Tuesday, March 23, 2010
To solve our problems, liberals, conservatives and moderates have to work together. None of us is ever going to get 100% of what we want in a political battle; however, compromise is possible when each side considers what best for the country and Americans as a whole.
The current debate regarding health care reform is rather silly in my opinion. On the right, we have those who claim the government has no role and, on the left, we have those who claim the government is the only answer. However, there's a middle ground here and, perhaps, the best approach is a combination of limited government intervention and private insurance. Other countries use this approach and it works. The big problem in some of those countries is the population is aging and birth rates are extremely low; therefore, even those programs will need reform.
The bottom line, for me, is that I'm willing to discuss an issue with anyone, but I'll ignore those who tend to fall into the political idelogue category because, frankly, they have nothing positive to offer.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Some of the American people probably thought they were voting for hope and change when they voted for President Barack Obama on Nov. 4, 2008. But according to Rev. Al Sharpton, they were voting for socialism.
Sharpton, the founder of the National Action Network and talk radio host told Fox News on March 21, during their special coverage of the House of Representatives' passage of health care reform legislation, this victory for President Barack Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi would begin "transforming" the country.
"I think that the president and Nancy Pelosi get credit," Sharpton said. "I think this began the transforming of the country the way the president had promised. This is what he ran on."And if that transformation is socialism, then so be it, he explained. That is what the American public "overwhelmingly" voted for
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Saturday, March 13, 2010
After the fiasco that was the slow and delayed response from the president,Obama did what is expected of all liberal government officials;he treated the incident, not as an act of war, but as a common criminal act. The man charged with attempting to suicide bomb a passenger jet was not placed in a military prison. Instead, he was given full and complete access to the Constitution as if he were a common criminal. He also has the full protection of a public attorney.
After the incident, Obama drew out a plan to enforce a one hour "security blanket" policy that would "make airlines safer an hour or so before landing". However, quick ridicule of his overwhelmingly weak security measures forced him to withdraw them.
Obama's Department of Homeland Security Tzar, Janet Napolitano, (the same woman that deemed conservatives and military servicemen "national security threats") responded by saying that their security measures "worked really well", and are the reason the bombing was a failure,,,,despite the fact that the bomber got a passport and Visa while being on the terrorist watch list,despite the fact that the terrorists father warned of his son's Al'qaeda connections,and despite the fact that he was able to board and detonate a bomb on an airplane.
So, what do you think?