Guns in the hands of madmen, by who's definition?

Frankly I just don't get it......

America is currently embroiled in a nationwide debate over gun control, pro gun, anti gun, both sides are polarized in their beliefs of what should or shouldn't be done to protect the innocent. Although the two sides are generally light years apart in their proposed solutions they do share one thing in common, a underlying opinion that things must change and the innocent must be protected from the whims of gun toting madmen.

On this issue everyone has an opinion, the Right tends to lean towards protecting the 2nd amendment, while the Left favors (as usual) legislating away the rights of law abiding citizens in the belief that this will have an impact on the occasional madmen. While the Right refers to the Bill of Rights and crime statistics, the Left has the Vice President doing a road show, the President holding press conferences with children, and gun violence "celebrities" such as Gabby Gifford's forming groups and making the speaking circuit. In fact Mr Obama isn't waiting for the normal political course of actions to take place on this issue, he simply issued 23 Executive orders as part of his campaign to disarm the American people. Not only do these Executive orders address actual gun control but in some cases cross into areas that erode civil liberties, case in point turning doctors into informants by ordering them to “ask patients about their guns” and reporting on them.

Whether you consider the above actions right or wrong, it is very apparent that those currently in power see curbing gun violence and it's impact on innocents the political "flavor of the month" with the American people. Now please don't take me wrong, I am certain that many of those speaking out for change do so sincerely and out of passion, and I myself believe that something needs to be done to curb the violence perpetrated by gun toting madmen. However, my opinions on the solutions to this problem are best saved for another time.

What I don't get is this.....

A better perspective on government fiscal stupidity

The fuse is burning

Like most sensible people I often worry where the continuous overspending by all levels of government will eventually lead. Ongoing spending by Municipal, Provincial, or Federal governments seems to indicate a total lack of common sense or any fiscal responsibility on the part of our elected officials. It's almost like they live on a different world where money literally grows on trees and they function using a system of math where two plus two does not equal four. The alternative would be that they are simply stupid or incredibly naive about managing money.

Now while our Canadian Federal or Provincial governments are not by any stretch of the imagination "fiscally responsible" they do not even come close to displaying the free spending mindset and the reckless fiscal abandonment that our American neighbors to the south are engaging in, particularly at the Federal level in Washington. Watching their antics as they battle over adjusting personal tax rates higher, debt ceiling increases, and implementing spending cuts, would be comical if it was not so serious that the outcome has the ability to negatively impact the entire global economy. Even a simpleton knows that you can not continuously spend more than you take in, unfortunately this basic fact seems to be lost on America's elected officials especially the guy currently serving as President.

So if a simpleton can understand the concept, why can't supposedly bright elected officials?
Here's what I think........

Political Correctness, Will it ever come to an end?

Just when I think I have heard it all, along comes another example of just how ridiculous the whole issue of being politically correct has become. Maybe I am simply more aware of it because we are heading towards Christmas and the confusion is rampant, Merry Christmas or Happy Holidays... no one is quite sure. Even Santa seems confused, how many times does old St Nick appear in an advertisement wishing everyone "Happy Holidays"' pretty sad when even he is afraid to use the "C" word in public.

But enough about the confusion surrounding "Christmas" (oops, old habits die hard). What got my head spinning this week has absolutely nothing to do with the political correctness surrounding this particular time of year. It appears we have a new word that has been added to the list that we are not allowed to use in polite company. Now this particular word is one that many of us grew up hearing on a regular basis, one that we all took for granted, and one to my knowledge carried no animosity or ill will with it. Even as a very young boy I commonly used the world to refer to a popular sports and even a particular model of sports car.

At this point you are undoubtedly wondering what this taboo word is, well for now lets just call it the "M" word as I am now finding myself having difficulty even using this now demeaning term in my blog, "oh the humanity".

Another Term, Same Song and Dance Routine

How often have you heard a politician speaking to a crowd and shook your head in disbelief, knowing full well that the individual addressing the group was pandering to the gathered with every word. As you listened you realized that the speech being given was absolutely no reflection of reality, it was simply intended to appease the individuals in the room who stared through glazed eyes, listened intently, and virtually hung on every syllable as they were spoon fed their daily dose of propaganda. Typically this type of performance is presented by politicians who have a captive audience, one that will not ask too many questions, and generally in their ignorance of facts will bring the house down with applause.

Such a speech was given Monday, December 10 by a politician that most have us have come to think of as a master of deception, the King of pandering, and a man so out of touch with reality that nothing he says surprises those of us who keep ourselves informed. This man stumbles around from speech to speech manipulating the facts depending on the audience. So, what was said and who said it?

The sky is not falling Chicken Little

In the days since the Presidential election the media has been rife with opinions on how and why Mitt Romney took second place. Commentators, talk show hosts, or political pundits all have a wealth of suggestions about what changes the Republican party must undertake to win the Whitehouse in 2016. Most of these suggestions tend to cover the same ground, the  Republicans need to get in touch with and win over the Latino vote,  single woman, African Americans, soften their stance on different issues, or learn to sling mud like their opponents.

This election is lost and there's no changing that fact. However, what a lot of this opinionated discussion overlooks is the fact that what America really needs at this moment in history and for the foreseeable future is a President who has truly bought into and believes in a Conservative platform , who places the interests of the nation before their own or their parties. An individual that fully understands the precarious financial position the nation is in and the dire consequences that it is facing due to a succession of free spending fiscally irresponsible federal governments. What America definitely does not need is a another leader who caters to the whims of every ethnic or special interest group as a means of winning their support and the Oval Office. Unfortunately for the last four years and the next four, America has a guy in the Oval Office with feet of clay whose only goal in life is retaining power long enough to see his personal agenda reshape the nation. As a means to do so Mr Obama will promise and do whatever it takes, something he learnt well in the Chicago political arena. He and his party proved themselves the masters of falsehoods and mudslinging over the last six months.And please don't get me started on his promise of open government and transparency..... sheesh. America has never experienced a more clandestine administration, two great examples are the "Fast and Furious" and "Benghazi" fiascoes. These guys would shame even Tricky Dick Nixon

Was Mitt Romney the man America truly needed in the Oval Office?  Probably not, but on the flip side he was a lot closer than the one they have.

Does such an individual exist and if they do is there even a remote chance they would survive the primaries or have even the faintest hope of becoming President? The primaries would certainly be a challenge as the upper echelon of the GOP are not exactly risk takers when it comes to their candidates and certainly respect a pecking order. What the GOP needs is another Ronald Reagan type individual, someone that stands on his principals knowing full well that in doing so he is bucking the "old boys club" in the party. However the electorate might very well reject just such an individual on the basis they simply have become very used to the idea that government provides everything and nurse maids them from cradle to grave. Americans might not be prepared for or even desire a more self-reliant existence, many of them might be very comfortable in their nanny state stupor.

My personal opinion is that the Right must go back to it's conservative values, and I am not referring to issues surrounding abortion or same sex marriage, these are societal and religious ones, not governmental ones. The conservative values I speak of are those of smaller government and sound fiscal management. The country is heading over the fiscal cliff, yes they may postpone it this year, but with current spending practices it is inevitable. Until Washington begins practicing sound fiscal management, and more importantly until the Oval Office has an individual in it that understands their job is to lead the country, not kowtow to every group that promises support, the country will remain on the same Greece like path. A true leader understands that at times they must make unpopular decisions, ones that look further forward than the next election. A true leader does not check the direction the political wind is blowing every morning upon getting out of bed (frankly I am surprised Obama has not had a weather vane installed atop the Whitehouse).

What the GOP does not need under any circumstances is a candidate that will cater to passing whims of this group or that group in hopes of currying favour and winning the Oval Office.  The GOP can not "outbid" the Democrats with promises, nor should they. After all, if they play that game we will simple see two versions of the Democrat party running for the Presidency in 2016 and the ultimate loser will be the American citizenry and the rest of the world.

On a last note, the good news is that Obama is now in his Legacy term of office, more to the point is the fact that after the first two years or so he will effectively become a lame duck President as Democrat politicians try to put some distance between themselves and him prior to the next election. So hopefully he won't cause much havoc or do too much more harm to the nation and the world.

No relief for democracy on the horizon.....

Well, after spending most of the evening watching the Fox News network coverage of the Presidential election, I am ready for bed. Now barring a miracle akin to parting the Red Sea it would appear that I will awake to four more years of watching the destruction of America under the hand of President Obama.

However, the reality is that as a Canadian I am by default simply a third part observer. Unfortunately, even as a third party observer it saddens me greatly to see the once shining example of democracy, liberty, and free enterprise, so readily and willingly give up the very things that their forefathers shed blood to win. Instead, as a nation it appears they prefer the embrace of an all powerful centralist government that dictates every aspect of its citizens lives, much like the one they fought to escape from over two centuries ago. The vast portion of Americas citizenry have sold their freedom for a handful of beads, much like Native Americans traded away Manhattan in the 17th century. Only the currency has changed, in today's world the beads have been replaced with government entitlement programs.

While it would be easy to simply watch our southern neighbours readily chase after socialism,  a path that for many years it appeared that Canada was all to eager to embrace ourselves, the repercussions of where Americas path is leading are frightening. Unfortunately the failure or success of America has a ripple affect on all nations to some degree, and to Canada in particular. America bears a responsibility to the rest of the world as for so many years they have intentionally entrenched themselves in the very economic fabric of the world economy. They are now to a great degree a large portion of the very foundation of world economics, think about it, is there anymore recognized or accepted currency worldwide than the American greenback? Is there any single nation with greater power to consume? America's credit rating is downgraded and world stock markets fall.

Just a mere 10 years ago if I had suggested that between our two countries that Canada had the more fiscally responsible Federal government, I suspect that someone would have had me committed. Now in the present, I would simply be stating a fact. How has so much changed in just one decade?

I suspect it lies with the fact that after a flirtation with a somewhat socialist agenda we came to the conclusion that it simply was a fantasy that could not exist in the real world if we wanted a prosperous future. A future that would provide the greatest opportunities for the most people. This is something that I imagine America too will discover with time, lets just all hope that hey don't wait too long.

In the meantime if the past four years is any indication of what the next four will hold, President Obama will likely continue to attempt to spend America into prosperity and out of debt. Who knows, maybe over the next four years the man will actually propose a budget that will garner a single vote from members of his own party in the Senate ( unlike his 2011 budget that was voted down by Senate Democrats 97-0). At least that would be a start, a weak one but a start none the less.

Stoking the fires of resentment

With the first snow on the ground I suspect I will be a bit more housebound and spending more time "putting my thoughts to paper", as they say. So here I go, for those of you who have any interest read on.

With the race for the Oval Office in its last days we can expect to see the candidates talking themselves up and talking their opponents down. Now to be very honest I have no problem with a political candidate preying on the weaknesses and and character flaws of their opponents. After all, as Harry S Truman would say, "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen".

However where I have a problem is when candidates intentionally stretch the truth, creatively edit the facts, or simply assume that a false message delivered in the right tone will fool us simpletons into believing what they want us to believe. Yes, I know that it is common practice, but the reality is that at times it is taken to the point that it creates undeserved animosity amongst the electorate toward a particular candidate. Animosity to the point where a candidate's character or personal integrity are called into question based on nothing more than "political spin".

You tell them Harry

One case in point is the efforts that have been made by Democrat Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid to besmirch Mitt Romney's character, above and beyond the point of common decency.

Really Harry is this the best you can do? " I heard Mitt Romney has not paid tax in the last ten years". The follow up from Harry was even better "It falls upon Governor Romney to prove otherwise by releasing his tax returns"

Frankly if I was a resident of Nevada I would be ashamed to admit that Mr Reid represented my state. This is the same guy that a quick search on the Internet will find hundreds of articles detailing how Harry has somehow managed to increase his net worth from a "paltry" $1.2 Million to the tune of about $11 million during the time he has been a public servant (public servants must be paid very well in Nevada). Interesting as well is the fact that while  Harry was claiming that Mr Romney could  disprove the allegations of tax evasion simply by making his tax returns public, good old Harry has refused all requests to make his own tax records open to the public. I guess Harry doesn't buy into the old adage, "what's good for the goose, is what's good for the gander".

What's really troubling about this is that it is the lowest form of mud slinging and was allowed under the watchful eyes of the President. All Mr Obama had to do to put an end to it was make one phone call. It speaks volumes about the man that he allowed this (and many would say "encouraged "it ) under his watch. I imagine what we have witnessed here is some of the tricks that Mr Obama learned during his tenure in Chicago style politics, not very Presidential to say the least. But on the other hand , pretty much what one would expect from a man who refers to his opponent as a "bulls^^^ter" in a televised interview. Just the kind of guy a nation wants on the world stage.

Renovating the den, while he kitchen is on fire. Part 2

In Part One I discussed how our governments in both Canada and the United

States for all intents and purposes are simply ignoring the massive debts they are incurring. Sure, once in a while they pay lip service to the debt, but generally it is placed on the back burner. I detailed my thoughts on this in Part One, and since that time I have seen some classic examples of our elected officials focusing on minor issues and treating them as if they had the potential to change civilization.

Here is a real doozie!

It appears that both the American Congress and Senate are up in arms over the fact that the uniforms of the U.S. Olympic Team were manufactured in China. In fact a bill was introduced in the Senate that if passed, would require the US Olympic Committee (USOC) to outfit Olympic athletes in ceremonial uniforms "sewn or assembled in the United States."

Let me get this straight, in the midst of what could possibly be considered the second worst financial crisis in American history (a close second right after the Great Depression) and at a time when government spending is spiraling out of control, it appears that the biggest concern of these elected officials is who did the sewing for Team USA! One can only imagine what this is costing the American taxpayer to have these individuals sit around and discuss the rag trade. I'm not making this up, trust me I am not that creative to imagine such stupidity. Sure, I realize that the uniforms are just a symptom of the bigger problem, the outsourcing of American jobs. However, that horse has left the barn!

They certainly make a fine pair......

As the American Presidential election gets closer we can expect hear a lot more about the candidates, both the incumbent President Obama and his opponent Republican Mitt Romney. I have a suspicion that this race is going to get down and dirty and will be very "in your face" as both parties have access to large amounts of cash for media buys.

Obama will undoubtedly take credit for real and perceived success during his first term in office and will play every card available to him to avoid too much attention being focused on his real legacy and less than desirable achievements that will linger for decades.

Already we are seeing this with the best example being the recent one year anniversary of Bin Laden's death. In retelling this story the only thing that Obummer and his spin doctors haven't claimed is that the President led the charge himself on Bin Ladens compound all the while fighting side by side with Chuck Norris! Undoubtedly that will come to light next week,  or maybe Mr Norris has more common sense than to be associated with a sinking ship. Hey, even Chucks worst movie made more sense than what is taking place in the White House.

In the meantime this election is shaping up to be one of mud slinging and accusations that will certainly lower the bar even further for American politics. Is that even possible?

One thing for sure is it will be interesting in a comical kind of way, just last week VP Biden while speaking on "Meet The Press" referred to President Romney on a number of occasions ( does this guy know something the rest of us don't?) and addressed his own boss , President Obemmer as President Clinton (maybe something is taking place in the privacy of the oval office that causes him to confuse the two? Interns take cover!). Mind you it is not surprising that Biden has a problem remembering who he reports to, after all his boss Sir Obummer forgot that he reports to the American taxpayer one day after he stepped into the Oval Office. Whatever the case, its too bad that Biden isn't the one spending all of his time on the golf course, at least that might keep him out of the public eye. On the other hand for those of us who would like this to be Obummers one and only term, the VP is "the gift that just keeps on giving", even the Republicans couldn't make up some of the stuff that comes out of Joe's mouth, yes it really is a "BFD". But the reality is the two (Biden and Obummer) seem perfectly suited for one another, you know like Stan and Ollie, or Abbot and Costello.

What amazes me is that America is past the point of heading for the cliff financially, they are standing on the precipice and yet no one in power seems to be able to realize this or take a position to resolve the situation. At every level of government they all seem far too busy and focused on bashing the other guy to actually get to work and fix the problem.

On the other hand maybe the problem is so big that what America really needs is a little slapstick humor from it's leaders, in that case they are certainly being well served.