Saturday, October 28, 2006

Stop the Water boarding Reports!

ENOUGH ALREADY WITH THE WATER BOARDING REPORTS!!!

We are citizens of the United States of America.
We would like to be left in peace and reach out to others who ask for help
Sometimes this makes problems for us and we get involved where it is not appreciated.
But when we do not help enough we are criticized for not helping enough.

We support the United Nations as a moderating and peace keeping forum. When the United Nations takes a position but then does not enforce the position we have taken alternate action, for the benefit of peace and prosperity of the world.

When we take action we try to do it in a manner that causes the least amount of harm and suffering to innocent civilians. We have made mistakes and are trying to overcome them.

We could use our powerful weapons to destroy our enemies but this would kill millions of innocent people. Our brave citizens volunteer to fight on the ground to try to attack just the enemy. But the terrorist enemy hides behind civilians and coerces them into killing themselves in an attempt to fight us. They are cowards and refuse to meet us on a battle field because they know they cannot win. So they hide behind children and then complain when a child is hurt in battle. They have caused the death, not the USA. They do not wear a uniform or identify with a known movement and therefore are not members of the Geneva Accord and do not qualify for its protection. They do not recognize the Accord when they torture us or citizens or warriors of other nations.

Whenever possible we take prisoners and take care of them as citizens of the world rather than killing them which would be cruel. Sometimes our own fighters die trying to protect the enemy fighters.
In order to harm fewer civilians we have taken action to obtain information from these terrorists. The press and media want to know exactly what we do to learn information. When the press publishes this information our enemies practice techniques to help their members resist giving information. This action can result in the unwanted death of innocent or mislead civilians.

The terrorists have vowed to destroy us or use us as their tools.

Every member of the press and media must ask themselves these questions:
Do you want to cause the United States to lose this war and subject your family and your children to be placed in the hands of terrorists who will torture or slaughter all of you?

Your actions are going to kill many innocent people unless you change your goals.
In fact, right now, you are giving an incentive to our defenders to “Take no Prisoners”.

Because of your actions and beliefs, more people are going to die.

A sad veteran, Grampa Stew

Thursday, October 26, 2006

Bush, Fox and Stem Cells

While reviewing the controversy over stem cell research let us not forget a couple of items.
There are no restrictions against stem cell research.
Bush was the first president to allow government funds to sponsor stem cell research.
Government funding is required because private funding is limited due to the limited success with the research.
The only limitations imposed have been placed on the extent of government involvement and sponsorship as an attempt is made to represent the will of the people.
Everyone will support research with any significant hope of success to cure these terrible diseases.
The major successes in disease curing or prevention have been where the body has been involved.
If you believe in creation then you know you have to search for the system designed by the creator to cure these diseases.
We must search together, help one another and cooperate with each other.
We must be tolerant of those who represent the public and do their bidding.
Thank you.

Technorati Profile

Wednesday, October 18, 2006

ADJUSTING STRATEGY FOR THE WAR IN IRAQ.

I must admit that I am not big on my local newspaper. The code of ethics of the Newspaper Editors group is to give all facts about a story which would mean if different people have different opinions as to what is happening all sides should be presented.
Our founding fathers did not want us to be restricted to the news.
However, like many newspapers our local paper gives only the side of the news that meets its own opinion. We are often denied many facts.

I was interested in a story submitted recently by a former professor of international politics and retired State Department Official who lives locally and submitted a story to our local paper. (The professor is Raymond Platig, PhD)

Supporters of the President have not been pushing changes while opponents have used the status quo as a talking point. I have placed faith in the President and Rumsfeld but I recognize a shift and possible interest in exploring options.

He gave an explanation of three possible options for Iraq based on the current conditions influenced by the sectarian activity.
1. Reposition and possibly increase U.S Troops.
2. A Diplomatic Offensive.
3. Exercise sovereign power in Iraq.
These are worthy options for consideration and discussion and I encourage you to read the original article and voice your opinion. You will find this article at:
http://www.news-journalonline.com/NewsJournalOnline/Opinion/Editorials/opnOPN85101306.htm

I had prepared a possible solution to this and the Iran problem but it is more flamboyant than and not as sophisticated as Dr. Platig’s paper.

Find the article at:
http://divinebullet.blogspot.com/2006/08/what-would-teddy-do.html

I find John Kerry’s comments today surprising. There are different religious groups in Iraq fighting for power. Kerry says we should not promise long term support and indicate an early pull out. This action would just add to the mess with the warring factions just waiting for us to leave so the strongest can take over. The Bush policy lets them know their struggle will not be tolerated and they need to work together for the good of all the citizens and then we can leave.
The civil bickering does damage our patience and some penalties might be considered. The professor’s thoughts about exercising sovereign power are tempting.

Thursday, October 12, 2006

THERAPY FOR THOSE WHO WILL NOT VOTE THIS TIME.

Okay, you are upset and have decided not to vote this year as a protest to those in power. Sort of a non-power display.

I want you to know that I will not give up. I intend to vote. In fact I am giving my pledge to you that I will be there.

My family, as I have constantly reminded you has been there since the founding of the Republican Party. We have seen many failures and most of them did not live to see the party have control of both houses of congress, the presidency and have a big influence on the judicial branch. Until this current condition the opposition always had enough control to block a strong Republican influence.

Sure, I am upset by the actions of various members and the failures that have happened. But I do not want to give up. Hot shots come and go, but it is the plodders who keep plodding away and eventually get the job done. Just think about all of the Mom’s and Dad’s who sacrifice so much to send their children to college, working to give them a better life. So many individuals keep plodding away and it adds to the success of our country and gives it renewed strength.

I PLEDGE TO YOU:

I will vote and I will encourage as many of my friends as possible to vote.
I will not be swayed by failures that can be corrected. I will push on and work to correct the problems and change those who fail to meet the goals of our party.
I will work for the high ideals of my party. I want less government and more self responsibility.
I will work to help individuals succeed because it is the entrepreneur who gives our country its strength. This includes having a favorable business and investment atmosphere
I will not allow the main stream media to corrupt my outlook. I will not accept poll results based on the influence of the MSM. I will seek the truth.
I will not stop plodding because of some setbacks, instead I will continue to work against those impediments and overcome them.
I pledge to you that I will keep plodding along until we win.
I pledge to you that I will vote.
Please join me.

Saturday, October 07, 2006

WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE DONE ABOUT FOLEY?

Because we are doing a what if (?) think about if you are an executive in a mid size corporation and one of your department heads sends some emails to clients or employees similar to the first emails disclosed sent by Foley.

These emails were suggestive but none were forward about sex like the messages recently released (but went back a couple of years).

So you are an executive and you want to do something about this person who sent out questionable emails. What you do is call your personnel manager or head of human resources as they are called now. Because of the present laws you have to be careful that you follow the procedures to prevent you from losing the company in a law suit.

Not surprisingly your HR people tell you it is probably better not do anything except keep your eyes open for more evidence. What you have are some comments from someone that seemed to be overly friendly and there were rumors of him possibly being gay.
Therefore, if you attacked him for his comments you would be guilty of restricting his rights to free speech. If you bring up a rumor that he might be gay you are guilty of discrimination. Therefore, the professionals and your lawyers are going to tell you not to do anything or you are going to end up in court.

This same procedure was probably considered or followed in the halls of congress. After all, these are the people who wrote the laws and confirmed the judges of SCOTUS who interpret them. They must have had these considerations. I do have some unconfirmed buzz that this is exactly what happened. The implication is that former appointments to the court have it leaning toward the rights issues very heavily and rulings are blocking many corrections in human behavior. Foley will be supported in his right to free speech to the Pages except in the most recent and more explicit text messages that have been revealed.

The messages that recently were revealed are more suggestive and more action could no doubt have been allowed. However, the press disclosed the messages before they were taken to the leadership. Emails are preserved when you turn off your computer. However, text messages disappear unless they are saved. One wonders why a message that is so objectionable was actually saved. Was Foley being baited? Were plans under way to set him up? Or was this a reasonable effort to disclose what Foley is like? If so, then the person or group that withheld these messages until just before the election are guilty of leaving young Pages at risk longer than necessary and are as guilty as Foley.

None of the charges are about protecting the Pages or doing what is right. There are no cries for reform, standards of treatment or education of congress. All we have are charges against the leadership and a request to resign. If Hastert did resign his opposition would make headlines about his weakness and that he had to resign. If he does not resign they will make headlines about him not accepting responsibility and resigning. It is a no win situation for the Republicans.

But it is not the end of the election. At my age I have been through this many times and always know these neat tricks being performed will backfire. The Democrats are elated and confidant. This will take the pressure off many to endure the inconvenience of voting because many will figure it is going to be such a slaughter that their vote will not be missed. The Republicans are worried and energized and will push to get as many votes as they can. The polls are all based on likely voters. It is the actual turn out that will determine the outcome and I am predicting it will be closer than you think.

I would suggest the Republicans should follow a different course of action. They should be critical of the Democrats for setting up a system that protected Foleys rights to verbally intimidate the young people. Republicans must point out the failure of Democrats to seek reforms to protect Pages such as a code of ethics for the treatment of them by the congressional members and an advocate where Pages may discuss any item making them uncomfortable without placing them at risk for dismissal. Show instead that the Democrats are only interested in taking control of the purse strings for their own benefit.

Thursday, October 05, 2006

.
.
.
CAN WE IMPROVE CONGRESS OR JUST BASH IT?

There always seems to be something about the hallowed halls of congress that disturbs us. We blame everything on the President but congress has a lower approval rating than he does.

I am most concerned with the way the members of congress raise money to finance their campaigns and have been outspoken about it in my blogs.

If we can seriously do anything about the problem we must study it and understand it. This week Bruce Bartlett wrote a very educational article for Townhall.com titled “Evolving democracy” and it explains the background of congress from the intent of the founding fathers up through current changes. It is an easy short read that I really enjoyed and if you have interest in the government you will want to look this over. Go here: Evolving Democracy

If you start reading previous postings of Mr. Bartlett you will find him very interesting. He also writes for the Washington Times and is an author. He is a conservative, he understands what he believes in and he is dedicated to his cause. I have mentioned before that my great grandfather was a member of the grass roots movement that founded the Republican Party for the primary purpose of ending slavery. We are a large party and try to appeal to enough voters to gain influence and often must soften our conservative ideals to at least slow down the opposition. Sometimes our thinking gets cloudy and Mr. Bartlett can always be counted on to help us think through and clarify conservative objectives. We need Mr. Bartlett and must support and encourage him.