What Is It With That?

(billboardmama.com)
(billboardmama.com)

By: Wayne Brown

For the first time in my memory since the Era of Vietnam, this country is immersed in a tangle of issues, some need resolving, some just need to go away. The “will of the people” has little or no bearing in the process as there seems to be an agenda that is driven by some force or philosophy other than the democratic process.  The good ship “America” has no one on the rudder steering the vessel and few who seem willing to stand up and demand a change in direction.  I must ask you, ‘what is it with that?

 

Arizona is under the spotlight for their stand on immigration laws.  Here is a population of people desperate to do something to resolve the financial ruin and crime heaped upon the state by illegal immigrants coming across its southern border.  In light of the federal government’s inaction on enforcing existing immigration laws currently on the books, Arizona has taken action to enforce such laws locally.  As a result, the state is bombarded by threats of multi-state trade boycotts, by threats of Federal Government actions in the courts to rescind the state’s action.  70% of Americans agree and support the actions taken by Arizona. There is likely another 10-15% of the population who could care how it all plays out.  Then there must be a 10-15 faction that keeps this protest alive.  In the meantime, all the Federal Government can do is to proceed with legal action against the state.  Whatever happened to the “will of the people?”  Whatever happened with people who took elected oaths of office to protect our borders?  Whatever happened to the truth? I must ask you ‘what is with that?’

 

Our current Homeland Security Director, Janet Napolitano, who by the way is also the former governor of Arizona, has done little or nothing to address the issue of security on our southern border, especially that of Arizona.  When questioned as to the value of continuing to fence the area and possibly erecting 50 ft high fences to act as a deterrent, Ms. Napolitano simply replied that the illegals would “just show up with a 51’ ladder”.  What a stupid assessment of a serious situation by someone charged with the responsibility of creating security in that area.  If she does not have a better idea, the she needs to shut up and quit criticizing and belittling the ideas of others.  The President wanted the fencing stopped and Ms. Napolitano is bending over backwards to satisfy his desires. Of course bending that way is no problem when you have no spine.  Leakage on our borders should be a primary concern of Homeland Security but does not seem the case. The truth of the matter is all laws are subject to interpretation and/or mishandling by those applying them. That possibility cannot be the basis for not either enacting or enforcing laws. But that seems to be the “Litmus Test” in this case.  Now I ask you, ‘what is with that?’

 

One of the more talented leaders of recent military times was just relieved of his duties commanding forces in Afghanistan.  This is a man with 30 years of experience dealing with politics, leadership issues, the media, and various and sundry other subjects.  This is a man with a tremendous amount of experience in all these areas.  Yet, we are asked to believe that a man with such a background experienced a “lack of judgment” in allowing the Rolling Stone reporter access to his operations.  Do we really think that decision belong to General McChrsytal alone?  Do we really believe that he was granting such access without it being knowledge to his direct commander and possibly even to the President?  Are we expected to believe that the President’s copy of Rolling Stone is delivered on a monthly basis within hours of the printing? Are we expected to assume that someone did not do a hatchet job on General McChrsytal?  Do you really believe that a man of this considerable accomplishment and experience committed such a stupid error in judgment? The truth of this matter has yet to come to light.  Now I ask you, ‘what is with that?’

 

The Al Gore fiasco is rather troubling, a rather “inconvenient truth” of some sort I suppose.  There is deep concern for ruining the good name of a former Vice-President, Nobel Prize Winner, and inventor of the Internet….yadda, yadda, yadda.  The woman involved has been slow to come forward with her allegation and deserves some level of criticism for her inactions.  At the same time, look at how her claims are met at this point and ask yourself if it would have been given any credence two years earlier.  I see no reason to convict Al Gore at this point but this woman also deserves her day in court if she is willing to come forward and speak of the incident.  If she has no case, that should become evident and she should be dealt with accordingly.  On the other hand, she should not have to sweep it all under the rug and forget about it in light of the fact that Al Gore was involved.  Al Gore or not, this woman deserves to be heard in a court of law.  In all likelihood, she will cave to the intense pressure of the media and special interest groups supporting Gore and thus will collapse in her attempt. She will not benefit from a democratic process.  The truth of the matter is we all deserve our day in court. Now I ask you, ‘what is it with that?’

 

Cindy Sheehan rose to prominence with the American media when she protested the death of her son in Iraq outside the Bush family ranch.  She continued those protests at various sites throughout America practicing her right to “freedom of speech” under the Constitution.  Ms. Sheehan seems to enjoy her time in the spotlight and must have found many “friends” willing to support her and direct her in speaking out on other items of interest while she has the attention of the media.  I can understand Ms. Sheehan’s grief and frustration in the loss of her son.  I can even understand that she wants to blame former President Bush for his death.  What I cannot understand is how that issue can translate into her standing before audiences in New Orleans recently espousing the virtues of the Federal Government taking over all the major business in this country.  Her rationale was offered as the whole system would be far more stable with “central control”. In case Ms. Sheehan has not checked lately, she is spouting Communist Doctrine in her fifteen minutes of fame.  The truth of the matter is Ms. Sheehan is getting used.  Now I ask you, ‘what is it with that?’

 

Every day the talk out of Washington is spending, spending, and more spending, all with the promise of either rescuing our economy or creating jobs.  Since when did the government ever directly create any jobs which contributed to the private sector economy?  The fact that we need another bureaucrat in Washington or another security guard at the airport does nothing for the overall economy of the private sector.  Why is there no talk on relaxing some of the reins on the private sector in order to stimulate investment by business owners?  Why is there no movement to create investment and tax stimulus to inspire these companies and business owners to move forward?  The rationale seems to be that the American citizen should be looking to Washington to create and control all positive movement in the market.  This equates to another example of “central control” which reeks of Socialism. The truth of the matter is the government is not the savior of the people and was never intended to be. Now I ask you, ‘what is it with that?’

 

Senator Robert Byrd has just passed away at the age of 92.  He still occupied his Senate seat having spent more than 51 years serving as Senator of West Virginia.  Surely many of those years served the people of West Virginia well.  At the same time, this is an example of career politicians literally holding an office for their lifetime.  At what age did Senator Byrd begin to lose some of his mental sharpness?  At what age did he become a “symbol” of West Virginia rather than a functioning member of the Senate?  Obviously Senator Byrd felt it was in his best interest to occupy the office until dead caused his resignation, but was that just for the good of Senator Byrd or did it represent the best interest of the people of West Virginia?  Seniority and committee representation have become mainstays of career politician’s arguments to remain in office and America has gone along with it. Now I ask you, ‘what is it with that?’

 

America has burned a lot of candles at both ends.  Some of those candles have singed our fingers in the process and a lot of the hot wax has spilled on our floors over the years.  We have long been a country in which it is easy to become apathetic and accept whatever happens as being okay.  We have been influenced to believe that “this is America and everything always works out.”  For too many years, far too many of us have lived that way.  In the process, more and more of our liberties, our institutions, our cultural values have been attacked, disassembled or rearranged and we just shrug our shoulders and go on with life.  One day, we will look up and our country as we knew it will be gone, gradually taken from us by those who have insidiously inserted themselves into positions of influence and have gently twisted our democratic republic into a Socialist enslavement. The truth of the matter is we continue to let it happen by not guarding our freedoms or using our vote wisely. Now I ask you, ‘what is it with that?’

 

© Copyright WBrown2010. All Rights Reserved.

 

More by this Author


Comments 13 comments

Tom Whitworth profile image

Tom Whitworth 6 years ago from Moundsville, WV

Wayne,

We have one basic problem and that's the Captain is scuttling the Ship of State!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Wayne Brown profile image

Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas Author

@Tom Whitworth...I think you are correct in your assessment Tom! WB


tony0724 profile image

tony0724 6 years ago from san diego calif

Wayne you said it all in one of your initial statements in this hub , about no one steering the ship. They should also put a sign up outside Washington DC " no lifeguards on duty "


TimBryce 6 years ago

Wayne, it's going to be interesting to see what General McChrystal has to say after his resignation goes into effect. If he decides to publicly criticize the O-Bomb before the November elections, it could have a rather dramatic effect on the outcome. The general's story is going to be worth a lot.

All the Best,

Tim


Wayne Brown profile image

Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas Author

Yes, Tim, you make a good point. The one thing that gnaws at me about the General is the rumor that he voted for Obama. If that is the case, we may not ever get the "real" story behind this incident. The media is saying that McCrystal had total control over rules of engagement in Afghanistan. I don't buy that. He had a lot of latitude in implementing and employing the rules but I am quite certain that the rules of engagement for that conflict or any other come out of Washington and were more than likely dictated at the Joint Chiefs or even to some extent, the Presidential level. I cannot help but equate Obama's desire for restraint on the battlefield with the rules of engagement that were in place. I think those rules failed and I think the Rolling Stone article made it clear those rules were a failure. Obama quickly distanced himself from that failure by putting everything in the lap of McCrystal and now Petraeus will go in and fix the situation...leaving McCrystal looking like the idiot who got our boys killed. Shameful. WB


Wayne Brown profile image

Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas Author

@Tony0724....Right on, Bro! That is a hilarious thought that I wish had incorporated...maybe on the next go 'round! Thanks for the read Tony. WB


LRCBlogger profile image

LRCBlogger 6 years ago

Wayne, a lot of good points here. I will say in regards to the first comment made by Tom, Obama being blamed is a bit misguided. Many of these problems have been around long before he took office.

I truly believe that a large source of issues in this country is the conflict in politics. For example, Dick Chenney owning billions in Halliburton and then helping make decisions on whether to go to war. Other examples include every single bill passed in the last hundred years that is full of pork spending so that congress can "pay back" corporations and special interest groups that donated to their campaigns.

A few direct comments:

Arizona - the original bill had serious flaws which were corrected. If they got it right the first time, they might have even received some praise.

McChrsytal - seriously, your not a rock star. Is that a good use of your time, hanging out with an enterainment magazine? I know you pointed out his experience but what about the CEO's that work their tail off for 30 years and then decide to forge the earnings numbers? Yes, I think accomplished individuals can make mistakes and McChrsytal made a huge one. At least he resigned with a little dignity rather than being fired.

Spending: When GOP had control of congress and Bush was president, our govt spending almost doubled in size. Now with Dems in control, I still have not seen a rational plan to reduce spending or the deficit. The problem is on both sides. Get money out of politics and you start addressing this problem. CT is one of only 3 states that has passed comprehensive finance reform (It just happened in time for the last election). Already we are seeing great things.

If the GOP was serious about spending, ask your GOP lawmakers (and DEM) what spending can be cut in their district...hear the crickets chirping?


Wayne Brown profile image

Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas Author

LRCBlogger...You make some very good points and I don't have any real disagreement. In terms of the Cheney comment, I equate it to LBJ expanding the Vietnam War when Brown&Root were his major backers and they ended up building much of the infracstructure the US created in those countries during the war. In addition, LBJ and his wife held positions in Conex Corporation which basis spread its wings in Vietnam with containerized shipping and Flying Tiger airlines which contracted to move troops back and forth during the conflict. I really do not want to throw either party under the bus too much here because, as you point out, the problem comes from both sides of the aisle and stems largely from the American public electing to send the same old tired politicians back there to spend our money. Pork-barreling has reached the point of embarrassment and has parasitically inserted itself into every bill crossing the table such that we cannot get the benefit of effective measures past without it costing an arm and a leg in additional spending. Some sanity must return to the process and I think the most realistic option will be gridlock in either one or both houses of Congress after the next election. The economy of the country seems to flourish when Congress cannot act...hmmm, is there a correlation? I think voters on both sides of the aisle are starting to get the idea that it does not matter much who is in the White House if our Congress holds the purse strings. Once we get really wise to how government works, then maybe we can make some informed decisions as a public at the ballot box. At the same time, maybe we will get some qualified candidates interested in carrying out the will of the people and maintaining this country as a democratic republic. I sure hope so! My retirement is riding on it! Thanks much for your input and commentary! WB


Joni Douglas profile image

Joni Douglas 6 years ago

"At the same time, maybe we will get some qualified candidates interested in carrying out the will of the people and maintaining this country as a democratic republic. I sure hope so!"

I hope so too. I find it interesting that the founding fathers, when addressing how often Congress should convene, insisted that Congress should meet at least once a year. They never intended it to be full time job. We have let Congress claim far too much power over us.

Great hub!


Wayne Brown profile image

Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas Author

Joni...we sure have and they prove that every time they become deadlocked and cannot pass legislation...our economy flourishes, the deficit drops, and everyone gets a lot happier. The problem with these folks is they see all this money coming in and too many of them such as Dinghie Harry Reid want some of it in their own pockets! WB


lisadpreston profile image

lisadpreston 6 years ago from Columbus, Ohio

Good hub. I promised myself I would keep my mouth shut and not comment on political hubs.


Wayne Brown profile image

Wayne Brown 6 years ago from Texas Author

Lisa...not a bad philosphy at all. Thanks for your comments! WB


Petra Vlah profile image

Petra Vlah 6 years ago from Los Angeles

I will only address two of the points you made since I see them as being connected.

General McCrystal with his experience and smarts knew for a fact that we can’t win the war in Afghanistan and he did not want to be part of the defeated mission. The rules of engagement that put American troops and lives in harm’s way are a result of Petraeus philosophy – know as COIN – an attempt to win hearts and minds.

The stupidity of such endeavor is unparalleled and an obvious sign of incoherent political policy as well as a disastrous military strategy. It is tragic that US has never learned from history and costly mistakes and is going down the same rout as Vietnam and Korea, not making much of a detour from Cambodia and Laos – in terms of human lives sacrificed in both parts.

Bombs do not change minds and hearts and neither do fences – so here is my point about linking together the two issues. Walls have proved their futility more than once, but we still don’t get the message.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working