On September eleventh we need to remember that there are those who wish to destroy our country and way of life, that we must remain vigilant against attack from our enemies.
On September eleventh we need to remember those who died on this day in 2001 simply for being in The United States of America. We need to remember those who died protecting their country on Flight 93. Most of all we need to thank those who stand in defense of our country everyday.
The events of Sept. 11, 2001 kept running through my thoughts until I had to write my feelings down. Eventually, I wrote the following poem, and I would like to share it with you in remembrance and vigilance.
For Which It Stands
every morning I raise my flag high
I like to stand and watch it against the clear blue sky
sometimes I can’t help but remember another clear blue morning
when hatred and death came without warning
then I stand and watch a while longer
it makes me feel proud – and a little stronger
I think of you who’ve been called to fight
so that I may always enjoy that sight
though far away in desert sands
you struggle so all may share in that for which it stands:
Liberty and Justice for All
in a world that has grown so small
I thank you for standing tall
Freedom and Peace come at high cost
because of people like you, they will never be lost
Mark Conrad
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
More Health Care Reform Rhetoric
Our President refuses to listen:
President Obama returned to the same old rhetoric in his speech to the AFL-CIO last night. During this speech Mr. Obama stated “I’ve got a question for all those folks (opposing his health care reform); What are you going to do? What’s your answer? What’s your solution?” He added “And you know what? They don’t have one. Their answer is to do nothing.”
Mr. President, if you were listening, you would know that no one is saying to “do nothing”! There are scores of suggestions on how to reform health care, on what the American people want to have addressed and what we don’t want to see happen. Are you really so arrogant that if you don’t hear people embracing your ideas that you hear us saying that we don’t want to do anything? Do you actually believe that your concept of a government run health care system is the only proposal that has merit? Please open your mind and your ears, hear what the people are saying and help create health care change that will benefit all Americans!
President Obama returned to the same old rhetoric in his speech to the AFL-CIO last night. During this speech Mr. Obama stated “I’ve got a question for all those folks (opposing his health care reform); What are you going to do? What’s your answer? What’s your solution?” He added “And you know what? They don’t have one. Their answer is to do nothing.”
Mr. President, if you were listening, you would know that no one is saying to “do nothing”! There are scores of suggestions on how to reform health care, on what the American people want to have addressed and what we don’t want to see happen. Are you really so arrogant that if you don’t hear people embracing your ideas that you hear us saying that we don’t want to do anything? Do you actually believe that your concept of a government run health care system is the only proposal that has merit? Please open your mind and your ears, hear what the people are saying and help create health care change that will benefit all Americans!
Monday, August 24, 2009
representatives not rulers
It seems that many of you elected officials have forgotten your duty:
In 1787, we, the American people, chose not to be ruled, but to rule ourselves. We decide through elected citizens who represent our voice and our ideals! Lately, many of you officials are not listening to the people that you are supposed to represent. You are trying to convince us that you know what is good for us. Some of you have even come out and stated that you will vote against the position taken by your constituents if you believe it is in their best interest.
You people think you are our rulers not our representatives! You are not! We put you in office and we will remove you if you do not act in accordance with our will!
By definition to represent means to “act for or in behalf of”. Your job as a Congressperson or Senator is to represent the will of the majority of the people in your district. You will know what their will is by listening to what they tell you through email, phone calls, conversations and demonstrations. You were not elected to decide what is right for us, you were not chosen because you are better than us. You do not rule us rather you work for us!
In 1787, we, the American people, chose not to be ruled, but to rule ourselves. We decide through elected citizens who represent our voice and our ideals! Lately, many of you officials are not listening to the people that you are supposed to represent. You are trying to convince us that you know what is good for us. Some of you have even come out and stated that you will vote against the position taken by your constituents if you believe it is in their best interest.
You people think you are our rulers not our representatives! You are not! We put you in office and we will remove you if you do not act in accordance with our will!
By definition to represent means to “act for or in behalf of”. Your job as a Congressperson or Senator is to represent the will of the majority of the people in your district. You will know what their will is by listening to what they tell you through email, phone calls, conversations and demonstrations. You were not elected to decide what is right for us, you were not chosen because you are better than us. You do not rule us rather you work for us!
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Health care reform is not an all or nothing deal
President Obama has brought the health care debate back to the same old all or nothing argument he used to push his spending package. He insists that his plan is the only alternative by consistently leaping to what will happen if we “do nothing”. No one is saying that we do not need some type of health care reform, but the president and his supporters refuse to compromise. There have been many health care reform proposals over the last several years, which have been summarily dismissed. It seems that the democrats were waiting to have the power to put forth this type of government controlled program. This administration does not want health care reform as much as it wants this health care reform plan.
We do need to make changes to our health care insurance system but it should be done in steps, addressing specific issues individually. We cannot afford the huge sweeping changes proposed by the Obama administration, financially or ethically. This is not an all or nothing decision, but if I am forced to decide, I believe that we will be better off doing nothing than accepting this policy as it stands.
We do need to make changes to our health care insurance system but it should be done in steps, addressing specific issues individually. We cannot afford the huge sweeping changes proposed by the Obama administration, financially or ethically. This is not an all or nothing decision, but if I am forced to decide, I believe that we will be better off doing nothing than accepting this policy as it stands.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
GO GREEN
The current “go green” movement is more political than practical. Most green initiatives are superficial. The brand of dish soap I use has a new environmentally friendly formula; it doesn’t cut grease as well as the original formula but it is politically correct and good marketing to be eco-friendly.
Now I use more soap and more hot water, therefore more oil and electricity to heat the water, just to clean the same amount of dishes. Whatever has been removed from the more effective original formula of dish soap is undoubtedly making the Earth a healthier and cleaner place to live with all the added benefits of increased use of fossil fuel.
Say…. I can reduce my fossil fuel consumption by replacing my old inefficient incandescent light bulbs with new “smart energy” long life bulbs. Wow! I’m sure the mercury contained in these bulbs won’t have nearly the adverse effect on the environment as the poison removed from the dish soap I’ve been using for the last twenty years.
Be sure to support all the green products and programs; it won’t help the environment but it will cost you more. At least somebody is getting green!
Now I use more soap and more hot water, therefore more oil and electricity to heat the water, just to clean the same amount of dishes. Whatever has been removed from the more effective original formula of dish soap is undoubtedly making the Earth a healthier and cleaner place to live with all the added benefits of increased use of fossil fuel.
Say…. I can reduce my fossil fuel consumption by replacing my old inefficient incandescent light bulbs with new “smart energy” long life bulbs. Wow! I’m sure the mercury contained in these bulbs won’t have nearly the adverse effect on the environment as the poison removed from the dish soap I’ve been using for the last twenty years.
Be sure to support all the green products and programs; it won’t help the environment but it will cost you more. At least somebody is getting green!
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Reverse Discrimination?
The case of discrimination against the firefighters in New Haven CT is clearly racial. The fact that laws supposed to prevent racism created this situation does not change the reality that the decision not to promote these people is based upon their race.
The fact that they are white does not mean that they cannot be discriminated against. This is discrimination. It is not “reverse discrimination”! What does that mean? Reverse discrimination? The two terms do not combine into a coherent expression! Discrimination is not directional, it is impartial and refers to the treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit.
To label discrimination against a white person as “reverse” implies that discrimination is an act committed by white people against people of other races. This is in itself a racist view. Isn’t the goal of our society to treat all people as being equal? Everyone took the same exams; those that scored the highest on the exams earned the right to the positions and should receive the jobs. Equality. Fairness.
The fact that they are white does not mean that they cannot be discriminated against. This is discrimination. It is not “reverse discrimination”! What does that mean? Reverse discrimination? The two terms do not combine into a coherent expression! Discrimination is not directional, it is impartial and refers to the treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit.
To label discrimination against a white person as “reverse” implies that discrimination is an act committed by white people against people of other races. This is in itself a racist view. Isn’t the goal of our society to treat all people as being equal? Everyone took the same exams; those that scored the highest on the exams earned the right to the positions and should receive the jobs. Equality. Fairness.
Friday, April 10, 2009
Immediate action required
Why is the Obama administration in such a hurry to pass all their new programs? I would prefer that the government took the time to get a bill right rather than rush it through, as with the AIG bonuses in the bail out. The administration was aware of these bonuses and chose to rush through an inadequate policy rather than address and correct the problem.
Since Mr. Obama took office we have been told that it is imperative that we; act now, move quickly, pass this before it is too late, and that we must take advantage before the window of opportunity closes. We are given only a broad overview of plans with details to be filled in after the legislation is passed, like with the stimulus plan.
Are they trying to push through a specific agenda before most Americans know what is happening? There is a difference between decisive action and reckless behavior.
Since Mr. Obama took office we have been told that it is imperative that we; act now, move quickly, pass this before it is too late, and that we must take advantage before the window of opportunity closes. We are given only a broad overview of plans with details to be filled in after the legislation is passed, like with the stimulus plan.
Are they trying to push through a specific agenda before most Americans know what is happening? There is a difference between decisive action and reckless behavior.
America must lead
America must resume her role as the leader regarding international conflicts. The UN is great for supplying aid to those in need, but completely ineffectual at enforcing her own resolutions. The US does not need UN approval to do what is right and necessary, in general, or in regard to the North Korean missile test. Europeans will complain if we take decisive action or if we wait, as they will, until a situation is out of control.
When Americans are at risk America must act! We should have already been addressing the piracy issue, but when a ship under a US Flag is attacked, the US must respond!
In response to this attack on American citizens and assets Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated that “More generally we think the world must come together and end the scourge of piracy." WRONG! The US must take the initiative in putting an end to piracy. We should not have waited this long, we must act now and set the example for the world.
When Americans are at risk America must act! We should have already been addressing the piracy issue, but when a ship under a US Flag is attacked, the US must respond!
In response to this attack on American citizens and assets Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated that “More generally we think the world must come together and end the scourge of piracy." WRONG! The US must take the initiative in putting an end to piracy. We should not have waited this long, we must act now and set the example for the world.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Racist?
What is an African American?
By definition I would expect that African American refers to any American citizen who is, or is descended from, a person who immigrated to The United States of America from Africa. If this is correct then the term does not apply to all black Americans and will include many people who are not black.
I am fair skinned or white, I am referred to as Caucasian. Once dark skinned or black people were referred to as Negro. Why is it now considered offensive to call a dark skinned person black or a Negro? Why is it correct to refer to dark skinned Americans as African American when it is clearly not accurate?
You may think that I am a racist by asking this question. Well I admit that I am. I believe that my race is superior to all other races on the planet. If we could get past some minor differences like skin color and language, we may be able to address some major ideological issues and begin to live up to our potential as members of the HUMAN race.
It seems that some people need to classify or categorize everything including people. There are those who classify people for beneficial reasons like medical research and those who have political or personal reasons. It is a waste of time and energy to argue over or be offended by these labels when they actually mean very little to most of us as we try to live our lives, raise our children and become better human beings.
By definition I would expect that African American refers to any American citizen who is, or is descended from, a person who immigrated to The United States of America from Africa. If this is correct then the term does not apply to all black Americans and will include many people who are not black.
I am fair skinned or white, I am referred to as Caucasian. Once dark skinned or black people were referred to as Negro. Why is it now considered offensive to call a dark skinned person black or a Negro? Why is it correct to refer to dark skinned Americans as African American when it is clearly not accurate?
You may think that I am a racist by asking this question. Well I admit that I am. I believe that my race is superior to all other races on the planet. If we could get past some minor differences like skin color and language, we may be able to address some major ideological issues and begin to live up to our potential as members of the HUMAN race.
It seems that some people need to classify or categorize everything including people. There are those who classify people for beneficial reasons like medical research and those who have political or personal reasons. It is a waste of time and energy to argue over or be offended by these labels when they actually mean very little to most of us as we try to live our lives, raise our children and become better human beings.
continue to persevere
It is difficult to keep posting new ideas when you don't get any comments on what you have posted, and by you I mean me. But I will try to continue to persevere.
In a way it is like voting Republican in Connecticut. Although most of the people I know have similar ideals we repeatedly watch as Connecticut keeps turning up blue (I'm really BLUE after the last presidential election). I will continue to vote for conservative candidates and smaller government in the hope that it will eventually pay off somehow. I don’t know if anything I post will “pay off” per say, but it lets me express myself and will hopefully encourage other people to do the same. We all need to pay attention to what is going on in our country, to think about the changes that some want to make, and to express our opinions. Do it in a blog and more importantly do it in letters to your elected officials. Writing to my elected “representatives” feels about as productive as shouting at the TV, but I will continue to both!
Please comment on this or my other posts, send me your ideas or links to other blogs. Lets talk amongst ourselves.
In a way it is like voting Republican in Connecticut. Although most of the people I know have similar ideals we repeatedly watch as Connecticut keeps turning up blue (I'm really BLUE after the last presidential election). I will continue to vote for conservative candidates and smaller government in the hope that it will eventually pay off somehow. I don’t know if anything I post will “pay off” per say, but it lets me express myself and will hopefully encourage other people to do the same. We all need to pay attention to what is going on in our country, to think about the changes that some want to make, and to express our opinions. Do it in a blog and more importantly do it in letters to your elected officials. Writing to my elected “representatives” feels about as productive as shouting at the TV, but I will continue to both!
Please comment on this or my other posts, send me your ideas or links to other blogs. Lets talk amongst ourselves.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Regarding Health Care Reform
Regarding Health Care Reform:
Health insurance should be privatized, it should be purchased in the same manner as auto and homeowners insurance. When the free market takes over the cost will come down and more options will be available.
Health Insurance should not be provided through your employer: This places a burden small businesses; A business that does not have many employees will have to pay more for insurance coverage per person. Many small companies must chose between hiring more people and providing insurance for those people they currently employ.
On the other hand some large companies take advantage of the system by hiring two part time employees rather than one full time employee as they are not required to insure part time employees
When Health care is provided as a “benefit” from an employer it usually comes after a probationary period, during which time the individual has no health insurance coverage and therefore can be a deterrent to an individual’s pursuit of better employment opportunities.
I would rather be paid a better wage and be responsible for my own health insurance than to have my insurance tied to my employment and have my employment options limited by the insurance system.
The governments only role in health care should be one of regulation. In fact, if the government was doing a proper job of regulation we would not have as serious of a problem as we are now facing.
An instance where government regulation should be implemented is on limiting the Insurance companies ability to set the price that they will pay for prescriptions and medical services. When a doctor or pharmacy agrees to accept insurance from a provider, they agree to the terms the insurance company sets, which include limits on how much they will pay for services. Wouldn’t it be nice to fill your gas tank and tell the station owner that although they charge $4.00/gallon you will give them $1.50 because it is what you consider to be reasonable and customary. The cost of the “savings” the insurance companies get from this policy is passed on to other consumers.
If the Federal government were to implement strict and fair guidelines on private health insurance, and provide assistance to those who cannot afford it on their own, we could all have decent medical care at a reasonable cost.
As far as having the federal government run our health care system, well just look at the deplorable state of the Veterans Administration. If the government can not provide adequate health care for the small percentage of our population that are veterans, how could we even consider having them run the operation of a nation wide health care program?!
Health insurance should be privatized, it should be purchased in the same manner as auto and homeowners insurance. When the free market takes over the cost will come down and more options will be available.
Health Insurance should not be provided through your employer: This places a burden small businesses; A business that does not have many employees will have to pay more for insurance coverage per person. Many small companies must chose between hiring more people and providing insurance for those people they currently employ.
On the other hand some large companies take advantage of the system by hiring two part time employees rather than one full time employee as they are not required to insure part time employees
When Health care is provided as a “benefit” from an employer it usually comes after a probationary period, during which time the individual has no health insurance coverage and therefore can be a deterrent to an individual’s pursuit of better employment opportunities.
I would rather be paid a better wage and be responsible for my own health insurance than to have my insurance tied to my employment and have my employment options limited by the insurance system.
The governments only role in health care should be one of regulation. In fact, if the government was doing a proper job of regulation we would not have as serious of a problem as we are now facing.
An instance where government regulation should be implemented is on limiting the Insurance companies ability to set the price that they will pay for prescriptions and medical services. When a doctor or pharmacy agrees to accept insurance from a provider, they agree to the terms the insurance company sets, which include limits on how much they will pay for services. Wouldn’t it be nice to fill your gas tank and tell the station owner that although they charge $4.00/gallon you will give them $1.50 because it is what you consider to be reasonable and customary. The cost of the “savings” the insurance companies get from this policy is passed on to other consumers.
If the Federal government were to implement strict and fair guidelines on private health insurance, and provide assistance to those who cannot afford it on their own, we could all have decent medical care at a reasonable cost.
As far as having the federal government run our health care system, well just look at the deplorable state of the Veterans Administration. If the government can not provide adequate health care for the small percentage of our population that are veterans, how could we even consider having them run the operation of a nation wide health care program?!
bonus anger misdirected
The anger over AIG bonuses is misdirected. We should be angry that employees of companies receiving federal bail out money are being paid bonuses. Our anger should be directed at the elected officials that wrote, supported and voted for the bill!
The authors of the bailout plan should have set limits on, or called for the elimination of employee bonuses as a condition of receiving federal bail out funds. AIG could then have renegotiated the contracts which guaranteed the bonuses with its employees.
The administration was aware of these bonuses and chose to rush through an inadequate policy rather than address and correct the problem.
I believe that this administration is now feigning outrage and indignation over the issue of bonuses to increase our own anger. The Obama administration is using our anger to rush this bill through as the will of the people when they are actually acting in order to further their own agenda. The bill proposing a 90% tax on the bonuses is the first step toward government control of corporate pay structure including salary caps and pay limitations. This bill is reactionary and fundamentally wrong.
I believe that the government should be working with AIG and other companies to have any bonus money returned as these employees should not profit from tax payer money. I would support a bill that sets limits on bonuses to employees of companies receiving future bail out type funding from the federal government. I do not support government regulation or control of private industry pay and compensation. That said, I also believe that companies and employees of companies receiving our tax dollars should concentrate on stabilizing their business and our economic system and not on their individual profit.
The authors of the bailout plan should have set limits on, or called for the elimination of employee bonuses as a condition of receiving federal bail out funds. AIG could then have renegotiated the contracts which guaranteed the bonuses with its employees.
The administration was aware of these bonuses and chose to rush through an inadequate policy rather than address and correct the problem.
I believe that this administration is now feigning outrage and indignation over the issue of bonuses to increase our own anger. The Obama administration is using our anger to rush this bill through as the will of the people when they are actually acting in order to further their own agenda. The bill proposing a 90% tax on the bonuses is the first step toward government control of corporate pay structure including salary caps and pay limitations. This bill is reactionary and fundamentally wrong.
I believe that the government should be working with AIG and other companies to have any bonus money returned as these employees should not profit from tax payer money. I would support a bill that sets limits on bonuses to employees of companies receiving future bail out type funding from the federal government. I do not support government regulation or control of private industry pay and compensation. That said, I also believe that companies and employees of companies receiving our tax dollars should concentrate on stabilizing their business and our economic system and not on their individual profit.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)