From the Porch….by John R. Nelson
Taking Back Roads
On a recent trip from New Smyrna Beach back to North Georgia I departed the comfort and safety of the interstate highway for a back road. In this case it was Highway 341 near Brunswick, Georgia threading its way through the landscape of Jessup, Braselton, and ultimately changing roads to Dublin, Georgia. Leaving the interstate forces me to slow down, lending opportunity to look around. Gone are the Tanger Outlet malls, truck stops, and billboards. Instead, roadside stands appear, homes front the road, and Main Street comes into view. Each giving pause to what I would describe as the “real America.”
The rise of interstate highway travel brought families closer together and eased the transportation of commerce. From President Eisenhower we inherited a system of roads unique to America, meant to defend our country in the cold war. However, a hidden cost of this new method of transportation came too. Like “Radiator Springs” in my 2 ½ year-old son James’ favorite movie, “Cars”, towns were bypassed and left to die like withering grapes on the vine. Exiting I-95 to travel these roads requires slowing down at a town square, looking at family owned businesses in downtown, or seeing a local service station on the side of the road.
My wife and I looked with fascination at nature stealing homes and buildings. It does not take long for the weather, trees, and vines to destroy a once thriving farm or home. However, nearby structures grow, whether a modern “McMansion” or a single-wide mobile home Americans live and prosper. Instead of seeing blight I see hard-working individuals who are often mocked by Hollywood, Northeasters, Washington, and the media, but these citizens revere their God, country, and family. Towns like Lumber City, Georgia drive the economic engine of our country to deliver pine 2x4’s awaiting the return of construction that may not come again. Like the Interstate that passed them by before; the politicians are now claiming successes and a “new normal” ready to pass them by again.
Our Supreme Court Bench consists of only Ivy League law graduates; Congress is 90% composed of attorneys. Instead of mocking hard-working Americans with deep-rooted values who protest an irresponsible political class spending future generations’ wealth I wish our politicians would leave Washington D.C. and travel the back roads to meet the real America.
Friday, May 28, 2010
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Really?
There are days I watch the news with disbelief. Politicians offer statements and comments that my third grade son would laugh at and know are not true. Of more concern is the current the lack of experience, or just plain stupidity, of our current leaders.
Since the oil spill in the Gulf I knew jokingly George Bush would ultimately be blamed. As people would discuss the spill and what went wrong the comment would be made, “it must be George Bush’s fault” and laugh about the situation. When President Obama went on the offensive, to defend his actions on Friday he placed blame for the accident squarely on the shoulders of “administrations of the past decade”. I addressed such actions in prior columns and now we can conclude with certainty Obama is responsible for nothing. It appears anything, however remote to the past, will always be blamed on Bush.
There was no surprise in the media to Obama’s nomination of Kagan for Supreme Court Justice. With no record of judicial experience she is as qualified as the President is for his position. Kagan’s action to remove military recruiters at Harvard was unanimously overturned by the Supreme Court, and she has a failing track record arguing cases as Solicitor General. Her writings demonstrate contempt for the Constitution, and favoritism of a strong leftist approach to government. Compared to the President the only qualification she lacks is “Community Organizer.”
Finally, Attorney General Eric Holder made comments that should make every American stop in their tracks and say, “huh?” As Attorney General Holder’s job is to uphold the laws of the land and ensure constitutionality. Since the passage of Arizona’s “Enforcement of Immigration Laws” (AZ SB1070) Holder, and Obama, have both publicly criticized the law. On Thursday Holder was questioned before Congress and stated “I grant that I have not read it…my comments are based on reading news reports, watching television.” I am appalled the Attorney General and President criticize American citizens without reading legislation.
This morning I read the 17-page Arizona Bill in ten minutes. Based on the selection of Kagan for Supreme Court nominee, my ability to read state legislation, and the fact I took the LSAT I should be nominated for a high judicial position within the Obama administration. I can’t wait to see what this week brings; I only know it will be George Bush’s fault.
There are days I watch the news with disbelief. Politicians offer statements and comments that my third grade son would laugh at and know are not true. Of more concern is the current the lack of experience, or just plain stupidity, of our current leaders.
Since the oil spill in the Gulf I knew jokingly George Bush would ultimately be blamed. As people would discuss the spill and what went wrong the comment would be made, “it must be George Bush’s fault” and laugh about the situation. When President Obama went on the offensive, to defend his actions on Friday he placed blame for the accident squarely on the shoulders of “administrations of the past decade”. I addressed such actions in prior columns and now we can conclude with certainty Obama is responsible for nothing. It appears anything, however remote to the past, will always be blamed on Bush.
There was no surprise in the media to Obama’s nomination of Kagan for Supreme Court Justice. With no record of judicial experience she is as qualified as the President is for his position. Kagan’s action to remove military recruiters at Harvard was unanimously overturned by the Supreme Court, and she has a failing track record arguing cases as Solicitor General. Her writings demonstrate contempt for the Constitution, and favoritism of a strong leftist approach to government. Compared to the President the only qualification she lacks is “Community Organizer.”
Finally, Attorney General Eric Holder made comments that should make every American stop in their tracks and say, “huh?” As Attorney General Holder’s job is to uphold the laws of the land and ensure constitutionality. Since the passage of Arizona’s “Enforcement of Immigration Laws” (AZ SB1070) Holder, and Obama, have both publicly criticized the law. On Thursday Holder was questioned before Congress and stated “I grant that I have not read it…my comments are based on reading news reports, watching television.” I am appalled the Attorney General and President criticize American citizens without reading legislation.
This morning I read the 17-page Arizona Bill in ten minutes. Based on the selection of Kagan for Supreme Court nominee, my ability to read state legislation, and the fact I took the LSAT I should be nominated for a high judicial position within the Obama administration. I can’t wait to see what this week brings; I only know it will be George Bush’s fault.
Saturday, May 08, 2010
Clintons equal Contradiction
When former Presidents speak their mind it is amazing how the media rushes to give credibility to their statements. I find it interesting that both former Bush’s tend to keep their comments on the charitable and humanitarian side while both Carter and Clinton feel compelled to continue to govern and affect policy. Last week I wrote about former President Bush (“W”) and what history may regard as the worst change to our civil liberties, enacting the Patriot Act. This week, Bill Clinton, and Hillary, must be called out for what they are, the greatest liars to ever hold the highest office in the United States.
Probably no quote in history can be described as more concerning than, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky. I never told anybody to lie, not a single time; never. These allegations are false. And I need to go back to work for the American people. Thank you.” With the audacity of a teenager, Bill Clinton looked directly into the cameras and lied to the American people. Quickly defended by supporters and leftists, Clinton was given a pass on this issue as his behavior was regarded as irrelevant to the presidency and his ability to govern. Much ado was subsequently made regarding his statements and it took seven months to finally come to an admission of “improper physical relationship” on August 17, 1998.
During his presidency Clinton dealt with two attacks on American soil, the first World Trade Center bombing and the Oklahoma City Bombing. Obviously Oklahoma City made an impact on Clinton because it drove him to recently make comments comparing Tim McVeigh to the Tea Partiers of today. On April 16, Clinton said that “legitimate” comparisons can be drawn between today's grass-roots anger and resentment toward the government and the right-wing extremism that bubbled up prior to the bombing of a federal building in Oklahoma City 15 years ago. Personally, I can find no comparison to Tim McVeigh, a militia movement sympathizer, who sought revenge against the federal government for “Waco” which had ended in the deaths of 76 people exactly two years earlier. In contrast, the Tea Party has gained coverage in the media with credibility as average citizens rightfully protesting, under the First Amendment, the new debt policies of the current administration.
The Clintons’ contradiction seems to come from protesting against the actions of the government, when a Republican is in office, which is acceptable, versus when a Democrat is running the kingdom, unacceptable. Clinton ordered the Waco attack and Obama is fueling debt which will be put on the shoulders of generations of Americans to come, and both have generated protests. Clinton hated the Vietnam War and policies of Republican President Nixon, as quoted on June 9, 1969, the Frederick, Maryland Post ran an article by Tom Cullen on antiwar sentiment among the 29 American Rhodes Scholars attending Oxford. “And that's the way it should be,” says William J. Clinton, 22, of Hot Springs, Ark., “There would be something wrong with us if we could put the war out of our minds when our friends are being shot up in Vietnam.”
Hillary Clinton said it best though, in her 2003 tyrade on the floor of the Senate, “ I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration, somehow you're not patriotic, and we should stand up and say, "WE ARE AMERICANS AND WE HAVE A RIGHT TO DEBATE AND DISAGREE WITH ANY ADMINISTRATION!" Both Clintons want their right to protest, but not your right to protest against Democrats.
When former Presidents speak their mind it is amazing how the media rushes to give credibility to their statements. I find it interesting that both former Bush’s tend to keep their comments on the charitable and humanitarian side while both Carter and Clinton feel compelled to continue to govern and affect policy. Last week I wrote about former President Bush (“W”) and what history may regard as the worst change to our civil liberties, enacting the Patriot Act. This week, Bill Clinton, and Hillary, must be called out for what they are, the greatest liars to ever hold the highest office in the United States.
Probably no quote in history can be described as more concerning than, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky. I never told anybody to lie, not a single time; never. These allegations are false. And I need to go back to work for the American people. Thank you.” With the audacity of a teenager, Bill Clinton looked directly into the cameras and lied to the American people. Quickly defended by supporters and leftists, Clinton was given a pass on this issue as his behavior was regarded as irrelevant to the presidency and his ability to govern. Much ado was subsequently made regarding his statements and it took seven months to finally come to an admission of “improper physical relationship” on August 17, 1998.
During his presidency Clinton dealt with two attacks on American soil, the first World Trade Center bombing and the Oklahoma City Bombing. Obviously Oklahoma City made an impact on Clinton because it drove him to recently make comments comparing Tim McVeigh to the Tea Partiers of today. On April 16, Clinton said that “legitimate” comparisons can be drawn between today's grass-roots anger and resentment toward the government and the right-wing extremism that bubbled up prior to the bombing of a federal building in Oklahoma City 15 years ago. Personally, I can find no comparison to Tim McVeigh, a militia movement sympathizer, who sought revenge against the federal government for “Waco” which had ended in the deaths of 76 people exactly two years earlier. In contrast, the Tea Party has gained coverage in the media with credibility as average citizens rightfully protesting, under the First Amendment, the new debt policies of the current administration.
The Clintons’ contradiction seems to come from protesting against the actions of the government, when a Republican is in office, which is acceptable, versus when a Democrat is running the kingdom, unacceptable. Clinton ordered the Waco attack and Obama is fueling debt which will be put on the shoulders of generations of Americans to come, and both have generated protests. Clinton hated the Vietnam War and policies of Republican President Nixon, as quoted on June 9, 1969, the Frederick, Maryland Post ran an article by Tom Cullen on antiwar sentiment among the 29 American Rhodes Scholars attending Oxford. “And that's the way it should be,” says William J. Clinton, 22, of Hot Springs, Ark., “There would be something wrong with us if we could put the war out of our minds when our friends are being shot up in Vietnam.”
Hillary Clinton said it best though, in her 2003 tyrade on the floor of the Senate, “ I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration, somehow you're not patriotic, and we should stand up and say, "WE ARE AMERICANS AND WE HAVE A RIGHT TO DEBATE AND DISAGREE WITH ANY ADMINISTRATION!" Both Clintons want their right to protest, but not your right to protest against Democrats.
Sunday, May 02, 2010
George Bush’s Worst Decision
During the eight years of the George W. Bush presidency America changed significantly. Conservatives claim economic policies worked, but many were inherited from Bill Clinton. They claim the representation of smaller government fueled the economic boom of the aughts, but the truth is the largest expansion of government services and spending took place, until President Obama exponentially eclipsed those figures, and America’s civil liberties were willfully eroded. Repeatedly I have written about exchanging our liberties for the perception of safety, but no president did more to change our view of the world than “W” in the months and years following September 11th, 2001.
Congress immediately started working on the Patriot Act after the September 11th attacks. Even government marketing proponents make it hard to argue because it would make one “unpatriotic” to disagree. Among the worst elements of the Patriot Act that stole liberties was Title II, covering surveillance procedures. Although one could hope the original intent was to provide additional surveillance on enemies of the United States, the enhancements contained within this statute expanded the scope and availability of wiretapping and surveillance orders. Subpoenas delivered to internet service providers were expanded to include not only "the name, address, local and long distance telephone toll billing records, telephone number or other subscriber number or identity, and length of service of a subscriber" but also session times and durations, types of services used, communication device address information, payment method and bank account and credit card numbers.
Several other sections of the Patriot Act, Title III, anti-money-laundering to prevent terrorism, and Title IV, border security, have changed our daily lives. When dealing with any financial institution we must provide proof of American citizenship to open an account. Cash transactions in excess of $10,000 must be reported, and all brokers and bankers are trained to spy on you – ordered to report any odd patterns in financial transactions. Border security has limited our ability to take a weekend jaunt to the Bahamas, requiring a passport to return to our own country.
Finally, the most notorious provision in the Patriot Act is Title VIII, the Terrorism Criminal Law. It redefined the term "domestic terrorism" to broadly include mass destruction as well as assassination or kidnapping as a terrorist activity. The definition includes activities intended to "intimidate or coerce a civilian population," "influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion," or are undertaken "to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping" while in the jurisdiction of the United States. On one hand, under the guise of the attacks of September 11th, the provision arguably makes sense to allow prosecution of the foreign terrorists. However, a dramatic shift has recently taken place by the current party in power to invoke the elements of this section and call into question the activities of Americans peacefully protesting and asserting their First Amendment rights to free speech. Both Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and former President Bill Clinton have referred to citizens engaging in tax protests, arguing against health care, or disagreeing with the current administration as domestic terrorists.
Our government is asserting power it was never intended to have and I believe the Founding Fathers would be appalled at the efforts currently underway. It appears George Bush’s legacy is shrouded in reigning in the citizens of the United States, to control them and create an environment focused on monitoring and surveillance. The First Amendment is no longer about freedom of speech, to willfully speak, but containment of speech within the bounds of the Patriot Act.
During the eight years of the George W. Bush presidency America changed significantly. Conservatives claim economic policies worked, but many were inherited from Bill Clinton. They claim the representation of smaller government fueled the economic boom of the aughts, but the truth is the largest expansion of government services and spending took place, until President Obama exponentially eclipsed those figures, and America’s civil liberties were willfully eroded. Repeatedly I have written about exchanging our liberties for the perception of safety, but no president did more to change our view of the world than “W” in the months and years following September 11th, 2001.
Congress immediately started working on the Patriot Act after the September 11th attacks. Even government marketing proponents make it hard to argue because it would make one “unpatriotic” to disagree. Among the worst elements of the Patriot Act that stole liberties was Title II, covering surveillance procedures. Although one could hope the original intent was to provide additional surveillance on enemies of the United States, the enhancements contained within this statute expanded the scope and availability of wiretapping and surveillance orders. Subpoenas delivered to internet service providers were expanded to include not only "the name, address, local and long distance telephone toll billing records, telephone number or other subscriber number or identity, and length of service of a subscriber" but also session times and durations, types of services used, communication device address information, payment method and bank account and credit card numbers.
Several other sections of the Patriot Act, Title III, anti-money-laundering to prevent terrorism, and Title IV, border security, have changed our daily lives. When dealing with any financial institution we must provide proof of American citizenship to open an account. Cash transactions in excess of $10,000 must be reported, and all brokers and bankers are trained to spy on you – ordered to report any odd patterns in financial transactions. Border security has limited our ability to take a weekend jaunt to the Bahamas, requiring a passport to return to our own country.
Finally, the most notorious provision in the Patriot Act is Title VIII, the Terrorism Criminal Law. It redefined the term "domestic terrorism" to broadly include mass destruction as well as assassination or kidnapping as a terrorist activity. The definition includes activities intended to "intimidate or coerce a civilian population," "influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion," or are undertaken "to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping" while in the jurisdiction of the United States. On one hand, under the guise of the attacks of September 11th, the provision arguably makes sense to allow prosecution of the foreign terrorists. However, a dramatic shift has recently taken place by the current party in power to invoke the elements of this section and call into question the activities of Americans peacefully protesting and asserting their First Amendment rights to free speech. Both Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and former President Bill Clinton have referred to citizens engaging in tax protests, arguing against health care, or disagreeing with the current administration as domestic terrorists.
Our government is asserting power it was never intended to have and I believe the Founding Fathers would be appalled at the efforts currently underway. It appears George Bush’s legacy is shrouded in reigning in the citizens of the United States, to control them and create an environment focused on monitoring and surveillance. The First Amendment is no longer about freedom of speech, to willfully speak, but containment of speech within the bounds of the Patriot Act.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)