Home Station Blog on the Web

Yes, a BIG change has come to America.  Much is being said about the meaning in both the written and video press - not to mention the morning coffee calls all over the country !.  Many positions are being opened for discussion.  A few will be presented.

A Racial Change ?

Well yes, Mr Obama is, in fact, the is the first Black elected.  However, ask what was the effect on Cities given the many Black Mayors that were elected as a result of the civil rights movement.  Many a City has improved and also many have not improved.  Point -results rests with the ability of the leader not his color or ethnic background.  It is hoped that what is learned at it really does not make a difference one way or another.

A Generational Change ?

Yes, this time around the ‘younguns’ came forwarded and voted.  However, will the ‘next’ same age group be a factor ?  Will the those that voted this time do it again when they are two and/or four years older ?  We will have to wait and observe.

It is like Kennedy, an age group change.  Mr Obama is not a Baby Boomer, nor is he a Vitnam Vet.  Thus we have moved beyond those eras much like Kennedy moved beyond World War II.

Has the Country Moved Right or Left ?

Conservatives are quick to report that the Country remains ‘center right’.  It has been there since the Reagan era to include the eight years of Clinton.  Has the Country moved from that position ? — Perhaps.

It is being reported that the Country is:  Conservative — 34 * Moderate — 44 * Liberal — 22.  Also it seems in resent polls that 51% want a larger government participation and 47% want less government participation.   Then also there is the national ‘map’ that shows that some 78% of the Counties, the votes for DEM’s has increased over the previous 4 years.

Facts:  A DEM President has been elected.  Also the DEM majority in both Houses of Congress has been increassed.  Thus, it seems that the electorate has spoken - loud and clear - they want the Country to move to the Left.  The only remaining question is how far.

Discussion ( In the first person)

It seems to me that the Country is moving Left given the results of the election - those on the right lost and those on the left won.  Nuf said.  What might be the results ?

I see some change in the ’social issues’.  Efforts to limit abortions lost.  Efforts to limit gay issues won.  Efforts to limit ‘drugs’ lost.  Thus, it seems like a draw, and for the most part does not really make that much difference.

To me the biggest change will be economic.  When Reagen was elected, I went to a chalk board at work and wrote - ‘The rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer’.  After some 20 plus years it has come true - some 40% of the national wealth is owned by 1% of people. The increased in wealth has not ‘trickled down’.  The theory is nice, it just overlooks the fact that folks do not want to share. The rich have and do not share - the poor have no wealth to share, but are also selfish.

At present we are giving ‘cash’ to large corporations, both financial and auto.  The results of this effort is unknown, we can only hope for the best.  A right Pres asked, and a left Congress provided. It is hoped that both can take credit given good results - the outcome remains unknown.  The outlook does not look good, it seems, that the financial types are holding the cash, despite the fact that they were given the cash to loan.  Thus, the credit markets remain slow. Perhaps they are holding out for higher interest rates.

I believe that the economic policy of the past will be the change - one good reason is that it did not work.  However, what the new might be remains unknown.  Oh yes, I know the standard conservative response will be fear of ‘tax and spend’ and increase in welfare. Maybe yes, maybe no - we will have to wait and see.

Both the right and the left are speaking of a stimulus package.  I believe such is needed.  We have already put cash in at the top.  I seems to me that the next step should be a stimulus package for public works - not rebates to individuals.  I also believe that a public works package should be by design ‘big enough’ such that it would force hiring of the unemployed to get the job done.  The next big step should be creation of the  ‘green industry’ and ‘green jobs’.

Yes, change has come to America and the change will continue.  One can only hope that it is done wisely.  The best of all change will be made - the past needed corrections were not good.  The extreme positions of the Conservatives — 34 and Liberals — 22 are too fixed and are in the most cases are not  great solutions.  The key word is ‘fixed’  Is is it not nice that the Moderates — 44 in the middle are really the ones in control and willing to change as needed.

As to the question as to has the Country moved to the Left will be answered, by the Moderates, in the next Congressional Election of 2010 and the next Pres Election of 2012.

All we have to do is hang on - the ride continues, we have been aboard, since 1776.

Yes, do believe that change is needed 2009.  Much to late for this year.  It does really does make difference as to who will win the Presidential Election.

After the two Conventions the question was deferred from ‘what’ to ‘who’,  Wrong question, both slates have the ability to be President and Vice President.  No it is not a matter of whom do you trust, but rather what do they have in mind.  I trust them both.  Their plans are greatly different.

My Dad impressed me that if ‘one does the same today as one done yesterday - then one has not improved’.  Thus, from Dad’s point of view, change is needed.  Some 80% or so believe that change is required as the country is not on a course in the correct direction.

First tlhe GOP:

The conservative party were in complete control for the early six of the last eight years.  They are thus, responsible in the most part for the current state of affairs or at least guilty of inaction as things were going wrong.  Remember, 80% plus believe that the current state of affairs is not good.  Conservatives really do not believe in ‘change’ they have historically supported the ’status as is’.  Thus, one can not really expect ‘change’.

Second the DEM’s

The liberal party has been in control of Congress for the last 2 years.  They have not really done a heck of a lot to start the way toward change.  Many times they lacked the ‘collective idea’, then also they did not have a veto proof majority.  There also seemed a lack of real leadership.  The Speaker of the House is a powerful position, but we no longer have a Tip O’Neal or Sam Rayburn type leader.

Despite the failures of Congress for the last two years, it appears that the DEM’s somehow may increase their majority.  Veto proof- most likely not.

I firmly beleve that the top of the DEM ticket has leadership ability.  Many of his ideas for change are good enough to warrant an honest debate - of pro or con.  The ongoing debate between tha current and a new may not really effect the change needed, however.  A debate between two new ideas would be welcome, however at present we don’t have two new ideas.

Conclusion:

A GOP President that believes in the same old ways with a DEM Congress that may not develop a spine is a gamble for no change at all.  Thus, given the desire for change, there is really only one choice.  Just maybe, a DEM President will provide leadership to a DEM Congress to get a few things done.

Early in June 2008 a significant event happened.  Much has been written about the nomination of an African American as the Presidenial Canadate from the Democratic Party.  It was a close,  a Woman was almost elected.  Both events were great.

Not many years ago, 1954,  when I was first stationed in North Alabama at near the city of Huntsville there was enforced segregation.  That is, separate bathrooms, drinking fountains, and schools.  Name of game was separate but equal - one only had to observe and conclude - separate - yes, but not equal.

After hundreds of years of being wrong, we have come a long way since the early 1960’s.

We should be proud of ourselves.

The current state of the Iraq War is used as an example. First let me state for the purpose of this post, the need a war is assumed.

Declaration of War:

As we all know, I hope, it is Congress that Declares War. It is not the job of any President to take us into war. A declaration of war should be just that, in the case of the Iraq War, Congress did not declare ware - they authorized use of military force. If we are going to declare war then we should do just that. The declaration of war should be specific. The resolution for the Iraq War is so generalized - some believe and rightly so - that a new declaration is not required should we want to invade Iran, for example. The Declaration War should contain a ‘Mission Statement - goal statements - objectives’. To my knowledge the current resolution does not.

Support of the Operation:

The Military once deployed should be self supporting for the first year - if the war lasts that long. For the first year, supply, maintenance and transportation should be military. Civilian Contracts might be fine as the operation progresses for reconstruction of civil infrastructure.  One should at least wait to see what is required for support of direct military operations.  The delay in awarding contracts should reduce the need for ‘no bid’ and ‘cost plus’ contracts.

In addition the Military should take full advantage of their Civil Affairs Units.

Funding:

The first day after Declaring War the individual and corporate Income Tax Rates should be increased by 20%. Thus, if one is in a 30% tax bracket the new rate would be 36%. Leaving the cost of any war to one’s grandchildren is a crime. Also it seems fair that in the time of war all should sacrifice - not just the military families.

Military Resources:

On the first day after Declaring War the Draft should be activated. One may not need to draft, however the activation of the draft is a reasonable cost of war. The activation of the draft would assure the ability to sustain the required military manpower. The current war is being hampered by the lack of military resources. Lacking troops 5 years into a war, is a crime. The threat of being drafted, also falls into the idea of shared sacrifice.

This post was written and place on a former blog soon after the State of the Union Message in 2006.

The New Congress did not take the recommendation.
****************************************************************************

Way back a few years when I was in the 7th and 8th Grade in Potterville Public School in Central Michigan we had a great Civic Teacher. Her name was Mrs Mack. Now this wonderful lady was outstanding in the way she taught Civics. For those that may not know Civics is what we now call Government.

In those classes we were taught about the Second Continental Congress. Mrs Mack told us one of the great things that The Second Continental Congress done was to pass the Ordinance of the North West Territory. Mrs Mack took great pains teaching how the Ordinance changed the direction of the country. Some being public education to include higher education, public roads., the definition as to what was needed to become a New State along with other great stuff.

Following the continental Congress was the Articles of Confederation. If my memory is correct our current Constitution grew out of that body

Mrs Mack really took off on our Constitution. You all know the story – three co-equal branches, the theory of checks and balance. The timing of the terms for the offices – Judges – life: Senators (those that represent the Governments of the States) – six years: the President (the Administrator) – 4 years; and those that represent the people – 2 years. She taught that the Constitution specified the duties and limits of each branch. She also taught that the document would not have been ratified by the several states, without the promise of the ‘Bill of Rights’ – those famous first 10 amendments.

Mrs Mack, I know you have passed, but I am writing this to you – just to let you know that – somehow someway it is not that way any longer. The State of the Union is not good. We have strayed from the principals of the Constitution.

Mrs Mack, one of the methods that you used to teach, was the writing of position papers. Yes I know we were to foot note where we got the stuff. But forgive me; the following is based on some 60 years of life and reading since your classes. You did tell us to read a lot. You did tell us to ‘think’ and when required to ‘challenge our leaders’. I have tried to do that. I have read position papers of others, both pro and con on the position I will try to present to you. Thus, you are getting a gut feeling from a former student

We first got in trouble because of ‘The Cold War’. During that time we created ‘The Imperial President’. Because of the dangers of an Atomic War we gave the President great powers. For the most part there were checks by Congress. Some checks strong others weak, but checks none the less. In effect there was a feeling of an ‘automatic declaration of war’ if we were attacked. Weapons were locked and loaded - despite the fact that only Congress could Declare War.

On 9 Sep 2001, as you most likely know a ‘non government group of folks’ destroyed a couple of buildings in New York City. In addition to the buildings some 3000 people were killed. The reason given for the attacks were because we had Troops on Muslim sacred soil (Saudi Arabia) and that our support of the Israel was one sided. Both true.

Man oh man did our Imperial President react. In the name of ‘protecting us’ he has taken many steps outside the Constitution. He started a ‘preemptive war’, an invasion of Iraq. Sold as defense against a threat that was contrived by ‘cherry picking’ intel reports. As it turns out the items that were ‘cherry picked’ turned out to be in fact false. His Administration did an outstanding job of convincing folks falsely, that Iraq was a base of operation for the Al Qaeda - the ones that took down the Twin Towers.

He has detained prisoners, both foreign and domestic, without charges for years. He is demanding a trial system that does not allow the accused access to evidence. He supports the torture of prisoners in the name of ‘protecting us’. He has sold a state of ‘fear’ to our nation that the next attack will ‘steal our freedoms’. This ‘fear is evident at all levels. For example, here in Michigan an Arabic gentleman, a third generation citizen, was detained for several days – because he could not produce a Passport.

He has searched individuals and businesses without due process of law. Perhaps he should have been in your class when you taught the Bill of Rights. No never mind, he says it is ‘legal under the law’ because he is the Commander in Chief. I do not remember you teaching that the Commander in Chief has any ‘special powers’ above that of being President. Did you not teach us that one of the prime duties of the President was to enforce the law of the land? Our current President is breaking the law of the land.

Our Congress does not really exercise, check nor balance over the Administration. They too have been sold on the doctrine of ‘fear’ and do not challenge the action of the Administration. Oh once in awhile, and individual member, or several members, may speak out. However, once they do, they are tagged as being ‘unpatriotic’ and thus, not supporting the Commander in Chief. Or perhaps worse ‘aiding the enemy’.

The Rubber Stamp Congress has even passed a law where the government is provided a list of the books you check out from a library. Your telephone calls are monitored; your activity on the Internet is tracked. Sometimes, even the fact that you have been detained or charged is a secret. Thus, you can not seek council, because doing such would only add another charge – a security violation.

Mrs Mack, you always told us to summarize – so here goes.

1) The Checks and Balance System is Broke.
2) The Bill of Rights has been violated.
3) The President is acting like a King.
4) We have been deprived of freedoms for promised security – thus we have neither.

You also taught that when we found something out of order we had two choices. First to do nothing or second try for a change.

I am going for a ‘change’. The President is not up for re-election this year. However, Congress is. I am praying that the people have the will to ‘change the Congress’. I pray that the new Congress will use, what might remain of our Constitution and impeach the President for his ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’.