Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category

This is making the rounds today.  My two cents…

Proposals one and two, suggesting judicial term limits and Congressional override of judicial decisions, are just silly.  The Senate already has the power to impeach.  I don’t see why this can’t be applied to judges overstepping their authority.

Point three, repealing the 16th Amendment that explicitly allows Congress to collect income tax, is superfluous and I don’t know why it exists frankly.  Sections 7 and 8 of Article I of the Constitution already give Congress the power to raise revenue.

Point four – discussing election laws for Senators – right on.  The 17th Amendment effectively took power from the states.  The states are supposed to serve as a check and balance to the federal government.

Proposal five I support in principal – the rest of us have to make due with a balanced budget.  I don’t see why our government shouldn’t.  But restricting the government’s ability to issue debt may have large, unforeseen consequences.

Points six and seven are big reasons I can’t stand the Republican party.  The party talks about state’s rights and keeping the federal government out our lives and then try to tell us how to live (marriage laws) and what to do with our bodies (abortion).


Read Full Post »

It’s a little odd how little press the anniversary of this event is getting.

I was in the Army at the time studying Russian and I was chilled by the possibility that this event might be catalyst that tipped the world into war.  Instead, the coup failed after three days the Soviet Union, the bugaboo of the Western world, ceased to exist four months later.

Read Full Post »

Here is the text of a comment I sent to my representative in the House of Representatives, Representative Jay Inslee (D):

Mr. Inslee,

I encourage you to vote against H.R.3 – The No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act.  While I agree with some of the provisions of the bill, they cannot be accepted at face value in a vacuum.

For instance, I don’t generally approve of federal funds being spent to pay for abortions, not because of any religious conviction but because I don’t think that’s the federal government’s business.  However, what are active-duty, female, service members supposed to do if federal funding for abortions is completely cut-off?  I’m sure abortion options are extremely limited for a service member on assignment in Afghanistan.  An exception would need to be made here for our most valuable citizens.

Also, certain federally funded organizations, such as Planned Parenthood, would be prohibited from performing abortion services.  If you were able to arrange cessation of federal funding for Planned Parenthood, this would not be an issue.  As the current environment exists, however, low-income women – women that are precisely in a financial position that makes child bearing and caring a difficult proposition – would be left with few options to address an untimely pregnancy.

Finally, health insurance plans that take advantage of tax shelters such as Health Savings Accounts would also be targeted by the legislation.  I think it’s fair for the government to elect to not fund abortions for non-federal employees.  However, it’s unconscionable to think that the government is going to take less of MY MONEY if I choose a health care plan that does not provide abortion coverage.

I trust I’ve made my position clear and given you ample reason to not vote for H.R.3 – The No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act.


Jim Williams

This is honestly my first correspondence with any of my representatives at any level.  While I certainly welcome any discourse on the opinion, I’m really looking for feedback on my communication.  Is it effective?  Does it get the point across?  Is this an acceptable format and length?

Read Full Post »

Presidential Comparison

The similarity I want people to see is that both Reagan and Clinton were EXCELLENT statesmen.  When they took the podium, they spoke very eloquently and people listened.  They had charisma.
The Way of Things
Bush’s hands-off, appoint-educated-advisors-for-his-cabinet approach works most of the time.  But when push comes to shove, the American people want to see and believe in their president when he stands up and says, “everything is under control.”  Reagan and Clinton had that ability (Reagan is of course the most media-savvy president this nation has ever seen – being an actor actually paid off!  :-).  Bush, for whatever reason, lacks that ability.  It certainly doesn’t make him a bad president (that’s a whole other discussion), but he is weak in one area critical to the success of a president holding office during the information age.
Bitter Taste
You and I might be on opposite ends of the political spectrum on many issues, but I think we can both agree that the last two presidential elections have been a contest of throwing two noodles against the wall and seeing which one sticks.  Whether you want to believe it or not, voting for the presidency is a popularity contest.  The American people by and large vote a president into office based on how ‘cool’ he is.  Unfortunately, they have a separate measuring stick for the actual office of the president.  So, we elected the ‘coolest’ candidate as president, but as a president he’s ‘uncool’ front of the camera and we are horribly disappointed.

Read Full Post »

As everyone should be aware, two very serious storms have clobbered the gulf coast in the past month.  The damage, which probably could have been manageable, transformed into a humanitarian disaster with the bursting of levies in New Orleans, submerging the city under feet of water.  America is now facing the prospect of rebuilding an entire region, billions of dollars of property damage, and an untold loss of life.
Pointing the Finger
Some people hold Mayor Nagin responsible for the disaster in New Orleans.  Many people have laid the blame directly at the feet of the president.  I see another example of Americans trying to assuage their guilt by passing the buck on to someone else.
Evacuation notices were given well in advance of Katrina’s landfall.  Many people did not or could not heed the warnings and stayed put.  Socio-economics certainly played a role in who was and who was not able to get out of harms way, but pride and hubris did as well.  The geography of New Orleans specifically dooms it to significant flood danger; the failure of the levies and pumps could not have been forseen, but the results should not have been a surprise.  Responding to a disaster of this magnitude requires the sort of inertia that is nearly impossible to coax out of the federal government in less than 72 hours.  People decrying the federal response, pointing to reporters on the ground in New Oreleans and wondering why the government couldn’t get in there, are comparing apples and oranges.  Mobilizing a TV production crew takes a minute, insignificant fraction of the resources and logistical support compared to transporting thousands of tons of supplies and rescue workers into the zone and evacuating refugees out of the disaster area.  Holding one person to blame for this catastrophe is similar to blaming your doctor because you got cancer.
However, President Bush in his typical hands-off managerial approach avoided speaking directly on the disaster.  He seemed content to let FEMA director Mike Brown, Homeland Security secretary Michael Chertoff, and others deal with the media and be the face of the federal government for several days following the disaster.   Despite the repeated hardships of Bush’s presidency, and make no mistake his has been extremely challenging, he still does not seem to understand that the President of the United States is not a CEO of a federal corporation, but is a figurehead and a leader to which the people of this country look to for guidance and reassurance during a hardship.
I hope Bush does not have to deal with any further disasters of this magnitude for the remainder of his presidency, both for his health and the health of the country, and that future presidents will instead follow the leadership examples set by Presidents Reagan and Clinton.

Read Full Post »