TOPIC: Re: Any truth to the rumor...

<br />Now a real challenge would be to show an actual honest politician who *gasp* really does know what he/she is doing and actually gives a flying **** about the people who live here!  Not that I've grown bitter or anything...<br />

<br /><br />And I'd be showing you someone who would never get elected anywhere.

Personally, I think military service is a HUGE plus for a president...<br /><br />I want someone in office that has been in the military and understands that element of our country.

It used to be. Not anymore.<br /><br />Ever seen those stats for the % of congressmen and senators who have had military service? It's been declining like crazy.<br /><br />Only about 10 percent of the members elected to Congress for the first time this year (2096) are military veterans, according to a survey by the Military Officers Association of America. In all, only about one in four members of the new Congress will have served in the military -- down from half in 1991 and three-quarters a decade earlier. <br /><br />

<br />It used to be. Not anymore.<br /><br />Ever seen those stats for the % of congressmen and senators who have had military service? It's been declining like crazy.<br /><br />Only about 10 percent of the members elected to Congress for the first time this year (2096) are military veterans, according to a survey by the Military Officers Association of America. In all, only about one in four members of the new Congress will have served in the military -- down from half in 1991 and three-quarters a decade earlier. <br /><br /><br />

<br /><br />that's largely due to the fact that most folks with enough money to become a politician, chose to avoid military service.  I remember VERY few rich folks from when I was in.

That said - who wants a rich president in office? 

I don't want to be a politician.  I just want to be the General Manager of the Universe--my own universe.  I want politicians to start staying within the confines of a strict interpretation of the Constitution.  I think it is the responsibility of every individual to find their own personal contribution to improve our society.  When politicians and government strip that ability from me and force me to participate in their definition of what is good for society, they steal my freedom; they steal my dreams, they steal my humantity.  I try to stay low key about this, but I'm just about to blow up with a government that is trying to limit my freedom.  Percentage wise of salary, I would bet my house that I have given more to charities than anyone in the administration and probably more than 90% of Congress.  I choose to do that.  No one forces me, but when "they" meaning our wonderful government decides that I am "too" rich, so they can take more and decide better than me who deserves it (mostly their cronies and buddies or voters who will keep them in office--pork and the crap that goes with it), I get pissed.  I will now forgo contributions to the Rescue Mission, homless shelters, Katrina and tsunami type disasters, hospital, cancer society, March of Dimes, universities, on and on.  This administration and the previous administration threatens everything that has built me as a man.  And yet Obama is given the Nobel "Peace?" prize for doing nothing.  His policies give me no peace.<br /><br />They have already floated the trial balloon of no longer giving tax exemptions for charitable contributions.  Increasing my taxes and the taxes on our company will result in devastating effects on our employees.  Off the top--every one of our 85 employees are paid well with good benefits and receive the minimum of a $1,000.00 bonus (and some a lot more because of longevity) every November--been that way for almost 45 years--that will be gone.  As soon as there is government health care--ours will be phased out (which is very good care) and the government care will commence.  We are off 25% in sales this year so I am going to begin to lay off probably at least 20% of our employees.  This kills me, but the Democratically controlled state of Oregon just raised state taxes on business.  Can't afford it.  Time to cut.  There is a reason why Oregon has been second in the nation in unemployment.  A lot of "rich" people I know are retiring and closing their small businesses--just not worth it anymore.  You are bringing a lot of "Peace?" to our country Mr. Obama.<br /><br />Sadly the much of the general population of the US now craves only security.  They prefer to be birds in a cage, where a "kindly" keeper feeds them and cares for them.  No thank you.  I want to see the tree tops.  I want to soar on the wind in the mountains or over the cliffs of the sea.  Is there a chance I could fail?  Of course.  But the grand secret is that if you persist and keep flying, you become stronger and stronger and can weather almost all circumstances.  And if and when you join with a like minded flock, a self sufficient community develops.  I look at that as early America when people survived not because of government programs, but because the relied on their own skills, talents, and persistence, and a community that actually cared about one another.  I'm sick to death of politicians (Democrats and Republicans) and government officials who only care about segments of society, special interest groups, and phony "needs" that can "only" be addressed by the government, which in reality are only addressed to build, strenthen, or bribe a base of voters.  The executive administration and the legislative branch have become ego driven excuses for prostitutes.  And much of the judiciary has become rubber stamps interested only in political agendas.<br /><br />I'm reminded of a parakeet we had when I was young.  He got out of his cage, and we couldn't catch him.  My mother said to just keep him flying and not let him rest.  In about two minutes he was on the floor, helplessly panting--easy to catch and return to his cage.  I contrast that with one of the first great marathon runners from Africa--Kip Kieno (I think)--who trained by chasing down wild birds for dinner--same concept as my parakeet, but he would have to run for miles.  He would pick a bird and start to chase it.  The bird would fly and then land and rest until he caught up, and it would fly again until he caught up.  Over and over for miles.  Freedom in the wild had developed a strong bird with endurance, and the man who had to run to catch his dinner grew into an Olympic champion--not an award given by a committee because someone hopefully will do something.  What a travesty.<br /><br />Sorry for the rant.  Just very frustrated today trying to decide when to begin the layoffs.

That said - who wants a rich president in office?

<br /><br />Or rich congressmen or senators?  Officially, I want them all voted out--every incumbent voted out--Democrat or Republican.  Nobody we could elect could do any worse.  They need to go to Washington with the mandate that the first bill passed and signed will be term limits for congress and the senate--no more career politicians.  Period.  And if they don't pass that bill they are voted out until a congress does pass it.

Term limits are a terrible, terrible idea.  We already have them - they are called elections.  When we find people with the ability and personality to do the job, whether they are a Kennedy or a McCain, they need the time to learn how to do the job.  If term limits were a good idea, the Founding Fathers would have included them in the Constitution - they were considered and wisely rejected.

Not putting term limits to allow a person to "learn how to do the job" works too well.  The fallacy is that these politicians would work for their constituents altruistically.  In the end, they learn the ins and outs of how to enrich themselves and their supporters, which consequently will allow them to put more effort in getting reelected.  <br /><br />Sadly, the majority of our voters are not as well educated as we wish them to be.  <br /><br />Heck, some of the educated ones will follow lockstep to their chosen party no matter if their policy/platform is ridiculous or dangerous.<br /><br />The put up or shut up philosophy to challenge us to run for office is truly flawed, because the two main parties would rather they have well heeled lap dogs in office rather than those with radical views.

Term limits are a terrible, terrible idea.  We already have them - they are called elections.  When we find people with the ability and personality to do the job, whether they are a Kennedy or a McCain, they need the time to learn how to do the job.  If term limits were a good idea, the Founding Fathers would have included them in the Constitution - they were considered and wisely rejected.

<br /><br />So I suppose you are in favor of getting rid of term limits for the presidency so Obama can learn to do the job.  There have been good amendments to the Constitution for things the Founding Fathers did not foresee.  I don't think they imagined the corruption of political machines like the Daley machine in Chicago, or Taminy (sp?) Hall in New York.  I don't think they saw big business buying votes with lobbyists or unions strong arming member for votes.  I don't think they saw liberal and conservative news medias that absolutely crucify good candidates because they had a traffic ticket in high school.  I don't think they saw politicians who would sell their souls and votes for booze, women, or $100,000.00 in their freezer.<br /><br />Yes, they are called elections.  They are bought and sold every 2 to 4 years.  Any one who doesn't see that on both sides of the political spectrum is asleep.  All you have to do is ask Acorn how Mickey and Minnie Mouse voted.

Mickey and Minnie Mouse did not vote.  Acorn is a legitimate community organization that had some bad employees/volunteers.  Registering a fake person/name is not the same as voter fraud until Mr. "Mickey Mouse" actually tries to cast a ballot.<br /><br />As far as the 22nd Amendment is concerned, I'd be a lot less worried about a third Obama term than I would have been about the disaster a third GWB term world have been.  But I don't have a problem with it - I would have been against it at the time, b/c I think people should be free to vote for the candidate they want, but it was ratified and that is that.<br /><br />Tammany<br />

We need all the sleepers in our society to wake up and vote, while we still have a free country to enjoy. I have often said (half tongue in cheek but less so before than now) that the biggest voting mistake is to vote for the incumbent. Widseth's comments echo true to all of us who care to see the truth.