Origins of OWS not the same as Tea Party

There have been thoughts on TV recently that the Tea Party has the same origin as Occupy Wall Street. I couldn't disagree any less. The origins of the Tea Party came from the idea that government was mis-spending taxes. Maybe a better way of saying it is that the Tea Party didn't believe their taxes was used in ways in that didn't represent their beliefs. Out of this idea came the political will to block all legislation from the Democratic Party. After all, if government couldn't be trusted to use taxes in ways that were acceptable to them, why trust it at all? So no ideas that they didn't some up with on their own were to be voted down. And everyone who disagreed with their views were to be ousted, or if not in office, voted down by any means necessary. Now Occupy Wall Street started as a way to protest the money and the power being in the hands of a few people. It protests the middle class' loss of wealth and money. Since in a truly free money market society this is impossible, Occupy Wall Street must look to government to help equalize the system. Not with hand-outs, but in laws fairly and equally distributed. To ensure that all are created and treated equal and not just some get the break, it is only a government that can level the field. So what will the political will be of this group? What will they require to keep government running? But 2 things when looking at the situations this way become very clear. One is that the 2 groups have very different agendas, and therefore different goals and means to get there. And the second thing is that only one group believes in the founding principle of this country, that all men are created equal and should be given equal chances to succeed. And it isn't the Tea party. Which side are you on?        

If women ruled the world

A friend of mine on facebook posted this saying: If women ruled the world, there'd be no wars. Now this is a saying I have heard before, but in this politically-charged time, it got me thinking. Now as a divorced man, and a guy with 4 sisters, I can tell you that idea a woman wouldn't go to war is at best, ludicrous. Heck any man that's ever been married or lived with a woman knows there are times she'd go to war (And I don't mean time of month). Everyone knows, or should know, that if someone threatens to or actually harms a woman's family, she will do whatever it takes it protect, or at worst, get revenge for anything done to her family. But a woman wouldn't go to war for stupid reasons that have nothing to do with the safety and protection of her family. And a woman at the head of a country will feel the same way about the country. Think Golda Meir of Israel or Margaret Thatcher of Great Britain. They would and did go to war to protect their country, their family as it was. Now, to put it in today's context, when bin-Laden attacked and took down the towers, a woman would have no problem going after him and his group with all the fury at her disposal. But she wouldn't have gone to war and invaded Iraq. If women ruled the world, there'd be wars, but there'd be few if any stupid, petty wars.   

If women ruled the world

A friend of mine on facebook posted a saying: If women ruled the world there'd be no wars. As a man with 4 sisters, can I tell you that the idea of women not making war is ludicrous at best. Heck, any man that has ever been married or even lived with a woman knows there are times that a woman will go to war (And I don't mean time of month). Everyone knows, or at least should know, that if someone harms a woman's family, she will do whatever she can to get even. But a woman wouldn't go to war for stupid reasons.

Did America try to build an empire?

Throughout the weekend, with the news that our troops were leaving Iraq and that Libya's Khaddafi was dead, there was a lot of talk on the liberal shows about how many thought we wouldn't actually leave Iraq. The pundits, most of them came  from either Africa or the Middle East, were talking about how since we were a nation that had built an empire, we weren't very likely to give it up. So this got me asking the question: Did America really try to build an empire?
Now if you go back 65 years to the beginning of the cold war, there is no doubt that America propped up dictators that would stand against the Soviet Union. And if you think of this as trying to build an empire, then I guess America did do that. And since almost all those dictators, by their very nature
 

Where's the middle ground? Not in foreign policy

Just when I think that nobody could take one side or the other, both the Tea Party and the Democratic Party have decided that since they can't stand each other when it comes to domestic policy, they'll extend it to foreign policy, too. Now where I can almost understand why the Tea Party hates what happened in Libya (This was all President Obama's doing, and his actions have been proven to be correct. So much for a Democrat mismanaging a crisis.), the actions taken to bring home all military from Iraq has both sides rattling their sabers. (Sorry about the war analogy.) On the left, everyone is hailing the President's actions as one of the greatest feats he could ever take. Now, whoa Nellie! President Bush had signed an agreement to get all but a few thousand troops out of Iraq by the end of 2011. Now, instead of a few troops that could get easily sucked into any civil war, and would be in the eye of the tiger, so to speak, now if there is any problems in Iraq, it will be Iraq's problem to solve, which is the way it should be. So the President's actions were simply prudent actions taken by him. Now for those on the right that believe this shows his lack of foresight (And I can't say the Tea Party, because a lot of Tea Party members want all troops brought home from everywhere, not just Iraq), remember that this was basically the agreement that President Bush signed. How long would you keep troops there? What should their mission be? Do you know? Do you even care? All military missions should cease whenever the mission has succeeded or when there is no chance to accomplish the mission. The mission has been accomplished, and so the troops are coming home. And I will be glad to say to them, Welcome Home for the Holidays, troops. Mission Accomplished.    

Senate Rules Helps Tea Party Lie.

Watching Kevin McCarthy, Tea Party Representative from California and , I believe, the 3rd ranking Tea Party member of the House, I was reminded how much the Tea Party will take a fact and then use it to tell a lie. Or tell a lie and prove with information that they see one way while the facts are the other. Rep.McCarthy stated that the Tea Party was not obstructing President Obama and would work with him if he'd let them. To prove this point, he stated how President Obama jobs bill wasn't acceptable to either Tea Party or Democrats, since the Democratic controlled Senate couldn't get the votes to get it passed. Now, while it is true that the bills didn't pass, it isn't because the bills didn't get a majority of the votes. Both bills got enough votes to pass a straight up/down vote, but due to the arcane rules of the Senate, both bills needed 60 votes to pass. So yes, Rep. McCarthy, your minority in the Senate obstructed the majority in trying to pass a bill. So in this case, you took information and stated it in a way which was a lie. Now your original statement about not obstructing the President is also a lie, or every paper in the country got information about the $4 billion compromise to cut programs and eliminate tax loopholes was wrong. Rep. Boehner and the President had an agreement but Boehner was told by the hard-core members of the Tea Party that they wouldn't vote for it, so the compromise was shot down. Do you not call this obstruction, or do you think that every paper in the country lies? Oh, that's right, you're the Tea Party, and when someone disagrees with you, they lie and are un-American. I guess to you, the papers all lied, and polls that say how unpopular you are lies too.     

And Libya is in Africa, too.

So now Qaddafi is dead and the people of Libya are free from his rule and thankful for the help of the U.S., I'm wondering how the Tea Party will make this an utter defeat for the Obama Administration. Of course, since most of them would need an atlas to find the country, I don't know why people would listen to their opinion anyway.