The Day After the (Special) Election Day

Yesterday was an earth shaking day in American politics. I believe the citizens of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts fired the first shot of the second American Revolution - just as their forefathers did some 235 years ago. Isn't it ironic that this shot came on the eve of the one year mark of the Obama Presidency? This country lurched leftward with the election of Mr. Obama in the fall of 2008. However, I don't truly believe that most saw how left we were lurching. This first year has shocked the majority of Americans with not only the scope and scale of the spending, but the bully pulpit from which it was administered.

Make no mistake, government is out of control. The US adopted its first $1T budget in 1987. We are cruising past $4T now. The red ink printed since 1980 is astounding. James Earl Carter III wrote $152.8 B his final two budgets, the Gipper wrote up $1.412 T, Bush I added $1.036 T in four years. William Jefferson Clinton actually was positive over his 8 budgets - but not until the mid term elections steered his presidency decidedly more moderate. In the end, he had returned a $62.8B in surpluses. Bush II ran up debts of some $2.494 T. That is a collective $5.032 T in 30 years - an average of $167.8 B per year. Enter the year 2009 and spending explodes to a $1.4 T single year deficit. This is the headwater of American's discontent.

285 days remain before Americans again return to the polls. Will Democrats get the message? Have Republicans learned their lessons? Will third party "Tea Party" candidates emerge?

Today, I read Martin Luther King's...

Letter from Birmingham Jail. Powerful stuff. You can read it here: http://patriotpost.us/historic/documents/81/ History always painted MLK out to be a radical liberal. Let me look a bit deeper at these labels. "Radical" according to my dictionary is "thoroughgoing or extreme, esp. as regards change from accepted or traditional forms: a radical change in the policy of a company. Favoring drastic political, economic, or social reforms: radical ideas; radical and anarchistic ideologues." Liberal, from the same source: "favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs." On the surface, and as history has taught us, Mr. King would indeed fit the label "radical liberal". However, read his words. Look at the thoughts he shared, and you find a striking similarity to Paul, who wrote the Book of Romans. Again, falling back to my dictionary as is my wont, I see "conservative" defined as "disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change. Cautiously moderate or purposefully low: a conservative estimate. Traditional in style or manner; avoiding novelty or showiness: conservative suit." Mr. King was conservative in his style, his non-violent approach, and his drive for racial equality. He only wanted for Black America the same traditional opportunities whites enjoyed, nothing more, nothing less. His writings struck me today.

"Gone" Barack Obama

Barack Obama Countdown widget brought
to you by www.obamacountdownwidget.com

Obama' Sense of Urgency...

I don't get it these days. It took our President 3 days to speak about the attempted bombing of Flight 253 to Detroit on Christmas Day. Yet, when NV Senator Harry Reid's little 'racist' faux pas came to pass... BHO was Johnny on the Spot in his defense. When Haiti suffered its devastating earthquake in the wee hours of Tuesday morning - there was BHO on the morning news addressing the situation. Is this a matter of priorities being confused? Was he upset the attempted terrorist attack interrupted his vacation? Is saving Reid's hide that vital... and would it be if it weren't for the health care legislation?

Ronald Reagan Quote

I read an interesting quote from Ronald Reagan today. Quotes interest me, for I find inspiration within them. The student of history in me tries to frame the quote within the context of who, when, what, and where. Thus, this one stood out to me. He said, "Since when do we in America believe that our society is made up of two diametrically opposed classes -- one rich, one poor -- both in a permanent state of conflict and neither able to get ahead except at the expense of the other? Since when do we in America accept this alien and discredited theory of social and class warfare? Since when do we in America endorse the politics of envy and division?"

The mobility of the masses to move from poor to rich is a promise delivered upon far more frequently under the capitalist United States than anywhere else on the globe. While that very promise brings people here from every corner, as it has for over 225 years - the other side of the equation also drives this great country. For it is the ability to fail, and to fall from wealth to poverty that drives those who have achieved wealth. You can not count on good fortune remaining your constant companion, if you choose to rest on your laurels. Work gets you out of poverty in this country, and work keeps you rich once you get there.

Today, our political leaders seek to divide. Our society is used to multiplication. We can't discuss health care reform without it appearing as class warfare. The politicians would have us believe that the 'haves' are opposed to the 'have nots' gaining coverage. The discussion blurs the distinctions between rights and privileges, what is earned, and what is given. Our politicians should reference this quote, and get to work moving America forward again.