be amazed at the out flowing of support neighbors give. We are already a very generous nation on our own, and that is after we have given at work "taxes". If we have more disposable income then it will be easier for us to help our neighbors. I also believe that the church needs to step this aspect of outreach up. Because the government has taken over doing much of this people have backed off because, on a certain level, why should they help when the government is going to help out?
Remember the overall cost of everything is higher, because companies know people will pay it, because there is some assurance that if trouble happens someone, or something, will step in to pay for it. Much like the cost of healthcare has increased because of third party payers. Since they have deep pockets, companies can charge more, plus companies must charge more to make the same amount when more of what they make is being taken in taxes.
First off I am not a fan of McCain. I do think that Palin would make a good president, because I do not think that she thinks she could do it on her own. She would surround herself with people to help her, and she has the general principles that I think are more important. She has the most EXECUTIVE experience of everyone on the ticket, and it is always different when the buck stops with you than when it stops with a group that you belong to. That is why I think Senators make bad choices for presidential candidates.
Obama is not just going to cause problems for small business, he is going to cause problems for everyone. He is weak on foreign policy. Some of his economic advisors are the same people who voted to prevent regulations on FannyMae and Freddie Mac. He has even consulted the person who ran FannyMae, and found guilty of falsifying financial statements in the organization so he could get bonuses. He had to pay fines and/or give back the bonuses, but the guys at Enron did the same thing and they are in jail. He wants to write a "Second Bill of Rights" that tells us what the government owes us. For instance we all have a right to a job, and a house. That sounds like a little thing they tried in Russia called communism. What makes America great is that we have opportunity to advance ourselves. Everyone does. Why is it that every ethnic group that legally migrates to the US is able to make a good living within a generation or two yet African American's are not? I think the main reason for that is because the government has been paying them to do nothing, and telling them that they can't make it because "the man" is keeping them down. Bull! I am sure that it would be very difficult to make something out of your self if you come from an inner city. The reason being that the education system there sucks, and several people tell you that you can't make it. Clarence Thomas over came a great deal to get where he is but he is vilified by the media instead of celebrated.
An interview Obama had in 2001 when he was in the IL senate has surfaced, and in it he says that the fundamental problem with America is the Constitution because it does not say what the government can do for us. The best thing the government can do for us is to get out of the way and let us succeed.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
The movie 300
Just saw this movie this weekend and I was delightfully surprised. There was some totaly unnecessary nudity, and the gore was a little over the top, but the main story was good. The story was based on a true story, at least as much as any hollywood story may be. What I found interesting was the driving force behind the Spartans. It was their freedom! Here were people who were willing to fight, and die, for their freedom, and most of us are to lazy to vote, or contact our officials. I thought this movie could be shown in a civics class to demonstrate how we should view the priveldge that we enjoy of freedom.
Army Navy Surpulus
I work outside during the winter, here in the upper midwest, and at times it can get kind of cold. Since my profession requires a coat that has a zipper in each arm, and there is only one company that makes them to my knowledge, the variety of styles is limited. I like to have a hood, so that the back of my neck stays warm. I have seen those pull on hoods that kind of work like a ski mask, but the neck part is never long enough and my neck always gets exposed to the elements. I got to thinking that if anyone had solved this problem, it was probably the military. That led me to a website that had army and navy surplus on it. Low and behold I found just what I was looking for. I don't think I can describe it adequately so follow this link to see what I am talking about: Military Balaclava
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Various thoughts
Tom Brokaw
So yesterday I am watching some of Mr. Brokaw's "The Greatest Generation" on Hulu and I was just amazed at how his world view came across. The first story was about some DDay vets who fought in this small French town, which was eventually destroyed by the Germans when they fought to take it back. Tom repeatedly expressed disbelief at the fact that the townspeople risked their lifes to help the soldiers, and that they did not hold the US responsible for the destruction of their town. It did not even occur to Tom that it was not our fault the town was destroyed. We were there doing good, as usual, and not the source of the evil that was going on. The Nazis were the source of the evil. Believe it or not Tom, the French appreciated that we were there to liberate them and they were willing to suffer with us. He kept acting like the population of the town only suffered because we had military there. No! They suffered because the flippin Nazis had invaded their country and did not want to give it back.
In the next episode I watched Tom talked about the patriotism that the Greatest Generation had. Of course they were patriotic Tom, they did not have a bunch of liberal journalists telling them all the time how nasty our nation was. Because of their patriotism they believed in a bigger cause and thousands of them willingly gave their lives because they believed they owed their country something, not the other way around. One of the interviewed GIs talkd about the letters he had received as CO from the families of his fallen comrades. All the letters were positive and none of them blamed him for the death of their loved ones. Tom could not believe this either. It really saddens me to think that our country has fallen so quickly from that kind of thinking, into the current mind set that the government owes us.
The Bailout
Waste of monney! Do away with capital gains taxes, and drop the tax rate on buisness and watch the markets sore. After a couple of years you can reinstate the capital gains tax if necessary.
Movies
Saw the movie "Fireproof" and it was as good as I hoped. I strongly encourage all of you to see it. I can not wait for "An American Carrol" to come out on DVD so I can see it. No theater within 40 miles of here will show it. It looks very funny. If you have not seen the movie "Obsession" about radical Islam, you need to see it. I bought it a couple of years ago when it first came out but a friend just received a free copy in the mail two days ago, so look for it and watch it. It will spook you.
So yesterday I am watching some of Mr. Brokaw's "The Greatest Generation" on Hulu and I was just amazed at how his world view came across. The first story was about some DDay vets who fought in this small French town, which was eventually destroyed by the Germans when they fought to take it back. Tom repeatedly expressed disbelief at the fact that the townspeople risked their lifes to help the soldiers, and that they did not hold the US responsible for the destruction of their town. It did not even occur to Tom that it was not our fault the town was destroyed. We were there doing good, as usual, and not the source of the evil that was going on. The Nazis were the source of the evil. Believe it or not Tom, the French appreciated that we were there to liberate them and they were willing to suffer with us. He kept acting like the population of the town only suffered because we had military there. No! They suffered because the flippin Nazis had invaded their country and did not want to give it back.
In the next episode I watched Tom talked about the patriotism that the Greatest Generation had. Of course they were patriotic Tom, they did not have a bunch of liberal journalists telling them all the time how nasty our nation was. Because of their patriotism they believed in a bigger cause and thousands of them willingly gave their lives because they believed they owed their country something, not the other way around. One of the interviewed GIs talkd about the letters he had received as CO from the families of his fallen comrades. All the letters were positive and none of them blamed him for the death of their loved ones. Tom could not believe this either. It really saddens me to think that our country has fallen so quickly from that kind of thinking, into the current mind set that the government owes us.
The Bailout
Waste of monney! Do away with capital gains taxes, and drop the tax rate on buisness and watch the markets sore. After a couple of years you can reinstate the capital gains tax if necessary.
Movies
Saw the movie "Fireproof" and it was as good as I hoped. I strongly encourage all of you to see it. I can not wait for "An American Carrol" to come out on DVD so I can see it. No theater within 40 miles of here will show it. It looks very funny. If you have not seen the movie "Obsession" about radical Islam, you need to see it. I bought it a couple of years ago when it first came out but a friend just received a free copy in the mail two days ago, so look for it and watch it. It will spook you.
Friday, September 12, 2008
Editorial for local paper
I wrote this for a local paper. My wife thought it was good so I'm posting it here.
Country First: It’s How He Lives
I will be the first to admit that Senator John McCain, because of his “immigration reform” and involvement in the “gang of 13” was not my first choice for a presidential candidate. Heck, he was not even my second or third, but my guys did not make the cut, and I was left with Senator McCain. I was really sweating over who to vote for in this November’s election. I knew I did not want Senator Obama, mainly because I think I spend my money better than the government, but I also knew that I did not agree with Senator McCain on some very prominent issues.
In May I read a piece by Karl Rove that spoke of Senator McCain’s personal character. It told stories of his bravery in the Hanoi Hilton, where he was called on to splint a fellow captive’s broken arm with bandages he took from his own injured leg, and his sermons passed via Morse code. It spoke of how he and Cindy adopted a baby from Mother Theresa’s orphanage in Calcutta because it had special physical needs, and then paid for a low level McCain aid to adopt another. Okay, so I had to admit the man had character, but it takes more than a man of character to be President.
It was with great trepidation that I waited for the announcement of his Vice Presidential candidate, especially with names like Lieberman, and Pawlenty being thrown around. When he announced Sarah Palin as his running mate, I have to admit I got excited. I now had someone I knew I could vote for, even if she was on the bottom of the ticket. Now that I had some hope of actually being able to support Senator McCain, I did a more thorough examination of his positions.
I already knew that he was strong on national defense, and national security. After all he was just about the only one whom never waivered in support of our troops and the surge in Iraq. Even Senator Obama has admitted that it has worked, though he still says he would not vote in favor of it even with his current knowledge. I knew Senator McCain had a very solid pro-life voting record, and that he has committed to nominating strict constructionist judges to the courts.
Lately he has been telling us that he is in favor of lifting the moratorium on off shore drilling, and wants us to get our own natural resources out of the ground, to help lower the price of fuel in America. He proved this to me by announcing Governor Palin as his running mate. She has pushed for more drilling in Alaska since she became governor. He also is pro-nuclear. Nuclear is a safe cheap way of producing electricity that is also environmentally friendly. Several other countries rely heavily on nuclear energy to meet their power needs, and they have had no problems. I agree with the Senator that it is time to reinvest in this underutilized asset.
While he has not been a supporter of the Bush tax cuts in the past he now says that he sees their value and will work to make them permanent. He also is in favor of cutting the corporate tax rate from 35% (the second highest rate in the world) down to 25%. I hear you all griping about why do the wealthy need a tax cut. Well, generally speaking the wealthy employ most of the rest of us. They are going to make their money, the question becomes if they are going to make it in the US, employing Americans, or somewhere else. With the lower tax rate, the US at least looks more attractive.
Senator McCain is also stating that he wants to reduce the estate tax to 15% with a $10 million exemption. That should be very well received by farmers who are looking to pass on their operation to a family member when they pass. What I think will be the most effective measure against wasteful spending in government is if Senator McCain is able to get a line item veto like he wants. A line item veto allows the executive office holder to veto only certain things in a bill. Several states have these for their governors and it allows them to veto spending that is attached to other bills without having to veto the entire bill they way the President currently has to.
When it comes to health care Senator McCain does not favor socialized health care like Senator Obama does. Socialized health care does not work. Ask anyone from a country that has it and they will tell you. Senator McCain proposes that each family receive a $5,000 tax credit, with which they can purchase their own health insurance. This will cause competition in the health insurance market, and competition drives prices down. It will also allow us to purchase health insurance that is more tailored to our needs. Senator McCain is also in favor of tort reform. This will allow people to still seek compensation for sub par care, but it will not allow them to get rich by suing doctors. After all folks it is called practicing medicine for a reason. As much as we wish they were perfect, doctors are people and they make mistakes. By limiting the amount they can get sued, the price of malpractice insurance will decrease, and that will allow hospitals to decrease their overhead, and pass that savings on to you.
I was delightfully surprised when I read Senator McCain’s education proposal. He proposes that parents should have the opportunity to move their children to a school of their choosing to ensure the children get the education they need. Not only will parents be allowed to move their children, but the tax money that they pay into the school district will follow the child. That way parents are not forced to pay for their kids to go to school, and pay for a school that their children do not attend. Senator McCain is also in favor of fighting the teachers union and making it easier for bad teachers to be dismissed, regardless of tenure, and easier for good teachers to be recruited with incentives.
We already knew Sarah Palin was pro-gun, in fact she may be the first person since Teddy Roosevelt to live in the White House and know how to field dress a moose, but I was delighted to find that Senator McCain voted in favor of gun right many time. He has voted against liability for gun manufacturers whose guns are used to commit crimes, opposed waiting periods on gun purchases, and against bans on ammunition. I feel strongly the Senator McCain will defend my second amendment rights.
Finally, and possibly the most important item, Senator McCain has stated that he will appoint strong constructionist judges to the federal courts and the supreme court. With his history in the gang of thirteen, and his ample willingness to cross the aisle for progress, I have to admit that I am skeptical of this claim. All I can do is go by what the man states in his beliefs, and hope that he holds to his integrity.
Some say that Sarah Palin is not an asset of Senator McCain’s campaign. I disagree. She has more executive experience than any of the other candidates on either of the tickets. She is only a heartbeat a way from the Presidency, and I find that comforting. She has strong convictions, and she has fought corruption in both parties. I have no doubt that she would make a good president. Besides think about the fact that Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is only two heartbeats away and all she has done is lead the Congress to its lowest approval rating, ever!
Country First: It’s How He Lives
I will be the first to admit that Senator John McCain, because of his “immigration reform” and involvement in the “gang of 13” was not my first choice for a presidential candidate. Heck, he was not even my second or third, but my guys did not make the cut, and I was left with Senator McCain. I was really sweating over who to vote for in this November’s election. I knew I did not want Senator Obama, mainly because I think I spend my money better than the government, but I also knew that I did not agree with Senator McCain on some very prominent issues.
In May I read a piece by Karl Rove that spoke of Senator McCain’s personal character. It told stories of his bravery in the Hanoi Hilton, where he was called on to splint a fellow captive’s broken arm with bandages he took from his own injured leg, and his sermons passed via Morse code. It spoke of how he and Cindy adopted a baby from Mother Theresa’s orphanage in Calcutta because it had special physical needs, and then paid for a low level McCain aid to adopt another. Okay, so I had to admit the man had character, but it takes more than a man of character to be President.
It was with great trepidation that I waited for the announcement of his Vice Presidential candidate, especially with names like Lieberman, and Pawlenty being thrown around. When he announced Sarah Palin as his running mate, I have to admit I got excited. I now had someone I knew I could vote for, even if she was on the bottom of the ticket. Now that I had some hope of actually being able to support Senator McCain, I did a more thorough examination of his positions.
I already knew that he was strong on national defense, and national security. After all he was just about the only one whom never waivered in support of our troops and the surge in Iraq. Even Senator Obama has admitted that it has worked, though he still says he would not vote in favor of it even with his current knowledge. I knew Senator McCain had a very solid pro-life voting record, and that he has committed to nominating strict constructionist judges to the courts.
Lately he has been telling us that he is in favor of lifting the moratorium on off shore drilling, and wants us to get our own natural resources out of the ground, to help lower the price of fuel in America. He proved this to me by announcing Governor Palin as his running mate. She has pushed for more drilling in Alaska since she became governor. He also is pro-nuclear. Nuclear is a safe cheap way of producing electricity that is also environmentally friendly. Several other countries rely heavily on nuclear energy to meet their power needs, and they have had no problems. I agree with the Senator that it is time to reinvest in this underutilized asset.
While he has not been a supporter of the Bush tax cuts in the past he now says that he sees their value and will work to make them permanent. He also is in favor of cutting the corporate tax rate from 35% (the second highest rate in the world) down to 25%. I hear you all griping about why do the wealthy need a tax cut. Well, generally speaking the wealthy employ most of the rest of us. They are going to make their money, the question becomes if they are going to make it in the US, employing Americans, or somewhere else. With the lower tax rate, the US at least looks more attractive.
Senator McCain is also stating that he wants to reduce the estate tax to 15% with a $10 million exemption. That should be very well received by farmers who are looking to pass on their operation to a family member when they pass. What I think will be the most effective measure against wasteful spending in government is if Senator McCain is able to get a line item veto like he wants. A line item veto allows the executive office holder to veto only certain things in a bill. Several states have these for their governors and it allows them to veto spending that is attached to other bills without having to veto the entire bill they way the President currently has to.
When it comes to health care Senator McCain does not favor socialized health care like Senator Obama does. Socialized health care does not work. Ask anyone from a country that has it and they will tell you. Senator McCain proposes that each family receive a $5,000 tax credit, with which they can purchase their own health insurance. This will cause competition in the health insurance market, and competition drives prices down. It will also allow us to purchase health insurance that is more tailored to our needs. Senator McCain is also in favor of tort reform. This will allow people to still seek compensation for sub par care, but it will not allow them to get rich by suing doctors. After all folks it is called practicing medicine for a reason. As much as we wish they were perfect, doctors are people and they make mistakes. By limiting the amount they can get sued, the price of malpractice insurance will decrease, and that will allow hospitals to decrease their overhead, and pass that savings on to you.
I was delightfully surprised when I read Senator McCain’s education proposal. He proposes that parents should have the opportunity to move their children to a school of their choosing to ensure the children get the education they need. Not only will parents be allowed to move their children, but the tax money that they pay into the school district will follow the child. That way parents are not forced to pay for their kids to go to school, and pay for a school that their children do not attend. Senator McCain is also in favor of fighting the teachers union and making it easier for bad teachers to be dismissed, regardless of tenure, and easier for good teachers to be recruited with incentives.
We already knew Sarah Palin was pro-gun, in fact she may be the first person since Teddy Roosevelt to live in the White House and know how to field dress a moose, but I was delighted to find that Senator McCain voted in favor of gun right many time. He has voted against liability for gun manufacturers whose guns are used to commit crimes, opposed waiting periods on gun purchases, and against bans on ammunition. I feel strongly the Senator McCain will defend my second amendment rights.
Finally, and possibly the most important item, Senator McCain has stated that he will appoint strong constructionist judges to the federal courts and the supreme court. With his history in the gang of thirteen, and his ample willingness to cross the aisle for progress, I have to admit that I am skeptical of this claim. All I can do is go by what the man states in his beliefs, and hope that he holds to his integrity.
Some say that Sarah Palin is not an asset of Senator McCain’s campaign. I disagree. She has more executive experience than any of the other candidates on either of the tickets. She is only a heartbeat a way from the Presidency, and I find that comforting. She has strong convictions, and she has fought corruption in both parties. I have no doubt that she would make a good president. Besides think about the fact that Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is only two heartbeats away and all she has done is lead the Congress to its lowest approval rating, ever!
Monday, July 28, 2008
FCC Fine Oveturned
Many of you remember the infamous wardrobe malfunction at the 2004 Super Bowel halftime show. You may also remember that the FCC levied a fine against CBS for them broadcasting it. Well the federal appeals court, in all of it's wisdom, has overturned the fine. Specifically it was the third circuit that made the ruling. I think this is unbelievable. Either the FCC has the power to levy fines or they don't. The government can't under cut the authority of the FCC by overturning a fine that they finally had the guts to implement.
There is currently a bill called Senate Bill 1780 that would toughen the standards on tv during prime time. I encourage you to investigate it and then call the congress switch board (202) 224-3121 and encourage Sen. Reede to put it up for a vote, and encourage your senators to support it.
There is currently a bill called Senate Bill 1780 that would toughen the standards on tv during prime time. I encourage you to investigate it and then call the congress switch board (202) 224-3121 and encourage Sen. Reede to put it up for a vote, and encourage your senators to support it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
