It is inevitable, like day coming after night, and it hits people at different ages, and in different ways, at different times. One day, you just start thinking differently, that youth, that you have held on to so tightly, for so long, you realize is gone. It signals a whole new way of thinking and looking at things. Realization sets in, and you realize that each heartbeat, could be your last.
You are acutely aware of skipped heart beats, or any unusual chest pains, wonder if this is the one. You no longer think of the future in an optimistic way, the door has slowly closed on the future, and that optimistic thinking about tomorrow, is gone.
Instead, you have a tendency to reflect, mistakes you have made, things you think you could have done differently, other paths you could have taken, what "might" have been, if only.
But then, you realize that any small change in the past, could have had consequences on today, on you, your family, your friends, and you finally realize that you would not change a thing, that if it any way altered the present, right or wrong, everthing worked out for the best.
That is the only way you can justify what you have done in the past, mistakes were not mistakes, because if you had done things that way, then this would not have happened.
So there is contentment in your life, regardless of your situation, everything you did was right, every decisions you made was correct, because you are at this point, you are alive, and possibly, if anything in the past had been done differetly, you would not be where you are today.
At some point, you become your age, for one reason or another, it is inevitable, it varies from person to person. If you are alive, you have done something right, regardless.
"If only" could have an impact on where you are today, "if only you had" could mean..........
Sunday, June 08, 2008
Monday, May 12, 2008
SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT
Many years ago, a great hitter named Paul Waner was nearing the end of his long career. He entered a ballgame with 2,999 hits -- one hit away from the landmark total of 3,000, which so many hitters want to reach, but which relatively few actually do reach. Waner hit a ball that the fielder did not handle cleanly but the official scorer called it a hit, making it Waner's 3,000th. Paul Waner then sent word to the official scorer that he did not want that questionable hit to be the one that put him over the top. The official scorer reversed himself and called it an error. Later Paul Waner got a clean hit for number 3,000.
What reminded me of this is the great fervor that many seem to feel over the prospect of the first black President of the United States. No doubt it is only a matter of time before there is a black president, just as it was only a matter of time before Paul Waner got his 3,000th hit. The issue is whether we want to reach that landmark so badly that we are willing to overlook how questionably that landmark is reached. Paul Waner had too much pride to accept a scratch hit.
Choosing a President of the United States is a lot more momentous than a baseball record. We the voters need to have far more concern about who we put in that office that holds the destiny of a nation and of generations yet unborn. There is no reason why someone as arrogant, foolishly clever and ultimately dangerous as Barack Obama should become president -- especially not at a time when the threat of international terrorists with nuclear weapons looms over 300 million Americans. Many people seem to regard elections as occasions for venting emotions, like cheering for your favorite team or choosing a Homecoming Queen. The three leading candidates for their party's nomination are being discussed in terms of their demographics -- race, sex and age -- as if that is what the job is about. One of the painful aspects of studying great catastrophes of the past is discovering how many times people were preoccupied with trivialities when they were teetering on the edge of doom.
The demographics of the presidency are far less important than the momentous weight of responsibility that office carries. Just the power to nominate federal judges to trial courts and appellate courts across the country, including the Supreme Court, can have an enormous impact for decades to come. There is no point feeling outraged by things done by federal judges, if you vote on the basis of emotion for those who appoint them.Barack Obama has already indicated that he wants judges who make social policy instead of just applying the law. He has already tried to stop young violent criminals from being tried as adults. Although Senator Obama has presented himself as the candidate of new things -- using the mantra of "change" endlessly -- the cold fact is that virtually everything he has said about domestic policy is straight out of the 1960s and virtually everything he says about foreign policy is straight out of the 1930s. Protecting criminals, attacking business, increasing government spending, promoting a sense of envy and grievance, raising taxes on people who are productive and subsidizing those who are not -- all this is a re-run of the 1960s. We paid a terrible price for such 1960s notions in the years that followed, in the form of soaring crime rates, double-digit inflation and double-digit unemployment.
During the 1960s, ghettoes across the countries were ravaged by riots from which many have not fully recovered to this day. The violence and destruction were concentrated not where there was the greatest poverty or injustice but where there were the most liberal politicians, promoting grievances and hamstringing the police. Internationally, the approach that Senator Obama proposes -- including the media magic of meetings between heads of state -- was tried during the 1930s. That approach, in the name of peace, is what led to the most catastrophic war in human history. Everything seems new to those too young to remember the old and too ignorant of history to have heard about it.
The Author, Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of Basic Economics: A Citizen's Guide to the Economy.
What reminded me of this is the great fervor that many seem to feel over the prospect of the first black President of the United States. No doubt it is only a matter of time before there is a black president, just as it was only a matter of time before Paul Waner got his 3,000th hit. The issue is whether we want to reach that landmark so badly that we are willing to overlook how questionably that landmark is reached. Paul Waner had too much pride to accept a scratch hit.
Choosing a President of the United States is a lot more momentous than a baseball record. We the voters need to have far more concern about who we put in that office that holds the destiny of a nation and of generations yet unborn. There is no reason why someone as arrogant, foolishly clever and ultimately dangerous as Barack Obama should become president -- especially not at a time when the threat of international terrorists with nuclear weapons looms over 300 million Americans. Many people seem to regard elections as occasions for venting emotions, like cheering for your favorite team or choosing a Homecoming Queen. The three leading candidates for their party's nomination are being discussed in terms of their demographics -- race, sex and age -- as if that is what the job is about. One of the painful aspects of studying great catastrophes of the past is discovering how many times people were preoccupied with trivialities when they were teetering on the edge of doom.
The demographics of the presidency are far less important than the momentous weight of responsibility that office carries. Just the power to nominate federal judges to trial courts and appellate courts across the country, including the Supreme Court, can have an enormous impact for decades to come. There is no point feeling outraged by things done by federal judges, if you vote on the basis of emotion for those who appoint them.Barack Obama has already indicated that he wants judges who make social policy instead of just applying the law. He has already tried to stop young violent criminals from being tried as adults. Although Senator Obama has presented himself as the candidate of new things -- using the mantra of "change" endlessly -- the cold fact is that virtually everything he has said about domestic policy is straight out of the 1960s and virtually everything he says about foreign policy is straight out of the 1930s. Protecting criminals, attacking business, increasing government spending, promoting a sense of envy and grievance, raising taxes on people who are productive and subsidizing those who are not -- all this is a re-run of the 1960s. We paid a terrible price for such 1960s notions in the years that followed, in the form of soaring crime rates, double-digit inflation and double-digit unemployment.
During the 1960s, ghettoes across the countries were ravaged by riots from which many have not fully recovered to this day. The violence and destruction were concentrated not where there was the greatest poverty or injustice but where there were the most liberal politicians, promoting grievances and hamstringing the police. Internationally, the approach that Senator Obama proposes -- including the media magic of meetings between heads of state -- was tried during the 1930s. That approach, in the name of peace, is what led to the most catastrophic war in human history. Everything seems new to those too young to remember the old and too ignorant of history to have heard about it.
The Author, Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of Basic Economics: A Citizen's Guide to the Economy.
Monday, May 05, 2008
HOW did things get so MESSED UP?
I got this reply in an email the other day in regards to an EMail I had sent about no more "In God We Trust" on currency, etc.
HOW did things get so messed up? When did it start, and who started it? Have we been slowly taken over and had all of our thoughts and rights taken over and changed by some mysterious source?
Right after our founding fathers decided to establish this country, and on our money place the phrase, that some OTHER source started working to take it off. There is a right and left and a good and bad. Is there always opposition to anything that takes place? When did SOMETHING become so powerfull that it can change almost anything.
Are atheists that powerfull, or is it the ACLU that is "protecting" all of our freedoms, and interpreting all of our laws in one way or another.
IN GOD WE TRUST, what should it be if not that? There was a TV show years ago, Who Do You Trust, I think it was, they never decided, as I recall.
Why can't we trust GOD? We know primarily who we CAN'T trust, at least most of the time, and with total certainty. I can't think of anyone I can trust with 100% certainty, other than GOD, so why not use the phrase IN GOD WE TRUST.
TRUST, there were Savings and Trust companies, we trust banks, generally, but they failed at one time, and, I think, once you lose your "trust" in someone, it is difficult, or can never be regained, it is unrepairable or non repairable, "I can never trust you again."
So we have IN and WE, which by themselves are little two letter words. Alone they don't mean much but put in that phrase, they have deep meaning IN God ........... WE Trust, four words, 12 letters, but a whole world of meaning, and they harm no one, yet they cause so much consternation in some... how can they, that do not believe in GOD, be so much stronger than those of us who DO believe there is a God.
The new Dollar coin does not have that inscription upon it, so if offered one, by a bank or anyone, just refuse it, and ask for a dollar bill, or change to make a dollar. Take that dollar bill, or that dollars worth of change, and buy a RED arm bracelet, and wear it, for our troops and armed forces, show them we TRUST and believe in them, and appreciate the sacrifices they are making so that all of us, including those who deleted the phrase from out dollar coin, can live free and out of harms way.
HOW did things get so messed up? When did it start, and who started it? Have we been slowly taken over and had all of our thoughts and rights taken over and changed by some mysterious source?
Right after our founding fathers decided to establish this country, and on our money place the phrase, that some OTHER source started working to take it off. There is a right and left and a good and bad. Is there always opposition to anything that takes place? When did SOMETHING become so powerfull that it can change almost anything.
Are atheists that powerfull, or is it the ACLU that is "protecting" all of our freedoms, and interpreting all of our laws in one way or another.
IN GOD WE TRUST, what should it be if not that? There was a TV show years ago, Who Do You Trust, I think it was, they never decided, as I recall.
Why can't we trust GOD? We know primarily who we CAN'T trust, at least most of the time, and with total certainty. I can't think of anyone I can trust with 100% certainty, other than GOD, so why not use the phrase IN GOD WE TRUST.
TRUST, there were Savings and Trust companies, we trust banks, generally, but they failed at one time, and, I think, once you lose your "trust" in someone, it is difficult, or can never be regained, it is unrepairable or non repairable, "I can never trust you again."
So we have IN and WE, which by themselves are little two letter words. Alone they don't mean much but put in that phrase, they have deep meaning IN God ........... WE Trust, four words, 12 letters, but a whole world of meaning, and they harm no one, yet they cause so much consternation in some... how can they, that do not believe in GOD, be so much stronger than those of us who DO believe there is a God.
The new Dollar coin does not have that inscription upon it, so if offered one, by a bank or anyone, just refuse it, and ask for a dollar bill, or change to make a dollar. Take that dollar bill, or that dollars worth of change, and buy a RED arm bracelet, and wear it, for our troops and armed forces, show them we TRUST and believe in them, and appreciate the sacrifices they are making so that all of us, including those who deleted the phrase from out dollar coin, can live free and out of harms way.
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
POLITICIANS
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.Have you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, we have deficits? Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, we have inflation and high taxes? You and I don't propose a federal budget. The president does. You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does. You and I don't write the tax code. Congress does. You and I don't set fiscal policy. Congress does. You and I don't control monetary policy. The Federal Reserve Bank does.One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president and nine Supreme Co urt Justices - 545 human beings out of the 300 million - are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered but private central bank.I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman or a president to do one cotton- picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.
A CONFIDENCE CONSPIRACY
Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is NOT their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party. What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a SPEAKER, who stood up and criticized G.W. BUSH for creating deficits.The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it. The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes.Who is the Speaker of the House? She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow Democrats, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they ca n pass it over his veto. REPLACE THE SCOUNDRELS It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts - of incompetence and irresponsibility.I can't think of a single domestic problem, from an unfair tax code to defense overruns, that is not traceable directly to those 545 people.When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist. If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair. If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red. If the Marines are in IRAQ , it's because they want them in IRAQ .There are no insoluble government problems. Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, wh om they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobb yists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power.Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exist disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation" or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible. They, and they alone, have the power. They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses - provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees. We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess.
A CONFIDENCE CONSPIRACY
Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is NOT their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party. What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a SPEAKER, who stood up and criticized G.W. BUSH for creating deficits.The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it. The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes.Who is the Speaker of the House? She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow Democrats, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they ca n pass it over his veto. REPLACE THE SCOUNDRELS It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts - of incompetence and irresponsibility.I can't think of a single domestic problem, from an unfair tax code to defense overruns, that is not traceable directly to those 545 people.When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist. If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair. If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red. If the Marines are in IRAQ , it's because they want them in IRAQ .There are no insoluble government problems. Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, wh om they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobb yists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power.Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exist disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation" or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible. They, and they alone, have the power. They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses - provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees. We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess.
Sunday, April 20, 2008
HEALTH UPDATE
Some have inquired about my progress, so an update.
CARDIO-REHAB, there is a lot more to it that I initially understood. BIPASS surgery is so invasive that they don't know what all is going to happen in the post-operation time frame. I felt great, with soreness exceptions, after the surgery. THEN so mysterious symptoms surfaced, DEPRESSION, PANIC ATTACKS and more, took over my life. And, they were out of my control, then controlled me.
How long will they last, I don't know. I take one day at a time, and emotional highs and lows as they come. Some days good, some days bad.
I have tried to stick to a routine, so I know how things are going, and walking seems to be a large part of the equation. My days are more normal if I walk in the morning. I try to do at least 15 minutes, and generally do 20 to 30 minutes per walk.
CARDIO-REHAB, there is a lot more to it that I initially understood. BIPASS surgery is so invasive that they don't know what all is going to happen in the post-operation time frame. I felt great, with soreness exceptions, after the surgery. THEN so mysterious symptoms surfaced, DEPRESSION, PANIC ATTACKS and more, took over my life. And, they were out of my control, then controlled me.
How long will they last, I don't know. I take one day at a time, and emotional highs and lows as they come. Some days good, some days bad.
I have tried to stick to a routine, so I know how things are going, and walking seems to be a large part of the equation. My days are more normal if I walk in the morning. I try to do at least 15 minutes, and generally do 20 to 30 minutes per walk.
Could Bob Barr’s Run as Libertarian Doom McCain?
Former Republican Rep. Bob Barr is seen as the Libertarian Party’s most likely presidential candidate — and he could wind up torpedoing John McCain’s White House hopes.
“Given the recent fundraising prowess of a kindred spirit — Ron Paul's campaign for the Republican nomination siphoned up $35 million, mostly off the Internet — libertarians are feeling their oats,” political analyst George F. Will writes in Newsweek.
“Come November, Barr conceivably could be to John McCain what Ralph Nader was to Al Gore in 2000 — ruinous.”
Nader was a weak third-party candidate and won only 2,882,955 popular votes nationwide, but 97,488 of them were in Florida — where, because of Nader, George W. Bush won by 537 votes, Will notes.
Shane Cory, the Libertarian Party's executive director, “thinks his party is upwardly mobile,” Will writes.
“In 2004, its presidential candidate received just 397,265 votes, a mere .32 percent of the national popular vote…
“But in no state was the Libertarian vote larger than the winning candidate's margin of victory. This year, however, Cory thinks the party can far surpass its best national performance — 921,299 votes in 1980.”
Cory and Barr say the party almost certainly will be on the ballot in at least 48 states.
Republican consultant Craig Shirley recently wrote: “This Libertarian thing may be bigger than anyone is foreseeing right now.”
Barr left the GOP in 2006 over what he called bloated spending and civil liberties intrusions by the Bush administration.
A former U.S. attorney in Atlanta, Barr served eight years as a Republican congressman from Georgia before losing his seat in 2002 after a redistricting.
A Barr run for the White House would be handicapped by “John McCain's handiwork,” Will added.
“One wealthy libertarian would give $1 million if the McCain-Feingold law regulating political participation did not ban contributions of more than $28,500 to national parties.
But Will concludes: “If libertarian voters cost McCain the presidency, that will be condign punishment.”
Former Republican Rep. Bob Barr is seen as the Libertarian Party’s most likely presidential candidate — and he could wind up torpedoing John McCain’s White House hopes.
“Given the recent fundraising prowess of a kindred spirit — Ron Paul's campaign for the Republican nomination siphoned up $35 million, mostly off the Internet — libertarians are feeling their oats,” political analyst George F. Will writes in Newsweek.
“Come November, Barr conceivably could be to John McCain what Ralph Nader was to Al Gore in 2000 — ruinous.”
Nader was a weak third-party candidate and won only 2,882,955 popular votes nationwide, but 97,488 of them were in Florida — where, because of Nader, George W. Bush won by 537 votes, Will notes.
Shane Cory, the Libertarian Party's executive director, “thinks his party is upwardly mobile,” Will writes.
“In 2004, its presidential candidate received just 397,265 votes, a mere .32 percent of the national popular vote…
“But in no state was the Libertarian vote larger than the winning candidate's margin of victory. This year, however, Cory thinks the party can far surpass its best national performance — 921,299 votes in 1980.”
Cory and Barr say the party almost certainly will be on the ballot in at least 48 states.
Republican consultant Craig Shirley recently wrote: “This Libertarian thing may be bigger than anyone is foreseeing right now.”
Barr left the GOP in 2006 over what he called bloated spending and civil liberties intrusions by the Bush administration.
A former U.S. attorney in Atlanta, Barr served eight years as a Republican congressman from Georgia before losing his seat in 2002 after a redistricting.
A Barr run for the White House would be handicapped by “John McCain's handiwork,” Will added.
“One wealthy libertarian would give $1 million if the McCain-Feingold law regulating political participation did not ban contributions of more than $28,500 to national parties.
But Will concludes: “If libertarian voters cost McCain the presidency, that will be condign punishment.”
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
FOR CONTEMPLATION ON OBAMA
The Obama Tidal Wave
We are witnessing a political phenomenon with Barack Obama of rare magnitude. His speeches have inspired millions and yet most of his followers have no idea of what he stands for except
platitudes of 'Change' or that he says he will be a "Uniter". The power of speech from a charismatic person truly can be a powerful thing. Certainly Billy Graham had charisma and both his manner of speech and particularly the content changed millions. On the extreme other hand, the charisma of Adolph Hitler inspired millions and the results were catastrophic.
Barack Obama certainly is no Hitler or a Billy Graham, but for many Americans out there feeling just like a surfer who might be ecstatic and euphoric while riding a tidal wave, the real story is what happens when it hits shore.
Just Some of What Defines Barack Obama:
He voted against banning partial birth abortion.
He voted no on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions.
Supports affirmative action in Colleges and Government.
In 2001 he questioned harsh penalties for drug dealing.
Says he will deal with street level drug dealing as a minimum wage affair.
Admitted marijuana and cocaine use in high school and in college.
His religious convictions are very murky.
He is willing to meet with Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Kim Jung Il andMahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Has said that one of his first goals after being elected would be to have a conference with all Muslim nations.
Opposed the Patriot Act.
First bill he signed that was passed was campaign finance reform.
Voted No on prohibiting law suits against gun manufacturers.
Supports universal health-care.
Voted yes on providing habeas corpus forGuantanamodetainees.
Supports granting driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.
Supports extending welfare to illegal immigrants.
Voted yes on comprehensive immigration reform.
Voted yes on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security.
Wants to make the minimum wage a 'living wage'.
Voted with Democratic Party 96 percent of 251 votes.
Is a big believer in the separation of church and state.
Opposed to any efforts to Privatize Social Security and instead supports increasing the amount of tax paid.
He voted No on repealing the Alternative Minimum Tax
He voted No on repealing the 'Death' Tax
He wants to raise the Capital Gains Tax.
Has repeatedly said the surge in Iraq has not succeeded.
He is ranked as the most liberal Senator in the Senate today and that takes some doing.
He would take the troops out of Iraq almost immediately (and then put them back because Al Queda will come in).
He is a one-trick pony. The answer to every question is that he made the right decision on entering into the Iraq war.
He would bomb Pakistan and send the troops in.
He insists that Mexico should adopt our labor and environmental laws or he will abrogate the NAFTA treaty.
If your political choices are consistent with Barack Obama's and you think that his positions will bring America together or make it a better place, then you will probably enjoy the ride.
If you are like most Americans that after examining what he stands for, are truly not in line with his record, it would be prudent to get off the wave or better yet, never get on, before it comes on shore and undermines the very foundations of this great Country. We have limited time to save America or the Supreme Court as we know it. Inaction is action.
I PUBLISH THIS TO GET YOU TO THINK, ASK QUESTIONS, GET ANSWERS, AND THEN MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION.
I PERSONALLY THINK THAT HE IS NOT READY TO LEAD THIS NATION AT THIS TIME, HE IS TOO INEXPERIENCED, AND DOES NOT HAVE THE NECCESSARY FOUNDATION ON WHICH TO BUILD A PRESIDENCY. THE FUTURE OF THIS COUNTRY IS AT STAKE.
We are witnessing a political phenomenon with Barack Obama of rare magnitude. His speeches have inspired millions and yet most of his followers have no idea of what he stands for except
platitudes of 'Change' or that he says he will be a "Uniter". The power of speech from a charismatic person truly can be a powerful thing. Certainly Billy Graham had charisma and both his manner of speech and particularly the content changed millions. On the extreme other hand, the charisma of Adolph Hitler inspired millions and the results were catastrophic.
Barack Obama certainly is no Hitler or a Billy Graham, but for many Americans out there feeling just like a surfer who might be ecstatic and euphoric while riding a tidal wave, the real story is what happens when it hits shore.
Just Some of What Defines Barack Obama:
He voted against banning partial birth abortion.
He voted no on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions.
Supports affirmative action in Colleges and Government.
In 2001 he questioned harsh penalties for drug dealing.
Says he will deal with street level drug dealing as a minimum wage affair.
Admitted marijuana and cocaine use in high school and in college.
His religious convictions are very murky.
He is willing to meet with Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Kim Jung Il andMahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Has said that one of his first goals after being elected would be to have a conference with all Muslim nations.
Opposed the Patriot Act.
First bill he signed that was passed was campaign finance reform.
Voted No on prohibiting law suits against gun manufacturers.
Supports universal health-care.
Voted yes on providing habeas corpus forGuantanamodetainees.
Supports granting driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.
Supports extending welfare to illegal immigrants.
Voted yes on comprehensive immigration reform.
Voted yes on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security.
Wants to make the minimum wage a 'living wage'.
Voted with Democratic Party 96 percent of 251 votes.
Is a big believer in the separation of church and state.
Opposed to any efforts to Privatize Social Security and instead supports increasing the amount of tax paid.
He voted No on repealing the Alternative Minimum Tax
He voted No on repealing the 'Death' Tax
He wants to raise the Capital Gains Tax.
Has repeatedly said the surge in Iraq has not succeeded.
He is ranked as the most liberal Senator in the Senate today and that takes some doing.
He would take the troops out of Iraq almost immediately (and then put them back because Al Queda will come in).
He is a one-trick pony. The answer to every question is that he made the right decision on entering into the Iraq war.
He would bomb Pakistan and send the troops in.
He insists that Mexico should adopt our labor and environmental laws or he will abrogate the NAFTA treaty.
If your political choices are consistent with Barack Obama's and you think that his positions will bring America together or make it a better place, then you will probably enjoy the ride.
If you are like most Americans that after examining what he stands for, are truly not in line with his record, it would be prudent to get off the wave or better yet, never get on, before it comes on shore and undermines the very foundations of this great Country. We have limited time to save America or the Supreme Court as we know it. Inaction is action.
I PUBLISH THIS TO GET YOU TO THINK, ASK QUESTIONS, GET ANSWERS, AND THEN MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION.
I PERSONALLY THINK THAT HE IS NOT READY TO LEAD THIS NATION AT THIS TIME, HE IS TOO INEXPERIENCED, AND DOES NOT HAVE THE NECCESSARY FOUNDATION ON WHICH TO BUILD A PRESIDENCY. THE FUTURE OF THIS COUNTRY IS AT STAKE.
Tuesday, March 04, 2008
Meanderings
PRIMARY ELECTIONS IN OHIO: Have to go vote in a while, not sure what to do this year. There are some local issues, a friend running for Judge, some other local offices. Hill, Hussein, McCain. Socialism or a 100 year war, what a cherce........... naturally it is raining in Ohio, supposedly this helps the Democrats, but Rush and others want everyone to jump party lines and vote for Hill, Hussein's workers are playing dirty in OH, handing out literature toooooo close to the door, and then somehow, no trash cans inside, so the literature is laying all over the voting area, clever. WHAT TO DO?
I remember back 20 years ago, a good friend of mine, a black, was running for a local council seat, and he asked me to go to one of his meetings with his supporters. I had done some campaigns, and been involved in politics, and he just wanted me to sit in and see what all was going on.
During the course of the discussion, they decided he needed a brochure, or a mailer of somekind. They discussed size, information to be added, background, associations, experience, all the normal stuff, BUT, let's not print his foto ............. I excused myself and got up and left the building.
In my days in Nevada, in the 50's, blacks were not allowed in the casinos. In 1952, my first demerits at The Citadel came for calling a black woman who worked in the dining room, "mam" .......... I was to use the "N" worrd, which I did not use in the past, never had, and never did in the future.
I must admit I try very hard, when I see anyone, in person or on TV to not see a race, just a person. In Barack's case, I am more concerned about a "takeover from within" ........... that is in one of their teachings, somewhere.
I am too far past the worry stage to get emotionally involved, as long as our checks come from SS each month, and Medicare works, I'm OK.
I still remember FDR and Wilkie, but a lot of other names have slipped by the wayside, time marches on, and hopefully, so will we.
I remember back 20 years ago, a good friend of mine, a black, was running for a local council seat, and he asked me to go to one of his meetings with his supporters. I had done some campaigns, and been involved in politics, and he just wanted me to sit in and see what all was going on.
During the course of the discussion, they decided he needed a brochure, or a mailer of somekind. They discussed size, information to be added, background, associations, experience, all the normal stuff, BUT, let's not print his foto ............. I excused myself and got up and left the building.
In my days in Nevada, in the 50's, blacks were not allowed in the casinos. In 1952, my first demerits at The Citadel came for calling a black woman who worked in the dining room, "mam" .......... I was to use the "N" worrd, which I did not use in the past, never had, and never did in the future.
I must admit I try very hard, when I see anyone, in person or on TV to not see a race, just a person. In Barack's case, I am more concerned about a "takeover from within" ........... that is in one of their teachings, somewhere.
I am too far past the worry stage to get emotionally involved, as long as our checks come from SS each month, and Medicare works, I'm OK.
I still remember FDR and Wilkie, but a lot of other names have slipped by the wayside, time marches on, and hopefully, so will we.
Friday, February 01, 2008
I need cardio rehab, walking, it is cold, icy and snowy, I can't start my rehab at the local hospital till March. Well, I could, for $150 a week, too pricey. So, we changed out insurance, and they will do a copay of half that, but we have to wait till March.
Rehab is not easy, they told me to walk, walk, walk.
POLITICS I think it is going to end up like we all thought it would anyway, old Hill and the war vet. We thought that months ago, but now, after billions are spent on ads and campaigns, it is narrowed down to old Hill and the war vet. I don't think Obama can pull an upset, the Clinton machine is too powerfull, and will overcome his charisma. I'm not sure if charisma should get you elected anyway, not if you don't have much else to go with it. Can you imagine the runaway it would be if old Hill had HIS charisma?
"It's MY money and I want it NOW! Where is the money the gov is going to send us. I wish I had a machine like they had, just print more. Like having a bunch of credit cards with NO LIMIT
Seems like everyone is going to lose their job, their home and car, and here I sit, waiting for my SS check. I hope they never run out.
OHIO, my state, is thinking, "If we put in poker machines, our worries are over."
WHEN did GAMBLING ever solve problems? Gambling CREATES problems. Let's see how that works.
Everyone is on welfare or SS, so the state gets a lot of that back on the poker machines, supposedly to pay off debt. What happens when the welfare and SS run out, more machines. It really is crazy when you think about it, taking MORE of peoples money to pay off debt and make up deficits, and some say CUT TAXES.
TROUBLE, right here in River City, and that starts with T .....taxes nuff said..
Rehab is not easy, they told me to walk, walk, walk.
POLITICS I think it is going to end up like we all thought it would anyway, old Hill and the war vet. We thought that months ago, but now, after billions are spent on ads and campaigns, it is narrowed down to old Hill and the war vet. I don't think Obama can pull an upset, the Clinton machine is too powerfull, and will overcome his charisma. I'm not sure if charisma should get you elected anyway, not if you don't have much else to go with it. Can you imagine the runaway it would be if old Hill had HIS charisma?
"It's MY money and I want it NOW! Where is the money the gov is going to send us. I wish I had a machine like they had, just print more. Like having a bunch of credit cards with NO LIMIT
Seems like everyone is going to lose their job, their home and car, and here I sit, waiting for my SS check. I hope they never run out.
OHIO, my state, is thinking, "If we put in poker machines, our worries are over."
WHEN did GAMBLING ever solve problems? Gambling CREATES problems. Let's see how that works.
Everyone is on welfare or SS, so the state gets a lot of that back on the poker machines, supposedly to pay off debt. What happens when the welfare and SS run out, more machines. It really is crazy when you think about it, taking MORE of peoples money to pay off debt and make up deficits, and some say CUT TAXES.
TROUBLE, right here in River City, and that starts with T .....taxes nuff said..
Thursday, January 31, 2008
A different way to spend the holidays
It has been a while since my last post, 12/14 had a triple by-pass, still getting over that. It is an extremely invasive surgery and takes quite a while to get over. There are a lot of little subtle things that you go through.
I guess I was literally "dead" in many respects during the surgery, and as a result, I think a lot of things happen, emotionally. So many thoughts and emotions are amplified, and sleeping has becdome a problem for me. I sit up most of the night and watch TV, I miss the Australian Open, saw most matches twice.
But, even though they let me spend 5 hours in the emergency room while they were trying to determine what was wrong with me, one test came back indicating I was having a heart attack, and then they got to work.
So, I am still here, and sorry for the lack of communication to all my regulars.
Later ..
I guess I was literally "dead" in many respects during the surgery, and as a result, I think a lot of things happen, emotionally. So many thoughts and emotions are amplified, and sleeping has becdome a problem for me. I sit up most of the night and watch TV, I miss the Australian Open, saw most matches twice.
But, even though they let me spend 5 hours in the emergency room while they were trying to determine what was wrong with me, one test came back indicating I was having a heart attack, and then they got to work.
So, I am still here, and sorry for the lack of communication to all my regulars.
Later ..
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
