The Witching Hour has Arrived

Welcome to the last Sunday before the sequester.  Based on the philosophical and socio-political differences between the parties and the fact that Washington, D.C. is on vacation, it looks like the sequester is going to happen and draconian spending cuts will go into effect.

I made a point to say that though I am neither grandstanding nor cheerleading for the sequester, it seems as though America has exhausted all other options.  The result of the sequester will be somewhat financially tragic, America will survive and this somewhat tragedy is the only thing that is going to get politicians on both sides of the aisle to work together.  The good news is I think the sequester will happen, but it will be very short-lived.  Both parties in both houses of Congress will be willing to work together and work with President Obama to prioritize; that is restore what we absolutely cannot live without ASAP, say good-bye to what we do not need, and work on the borderline.  That’s the way it is, folks.  They say it is too late to pray on the day of final judgment; it is too late to debate the deficit issue as America is getting closer and closer to national bankruptcy.  If America goes bankrupt, we will all realize how minor the sequester was.

Fixing America is doable; the two questions are (1) at what price? and (2) which political philosophy is incorporated in the chosen solution?  Ridiculously high taxes to support a 1789 form of government will get the job done.  That will save the nation from bankruptcy, but will spiral 85% of the American people into poverty.  If that is the price we have to pay, we are better off being in debt till the end of time.  To give credit where credit is due, we Republicans do have to acknowledge that our rival Democrats are right about one thing; you can’t postpone raising taxes forever.  Even a 1789 form of government can accrue debt.  In 1804, you could buy an acre’s worth of land from the Louisiana Purchase for 3¢.  Today, a first class postage stamp costs 46¢.  Think about how many first class postage stamps it takes to fill one acre of land.  And one service the Federal Government always provided and always must provide regardless of cost is military defense; I know it has been more than a decade since 9-11 but don’t think it can’t happen again.  The Catch-22 is that with inflation, unemployment and wage reduction due to laid off full-timers forced to take part-time jobs, most Americans don’t have another spare penny to pay higher taxes.  Of the two major parameters being taxes and spending cuts, spending cuts is the only one anyone in government can control at this time.

What does irk me is the continued slow-boating in Washington; not only not getting things done, but when they do get something through, the result is spitting in the wind.  Both the sequester and the few alternatives that saw daylight for a little while, in the best case scenario, reduce the deficit by $1 Trillion over ten years.  Think about that magic number I put out there in most of my blogs $16 Trillion.  If you are going to pay off $16 Trillion dollars by paying off $1 Trillion every ten years, assuming the deficit does not grow (which we know will not be the case), it would take 160 years before we see a balanced budget.  Your great, great, great , great grandchildren won’t see it.  In fact, I don’t believe any human being will see it; I see Judgment Day coming long before then.  Mankind will be completely off the planet.  Now do you understand why you can’t get anyone in any class to make sacrifices?  At the end of the day, you still don’t have a balanced budget; in fact, you are still very deep in debt.  People make sacrifices all the time when they get something in return.  But reducing the debt by $1 Trillion here and there is still a lot of debt in the trillions; and no person on Earth has ever become a trillionaire.

The same old tune: limited government such that the only the most essential services survive and with the exception of the military, regardless of how essential, if it can be privatized, privatize it.  Also stabilize our currency with gold: 60% Federal Reserve Notes and 40% Gold Certificates.  Make the dollar bill worth what it was worth in 1952, a dollar.  This alone will reduce the number below $16 Trillion.  Bring back a strong, solid, manufacturing base and promote American-made goods.  Develop domestic energy sources.  And create the most small-business friendly environment possible at the federal, state, and local levels.  When one owns a small business, no one can outsource it or take it away from him or her.

Let’s see what’s on The 7 Train March 2^nd.

In Re: El-Rushbo

So I hear Rush Limbaugh is ashamed of [his] country.  The conservative talk radio host is upset, as are most Americans, about the sequester, the mandatory spending cuts taking effect March 1^st if Congress and the President can’t make a deal.  As conservative as I am, I admit I don’t always agree with El-Rushbo and on the things I do agree with him, I try to show a softer, more compassionate side.

For those of you who read, “The Great Sequester” blog I posted recently, I don’t want you to get the wrong idea.  I am not cheerleading for the sequester to happen, I just think it will and I don’t think the Federal Government has any other choice but to let it go through since none of the so called proposed deals do any better with the deficit and for Democrats won’t come on board with even their own deals unless more spending is included.  To make draconian spending cuts and then increase taxes to give the government more money to spend is like draining the bathtub with the water running.  I think the sequester is unfortunately a Hobson’s choice.

Unlike Limbaugh et al., I actually have a solution; what I have been preaching since I launched The 7 Train back in November, 2011.  Mr. Limbaugh exclaimed: “No meat inspection.  No cops.  No teachers.  No firefighters.  No air traffic control.  I’m sorry, my day of getting roped into all of this are over…”  I can assure police, fire, and EMT are always going to be here; there are some things you have to have no matter how bear the cupboard may be.  And the military will always be there, just smaller.  And once the sequester happens, all branches of government will convene the first things they will resurrect are the most essential services.  As for everything else, remember my buzzword—privatization! 

Now when I spoke of privatization in many blog articles, I made it clear that it is privatization and prioritization.  We need a company like Delta or the now new and supercharged American Airlines to get into the railroad business and run a privately-owned railroad replacing Amtrak—twentieth century America was built on private railroads.  In Ontario, Canada, a company called Bombardier is the only company in the world that manufacturers both trains and planes.  Boeing or Lockheed-Martin could open a new division making rail cars so it is no longer necessary to import Kawasaki-made M-8 rail cars from Japan.  Even General Motors could get involved.  This will lead to the right kind of job creation to kick-start the economy.  With cross county rail service turned over to the private sector, billions will be saved right there.

Meat inspection, mail service, environmental protection, ultimately even education can be operated by the private sector.  The key is to make rules and stick with them.  This is the good kind of regulation—updating statute law as a source of regulation, make the private sector companies administering these services comply with the statutes, and rather than an unmanageable voucher system, have the Federal Government issue a government contract to one company specializing in the respective category, and rewarding the companies administering the service zero or drastically reduced corporate taxes while the respective competitors pay fair rates.

While ranking government services in order of importance is well, important, the Federal Government must also rank in terms in what is easiest and most practical to privatize and get in privatized ASAP.  Then the rest should be manageable.  Also remember, both sides including myself would make more sacrifices, even if we had to pay a little bit more taxes albeit I am middle-class, if we actually could achieve the $16 Trillion we need to achieve a balanced budget.  You can’t blame anyone for not being willing to sacrifice anything if at the end of the day, the nation is still very deep in debt.  It is hard to sell the American public on how the government can raise or save millions and billions when we have to pay off trillions.  I also recommended the hybridization of our currency to sixty percent Federal Reserve Notes and the other forty percent back on the gold standard.  Gold is trading higher and higher and the deficit reduces itself just by having a dollar worth a dollar.  Now let’s show off our true conservative pride with what our Founding Fathers from George Washington on up to Ronald Reagan had in mind!

Dating Across Party Lines

Thought we’d have a little fun!

I was asked by a coworker at my place of work in Stamford, Connecticut who knows of my reputation as a staunch Republican conservative if I could date a liberal Democrat girl?  I never actually thought about this and consulted some web sites and blogs about opposites dating.  I did not find too many specific examples but I did find a few examples of people dating who have a very annunciated opposite.  He is a Yankee fan and she is a Red Sox fan, to name one.  But sports is all about fun—this is serious business.  I am a Met fan and would prefer her to be a Met fan so we can go to ballgames at Citi Field together, but I could adapt because by rooting for a different team, she is not having a direct effect on the future of America, and she may still enjoy a good ballgame.  But this is serious business!

The first question I would have to ask is How Liberal?  I could deal with a moderate liberal so long as she does not try to push me to the left.  Also, I would not want her making speeches all over the place selling her liberal ideas.  A Socialist or outright radical left-winger is out of the question.  And not because I could not be flexible to make a relationship work; that I can do; but the fact that she is hurting fellow Americans who are not involved in [our] relationship would give me a big problem.  No question to make a relationship work, you have to take the focus off yourself.  But the two parties in the relationship are not the only two people on Earth either.  We are ALL God’s children and even a good relationship between two unselfish people is problematic if people outside the relationship are hurt.  And liberal views can be detrimental to the American character which we Republican conservatives are working diligently to rebuild.

Another question: Suppose you could convert her? Well, I do not want to be converted to a liberal Democrat and relationships do not work if they are one-sided.  If she wanted to convert—absolutely!  That would be a feather in my cap even if the relationship did not last—if she couldn’t be a girlfriend, she could at least be a political ally rather than an adversary.  But I would have to know her for a long time and by being a good listener, maybe I could detect something in her words that would lead me to believe she doesn’t know why she’s a Democrat.  Once one realizes they don’t know why they are a Democrat, they want to convert.  Many Democrats need help converting because (1) their family is full of Democrats and (2) they fear the unknown; they hear too much negativity about conservatism from the liberal media they fear something bad is going to happen that they will be a part.  In the latter case, my goal would be to expose her to media outlets not sold out to the liberals; Fox News, Limbaugh, Hannity, and The Blaze TV.  But I could not convert her against her will since I absolutely will not convert to the left side.

Question: If I decided to run for office as a Republican, would she support me? Not that I have any plans to run for office, but it brings up a good point.  Ron and Nancy.  George (HW) and Barbara.  George and Laura.  And Barrack and Michelle.  I cannot imagine any of these presidencies being the same if their wives disagreed with them.  I neglected to mention Bill and Hilary; Bill cheated, and that says a mouthful about their relationship!  My own woman opposing me would be damning to my political career.  But it is a Catch-22; I wouldn’t want her to be unhappy and support me just for the sake of opportunism—read back that statement—sounds like a relationship killer to me.  So I would want to ask her this question well in advance of any feelings for each other metastasizing.  If I ran for office, my woman would have to be, and for that matter, want to be my ally, not my adversary.  And a relationship partners really should be lifelong allies with respect to each other.

Question: If you had kids together, how would they be affected? At age fifty, I am not planning to have any kids although I am very good with other people’s kids.  But even in a no-kids relationship, it is a valid hypothetical detail that has to be worked out.  Somebody’s kids will most-likely be listening to both of us.  America cannot afford to raise another generation of bleeding-heart liberals who grow up anti-American.  We need to resurrect the American Dream and make it flourish.  It is late in life for me, but I am very concerned about future generations whose future is in small-business ownership.  How could I live with a person telling today’s children, the future of America for whom guys like me are so interested in the future of American and the American Dream, the need for bigger government and more entitlements.  That could bring down a whole generation—a generation who needs to understand that limited government is to your advantage and that you will not have entitlements to cling onto.  If I had my youth over and wanted get married and raise a family, I would not want my kids growing up to be liberals.  And I would want them to register as Republicans on their eighteenth birthdays.  My mate has to be with me, not against me.

Question: If she wanted to run for office as a Democrat, would you support her? Sadly, no.  OK, I am human and I have my own tragic flaws.  I have come a long way when it comes to women’s rights and am OK with most of them.  If my girl were a Republican and were running as a Republican in support of my conservative beliefs, absolutely—I would be her unofficial campaign manager and support her to the hilt.  But if she were a Democrat running on liberal policy platforms, I’m sorry, but that I couldn’t do—I draw the line there.

I think a big mitigating factor would have to be how actively involved she is in her liberal politics.  If she is who she is but it is not a big priority in her life, it may work out.  Remember, someone like a socialist is never passive, so if she is passive about it, she is moderately liberal by default.  I would however, like her to vote on Election Day—it is hard for me to accept someone who won’t exercise the right people died for during the American Revolution.  There is a fine line of distinction between passive and apathetic.  I could never have a relationship with someone too apathetic to get up on the morning of the first Tuesday in November and cast a ballot.

All in all, for the most part, it would not be a deal breaker as long as she was OK with me remaining a conservative Republican.  I think if we cared for each other more than we cared about our personal politics, it would work.  Just remember, we are all obligated to love God even more than we love our own families, or potential mates.  I could handle the relationship locally; that is between her and me.  But for a God-fearing person to have a relationship, that’s not good enough—we are all God’s children and we must give thought to the global impact of our relationship, not just the two of us.  Based on what I have conjured up, I leave you to come to your own conclusions.

 

George Washington’s Warnings

As another Presidents’ Day passes, I would like to share with you the warning George Washington issued to Congress upon his departure from the office of President of the United States in 1797.  If our elected officials near the Beltway could see this.

On the Constitution:

This government … has a just claim to your confidence and your support.

Respect for its authority, compliance with its laws, acquiescence in its measures, are duties enjoined by the fundamental maxims of true liberty. The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of government.

Washington emphasizes the fact that we are the government of the people, but the people, for the people.  We are a free country with lots of freedom.  The Constitution defines these freedoms and defines or implies the responsibilities associated with these freedoms.  Just like when Moses bequeathed The Ten Commandments unto the people of Israel; there is no freedom without the law.

Towards the preservation of your government … resist with care the spirit of innovation upon its principles, however specious the pretexts. One method of assault may be to effect, in the forms of the Constitution, alterations which will impair the energy of the system, and thus to undermine what cannot be directly overthrown.

In all the changes to which you may be invited, remember that time and habit are at least as necessary to fix the true character of governments as of other human institutions; that experience is the surest standard by which to test the real tendency of the existing constitution of a country; that facility in changes, upon the credit of mere hypothesis and opinion, exposes to perpetual change, from the endless variety of hypothesis and opinion; and remember, especially, that for the efficient management of your common interests, in a country so extensive as ours, a government of as much vigor as is consistent with the perfect security of liberty is indispensable.

There is a hard truth that dictatorships are made of iron and democracies are made of glass.  A democracy can vote in a dictator, but to transform a dictatorship into a democracy requires bloodshed.  Washington had the foresight to understand the Constitution may fall out of date and need minor alterations, but believed wholeheartedly the need for a document that would be a constant fixture in defining our free country.  So alterations can be made but must pass a difficult process with many checkpoints and that the American people must proceed with caution when suggesting altering the Constitution.  Thus, the notion that conservatism is correctness.

 

On Political Parties:

 

Let me now … warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.

Sounds like a familiar tune—party generality.  The problem if all political parties stand for the same things; the ultimate breakdown of the Platonian dialectic process.  If everybody agrees on everything, there are only two possibilities; everybody’s right, or everybody’s wrong and believes they are right.  My good friend Mr. Markowitz once said “Pigs don’t know pigs stink.”

Hence, the need for two distinct parties to debate and find the truth.  Too bad the modern day Democrat has crossed the line and has been in defiance of not only Constitutional principles, but of God’s principles as well.

 

This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

Yes, the need for Barrack Obama and John Boehner to reach across each other’s aisles.  Their own ideals can become their worst enemy.  This would be a great spot for Thomas Payne to interject; bipartisan politics can be equally as damning as party partisanship—Constitutional and God’s principles can be in violate on both sides.  Thomas Payne “common sense” solutions should always be at the top of the list.

 

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism.

But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.

Yes, I get it.  Political party dominance can be the enemy to a functioning democracy of three branches of government.  But they are necessary evils.  Washington himself belonged to the old Federalist Party, which would ultimately be absorbed in the formation of the Grand Old Party or Republican Party as we know it today.  Without political parties, Congress would degenerate into one big New England Town Meeting with no consensus among its members whatsoever—which is why Washington, along with many other founding fathers chose representative democracy or “republic” over direct democracy where the citizens (masses) are the congress.  Party politics can guide us to take a stand, but no stand on any issue is can be validated within the party platform; that requires us as educated individuals to determine.

 

Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all.

The Nation, which indulges towards another an habitual hatred, or an habitual fondness, is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. … The Nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the Government, contrary to the best calculations of policy.

The Government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times, it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives.

The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of Nations has been the victim.

Do not pick a fight with another nation just for the sake of picking a fight; not even with a nation who demonstrates hate for America; unless they cross the line and take action to jeopardize our freedom.  Have a strong military defense so we are prepared in case going to war is a necessary evil for the preservation of freedom and Democracy.  And set no permanent alliances with any foreign nation; even those who demonstrate positive feelings and admiration for America—a drastic change in leadership, the fall of their status quo government, can alter that friendship.

 

On Public Debt (Pay real close attention to this one, folks!):

 

As a very important source of strength and security, cherish public credit. One method of preserving it is to use it as sparingly as possible, avoiding occasions of expense by cultivating peace, but remembering also that timely disbursements to prepare for danger frequently prevent much greater disbursements to repel it, avoiding likewise the accumulation of debt, not only by shunning occasions of expense, but by vigorous exertion in time of peace to discharge the debts which unavoidable wars may have occasioned, not ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burden which we ourselves ought to bear.

Holy crap!  Use it as sparingly as possible!  Guess the Democrats never read anything about the wisdom of the Father of our Country.  The Democrats “tax and spend” junkies say use it all the time and never pay it off!  Now we can’t even use is sparingly because the well is depleted–$16 Trillion to pay off.  And Democrats don’t want spending cuts?  I better not catch a Democrat, especially in Congress, chewing gum!  Owing $16 Trillion, they can’t afford gum!

The execution of these maxims belongs to your representatives, but it is necessary that public opinion should co-operate. To facilitate to them the performance of their duty, it is essential that you should practically bear in mind that towards the payment of debts there must be revenue; that to have revenue there must be taxes; that no taxes can be devised which are not more or less inconvenient and unpleasant; that the intrinsic embarrassment, inseparable from the selection of the proper objects (which is always a choice of difficulties), ought to be a decisive motive for a candid construction of the conduct of the government in making it, and for a spirit of acquiescence in the measures for obtaining revenue, which the public exigencies may at any time dictate.

That no taxes can be devised which are not more or less convenient and unpleasant, huh!  Another Democrat party faux pas—they have no problem making us pay inconvenient and unpleasant taxes, some of which taxpayers can’t even afford, so they can spend it their way!

The biggest problem is we need the margin of error in case of a national emergency.  That is why when I speak of the sequester, the one thing I think is dead wrong is for the military to be part of those draconian spending cuts slated for March 1, 2013.  Leads me to believe the Democrats are not in favor of the preservation of the American way of life.  If are not in favor, what are they by default?

 

It is HIGH TIME all Americans drink from the fountain of wisdom inherited to us from our Founding Fathers!  And do it NOW!

 

 

Presidents’ Day

President’s Day is a Federal holiday formerly known as Washington’s Birthday.  George Washington, our first president, was born on February 22, 1732 was celebrated on February 22^nd until a Monday holiday bill passed in 1971 making the legal holiday the third Monday in February.

Renaming the holiday Presidents’ Day and making it universal in all fifty states allows anyone to celebrate any president they choose.  While February 22^nd was the only Federal holiday honoring a U.S. President, there have been many states honoring one of two others.  Most states north of the Mason-Dixon line have celebrated the birthday of Abraham Lincoln on February 12^th; in Dixie, they celebrate the birthday of Confederate President Jefferson Davis on June 3^rd.  But the beauty of calling it Presidents’ Day is the opportunity to pay honor to presidents other than Washington and Lincoln (and Davis).

The Great Ronald Reagan, who with the possible exception of Teddy Roosevelt, was the greatest president of the twentieth century.  Reagan is my founding father, as well as a founding father of all of us who share the conservative vision to redefine America as the land of opportunity and not entitlements.  The conservative movement started in his years as president and with a booming economy in the 1980s, people realized you couldn’t argue with success and joined the movement.  Like Washington and Lincoln, Reagan has a February birthday, February 6, 1911.

I could not forget Teddy Roosevelt.  If I could choose to interview one deceased president, I would want to interview Teddy.  One question I would have liked to ask him is why he chose not to run again in 1908?  Taft was no T.R., and America could have used is wisdom four more years.  Especially since his cousin Franklin served three terms (got elected to a fourth), and Franklin is the founding father of entitlements; which we now know was a mistake.

To give credit where credit is due, Barrack Obama can be included.  Although I will never be on board with his liberal politics, he did break the color line and no matter what, he will always have the distinction of being America’s first African American president.  He did face the same adversities and Jackie Roosevelt Robinson did when he broke the color line in Major League Baseball.  Mets broadcaster emeritus Ralph Kiner always said Jackie was an outstanding football player, basketball player, and track and field athlete; he’s in the Hall of Fame in baseball and that was his worst sport.  Jackie was an excellent baseball player; he was just that much better in the other three sports.  Barrack Obama will follow a similar legacy; he will be remembered by people who were associated with him as a social organizer, U.S. Senator, and any titles or offices he held before the senate, but that President of the United States was his worst occupation.  Nonetheless, I give him credit for what he did for not only African Americans, but for all minority races discriminated against in the past (and present to a degree), and for the Caucasian race as well for opening many eyes.

All in all, Happy Presidents’ Day, no matter which presidents you wish to honor.

The Great Sequester

Since I was in first grade, I have been familiar with the terms “lamb” and “lion” referring to the month of March with the respect to the weather—it typically rolls in like a lion (a little more winter snow) and rolls out like a lamb (the coming of spring).  It would appear as though March 1^st, 2013 is going to roll in like a lion of a very different kind.

Two major events are going to happen.  One is the first Papal resignation in six-hundred years will take effect as Benedict XVI call it quits and an unusual interregnum and Pope selection with the Benedict still living.  The College of Cardinals is not 100% sure how they will handle it.  The other thing which is the purpose of this blog is The Great Sequester; unless Congress and the President work something out, the draconian spending cuts, the second half of that fiscal cliff we averted on January 4^th with an eleventh hour deal in Washington, will go into effect.

Congress went on vacation with no deal and the President is in Hawaii playing golf.  Looks like it is going to happen.  This morning (02/17/2013) on the CBS News show Face the Nation hosted by Bob Schieffer, Schieffer himself is convinced it is going to happen.  One of his guests from Mississippi was former Governor Haley Barbour (R) who was very adamant that although he would prefer to see The Great Sequester aborted, the Obama Democrats just want another excuse to raise taxes; and this is why Speaker Boehner cannot work with President Obama. OK, fair enough, the inability for politicians of different parties and ideologies to get along will ultimately be the spark will allow the sequester to happen.  But how bad is it really?

Keep in mind two things; first of all gridlock is supposed to the norm; constitutionally speaking, or Founding Fathers intended the Federal Government to be a very passive governing body.  Second, and extremely important, our Founding Fathers stood for what we now refer to as the concept of Limited Government.  The failure of the Articles of Confederation and Hamilton and Madison writing The Federalist Papers that ultimately led to our current Constitution made it clear to every generation of American from 1789 to the present that limited is small, but still a quantity greater than zero.

It is as clear as a freshly washed window that the budget cannot be balanced on the backs of taxpayers; all taxpayers in all classes—even the wealthy need to retain the wherewithal to create jobs if the American economy is going to flourish. With the exception of cuts to the military, and we do need a strong defense in Post-9-11 America with looming threats from Iran, Syria, and North Korea, it seems as though the best thing America can do is to press its proverbial reset button.  Kudos to the pundits on both sides who pointed out the negative side effects to the sequester including recession, but would you rather face it now or face it with a far more devastating thump when the American economy becomes insolvent beyond reconciliation?  The results will be to some extent tragic!  But tragedy is the only thing I can think up that can bring the two parties together.  9-11 brought Americans of all races and ethnicity together proudly displaying American flags and yellow ribbons.  More recently, the quaint town of Newton, Connecticut, where the horrific Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting took place brought a sense of community to big cities, suburbs, and small towns together in a way that had not been seen since prior to the John Dewey humanistic revolution of the 1920s; strengthening secularity and dampening spirituality.  The recent meteor hitting the ground in Russia leads us to believe that if a large meteor or other heavy materials from outer space hit land in America, partisan politics as we know it would come to an end and both parties would unite on how to rebuild this nation.  The tragedy of the sequester is tragic enough to bring people together from Washington to Wall Street to Main Street to Morning Glory Circle.  I am not thrilled with it, but it is what the doctor ordered; that elixir that tastes awful but works.

America’s best option is to get out of the way of The Great Sequester and then rebuild after it happens, understanding that most Americans do not have another spare penny to higher taxes and the ultimate realization that you cannot bring everything back and achieve formidable results.  This will bring both sides on board to sensible spending cuts where all will decide what is really important in terms of government services and entitlements and let the rest go.  As I have preached in past blogs, America is at the witching hour and limited government is a Hobson’s Choice.  Let’s not go the way of Greece, let’s face it head on!

 

Obama v. Rubio

Last Tuesday night we heard President Obama deliver the annual State of the Union Address where he discussed the economy, gun control, and reinvesting in America.  Then we heard Senator Marco Rubio (R-FLA) give the Republican response.  I have a great deal of respect for Marco Rubio, but he fell a little short of the real issue.

As expected, the gun-violence issue had to be addressed with people from Newtown, Connecticut including staff members from Sandy Hook Elementary School in attendance.  Both sides agree their need to be a reduction in gun violence; the two sides vary in how, more guns or more gun control.  Rock star Ted Nugent spoke twenty-four hours later on how important people are protected by armed guards, why not our children?  I don’t have a better idea right now, but it is a sad day for America if that is the only way our schools are safe.  Furthermore, no gun or gun control scenario could have prevented something like that.

Obama wants to raise the Federal minimum wage to $9.00 per hour.  Granted, you can’t put off raising the minimum wage to meet inflation and cost of living forever, but there couldn’t be a worse time with the wheels of job creation just beginning to turn.  It is currently $7.25 and it would make sense to try $8.00 first.  Remember, an employer only has to pay at least minimum wage if he hires someone.

While the economic portion of the State of the Union was centered on Obama’s view that government should increase government spending in entitlements to rebuild the middle class in
America, Rubio suggested investing in limited government and providing opportunities for any one middle class or below to overcome and survive and flourish in a limited government society.  My fellow conservatives and I know exactly how I feel about it, but sometimes it’s not about saying no, it’s about saying “not yet.”  The bottom line is the federal government cannot invest in anything at this time—it is $16 Trillion in debt and has no money to invest.  The only algorithm for rebuilding America (all classes) is to balance the budget, create a reasonable surplus, and then make a sensible and constitutional decision on how to invest that money back to the American people.  Unlike states, the Federal government cannot have a so called rainy day fund—as stated in Article 3 of the Constitution, the Federal Government is prohibited from becoming a for-profit entity and when it has a surplus, it must give it back to the American people in one form or another.  My hopes and dreams would be in the form of helping people help themselves in the limited government scenario or Founding Fathers intended for us.

Ken Blanchard in a popular self-help book called Ninety-Nine Road Signs to Success, once said the fundamental definition of the word average is either the best of the worst or the worst of the best.  No American should settle for either—we should all strive to be the best of the best we can be.  In my view, the word average functions as a pseudonym for middle class.  Entitlements enslave us all to the complacency in the class we are in.  Furthermore, I have blogged on several occasions that the future of the American economy and the American Dream is a small business society; where those graduating college do what they set out to do when they selected their majors, only instead of going through the career placement process and enslaving themselves to a boss in a somebody else’s business working for somebody else’ dream, to do it in small companies they own.

So step one is a balanced budget and step two is to fulfill the prophesy I suggest.  I’m not saying no, I’m simply saying “not yet.”  The time has come to do whatever it takes to get the budget balanced!

75 MPH?

I am responding to the latest proposal by the legislature in my home state of Connecticut to raise the speed limit on some of our limited access highways to an all-time high of 75 mph.  What were they thinking?

There must be a generation in Hartford that knows nothing of the history of limited access highways in Connecticut.  With the exception of loops (I-291 and I-691) the Interstate highways in Connecticut were built before the national 55 mph speed limit (1973 – 1997) was enacted as an energy saving matter by the Richard Nixon administration.  Even in the early 1960s no stretch of limited access highway in the Nutmeg State had speed limits higher than 70 mph.  In the case of I-95, better known in the days as the Connecticut Turnpike, the speed limit was 60 mph and 55 for trucks and buses; increasing to 70 mph east of Lake Saltonstall in Branford (east of New Haven).   How can anyone propose speed limits higher than the roadways were even built to handle—if 75 mph was unworkable in 1958 with about a tenth as much traffic as today, there is no way it would work now, especially on highways that accommodate tractor trailers were jackknifing on a highway with only two lanes of moving traffic in each direction makes the highway a deathtrap.

While the state’s cracked research department studied traffic in places like North Dakota and determined there are less accidents where speeds are higher—North Dakota?  Sure, 75 mph makes sense in North Dakota where you can drive 50 miles and count the vehicles you are sharing the road with on your fingers.  Then you want to be going fast enough so a car behind you does not get to close and can’t brake in time.  But not with the volume traffic and the state of the roads in the northeastern I-95 corridor.  I would rather see a lower speed limit for trucks and buses as it once was.

The real acts of buffoonery deal with why are state legislators debating something as ludicrous as this when they should be debating the important issues; like, especially, the state’s finances!  I think a lot of this is about with higher speed limits, higher fines can be levied to violators.  I don’t get it!  There is no reason why you can’t raise speeding ticket fines without raising the speed limit.  Furthermore, with higher speed limits and more speeders paying more fines, you need, you guessed it, more state troopers!  And Governor Malloy has reduced the size of the police force, as many municipalities did, to save money and attempt to achieve a balanced budget.  And police, fire, and ambulance are the LAST things you cut.  Nonetheless, this is the mentality of our current-day general assembly.

Between liquor on Sunday, 75 mph speed limits, and higher taxes that the unemployed and struggling families can’t pay right now, they should be focusing on sensible spending cuts.  Seems as though no one can prioritize anymore.

Ravens by a Touchdown

The surprise team of the year.  Predicting Baltimore Ravens to win Super Bowl XLVII by a touchdown.

Can’t wait to a start of a new baseball season!