America, the Land of the Free Stuff

 - and totally broke taxpayers.

Over the last several years, and intensifying as we approach the 2020 Presidential election, we have heard calls from the political left for all sorts of "free" programs. The programs range from "Medicare for All" to college debt forgiveness (and free college after that). But it's difficult for the average citizen to put the potential cost in perspective. From this article, we can glean a bit about the price tag on potential Democrat policies:

$1,700,000,000 - Universal child care. Cost over ten years.
$640,000,000,000 - Debt free college - initial outlay for debt forgiveness.
$1,250,000,000,000 - Debt free college - ongoing costs over 10 years.
$93,000,000,000,000 - Guaranteed income. Cost over ten years.
$100,000,000,000 - Reparations. One time cost.
$445,000,000,000 - Affordable housing. Cost over ten years.
$32,600,000,000,000 - Medicare for all.

$128,036,700,000,000 Total price tag.

My calculator errored out trying to add it all up, but the total cost is indeed $128 TRILLION dollars over ten years. To put that in perspective, the total national debt for the U.S. as of 4/4/19 is $32.6 trillion.

So - how will these programs be funded? The government has no source of income other than taxes.

Let that sink in a minute. Why yes, that would be taxes you and I pay. That is, if you are, like me, a member of the middle class, working and paying taxes. There is a significant segment of "taxpayers" who do not make enough to pay taxes, and who may in fact receive refundable credits. Yes, it is possible to get a tax refund even if you pay no taxes.

Ah, but several of these programs claim they will be funded by the "tippy-top" earners: a 70% tax on the rich. Never mind that the wealthy already fork over something like 90% of the total taxes collected any given year, let's just hit them up for more!

The problem is that the math doesn't work. Even if none of these wealthy people take steps to shelter any of their income, the total dollars collected by a 70% tax won't fund even one of the programs listed above.

This leaves a massive funding gap. Program sponsors then have three options: one, run up the national debt, making us beholden to foreign powers who may not have our best interests at heart, or two, drop that 70% tax rate on the rest of the taxpayers - primarily the middle class, or three, a combination of the two.

Will you really be happy with all the "free" stuff when you are handing over 70% of your income to a government that may not have your best interests at heart in order to fund the stuff? Are you certain you want the government to control your children, your education, your housing and your healthcare?

"Free" isn't free at all, it turns out.

What still is free, though, is our freedom to make our voices heard. Our freedom to have a choice in our future. Our freedom to call out the politicians - on either side of the aisle - who would so thoroughly bankrupt us and our children for the sake of a few votes.

It's time to stand up for true freedom.

Seventeen years

9/11/2001.

It's a bit surreal to think that the current crop of high school seniors were, for the most part, not even born when one of the most significant events in our country, certainly in my lifetime, took place. A rising generation that may know the facts of 9/11 (at least to the extent their schools teach actual facts, rather than whitewashed, politically correct "history"), but not the gut-wrenching emotion of it.

Shock. Horror. Disbelief. Confusion as conflicting information came in on that day. Finally, outrage.

Tell them your stories, where you were, your reactions. How your life was changed, how your understanding of the world shifted, how your belief in the safety of our country was shattered.

Remind them of the human toll. Read stories of the victims. Read about the first responders. Realize that there is still a human cost being exacted today, as many who worked in and around the site are now manifesting various cancers as a result of breathing in dust contaminated with unhealthy construction materials.

Explain why we go through security lines at airports, have the size of our bags limited when entering festivals, have them searched before entering a stadium. Active shooter drills are now part of their regular school experience - do not let them laugh them off.

Remember.

Do not let 9/11 become for them what Veterans' Day became for much of my generation when we were their age: a somber paper "holiday" commemorating events long ago with no current relevance.

Remember.

And the nomination goes to...

The nomination is in: Brett Kavanaugh for Supreme Court justice.

By all accounts, he is the perfect choice for the court. He has - and more importantly, has shown throughout his career - a commitment to interpreting the law as written, rather than trying to legislate from the bench as more "activist" judges have done. Yet he is known to have an open mind, a desire to know and understand all sides of an argument, valuing the input of diverse opinions. He's fairly young, and (Lord willing) will lend a consistent, conservative voice to the court for years to come.

Within minutes of the announcement, protest crowds outside were shouting their displeasure. I swear, they must have had a meeting earlier in the day to make up chants for all the potential nominees, so they would be ready the instant the nomination was made.

Then there are the dingbats who have their undies in a bundle over the imminent overturn of Roe v. Wade. Their dingbatted-ness is proved by the fact that they believe the SCOTUS has the power to just vote and overturn the decision. Last I checked, the court hears and decides on cases; it could be decades, if ever, that a case with particular set of facts needed to force the court to reconsider Roe v. Wade makes its way to the Supreme Court - and even then, the court has to decide to hear it.

I held my nose and voted for Trump, not because I actually liked or supported the man, but because the alternative was a proven disaster. I still don't care for him as a person, but I am impressed with a lot of what he has managed to accomplish thus far. This nomination, I think, isn't so much about a desire to push a Conservative agenda with a capital "C", but a desire for small-"c" conservatism.

The challenge these days is to not get too wound up over the dingbats and their shouting, to look past it to see what is actually happening. If nothing else, the current climate is a primer on the utter failure of modern civics and government education in our schools.

All we need are the peanuts and cotton candy

The circus is in town this week, or at least touring the state. All five remaining serious contenders for party presidential nominations are in Wisconsin, thanks to our only-in-the-nation-that-day primary coming up next Tuesday.

The three Rs (who bear nothing at all in common with readin, 'riting and 'rithmatic) are having a "town hall" about a mile from campus tonight. I'm half expecting Trump to take offense at some point during the proceedings, walking off the stage in a huff. Given that he hung up on a local conservative talk show host yesterday, I think a walk-off is a possibility.

While I was off last week, I intended to drop in to City Hall to early vote. That never happened. The new plan is to go after work tonight. While I feel a responsibility to do my civic duty, I find the choices available less than stellar, and feel a low level of repugnance for the whole process.

On the bright side, while it may be a circus, I know the Ringmaster and trust Him. Will He give us what we need - or let us get what we deserve? Either way, I know He has a plan, a long range, all encompassing plan in which this election is a small, small point.

Keep reminding me of that, would you?

Trumped

Scott Walker has officially suspended his campaign for the Republican nomination. It's too bad; he would have made an excellent president.

Personally, I'm blaming Donald Trump. His ego-driven, loudmouthed, reality-television type "campaign" is splitting potential voters into the truly informed (a fairly small percentage) and those who believe everything the media tells them (those who elected the previous president). If Trump really wants to support this country, believes in conservatism and wants to see the Republicans retake the White House, he would drop out of the race immediately.

His success gives a boost to several other candidates from outside politics. I understand the urge to support someone who is not associated with the morass that is our political system, but the reality is that a certain amount of insider knowledge is needed if a chief executive is going to be effective. Proven leadership ability (and I'm not sure Trump, Carson or Fiorina have shown that) must go hand in hand with an understanding of how day-to-day politics work.

She-who-must-not-be-named made a very telling statement regarding her non-political rivals. She said that they have no qualifications for the presidency because they "don't understand politics" (not an exact quote; it was really early in the morning when I heard it). It's interesting that she is harping on their lack of political skill, rather than their lack of leadership ability. Almost as if she is afraid to do so, lest her own leadership track record be brought up.

She can't have that, can she?

Bah.

There is hope: this morning I saw a headline and article actually critical of Trump. Perhaps this is the beginning of the end?

One can only hope.

Official at last

Last night, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker made his bid for the Presidency official.

It's been no real secret that he intended to run; delaying his announcement until after the biennial Wisconsin budget was signed was a smart move. For one, it showed that he is still working to improve the state, to continue the reforms he's begun. For two, it gave him additional time to position himself by meeting unofficially with various leaders/voters in important primary states, as well as time to visit key overseas allies and begin to build support.

While I missed all but the last couple of minutes of his speech, the text is available here.

Just a few top-of-my-head observations:

- The speech - and the campaign logo - emphasize that Walker is for America. He makes reference to voters being tired of being told by politicians what they are against, and who they should vote against. He seems to be signaling that he intends to run as clean a campaign as possible. We in Wisconsin know from the recall and other elections that while he may start out with the best of intentions, if his opponents start slinging mud, he is fully capable of slinging it back - we'll see how this turns out.

- A number of times he makes reference to Reagan's policies and accomplishments. It's pretty obvious Walker wants to cast himself in the role of a Reagan reincarnated for the present time. I'm not sure Walker has as much ability to work across party lines as Reagan, though.

- He fairly clearly outlines his platform, and hits on several "first thing" objectives that should resonate with a lot of voters - repeal Obamacare, sign Keystone, ditch the idea of Common Core and fix environmental legislation. Big talk. He promised a certain number of new jobs in Wisconsin in his first year in office. While he fell far short of that goal, he did make progress toward it. Can he deliver on these bigger promises if elected? Who knows.

- He calls for a return to American exceptionalism. Strengthen our military, shore up our allies, show our enemies just how much we can hurt them, when necessary. Stomp ISIS out of existence. Can't say I'd argue with him on any of this.

- In an interview with ABC's David Muir, Walker was asked about his change in stance on illegal immigration. He's previously supported amnesty, but backed away from that. Walker didn't actually answer why he changed his mind, but stated he supported vigorous enforcement of the laws we currently have. As for the millions of illegals already here, he said he sees the issue as complex, and that an all (give everyone amnesty and an easy path to citizenship) or nothing (deport every illegal) approach is naïve and ineffective. No clue on what he sees as possible solutions to that, though.

Walker has been criticized as a less than inspiring public speaker. Even in the few minutes I saw of the speech, I can see why. He's certainly been coached; his tone and pace overall was pretty good. But his body language...he seems to have only two or three set gestures, and those are all two handed (one arm mirrors the other). I'm not really too surprised, as from what I gather, in normal life Scott is rather...dorky. If you haven't seen them, the pictures of the family dressed as Pirates of the Caribbean for Halloween are priceless. I believe he's also a bit of a Star Wars fan. Anyway, even though he came out looking relaxed (no suit coat, no tie, collar open and sleeves rolled up), his movements on stage were a bit stiff.

Eh. We've had almost eight years of slick oration, and look where that has gotten us. Walker is a refreshing change.

The run up to the nomination should be a fun free for all. My only concern is how much of a spoiler The Donald will be. Can he just go away?

On a local note, the local paper began its attacks in earnest the instant Walker announced. I'm not expecting fair and unbiased coverage, at least anywhere in the state that gets its news from Milwaukee or Madison outlets.

I do, however, expect coverage 24/7 in an unending barrage. It may be best to avoid it, al least until the field narrows a bit. No sense spending the time evaluating candidates who will be long gone by the time Wisconsin holds its primary in April February April? Officially, it is April, but in both 2004 and 2008, it was moved to February.

Throwing her bonnet into the ring.

At long last, the presumed has been made official: Hillary Rodham Clinton is running for president.

Woo hoo?

There is some noise in certain quarters that "it is about time for a woman president", as if Hillary has no accomplishments on which to run.

They were probably in an e-mail housed on that personal server of hers, right next to the ones with the subject line "Benghazi".

Anyway, we have very recent experience of electing a candidate president because he fit some social justice, "it's about time for this", let's elect based on affirmative action rather than actual experience type criteria.

How's that working out for you?

If we were truly a post racial, gender neutral society, we'd be electing people based on their qualifications, not the color of their skin, what gender they self-identify as or whether they eat cornflakes on Tuesdays. And if the best choice were a white man, his gender and skin color would not work against him.

Please, please, as you consider the many candidates vying for your votes, think on their qualifications and experience, not on whether they have lady bits or dark skin. Let the best candidate capture your vote.

As for Ms. Clinton - do we really want four more years of Clinton-era politics in the White House?

Dear Lord, do we really want Bill Clinton as "First Husband"?

It's all over but the ... whining, shouting and fist shaking

Whew, glad to have the mid-terms over. Even more happy to see that the country overwhelmingly signaled their dissatisfaction with the leadership of the country, and their desire for change.

Though the president doesn't see this as a repudiation of his policies. I really think he is incapable of learning lessons from anything, because he truly thinks he is infallible.

Locally, Scott Walker, for the third time in four years, held off his challenger. The local liberal fish wrapper is careful to say that he basically did it with the same voters who elected him initially in 2010, and confirmed that election by giving him the win in the recall election the following year. Well, duh.

The vote was closer than it should have been, given his opponent has no real governing experience, and no real work experience to speak of - aside from the fact that she presents herself as one brick shy of a load most of the time. The votes she garnered, I think, were not so much for her but against Walker.

It's time for the Republicans to put their votes where their mouths are and get down to business, but not business-as-usual. There's a sense we've chosen the better of two evils, and the elephants have a lot to do to turn around that perception. They need to be a bit canny, since I think we will see a whole slew of Presidential vetoes on things, followed by the Dems whining they can't get anything done because of "obstructionist" Repubs.

Time will tell.

In the meantime, enjoy the 246.5 minutes of political ad free media before the 2016 presidential campaigns gear up.

Taxing your brain power

A friend on Facebook reposted a link encouraging everyone to boycott Walgreens because they were planning to merge with a Swiss firm to "avoid paying U.S. income tax".

//rolling my eyes so far into my head I see brain matter//

It's called inversion, and it's partially the result of the U.S. having one of the top corporate tax rates in the world. Oddly enough, inversion can actually be good for business in the U.S.

If a multi-national company is headquartered in the U.S., they have the privilege of paying U.S. taxes on their American operations - and also on the profits from their foreign operations, as soon as they bring those profits stateside. This is why you see the news stories laden with hysteria about the massive amounts of funds companies like Apple are "hoarding" offshore. Apple is incredibly successful world wide; the instant they bring any of those profits into the U.S., for any reason, they are subject to 35% tax.

Not exactly motivation to bring those profits over.

This is an oversimplification, but it lays out the basic issues. My widget company can't use the profits earned in Germany to improve the infrastructure of my American stores without first losing a substantial chunk of those profits to tax.

If I merge with a foreign widget company, however, and the merged company is organized in a country with a lower tax rate, it's good for everyone. My company is still taxed in the U.S. for operations in the U.S. - something all the hysterics don't seem to understand. But the foreign profits are taxed at the presumably lower foreign rates, and paid in to the foreign tax systems.

Since I'm now free to bring those foreign profits (net of the foreign taxes paid) to the U.S. without fear of losing a third to U.S. tax, I can bring that money over and use it in my domestic operations, through improvements or expansion, via investment or in any of the million other opportunities available here. One would assume I'd be doing that sort of thing in order to make more money in my U.S. operations: more earned = more taxes to the U.S.

As I said, inversion can be good for everyone involved.

I hadn't really meant to impose a tax lesson on you, gentle reader; it's the kneejerk, "OMG BAD!! BOYCOTT!" reaction to these sorts of reposts in social media that make me more than a little bit cranky. People are much too prone to believe everything they read/hear. It took all of two minutes to do a search and some research into exactly what inversion is, and maybe another two minutes to think through why a company like Walgreens may be investigating using it as a corporate strategy.

The correct response here is not to swear off Walgreens because they are abandoning the U.S., but to wonder why our country has a tax structure that is so bad for business, and call for changes.

There is simply no reason these days to be uninformed. Take the time to do some research. Learn how to evaluate the sources of information. Ask questions. Ask more questions. Deliberately try to see the other side of the issue, with an open mind. Carefully think through all you've learned.

Don't just reaction without knowing more about the issue.

//rant off//

Long may she wave

The angels who line our drive with flags bought some replacements- it's like this all up the (long) median, and there are flags every ten inches or so along the fence along the main street as well. That light green tree in the back, just right of center, is about fifteen feet this side of the end of the median strip. Quite a display.

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government...

...In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

May the spirit of our Founding Fathers live on.

Just...no.

Stay with me here...

The Potowatamis are busy building a high rise hotel down in the Menomonee River valley. I pass it on the way to work, as I cruise along the 16th Street viaduct, a high bridge linking one valley lip to the other. What I really didn't realize was how big the hotel is, at least not until I viewed it from further west, as I was on my way to meet a friend after work and was crossing the valley on the 35th Street viaduct.

The hotel takes up a huge expanse of what used to be a clear sightline to the lake. It makes sense; it would have been oriented on the land to make the most of the possibility of over charging for lake views.

The city and the local hotel community have gone back and forth for years over how to accommodate tourists and bring in larger conventions. First, the hoteliers complained that there were no suitable venues for larger conventions. So the city built the insert-the-current-corporate-sponsor-here Center, and Miller Park was built with a dome! to keep out the elements to make it available for other events when the Brewers are not using it.

Then, naturally, the city whined that there were not enough hotel rooms available. In addition to a few smaller projects, the Iron Horse Hotel (Harley Davidson) and the Potowatami Hotel (did I mention it's adjacent to their casino in the valley?) sprang up to provide more housing.

This all leads up to the cause of my consternation this morning:

According to local reports, the mayor of Milwaukee plans to place the city in the running for hosting the 2016 Democratic National Convention.

No. Dear God, no.

The city has been under Democrat (and Socialist) control for over one hundred years. It's also in Scott Walker's state - what better way to thumb your nose at a potential 2016 Republican candidate? It's full of universities - all those liberal academics ready to fawn over the candidate and pontificate in the direction of any microphone.

The thought of all those liberals and all that media crawling over the city is bad enough. But I also happen to work downtown, not all that far from the what'-its-name Center. Thankfully, I no longer have to take the freeway past Miller Park to get home. But the traffic will be horrendous, due both to security and crowds (and the mayor's pet project - a light rail running north-south from the toney east side to downtown - won't do anything but make it worse).

If it does come down that the convention is held here, I'm sure Governor (or possibly candidate) Walker will be more than gracious. After all, it would be an opportunity to showcase the state while grabbing on to those dollars the liberals like to throw around.

Still, I'm really hoping this is just a bit of nonsense talking, or that no one in their right mind in the Democratic leadership (um...) would consider little Milwaukee for the convention.

Fingers crossed.

A whole lot of quacking

The twitter feed and other social media outlets, as well as actual media outlets, have been foaming at the mouth over an interview Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty fame did with GQ magazine.

It's well known that Robertson and his family are conservative Christians who are outspoken about both their beliefs and their own sinful pasts. In the interview, he is asked what he would consider "sinful". In his reply, Phil included "homosexual behavior" as sinful.

Yep, the internet and the mainstream media outlets lit up brighter than the Christmas tree at Rockefeller Center when they heard that.

A&E, which produces Duck Dynasty, has placed Phil on indefinite suspension.

The spokesman for GLAAD seems to be a bit confused about things in his comments on the interview:

"What's clear is that such hateful anti-gay comments are unacceptable to fans, viewers, and networks alike," Cruz said. "By taking quick action and removing Robertson from future filming, A&E has sent a strong message that discrimination in neither a Christian nor an American value."

Sooo...in making his statement, Robertson was discriminating? How, exactly? By calling homosexual behavior (note that he said behavior, not persons) sinful? If what he said constitutes "discrimination", isn't he himself being discriminated against by A&E because of his religious beliefs?

Hypocrites.

It's been common knowledge for a number of years now that "tolerance" is now defined as "agree with me no matter what stance I take or I'll label you intolerant, racist, homophobic..." and the list goes on.

One thing I'm sure of, the Robertsons are secure in their beliefs. If the show goes away, they will keep making duck calls, hunting on the bayous and living contentedly off the land. This manufactured scandal will just roll off of them...

...like water off a duck's back.

Denim blues

A e-mail came out this morning saying that as long as we don't have meetings outside our office, we can wear jeans all next week.

Jean days have been coming up quite frequently over the last several months. It's clear that someone has read in some team building book that casual days can improve employee morale.

Our morale certainly needs improving.

You see, it was announced several months back that the university needs to tighten its belt. I'm not surprised at all; several pundits have been saying for years that academia was floating a bubble to rival the housing market bubble before that explosion. The increase in administrators and the corresponding year to year increases in tuition were unsustainable. The value of a college degree is nowhere near the cost of attaining one.

Back twenty years ago, needed expense reduction was accomplished by offering early retirement and doing lay offs; the resultant brain drain took years to rectify. The university does not want to go through that again.

At the same time, it's been acknowledged that our administrative staff is severely bloated, a fact I thoroughly agree with. In ten years we have added over 650 administrative positions. Our own area vice president has stated more than once that we have...too many vice presidents. We are up from seven sixteen years ago to somewhere around thirteen now.

Now matter how it's sliced and diced, no matter the commitment to keeping the salary lines we can, the bottom line is that positions will be eliminated, hopefully through natural attrition, but via lay offs and redistribution of duties if necessary. The current round focuses entirely on administrative, not academic, expenses.

The academic area will be up next, in a year or so's time. Now that will be a bloodbath.

My own area is at roughly the same staffing level as when I was hired sixteen years ago. Still, people in our office are a bit squirrely since the announcements. There are a lot of territorial fences going up, coupled with an insistence that things are so "busy" no new work can be taken on. There's more (intentional or not) undercutting happening, and the demarcation between the office "pets" and everyone else is growing clearer by the day.

Me? Pffft. I'm not personally worried; the more complex the government makes the tax code, the greater my job security. I can see, however, that I may end up taking on additional regular accounting duties. While our office is about the right size, we don't necessarily have the right people in the right positions. Some redistribution of duties is inevitable.

They don't have much to offer us now, hence the additional casual days.

At least we can be physically comfortable...

Homework hijinks

One of the distinct advantages to not having children is not having to stand over them, cracking the whip outrageously bribing encouraging them to complete their homework.

But the policies in a local, suburban school district have me scratching my head.

Three years ago, the board decided that grading should not reflect any homework turned in late or not at all. In other words, if no homework was turned in at all, the student's final grade would be based on in-class exams and other factors. According to the school board president, speaking of the one one-hundredth of a point between the top two students:

"It wouldn't be fair if it came down to an assignment not turned in."

Fast forward to today. The school board is in a lather, as apparently some teachers are not assigning homework to star students, as they don't need the practice doing homework affords in order to understand the material, while they do assign it to poorer performers. The exact policy varies among the teachers. to quote the article again:

But Maxey said students are missing a practical lesson if they skip a step or miss a deadline in a process that leads to the competent completion — in students' case, measured by a test on the material — of a task.

"They need to learn the life lesson that you can't ignore steps and turn in at the end of the month," he said. "That's not the way jobs are."

School Board member Art Marquardt agreed, saying that teachers who feel that the assigned homework is just a time-waster for some students should assign them different work that will challenge them.

All students should be treated the same when it comes to turning in homework, Maxey said.

In other words, if I understand this correctly, all students should be given an equal opportunity to turn homework in late or not at all - and not have it make an impact on their grades.

Is it any wonder the country is in the state it's in?

Two hundred and thirty-odd years later

It looks to finally be a rain-free day, highs close to eighty with copious amounts of sunshine. Grills will soon send flavorful smoke wafting over parks and backyards while diners try to answer the age-old question, "Does the mayonnaise potato salad smell a little 'off' to you?".

Fireworks last night and again tonight; parades with marching bands, kids on decorated bikes and giant fire trucks. People on lawn chairs in the dusk, chatting as the children run around (well past some of their bedtimes) waiting for the show.

In the two hundred plus years since the writing of the Declaration of Independence, we've grown complacent. We forget the price that was paid for our freedom, preferring to let it go in little bits and pieces as the government charged with "...deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..." seeks to legislate every facet of our lives.

It's the story of the frog who jumps into the cooking pot when the water is cold, not noticing as the heat intensifies.   "Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government,, and to provide new Guards for their future security."  

The colonists gave a good smack down to King George, declaring his governance tyranny, announcing their intentions to be free of it, to establish a form of government that worked for the people, rather than  one that provided nothing but oppression.

A thoughtful read through the list of grievances in the Declaration of Independence will reveal a number of them that could apply to our present state. But now, the enemy is not a ruler in a far away country, but those we ourselves have elected. The heat has turned up on the cooking pot, but we've barely noticed.

It's time for another revolution of sorts, one within our country, driven by those who believe in the tenets of her founding, the moral system under which she flourished for so long. It's time to undo the damage done by years of growing entitlements, ever increasing government intervention and voter apathy.

The only question is whether we still have any vestige of the fortitude of the colonists, the willingness to sacrifice, to stand firm until our goals are met.

God help us if we don't.

Why I should stop watching the news

So many things have me shaking my head this week. Thoughts on a few of them:

Paula Deen should not have her life destroyed over something she said decades ago. When you look at the facts and circumstances of things, it looks like 1) Her admission of using the "n-word" years ago came in a deposition given in a harassment suit brought by a white ex-employee of one of her restaurants (the only reason I can think of for her to be asked this question is to go to showing a pattern of harassment and denigration of her employees, as the plaintiff is white), 2) She used the word in a private conversation with her husband, describing a robbery at the bank at which she worked, during which a gun was held to her head. As Paula said, "I didn't feel real favorable to him."

Are we incapable of extending grace? Since when has the standard for judging someone innocent of racism perfection? Are we not allowed to make stupid slips of the tongue, even under duress?

The SCOTUS handed down some disappointing opinions this week, which certainly seem more politically motivated than based in law. I may be a bit fuzzy on how things work, but it certainly seems to me that the Justice Department saying outright they would not defend DOMA was the beginning of the end for the Act. Isn't Justice tasked with making sure the laws of the land are upheld? Since when do they get to decide they don't like a given law, and therefore do not have to work to maintain it?

Over on Twitter, someone was praising the opinion, using the hashtag "#lovewins". I had to laugh - Love Wins is the title of Rob Bell's heretical book from a couple of years ago claiming that there is no hell, no punishment for sin, that God is love and love only. There's some irony for you.

It's weeks like this that make me glad to know my true citizenship isn't here, but in heaven.

Minding the meld

Here's the thing about pop culture references: in order to serve their purpose they must be either cutting-edge current or alternatively classic in nature, and above all, used correctly.

Used incorrectly, however, it simply underscores all the things you are not.

I'm not sure which I find more appalling, that the President thought it appropriate to use a pop culture reference when speaking about the serious business of the sequester, or that he so badly mangled it, merging Star Trek and Star Wars in a way guaranteed to set off legions of fans of both franchises.

We seem to have a President more concerned with being the "hip", "cool" leader than with governing the country.

He's not doing very well at either.

Stupidest headline of the year (so far)

From ABC News: House Hesitates, Fears Cliff Deal Could Bloat Deficit

Strike that; it's not the headline that's stupid, it's the lawmakers.

The time to be concerned over deficit bloat was when you Democrats were pushing through Obamacare.

The time to be concerned over deficit bloat was when you Democrats failed to pass a budget at any time in the past four years.

The time to be concerned over deficit bloat was when your Democratic President was creating agency after agency, all designed to increase the number of people dependent on a government that thinks sound fiscal policy includes the option of simply printing more money.

Gah. If there is this much idiocy on January 1st, what will it be like the rest of the year?

While everyone is standing at the edge of the cliff pondering not how to avoid falling off of it, but how to escape with their political futures intact, they've taken the time to kick the debt ceiling can down the road another two months, so naturally, our lawmakers delayed mandatory sequestration by - gee, look at that - two months.

Those three days I spent without internet access and with the television unplugged? I think I need to do that again. My blood pressure needs a rest.

Get it done, folks. Think about the future of our country, not your careers.

November 7, 2012

A variety of quick takes -

- Locally, the GOP retained complete control of the state government, in spite of the hissy fits thrown by Dems, flights from the state and attempted recalls. Yet the same voters chose Obama, elected Tammy Baldwin (a raving lunatic liberal) to the U.S. Senate and reelected Congresswoman Gwen Moore. I just don't get it.

- One of the local media outlet's web page has a photo gallery on "foods to eat when you are depressed". Chocolate is not on the list, so I doubt its veracity.

- Starbucks has cute mini-shopping bags for the holidays. How do I know? Latte, breakfast sandwich AND a slice of cinnamon swirl coffeecake this morning (cinnamon is also not on the list in the previous point; another proof the list is flawed).

- Gas prices here jumped $0.30 overnight. I'm not surprised at all.

- Doom and gloom aside, God is still in control. This country's greatest need is not for a different president, but for spiritual revival.

But I didn't get a sticker

After work today I toddled off to City Hall to cast my vote early. From the looks of things, a steady stream of people are enjoying this convenience. Two people were ahead of me in line, but at least eight were either talking to the clerks or casting their ballots.

I'd say I'm tingling with the thrill of exercising my right to vote, but honestly, most of what I feel is relief. The end result of the election has always been in God's hands; whether or not "my" candidates win, God is in ultimate control and only what He allows will happen.

Which, for many, naturally leads to the question of evil in the world...I'm too tired to try to answer that one right now.

Go - vote. With early voting, you have no excuse.