I was recently in a quick discussion with another individual who stated that he understood that the Marxist philosophy had failed and anyone who wanted to belong to this failed philosophy must be delusional. I agree with the belief that anyone who wants to follow the Marxist philosophy must be delusional. But, despite the fall of the eventual Communist empire of the USSR, Marxism did not fail. WE, the People see it every day. Karl Marx established his philosophy on the belief that Socialism will destroy capitalism and lead to a pure state of communism. For the last 100 years, the socialist movement has been slowly creeping in and eroding our society and our different levels of government. We've especially seen an acceleration of socialist views in the past 18 months. But not before we saw it creep into our society (denial of God's Law as the principle to the Constitution, court systems interpreting the "separation of church and state" well outside of it's intentions as designed by our founding fathers, efforts to remove any references to God in our official documents and history books, etc.) and yet We, the People stood by on many occasions and let socialistic changes to our society and our government occur without standing up as one voice and saying "NOT ON MY WATCH!!"
Today, We the People are standing steadfast and being heard across our Republic as we work to pull out socialism from our society, our government and our livelihood. Just as the Socialist movement took decades of slow inception, We the People have years of hard work to RESTORE OUR REPUBLIC, including bringing the free market economy back to it's full potential.
But back to the original conversation, from which I am still waiting for some answers to some very important questions. Karl Marx is dead but his vision of socialism still lives on and is thriving nationwide and worldwide. So I'll ask to all who read this, just as I asked the individual in the original discussion: What are you going to do to stop this vibrant (not failed) philosophy? Or are you going to be in denial? We the People throughout this Republic have had a choice to make. And it better be the right one for our children and future generations. If you have not made your choice by now, you better make it fast!!
Sunday, June 27, 2010
Monday, June 21, 2010
DEFENDING OUR COUNTRY: THE PRESIDENT'S DUTY
DEFENDING OUR COUNTRY: THE PRESIDENT’S DUTY
Article II, Section I of The Constitution of the United States: The Presidential Oath of Affirmation states “I do solemly swear(or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of the President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Any federal law that has justly been approved and entered into the United States Code becomes part of the Law of the Land, the Constitution. Therefore, the protection of our country, in any terms from protecting our borders to protecting our environment, is a direct obligation of the President of the United States. Question: When is the President of the United States of America guilty of violating the Law of the Land? Answer: when he willfully violates the Oath of Affirmation.
The current President, Barack Hussein Obama (heretofore to be referred to as BHO) has willfully violated his oath on many occasions in just the first 17 months of his ongoing term. For the sake of argument, this evaluation will focus on specific events.
BHO, as the leader of his administration, has violated 18 USC 600, which states “Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment, position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit, provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for the support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party in connection with any general or
special election to any political office, or in connection with any primary election or political convention or caucus held to select candidates for any political office, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.” In addition, BHO has violated 18 USC 595, which states (in part) “Whoever, being a person employed in any administrative position by the United States…uses his official authority for the purpose of interfering with, or affecting, the nomination or the election of any candidate for the office of President, Vice President, Presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representatives, Delegate from the District of Columbia, or Resident Commissioner, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.” These violations of federal law occurred on two “recent’ occasions: during the attempt by representatives of the BHO administration, directly (as in the deputy chief of staff Jim Messina) to coerce Andrew Romanoff to back out of his candidacy as Democratic nominee for Senator of Colorado by offering three federal administrative positions and indirectly (as in attempt by former President Clinton by request of Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel) in offering a “high level, non-paying position”, as stated by White House press release, to Rep. Joseph Sestak in lieu of his backing out of his candidacy as Democratic nominee for Senate in Pennsylvania. WHERE IS THE LEGAL OUTRAGE AND JUDICIAL INVESTIGATIONS INTO THESE ADMITTED ACTIVITIES?
BHO openly violated Article II, Section 2 by appointing “czars”/advisors who are openly involved in policy making but were not subjected to consent by the Senate. The childish argument that “this has been an ongoing practice” is not justification for violating the Law of the Land. It is time for this practice to be outlawed by the judicial system and condemned by the Senate. WHERE IS THE LEGAL AND LEGISLATIVE OUTRAGE AND JUDICIAL INVESTIGATIONS INTO THESE ADMITTED ACTIVITIES?
For sake of argument, I will submit the following judicial interpretation of Executive Orders: Executive Orders do not require Congressional approval to take effect but they have the same legal weight as laws passed by Congress. The President's source of authority to issue Executive Orders can be found in the Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution which grants to the President the "executive Power." Section 3 of Article II further directs the President to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." To implement or execute the laws of the land, Presidents give direction and guidance to Executive Branch agencies and departments, often in the form of Executive Orders.
Executive Orders allow the President to make major decisions, even law, without the consent of Congress, which is in contrast to the logic of the Constitution’s “checks and balances” philosophy. On many occasions, Congress have passed laws without any direct method of how to implement them. Basically, these leaves any federal agencies affected by such law with the decision as to how to implement the law. The President is overall in charge of all federal agencies during his or her term(s). This scenario allows for wide open interpretation, which Presidents have followed thru by providing specific details via Executive Orders. This is the case for Jones Act of 1920. One problem in implementing this law, which requires intercoastal shipping of goods in U.S. maritime vessels, deals with the cost incurred by U.S. maritime in moving overseas cargo incoming to the U.S. from foreign to U.S. vessels.
When Denmark offered the use of their numerous scrubbers in the Gulf of Mexico immediately after the Deepwater Horizon oil rig disaster, BHO refused to initiate an executive order to temporarily exclude the requirements the Jones Act, which ultimately resulted in the widespread oil slick, along with the crude oil’s inwater separation that has created plumes underwater. This is a flagrant action by BHO to neglect his duty to protect our shores and territorial waters. A future post will also show how BHO has violated the Jones Act by allowing foreign-flagged ships to engage in commerce in American sea lanes. WHERE IS THE REAL OUTRAGE FROM THE CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES AND FROM THE LEGISLATIVE BODY??
One of the major duties of the President of the United States of America encompasses protecting our country (and therefore our borders) from enemies, foreign and domestic. However, BHO has openly shown his neglect to protect our southern border from illegal immigration. The only actions that BHO has taken are providing personnel to help in an administrative fashion, while the illegal immigration rate continues to increase and brings over violent criminals. What is needed to protect our border is more manpower on the ground controlling the border, along with completion of the border guard fence. However, the BHO administration continues the same actions that were evident in our last administration by refusing to provide the necessary means to stop and turn back any attempts at illegal immigration across our southern border. This has resulted in the passing of Arizona’s immigration law 1070, which will go into effect in July. As a response, the Justice Department announced on June 21, 2010 that a federal lawsuit will be filed against Arizona’s immigration law based on the supremacy clause of the Constitution. What the BHO administration has failed to recognize (or acknowledge) is that Arizona’s state law mirrors federal law Title 8 Section 1325 of the U.S. Code. In addition, the treatment and disposition of any illegal immigrants found in Arizona’s immigration law 1070 is to turn the illegal alien over to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement or the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency. In contrast, the federal law (Title 8 Section 1325 of the U.S. Code) declares an illegal immigrant has committed a federal crime and is punishable by criminal fines and imprisonment up to six months. Repeat offenders are treated under the federal law can incur up to two years in prison. As Governor Brewer (Az) said in response to the impending federal lawsuit, “Bring it.” By not providing protection on our borders from enemies foreign and domestic, BHO has once again violated his Oath of Affirmation. WHERE IS THE LEGISLATIVE OUTRAGE AND JUDICIAL INVESTIGATIONS INTO THIS CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATION??
Now the latest regarding border protection and comprehensive immigration reform: Today, June 21, 2010, a video tape of a meeting between Arizona’s Senator Jon Kyl and citizens revealed that recently Senator Kyl was involved in a one-on-one conversation with BHO in the Oval Office. Kyl has reported that BHO stated that he would not support increased border protection because it would take away any leverage from Republicans on Capitol Hill in supporting his comprehensive immigration reform practice. Almost, immediately, a White House press corp designee denied that this was ever said, from which Senator Kyl has reconfirmed what he had previously said. The questions for We, the People are : Who do we believe? Does the remark by BHO reflect his obvious stance as regarding enhancing the protection of our Southern Border? I know what my answers are; what are yours? LET THE OUTRAGE BEGIN!!!
Article II, Section I of The Constitution of the United States: The Presidential Oath of Affirmation states “I do solemly swear(or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of the President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Any federal law that has justly been approved and entered into the United States Code becomes part of the Law of the Land, the Constitution. Therefore, the protection of our country, in any terms from protecting our borders to protecting our environment, is a direct obligation of the President of the United States. Question: When is the President of the United States of America guilty of violating the Law of the Land? Answer: when he willfully violates the Oath of Affirmation.
The current President, Barack Hussein Obama (heretofore to be referred to as BHO) has willfully violated his oath on many occasions in just the first 17 months of his ongoing term. For the sake of argument, this evaluation will focus on specific events.
BHO, as the leader of his administration, has violated 18 USC 600, which states “Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment, position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit, provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for the support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party in connection with any general or
special election to any political office, or in connection with any primary election or political convention or caucus held to select candidates for any political office, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.” In addition, BHO has violated 18 USC 595, which states (in part) “Whoever, being a person employed in any administrative position by the United States…uses his official authority for the purpose of interfering with, or affecting, the nomination or the election of any candidate for the office of President, Vice President, Presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representatives, Delegate from the District of Columbia, or Resident Commissioner, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.” These violations of federal law occurred on two “recent’ occasions: during the attempt by representatives of the BHO administration, directly (as in the deputy chief of staff Jim Messina) to coerce Andrew Romanoff to back out of his candidacy as Democratic nominee for Senator of Colorado by offering three federal administrative positions and indirectly (as in attempt by former President Clinton by request of Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel) in offering a “high level, non-paying position”, as stated by White House press release, to Rep. Joseph Sestak in lieu of his backing out of his candidacy as Democratic nominee for Senate in Pennsylvania. WHERE IS THE LEGAL OUTRAGE AND JUDICIAL INVESTIGATIONS INTO THESE ADMITTED ACTIVITIES?
BHO openly violated Article II, Section 2 by appointing “czars”/advisors who are openly involved in policy making but were not subjected to consent by the Senate. The childish argument that “this has been an ongoing practice” is not justification for violating the Law of the Land. It is time for this practice to be outlawed by the judicial system and condemned by the Senate. WHERE IS THE LEGAL AND LEGISLATIVE OUTRAGE AND JUDICIAL INVESTIGATIONS INTO THESE ADMITTED ACTIVITIES?
For sake of argument, I will submit the following judicial interpretation of Executive Orders: Executive Orders do not require Congressional approval to take effect but they have the same legal weight as laws passed by Congress. The President's source of authority to issue Executive Orders can be found in the Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution which grants to the President the "executive Power." Section 3 of Article II further directs the President to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." To implement or execute the laws of the land, Presidents give direction and guidance to Executive Branch agencies and departments, often in the form of Executive Orders.
Executive Orders allow the President to make major decisions, even law, without the consent of Congress, which is in contrast to the logic of the Constitution’s “checks and balances” philosophy. On many occasions, Congress have passed laws without any direct method of how to implement them. Basically, these leaves any federal agencies affected by such law with the decision as to how to implement the law. The President is overall in charge of all federal agencies during his or her term(s). This scenario allows for wide open interpretation, which Presidents have followed thru by providing specific details via Executive Orders. This is the case for Jones Act of 1920. One problem in implementing this law, which requires intercoastal shipping of goods in U.S. maritime vessels, deals with the cost incurred by U.S. maritime in moving overseas cargo incoming to the U.S. from foreign to U.S. vessels.
When Denmark offered the use of their numerous scrubbers in the Gulf of Mexico immediately after the Deepwater Horizon oil rig disaster, BHO refused to initiate an executive order to temporarily exclude the requirements the Jones Act, which ultimately resulted in the widespread oil slick, along with the crude oil’s inwater separation that has created plumes underwater. This is a flagrant action by BHO to neglect his duty to protect our shores and territorial waters. A future post will also show how BHO has violated the Jones Act by allowing foreign-flagged ships to engage in commerce in American sea lanes. WHERE IS THE REAL OUTRAGE FROM THE CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES AND FROM THE LEGISLATIVE BODY??
One of the major duties of the President of the United States of America encompasses protecting our country (and therefore our borders) from enemies, foreign and domestic. However, BHO has openly shown his neglect to protect our southern border from illegal immigration. The only actions that BHO has taken are providing personnel to help in an administrative fashion, while the illegal immigration rate continues to increase and brings over violent criminals. What is needed to protect our border is more manpower on the ground controlling the border, along with completion of the border guard fence. However, the BHO administration continues the same actions that were evident in our last administration by refusing to provide the necessary means to stop and turn back any attempts at illegal immigration across our southern border. This has resulted in the passing of Arizona’s immigration law 1070, which will go into effect in July. As a response, the Justice Department announced on June 21, 2010 that a federal lawsuit will be filed against Arizona’s immigration law based on the supremacy clause of the Constitution. What the BHO administration has failed to recognize (or acknowledge) is that Arizona’s state law mirrors federal law Title 8 Section 1325 of the U.S. Code. In addition, the treatment and disposition of any illegal immigrants found in Arizona’s immigration law 1070 is to turn the illegal alien over to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement or the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency. In contrast, the federal law (Title 8 Section 1325 of the U.S. Code) declares an illegal immigrant has committed a federal crime and is punishable by criminal fines and imprisonment up to six months. Repeat offenders are treated under the federal law can incur up to two years in prison. As Governor Brewer (Az) said in response to the impending federal lawsuit, “Bring it.” By not providing protection on our borders from enemies foreign and domestic, BHO has once again violated his Oath of Affirmation. WHERE IS THE LEGISLATIVE OUTRAGE AND JUDICIAL INVESTIGATIONS INTO THIS CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATION??
Now the latest regarding border protection and comprehensive immigration reform: Today, June 21, 2010, a video tape of a meeting between Arizona’s Senator Jon Kyl and citizens revealed that recently Senator Kyl was involved in a one-on-one conversation with BHO in the Oval Office. Kyl has reported that BHO stated that he would not support increased border protection because it would take away any leverage from Republicans on Capitol Hill in supporting his comprehensive immigration reform practice. Almost, immediately, a White House press corp designee denied that this was ever said, from which Senator Kyl has reconfirmed what he had previously said. The questions for We, the People are : Who do we believe? Does the remark by BHO reflect his obvious stance as regarding enhancing the protection of our Southern Border? I know what my answers are; what are yours? LET THE OUTRAGE BEGIN!!!
Sunday, June 6, 2010
POLITICIANS: STAY OUT OF AMERICA'S GAME!!
America's game has always been filled with controversial calls, amazing plays in the field, awesome pitching, etc., etc., etc. The players, managers and owners who still believe in playing the GAME of baseball, not some event where you get rewarded no matter your status/record(which sounds like Saul Alinsky-type principles, doesn't it); those individuals still want the game to stay as is, no "instant replays", just play the game, kick some dirt on the umpire's feet, get in their face when you think they have made a bad call, and then continue to "play the game".
Baseball does not need politicians to stick their nose in probably the only purest American ideal (baseball) and the real players don't want them getting involved either. The pitcher (Andres Galaragga) who lost out on the perfect game due to the bad call was very professional and courteous on the field, to the point of separating his manager from umpire James Joyce after the manager (Leyland) had his "in the face" moment with the ump (part of baseball lore). The umpire (J. Joyce), considered one of the best in the business and admired by all teams, said he felt his heart fall when he looked up on the scoreboard and saw the replay (he's human and humans make mistakes).
All of this is part of the game. This is nothing new and calls similar to this will be made again in the future. The pitcher (Andres Galaragga)accepted the call and was extremely professional and understanding (to the point of forgiving James Joyce when he realized how bad Joyce felt) because he was raised in the true essence of baseball (my opinion as regarding how he learned the game of baseball). Baseball lore was reflected once again in the Tigers-Indians series when Andres Galaragga came out of the dugout in a following game to hand the lineup card to home plate umpire James Joyce. Like a true gentleman and a real baseball player, Galaragga not only presented the lineup card and handshake from Joyce, but gave him a hug as well, delighting the fans and entering another piece of history into baseball lore.
In the meantime, true baseball fans and players need to call, email and fax the offices of Senator Debbie Stabenow, Congressman John Dingell and Governor Jennifer Granholm to stay out of America's game and tend to their real job; the job of representing We, the People, of which they have done a poor job so far. Ask the residents of Michigan, state of one of the highest unemployment rates, sufferer of mass defections of major industries to other states and countries, etc., etc., etc. You get the point; you know the history of what Michigan has suffered as a state. Call, email, and fax these three to stay out of OUR game and do their real game of representing the needs of Michigan.
Baseball does not need politicians to stick their nose in probably the only purest American ideal (baseball) and the real players don't want them getting involved either. The pitcher (Andres Galaragga) who lost out on the perfect game due to the bad call was very professional and courteous on the field, to the point of separating his manager from umpire James Joyce after the manager (Leyland) had his "in the face" moment with the ump (part of baseball lore). The umpire (J. Joyce), considered one of the best in the business and admired by all teams, said he felt his heart fall when he looked up on the scoreboard and saw the replay (he's human and humans make mistakes).
All of this is part of the game. This is nothing new and calls similar to this will be made again in the future. The pitcher (Andres Galaragga)accepted the call and was extremely professional and understanding (to the point of forgiving James Joyce when he realized how bad Joyce felt) because he was raised in the true essence of baseball (my opinion as regarding how he learned the game of baseball). Baseball lore was reflected once again in the Tigers-Indians series when Andres Galaragga came out of the dugout in a following game to hand the lineup card to home plate umpire James Joyce. Like a true gentleman and a real baseball player, Galaragga not only presented the lineup card and handshake from Joyce, but gave him a hug as well, delighting the fans and entering another piece of history into baseball lore.
In the meantime, true baseball fans and players need to call, email and fax the offices of Senator Debbie Stabenow, Congressman John Dingell and Governor Jennifer Granholm to stay out of America's game and tend to their real job; the job of representing We, the People, of which they have done a poor job so far. Ask the residents of Michigan, state of one of the highest unemployment rates, sufferer of mass defections of major industries to other states and countries, etc., etc., etc. You get the point; you know the history of what Michigan has suffered as a state. Call, email, and fax these three to stay out of OUR game and do their real game of representing the needs of Michigan.
Monday, May 31, 2010
OIL DISPERSION OR OIL ELIMINATION??
Bioremediation, using engineered microbes for eliminating oil spills, is completely effective and environmentally safe. This was developed in the mid 1980s, tested under the supervision of the Texas Land and Water Commissioners' offices in a controlled environment and was completely safe and effective. This method uses microbes that were developed to use oil as it's food supply. Once the oil has been ingested, oil is broken down within the microbes and the waste product is CO2 and O2. The controlled tests showed that the microbes degenerate to the same waste products once it's food supply (oil) has been exhausted. This method was used on a large scale during the Galveston, TX oil tanker spill in the late 1990(over 5 million gallons of crude oil was released when the tanker was struck by a barge) and was 100% effective. This product, a powder form containing the microbes, has been used in the industrial field since and the supply of this product is readily available. In my career in the nuclear energy industry, in which I was trained and supervised in Hazardous Material Storage and Hazardous Waste (including oil) Response along with other quals, I can justify that this works. Emails and phone calls have been submitted to the Governors of Louisiana and Mississippi, along with correspondence with the states' Hazardous Waste Response Centers (these centers are required for all states by federal law). I find it completely unusual that nothing has been in newsprint or seen during research where the states (and their Hazardous Waste Response Centers) are considering this method. The following video goes over this method: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VfypUzx1tI&feature=player_embedded . The following link is a scientific journal, which like so many others if you do your own research, validate bioremediation for oil ELIMINATION (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/05/100504142110.htm). So the question is: Do we continue to disperse (dilute) the crude oil where it will still show up underwater and eventually in sea life and on the shores? Do we continue to use booms and buoys, which have been proven to be less than 10% effective in collecting the oil ON THE WATER SURFACE and ineffective for the heavier oily material that is going UNDERWATER? Or do we use a proven method that is readily available today ro ELIMINATE THE OIL ON THE WATER SURFACE AND UNDERWATER? You decide and then demand what you choose to be used on the Gulf Coast shoreline and in the Gulf Coast.
Sunday, May 30, 2010
A PERSONAL MEMORIAL DAY EVENT
A PERSONAL MEMORIAL DAY EVENT
(and something that I never expected)
Yesterday evening (May 29, 2010), I left shift work with my backpack containing 100 U.S.A. flags to be used for a duty that I had sworn myself to perform. When I had ordered the flags earlier, I knew that I would not be at home this weekend but I could fulfill my oath in the area that I work at during this weekend. My personal duty that I had sworn myself to was to visit the local cemetery and place new flags at the gravesites of veterans of the past. For a relatively small cemetery, I found more graves of heroes than one might expect. From World War I to the current war against terrorism (don’t call them “enemy combatants” or I’ll be knocking on your door), the numbers were significant.
At each gravesite, I announced the rank, name and branch of service, thanked them, as a fellow veteran, for the sacrifice of time from their family (and in some cases the sacrifice of life) which they had made to serve our country. I planted a flag by his or her’s tombstone, came to attention and saluted. There was a feeling of pride that slowly grew as I continued on from one grave to the next.
Near the end (I had about 30 flags left), as I was honoring another veteran, I realized that an older woman was standing by. I had noticed her a few minutes earlier as she was arranging flowers and placing a flag at a gravesite (an area I had yet reached). When I finished at this particular grave, I introduced myself as did she. She then asked if she could buy a flag from me, from which I responded “Ma’am, it is an honor to give you one”. She told me that she was doing the same at the grave of her husband, who had passed away two years ago. He was a retired colonel of the United States Army who was involved in the Korean War (don’t call it a “conflict” or I’ll be at your door again) and the Vietnam War. Buried nearby was her friend who was a nurse at a MASH unit during the Vietnam War. She had passed away just three months ago. I accompanied her to her friend’s grave, and as she planted the flag, I honored her friend’s service. With moist eyes, she took me to her husband’s grave. As I stood at attention and began honoring his service, she held my left hand. When I finished, I looked at a grateful woman with warmth in her face and tears in her eyes. Yes, real men do cry and we are proud to admit it.
After a couple of minutes of composure, I knew that she was ready to go. I escorted her to her suburban and told her that I saluted her sacrifice that she had made in honoring her husband’s wishes to serve his country and that I knew that she had lived a fulfilling life with her husband and family. After a grateful “Thank You”, she told me that tomorrow at 11:00, Memorial Day, she was one of the honorees at the traditional laying of the Memorial Wreath in Veterans’ Park here. I look forward to seeing her tomorrow.
Truly, this was a humbling experience of which I will always reflect on for time eternal. After she left, I continued with my honoring of deceased veterans until I had ran out of flags. On the next occasion, I’ll remember to order much more. I had a personal experience with the remaining veterans whom I had no flags for, but maybe I’ll tell that story another time. I say this because I had an enduring moment of reflection which I feel is important for you to hear.
At this cemetery, there were men and women who had fought (and for some, died) in wars that encompassed the 20th century up to today. They had sacrificed time away from their lives and their families to defend our freedom and liberties that were endowed to us over 220 years ago. I could only ask myself what these brave heroes, as they now sit at the right hand of God, were pondering as they looked upon our nation today. Do they wonder why we, as citizens of this great country, have allowed the slow but methodical erosion of our rights? Do they know, as I believe they do, what our country’s future holds for We, the People? I know that they are proud of our current men and women in uniform who are serving and fighting for our country, particularly as they are all now volunteers, Yet, they must be asking how their sacrifices may have been in vain as our rights are slowly being attacked, our leadership in government usurping their powers and violating the limitations endowed upon them by the Constitution, our Constituion slowly being shredded with the passage of another immoral and unconstitutional bill. This is the Constitution which our servicemen and servicewomen vowed to uphold and defend against enemies, foreign and domestic.
Hopefully, our Heavenly Father and our heroes of the past have given their blessings to We, the People, the ones who have opened our eyes to the disgressions which have been occurring for so many years to our Republic, in our endeavors to educate our fellow countrymen and are working towards the ideal to RESTORE OUR REPUBLIC. We, the People owe it to our fallen heroes, our living veterans and our current men and women in uniform to do our part to protect our country, and therefore our Constitution, from enemies, foreign and domestic.
Finally, one might ask why I titled this blog as “A PERSONAL MEMORIAL DAY EVENT” when the actions described occurred two days before Memorial Day. Because tomorrow morning, Memorial Day 2010, I will have the opportunity to meet a real American hero once again; the elderly wife of a career Army officer and a friend of a brave Army nurse.
(and something that I never expected)
Yesterday evening (May 29, 2010), I left shift work with my backpack containing 100 U.S.A. flags to be used for a duty that I had sworn myself to perform. When I had ordered the flags earlier, I knew that I would not be at home this weekend but I could fulfill my oath in the area that I work at during this weekend. My personal duty that I had sworn myself to was to visit the local cemetery and place new flags at the gravesites of veterans of the past. For a relatively small cemetery, I found more graves of heroes than one might expect. From World War I to the current war against terrorism (don’t call them “enemy combatants” or I’ll be knocking on your door), the numbers were significant.
At each gravesite, I announced the rank, name and branch of service, thanked them, as a fellow veteran, for the sacrifice of time from their family (and in some cases the sacrifice of life) which they had made to serve our country. I planted a flag by his or her’s tombstone, came to attention and saluted. There was a feeling of pride that slowly grew as I continued on from one grave to the next.
Near the end (I had about 30 flags left), as I was honoring another veteran, I realized that an older woman was standing by. I had noticed her a few minutes earlier as she was arranging flowers and placing a flag at a gravesite (an area I had yet reached). When I finished at this particular grave, I introduced myself as did she. She then asked if she could buy a flag from me, from which I responded “Ma’am, it is an honor to give you one”. She told me that she was doing the same at the grave of her husband, who had passed away two years ago. He was a retired colonel of the United States Army who was involved in the Korean War (don’t call it a “conflict” or I’ll be at your door again) and the Vietnam War. Buried nearby was her friend who was a nurse at a MASH unit during the Vietnam War. She had passed away just three months ago. I accompanied her to her friend’s grave, and as she planted the flag, I honored her friend’s service. With moist eyes, she took me to her husband’s grave. As I stood at attention and began honoring his service, she held my left hand. When I finished, I looked at a grateful woman with warmth in her face and tears in her eyes. Yes, real men do cry and we are proud to admit it.
After a couple of minutes of composure, I knew that she was ready to go. I escorted her to her suburban and told her that I saluted her sacrifice that she had made in honoring her husband’s wishes to serve his country and that I knew that she had lived a fulfilling life with her husband and family. After a grateful “Thank You”, she told me that tomorrow at 11:00, Memorial Day, she was one of the honorees at the traditional laying of the Memorial Wreath in Veterans’ Park here. I look forward to seeing her tomorrow.
Truly, this was a humbling experience of which I will always reflect on for time eternal. After she left, I continued with my honoring of deceased veterans until I had ran out of flags. On the next occasion, I’ll remember to order much more. I had a personal experience with the remaining veterans whom I had no flags for, but maybe I’ll tell that story another time. I say this because I had an enduring moment of reflection which I feel is important for you to hear.
At this cemetery, there were men and women who had fought (and for some, died) in wars that encompassed the 20th century up to today. They had sacrificed time away from their lives and their families to defend our freedom and liberties that were endowed to us over 220 years ago. I could only ask myself what these brave heroes, as they now sit at the right hand of God, were pondering as they looked upon our nation today. Do they wonder why we, as citizens of this great country, have allowed the slow but methodical erosion of our rights? Do they know, as I believe they do, what our country’s future holds for We, the People? I know that they are proud of our current men and women in uniform who are serving and fighting for our country, particularly as they are all now volunteers, Yet, they must be asking how their sacrifices may have been in vain as our rights are slowly being attacked, our leadership in government usurping their powers and violating the limitations endowed upon them by the Constitution, our Constituion slowly being shredded with the passage of another immoral and unconstitutional bill. This is the Constitution which our servicemen and servicewomen vowed to uphold and defend against enemies, foreign and domestic.
Hopefully, our Heavenly Father and our heroes of the past have given their blessings to We, the People, the ones who have opened our eyes to the disgressions which have been occurring for so many years to our Republic, in our endeavors to educate our fellow countrymen and are working towards the ideal to RESTORE OUR REPUBLIC. We, the People owe it to our fallen heroes, our living veterans and our current men and women in uniform to do our part to protect our country, and therefore our Constitution, from enemies, foreign and domestic.
Finally, one might ask why I titled this blog as “A PERSONAL MEMORIAL DAY EVENT” when the actions described occurred two days before Memorial Day. Because tomorrow morning, Memorial Day 2010, I will have the opportunity to meet a real American hero once again; the elderly wife of a career Army officer and a friend of a brave Army nurse.
Saturday, May 29, 2010
ODE TO OUR HEROES
'Twas the night before Christmas, he lived all alone
In a one bedroom house made of plaster and stone.
I had come down the chimney with presents to give,
And to see just who in this home did live.
I looked all about, a strange sight did I see,
No tinsel, no presents, not even a tree.
No stocking by the mantle, just boots filled with sand,
on the wall hung pictures of far distant lands.
With medals and badges, awards of all kinds,
a sober thought came through my mind.
For this house was different, it was dark and dreary,
I found the house of a soldier, once I could see clearly.
The soldier lay sleeping, silent, alone,
curled upon the floor in this one bedroom home.
The face was so gentle, the room in such disorder,
Not how I pictured a United States soldier.
Was this the hero of whom I just read?
Curled up on a poncho, the floor for a bed?
I realized the families I saw on this night,
owed their lives to these soldiers, who were willing to fight.
Soon round the world the children would play,
And grownups would celebrate a bright Christmas day.
They all enjoyed freedom each month of the year,
Because of the soldiers, like the one lying here.
I couldn't help wonder how many lay alone,
on a cold Christmas Eve, in a land far from home.
The very thought brought a tear to my eye,
I dropped to my knees and started to cry.
The soldier awakened and I heard a rough voice,
"Santa, don't cry, this life is my choice;
I fight for freedom, I don't ask for more,
My life is my God, my country, my Corps."
The soldier rolled over and drifted to sleep,
I couldn't control it, I started to weep.
I kept watch for hours, so silent and still
And we both shivered from the cold night's chill.
I didn't want to leave on that cold, dark night
This Guardian of Honor so willing to fight.
The soldier rolled over, with a voice soft and pure,
whispered, "Carry on, Santa, It's Christmas Day, All is secure."
One look at my watch and I knew he was right
Merry Christmas, my friend, and to all a Good Night!
In a one bedroom house made of plaster and stone.
I had come down the chimney with presents to give,
And to see just who in this home did live.
I looked all about, a strange sight did I see,
No tinsel, no presents, not even a tree.
No stocking by the mantle, just boots filled with sand,
on the wall hung pictures of far distant lands.
With medals and badges, awards of all kinds,
a sober thought came through my mind.
For this house was different, it was dark and dreary,
I found the house of a soldier, once I could see clearly.
The soldier lay sleeping, silent, alone,
curled upon the floor in this one bedroom home.
The face was so gentle, the room in such disorder,
Not how I pictured a United States soldier.
Was this the hero of whom I just read?
Curled up on a poncho, the floor for a bed?
I realized the families I saw on this night,
owed their lives to these soldiers, who were willing to fight.
Soon round the world the children would play,
And grownups would celebrate a bright Christmas day.
They all enjoyed freedom each month of the year,
Because of the soldiers, like the one lying here.
I couldn't help wonder how many lay alone,
on a cold Christmas Eve, in a land far from home.
The very thought brought a tear to my eye,
I dropped to my knees and started to cry.
The soldier awakened and I heard a rough voice,
"Santa, don't cry, this life is my choice;
I fight for freedom, I don't ask for more,
My life is my God, my country, my Corps."
The soldier rolled over and drifted to sleep,
I couldn't control it, I started to weep.
I kept watch for hours, so silent and still
And we both shivered from the cold night's chill.
I didn't want to leave on that cold, dark night
This Guardian of Honor so willing to fight.
The soldier rolled over, with a voice soft and pure,
whispered, "Carry on, Santa, It's Christmas Day, All is secure."
One look at my watch and I knew he was right
Merry Christmas, my friend, and to all a Good Night!
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
FINAL REVIEW OF NEVADA REPUBLICAN SENATE CANDIDATES
Sue Lowden: FACT - Currently serves as a Member of the Board of Directors and Secretary-Treasurer of Archon Corporation, a gaming and investment company (potentially will owe favors to the casino gaming industry if elected, just like Harry Reid does now). FACT - A "professional politician" since 1992, when she served as State Senator until 1996, upon which she was selected as Chairwoman of the Nevada Republican Party. FACT - Sue is on record as donating to the past Reid campaigns , even during her term as state Republican Party Chairwoman. During her term as State Senator, Sue Lowden has been quoted on several occasions by the Las Vegas and Reno newspapers of her support of Harry Reid's efforts to stop construction and use of Yucca Mountain. This displayed Lowden's ignorance, like Harry's, of the safety issues designed into Yucca Mountain, much less the boon to regional employment and businesses. As an engineer in the Radiological Control field, I've worked with commercial nuclear reactors for 18.5 years and now with DOE sites going thru decommissioning and remediation. So I have a firm understanding of the assets of Yucca Mountain, both in waste storage and potential reactor fuel reconstitution which could be sold. Does this sound like a Senator who would look out for the constituents of the state of Nevada in providing jobs? FACT -During a state Republican Party Convention, Chairwoman Lowden halted the convention in the middle of the delegate selection process, and then reconvened later which limited the number of proposed delegates to be submitted, which was a violation of state party convention rules. Can we say narcissitic?
SHARON ANGLE: FACT - Recently endorsed by the Nevada Concerned Citizens, whose Chairman Richard Ziser stated to the Review-Journal that his work to abolish gay marriage rights in Nevada (which I applaud him for) was also designed to ensure that gays would not come to Las Vegas, which would mean less revenue to be collected in LV. Should have kept your mouth shut that time, Richard; Las Vegas' casinos certainly appreciated that statement. So, where does Sharon stand on this in terms of how far she would take the gay marriage issue? She stands by her support of the Federal Marriage Amendment, which is a "pat" answer from anyone who claims to be conservative. FACT -In a town hall meeting last September, Sharon stated that custodial work was for immigrants because Americans will not do it. Can we say "elitist"? It has been logistically proven that over 8 million jobs have been taken over by immigrants (of which it is projected 90% are illegal) from American citizens who already had the jobs. So what is her true position regarding illegal immigration?: She says that, as a member of the state assembly, she authored legislation to safeguard our election process by requiring identification for voting in Nevada. However, she obviously didn't have the political strength to even get it considered for recommendation for committee review. FACT -Sharon Angle is a "professional politician", recently serving in the Nevada Assembly from 1999 to 2005 and then running for U.S. Representative of Nevada's 2nd district in 2006. At what point do We, the People realize that the "professional politicians" are the very culprits who have driven our country to the brink of Socialism, locally, within the state and in our federal government? FACT -In 2003, Angle sponsored legislation guided under the philosophy of Scientology for women's state prisons. The state's response (and rightfully so) was " "At a time when our kids might be going without books and teachers it would be impossible to justify spending money on an unproven massage, sauna and vitamin plan for prisoners. These gimmicky programs undermine successful rehabilitative programs". In 2003, the Nevada state budget was already operating in a deficit and Sharon wanted to spend taxpayers' money on "touchy-feely" programs for prisoners. I'll leave that judgment up to you.
DANNY TARKANIAN: FACT -Danny ran for the Clark County state Senate seat in 2004, only to lose by only 1900 votes in a Democratic swing district. In 2006, Danny ran for the Nevada Secretary of State ( a typical Democratic seat) and only lost by 40,000 votes out of over 560,000 votes cast (7%). As a private businessman and proven to fight against the odds, Danny is running a tight race with Sue Lowden and Sharon Angle for the Republican nominee as U.S. Senate. As compared to his opponents, Danny has stuck to his principles and values and not changed his stance on certain issues (not unlike his competition). Despite the fact that he is NOT a "professional politician", he is in the thick of this race and has led on many polls, including consistently polling as being able to beat Harry Reid in the general election. Danny has ran on his agenda as a Constitutionally-principled, morally ethical citizen and has won the support of many Tea Party-related groups within the state and like-minded citizens of Nevada. FACT -Danny has consistently ran against the Reid agenda, including the amnesty proposal and the Yucca Mountain issue (having realized as a businessman that Yucca Mountain is a boon for employment and benefits for the state). This is in contrast to his Republican opponents, where Sue Lowden proposes using Yucca mountain to develop methods for reducing the waste, while Danny has strongly stated how Yucca Mountain can be used for reducing waste and supporting available technology that is already tested and able to perform this intiative sucessfully; much less Sharon Angle who voted for a resolution in 2005 rejecting Yucca mountain as a dead-end nuclear dump; only to recently revamp her issues to support the use of Yucca Mountain. Sounds a little convenient for Sharon, if not also a bit "wishy-washy". Again, this points out the fact that Danny's stand on issues of importance to the citizens of Nevada and the United States have consistently been firm, fiscally and socially conservative, and has always recognized the need for a Constitutionally-principled, morally ethical legislator in Washington to help We, the People RESTORE OUR REPUBLIC.
SHARON ANGLE: FACT - Recently endorsed by the Nevada Concerned Citizens, whose Chairman Richard Ziser stated to the Review-Journal that his work to abolish gay marriage rights in Nevada (which I applaud him for) was also designed to ensure that gays would not come to Las Vegas, which would mean less revenue to be collected in LV. Should have kept your mouth shut that time, Richard; Las Vegas' casinos certainly appreciated that statement. So, where does Sharon stand on this in terms of how far she would take the gay marriage issue? She stands by her support of the Federal Marriage Amendment, which is a "pat" answer from anyone who claims to be conservative. FACT -In a town hall meeting last September, Sharon stated that custodial work was for immigrants because Americans will not do it. Can we say "elitist"? It has been logistically proven that over 8 million jobs have been taken over by immigrants (of which it is projected 90% are illegal) from American citizens who already had the jobs. So what is her true position regarding illegal immigration?: She says that, as a member of the state assembly, she authored legislation to safeguard our election process by requiring identification for voting in Nevada. However, she obviously didn't have the political strength to even get it considered for recommendation for committee review. FACT -Sharon Angle is a "professional politician", recently serving in the Nevada Assembly from 1999 to 2005 and then running for U.S. Representative of Nevada's 2nd district in 2006. At what point do We, the People realize that the "professional politicians" are the very culprits who have driven our country to the brink of Socialism, locally, within the state and in our federal government? FACT -In 2003, Angle sponsored legislation guided under the philosophy of Scientology for women's state prisons. The state's response (and rightfully so) was " "At a time when our kids might be going without books and teachers it would be impossible to justify spending money on an unproven massage, sauna and vitamin plan for prisoners. These gimmicky programs undermine successful rehabilitative programs". In 2003, the Nevada state budget was already operating in a deficit and Sharon wanted to spend taxpayers' money on "touchy-feely" programs for prisoners. I'll leave that judgment up to you.
DANNY TARKANIAN: FACT -Danny ran for the Clark County state Senate seat in 2004, only to lose by only 1900 votes in a Democratic swing district. In 2006, Danny ran for the Nevada Secretary of State ( a typical Democratic seat) and only lost by 40,000 votes out of over 560,000 votes cast (7%). As a private businessman and proven to fight against the odds, Danny is running a tight race with Sue Lowden and Sharon Angle for the Republican nominee as U.S. Senate. As compared to his opponents, Danny has stuck to his principles and values and not changed his stance on certain issues (not unlike his competition). Despite the fact that he is NOT a "professional politician", he is in the thick of this race and has led on many polls, including consistently polling as being able to beat Harry Reid in the general election. Danny has ran on his agenda as a Constitutionally-principled, morally ethical citizen and has won the support of many Tea Party-related groups within the state and like-minded citizens of Nevada. FACT -Danny has consistently ran against the Reid agenda, including the amnesty proposal and the Yucca Mountain issue (having realized as a businessman that Yucca Mountain is a boon for employment and benefits for the state). This is in contrast to his Republican opponents, where Sue Lowden proposes using Yucca mountain to develop methods for reducing the waste, while Danny has strongly stated how Yucca Mountain can be used for reducing waste and supporting available technology that is already tested and able to perform this intiative sucessfully; much less Sharon Angle who voted for a resolution in 2005 rejecting Yucca mountain as a dead-end nuclear dump; only to recently revamp her issues to support the use of Yucca Mountain. Sounds a little convenient for Sharon, if not also a bit "wishy-washy". Again, this points out the fact that Danny's stand on issues of importance to the citizens of Nevada and the United States have consistently been firm, fiscally and socially conservative, and has always recognized the need for a Constitutionally-principled, morally ethical legislator in Washington to help We, the People RESTORE OUR REPUBLIC.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
