Kelly Clarkson backs the crazy uncle

My respect for Kelly Clarkson has gone way down. No, not for her singing, but for her backing of Ron Paul. When my mom and I were talking today, she said Paul sounded like a nice, easy-going man. I told her, he reminds everyone of their crazy old uncle. Everyone has or has had one, the one that can sound so comforting and smooth and sweet, but as soon as you hear his opinion about something, you realize how crazy he really is. Don't believe me? This is a man that thinks that drug regulations are unlawful. No, not only the drugs you get over the counter, but those a local dealer would sell. Think heroin is okay? He doesn't, but sees nothing wrong if someone wants to use it. The same with any other drug. I wonder how he'd feel if the pilot of the plane he was on or his doctor the night before surgery thought there was nothing wrong with using drugs? See a problem in the world that we might want to do something about, like hunger and AIDS? Rep. Paul says they need to help themselves, that no foreign aid is needed or should be given out. Defend our friends like Israeli? No, that is out, too. Our military is only to defend our country here, not to help our friends. That also means if a country wants to acquire nuclear warheads, well, he has said all countries have the right to have them. But yes, that isolationism will shrink the military budget, and make it easier to balance the budget. Own a business and want to decide who you can serve to, discriminating against everyone you don't like? You can do that under Paul's plan for our government. Now if you're discriminated against due to any reason under his idea of the government, like sex or race or sexual orientation, too bad. That owner will have the right to do business with whom he/she wants. Women, get raped and want an abortion, or have a pregnancy that endangers your life and want an abortion? Now, under his idea of America, you can't do that, as all abortions are illegal, with the penalty of prison for either performing it or having it done. And this is only part of Rep. Paul's ideas for America.
Kelly, I hope you keep making wonderful music, but are these your views, too? If not, look into Rep. Paul's views, and read his pamphlet, which you can google. Take his views to a conclusion of what would happen if he got his way and see what you think. If you have, and you agree, then I will be one of the few to say that I will continue to listen to your music. But I and many others will never want to buy your CD or see you perform. You have the right to your opinion, and we have the right to choose how we spend our money. For this, in that way, will always be America, at least I hope so.      

What's a Tea Party to do?

With less than a week until the Iowa caucus, it looks like there are several scenarios that could happen, but they all lead to one conclusion: Either quickly or after a long battle, Mitt Romney becomes the Presidential candidate of the GOP. Either he wins Iowa, or comes in the top 3 in a very fractured caucus, then wins New Hampshire. He then goes to South Carolina, where he has the backing of the governor. But besides Newt, who else will campaign there? Will Paul? I'm sure he will. Perry? I think so, as he has the money. And either Bachmann or Santorum who gets very good in Iowa, one of them will campaign in South Carolina. So there's still 4 people that will vote by the Tea Party. So Romney might win in South Carolina, and then he'll win most of the states. But then, what will the Tea Party do? They don't like Mitt, so will they want a 3rd party against Democrats and the GOP, or will they not vote? I don't know. Probably, they don't know, either.   

1 Event- 2 Views- 3 Elections

As we look forward to 2012 and the election, I think it is important to look back. No, not at 2011, but at an event earlier that is still reverberating in our elections. And when it happened, nobody saw how it would affect our national outlook and have a great effect on our political system. The event? Hurricane Katrina. What no one could see was how we as a nation would look at our government afterward. And it isn't just that we look at our government one way, but how two camps have such a different view. One, which is held by the left and most of the center of America is that government had gotten ineffective, and the main culprit was President Bush. These people hold that government has many things that it can do for the people, but they must be done efficiently and with effective regulations. This camp sees that corporations, running rampant, pay for the government to tilt the scales in their favor, either by loosening or eliminating certain regulations or by having regulations enacted that limit competition and keeping taxes low for themselves. This camp voted for President Obama, and elected Democrats to majorities in both the House and the Senate in 2008. But this was just one point of view. The other was that government itself was the problem, and that the least government intrusion from Washington was the best, with the ideal being no federal government. This is the view of the far right, and some in the middle. And this camp voted in the Tea Party members into the House majority in 2010. And this brings us to now, and the 2012 election. Which camp will win this battle of different points of view and set the country on the path for the next few years? This is the question of 2012, and although jobs, foreign policy, monetary policy, entitlements and all the other topics of the day will be talked about, it is the view of the country, and the course it will take, that will be decided this election. And that makes the 2012 election a watershed event for America.      

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays

To everyone who follows me on one of my blogs, on twitter, and/or facebook, I want to wish all of you Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays. I am old enough to remember when Happy Holidays wasn't meant or thought of as a denigration of Christian beliefs, but as a way to convey good wishes to all throughout the season, and that is the way I send it out to all of you who read this. May you all enjoy the season, and may 2012 be a wonderful year for you and your family.

Boehner, when you save face, you still lose

Well, the Speaker of the House caved in and there is a deal on the 2 month tax cut extension, but Speaker, even now you lose. Every national cable news station (other than the 1 you can guess) is ripping the Speaker for his about-face and his ridiculous stance on why it happened. Oh, you're right, Speaker, it wasn't the smartest political move, but, admit it, it was the worst move you could have made. You've caved into the right-wing of the Tea Party, and when you were shown to be completely out of touch with the American people, then you caved into those people in your own party that realized how wrong you were. So, you got off your high horse and won a small battle, but you didn't win the battle, did you? The Democrats, and Senate Tea Party members, made you look like the small and petty person you are, and you gave into their compromise bill. So by winning in trying to save face, you lost the battle, and you're losing the war. Not one person from a non-Fox News station is giving you any credit for doing anything right. Saving face for you was one step forward, and you took 4 steps back at the same time.

Another Tea party mistake?

Rep. Eric Cantor of the Tea Party once again has stepped in it. Today, he said that he hoped that President Obama would not start his vacation until the tax cut was approved. Say what? President Obama has already said that he will be in town until the bill is passed, so what's the problem? You say the President shows no leadership, but yet, it was reported that when Speaker Boehner told the far right wing of the Tea Party about the 60 day extension, and pictures of the Senate Tea Party members high-fiving themselves after their vote, they told the Speaker that they would not vote for a 60 day extension. This made him come out and say he couldn't vote for the bill, and even change the language to pass/turn down the Senate bill. One member of the Tea Party even went on TV (I"m sorry I can't remember her name) and said she was glad that the Speaker gave in to their demands. So Speaker, this is leadership? You cave into less than 1/3 of your Tea Party, and you complain about the President's lack of leadership? Another Tea Party mistake? No, just a repeat of the same one you continually make: Thinking that just because you say it, it must be true. And every time you repeat the mistake, fewer people listen to your lies. That's why the Tea Party has gone from a 27% approval rating in the summer to 19% now. Keep talking, and soon you'll be in single digits, just like Congress.     

Newt, you know history?

I am constantly amazed by the Tea Party and its ability to have facts say what they want rather than what it really means, but now history is getting the Tea Party treatment thanks to Newt? The federal courts,with the Supreme Court being the final arbiter, aren't the decision-makers on which laws are within the Constitution and which ones aren't, and therefore are illegal? Isn't that their role in the government, Newt? Didn't Marbury vs. Madison in 1803 decide that was its job? Wasn't Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation written so that it effected none of the slaves in the states that were part of the union? Wasn't this done just so that the proclamation wouldn't go against the Dred Scott decision? That Supreme Court decision was never changed, and slavery was still allowed until the Constitution was changed, and therefore vacating the decision? It took me less than 5 minutes to look up these 2 cases and find these facts. Newt, how long did you study history, and are you sure you know history?      

Space for $200 billion? I'll take it!

In today's Parade magazine, one of the questions was if spending $200 billion in the last 40 years for space exploration was worth it? And the answer was, "really in the eye of the beholder." What a horrible answer! But my question would have been, if we have spent $7 trillion in the last 10 years in wars, how could spending $200 billion in 40 tears on space exploration be considered bad? Not only have we expanded our knowledge of the universe, and therefore mankind, but several useful things have gone from space exploration to use by some people, including light-weight heat resistant suits, artificial heart pumps, and land mine removal devices. What has the last 10 years in Iraq got us? Except for deaths and being hated by a lot of Muslims, not very much. We spend $1 billion every week now for the war, and in 4 years, we spend that we more than we spent for going into space. Now, tell me which money was worth it better?    

Goodbye, Ron Paul- Iran got you

There are a lot of things that Ron Paul says that I don't agree with, but at least I can understand his beliefs. But I agree that we need to bring troops home, or at least need to leave several places where our troops are no longer needed. But Ron, your stance on Iran is a death-knell for your push to be President. Thers are evils in the world that we need to stand up to, and Iran is one of those. And if you can't see that, then you don't have what it takes to be President. But the rest of the candidates made no sense either. We can't be the world's police force, but we can be its moral high ground. If Iran is close to getting a nuclear weapon, does anyone think that only Israel and the United States are worried about it? Think Iraq is happy about it? What about other countries in the region? Think Europe is happy about it? If Iran is close to getting that weapon, this would be a perfect time to talk with all the leaders in the area and see what they think. If action needed to be taken, it could be taken in unison with almost every other country in the world. Diplomacy would be the key. Did anyone say that last night? No! So where is this generation's James Baker in the GOP? Oh, that's right, the Tea Party has purged that part of the GOP. And that's why I refuse to put an (R) after any of these people's name, but a (T). The GOP is now the Tea Party, and that will be the death-knell for the GOP. 

Newt, it's influence peddling

Newt, don't you know when you're wrong? If you had said that your biggest mistake was not giving the money back to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae since they weren't folowing your advice, you may have been forgiven by the Tea Party. But your constant refusal not to see how wrong you were shows again what a horrible President you'd be. When Rep. Bachmann called you on accepting money from Freddie and Fannie, you defend it and say you did nothing wrong? And you think you're the smart one on those stages? I kept waiting for Rick Perry to say, "As the Texas governor, I know influence peddling, and Newt, peddling your influence is exactly what you've done since you left the government", but I guess that was a very low bar that the Texas governor couldn't jump over.  

Harry Reid, stop being yourself

For several months, I've railed on the GOP, who now aren't the Republican Party but the Tea Party, for being bombastic and rigid. They aren't in any way the party that said that all men and women, no matter the race, were equal (Lincoln), railed against big business and their perks (Teddy Roosevelt), wanted the country to have great access to roads, trains, and opportunity (Eisenhower), and would raise taxes to get what he wanted (Reagan), so they are now the Tea Party.  But Harry Reid this week reminded me why, for most of my life, I didn't like Democrats. A bill comes to the Senate from the House with what the President wants, with extra things attached, and what do you do? You say the bill is DOA, being and rigid. Even my own Democratic Senator says you went too far. Stop being the ass you are (yes, I've met him, talked to him, and discussed issues with him when I lived in Nevada) and be the Senate Leader. Complain that the the Republicans filibuster every bill the President sends you? Then make them actually stand and do a filibuster. Don't like a bill that the House sends you? Vote, then compromise. Do your job, Senator. Your job isn't to be the pocket veto of the President. And if he asks you to do that, he isn't doing his job. Be bigger than yourself. Be the leader of the Senate, which is a chamber of the government, not the government itself, and not the representative of a small part of Nevada. I'll rail against the idiots in the GOP, and Senator Reid, if you keep being an ass, I'll rail against you too. Because if you're not part of the answer to bring our government together, then you're a problem, no matter the party you're in.   

Harry Reid, let the governmaent run right

I'm tired of partican politics, and for quite a while, that I don't like the Tea Party. But now, Senator Reid, that said that you told that the Bill from the House that was DOA? So you are just as bad as Tea Party. Don't say that we disagree, but we'll take it to a vote, and then compromise? You're as stupid as the Tea Party is. Refuse to vote on the 15 bills that the House have sent you and refuse to talk? You're just like Mitch McConnell saying their # 1 goal is to stop all and see

Leaving Iraq- If not now, when?

The troops are out of Iraq and will be home for the holidays. And a man that I have respected and have met a few times, Senator McCain has stopped being the maverick, the smart, moderate person I knew and has turned into a NeoCon and Tea Party puppet. I spent 20 years in the military, Senator, and I know that when the objective is complete, you leave and come home. Are you saying our mission in going to Iraq was to set up an American satellite state to counter Iran? No, the mission was to defeat Hussein and bring democracy to the country. Well, the despot is dead and election have been held. What now do you want from Iraq? The country will continue to have problems, but they will be their problems, not ours. And would keeping 20,000 troops there prevent these problem? No, we'd just be sucked into them. Unfortunately, Senator, you think like too many military men I knew, and why I got out when I did. "No matter what happens, I will not allow this command to get smaller," is a statement I heard several times in briefings. This, I believe, is the mindset that keeps troops in Europe. History will be written many years from now, when both you and I are dead, Senator, but when it is written, if this is found to be a mistake, the problem won't be that we left too soon, but that we went there in the first place.       

With Newt, Tea Party finds a match made in their heaven.

Although I have my doubts about Newt Gingrich's staying power, what I fear isn't that he'll say something stupid and blow up his chances for the nomination, but that he'll continue to say stupid, idiotic things, and this will endear him to the Tea Party. This is a man that was fined $300,000 while in the Congress, came up with the plan to compromise with Democrats only as a last resort, thinks poor inner-city people have no work ethic, believes child labor laws should be abolished, sees no problem receiving over a million dollars from a government agency he thinks is taking illegal actions, and believes the dumbest thing he ever did was to do an ad with Nancy Pelosi. And lastly, he hates President Obama, not just his policies, but him personally. And he fits like a hand in a glove (an iron glove, though) with the Tea Party. They believe that banks are under-regulated (overturn Dodd-Frank), want air and water rules relaxed, if not completely repealed (Abolish the EPA), believes that the Constitution doesn't apply to all people (wants to limit the rights of gays and lesbians), and will go against the Constitution to stop the census (Abolishing the Commerce Department, which oversees the census, which is required in the Constitution). And yes, they hate President Obama, not just his policies, but him personally. The are a perfect match, but I wouldn't call where they are at heaven.     

What can they be looking at? Must be Fox News

In the paper today, out of 9 letters to the editors, 3 were hatred directed to President Obama, the Democratic party, or Occupy Wall Street. One said that  President Obama's speech in Kansas should have been given in Liberal Kansas, and not one President should give such a class-warfare rhetoric speech. After reading the speech transcript, what was the class warfare? The part that said that laws should be fair? The part that said loopholes should be closed to even out the tax burden? And wasn't it taken almost a word for word from another Presidental speech? Oh, that's right, yes it was, and a Republican President at that. The letter against the Democratic Party said that liberals refuse to compromise. Again, what did the GOP compromise on? If Democrats were willing to look at Medicare and Social Security and make cuts, where was the Tea Party on raising revenue and cutting defense spending? They were nowhere, refusing to look at either. The letter against the Occupy Wall Street groups said that they were camping out at every park, disturbing the peace, cops were getting beaten up and people killed by the occupiers, the group burning cars and breaking windows. Not only for the most part did this not happen, and vandalism was almost non-exiastant until the protesters were maced, hosed, and corralled into small areas, but it was the police in certain areas that were spraying pepper spray into the eyes of people that were hand-cuffed and on their knees. By these 3 letters just got me thinking, where can the Tea Party be getting their information? I know it's not CNN or MSNBC, and I doubt the 3 broadcast news casts would tell such obvious lies. No, I think I know where it came from, and it makes me want to change my last name. For my real name is John Fox, and when I give out news about myself, it comes out as a Fox News Report. I think I'll change my last name to Onion-LOL!!!   

How many people can be on the edge of a dime?

Although I am thoroughly disgusted with the GOP and their remaking themselves the Tea Party, when it comes to the budget deficit and the need to get it balanced, both sides are at fault. GOP, taxes are too low, no if, ands or, buts. While the norm for the amount of government income (taxes) to GDP and expenditures to GDP is around 19%, and taxes sit at 16% now. This cannot continue, and taxes must be raised. But expenditures are now at 23% or more (it seems to differ by how it is calculated), and this cannot be continued. So my suggestion is to have taxes at 21% and expenditures capped at 19% until the budget is balanced, and the then taxes can be lowered to 20%, and expenditures can be raised to 20%. But I know that will never happen. Why? Because in a lot of ways, it is like I am on the edge of a dime, seeing the head side and the tail side never meeting, and thinking they are both the only correct side to the coin. But until there are more people not siding with either side of the coin, but splitting the difference, there won't be any compromise. And that makes me wonder, how many people can fit on the edge of dime, anyway?

Oh yes, Mr. Cain, you had an affair

I hate to tell you this, Herman, but it really doesn't matter if you had sex with that woman. Well, it does, but it really doesn't since, if you knew a woman for over 10 years, gave her money occasionally, and your wife knows nothing about any of this, or even that you knew her, then you were unfaithful to her. Reverse the situation and see how you'd feel. Your wife has known a man for that long, has occasionally given him money (It's just that she's generous), and you know not one thing about him, or know that she knows him. Has she been truthful to you all these years? Has she been faithful to you? Now, back to you, and your actions. Does this make you a bad choice for President? No, there are many other things that do that, like your lack of experience and you views on the world. But it does mean that you've been living a lie for many years, and that, in my mind, does disqualify you to lead this country.  

Are debates Reality TV? No, it's an alternate world

It has been suggested that having Donald Trump moderate would show the debates for what they are, which is really a badly produced reality show. But I think it really shows that we now live in an alternate world, where non-sense makes sense, and lies are accepted as fact. Where is the place that has debates between those that have a background of governing states, like Johnson and Roemer, can be in the debates, and a CEO who has run for office but never elected has to sit out? Where is the place that when a candidate lies, it is immediately brought up, and they must answer the accusation? Where is the place that tells a person's background and holds them responsible? That would be the real world. But that's not where these debates are being held. No, these debates are being held in: THE TEA PARTY TWILIGHT ZONE.