A variety of thoughts and opinions.

WOW, Go New Hampshire

Written by:remyrw
Published on June 22nd, 2010 @ 09:46:21 am , using 138 words, 59 views
Posted in Commentary

Link: http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2009/HCR0006.html

EDIT: My mistake, I missed where this was old news and no longer an active bill. It got shot down.

New Hampshire just made a massive step in favor of state's rights.
Basically, they made it clear that as far as they are concerned, the Constitution of the United States of America is going to be followed, and if the federal government doesn't like it there will be consequences. They even specifically mention 2nd Amendment rights.

Obviously this will be a major blow to the federal government that will be challenged in court, but I expect to see it hold up as it is fairly simple and to the point. All they're saying is that the original document outlines what is and isn't the responsibility of each layer of government, and that they're sticking to that layout.

Memorial Day

Written by:remyrw
Published on May 29th, 2010 @ 02:51:35 pm , using 101 words, 72 views
Posted in Commentary

Link: http://oathkeepers.org/oath/

Thank you to all those who have served our nation honorably, those currently serving, and those who will serve. I ask everyone to remember the sacrifices our armed forces and emergency service folks make to keep the rest of us safe and prosperous.

I would also like to mention an organization dedicated to upholding the values and honor that make these people worth our respect and admiration. Oath Keepers, despite the occasional negative publicity, is simply reminding everyone of the oaths these people take and live by. These oaths are the guiding beacons for their actions and should not be forgotten.

No news?

Written by:remyrw
Published on May 17th, 2010 @ 12:04:15 pm , using 527 words, 41 views
Posted in Commentary

I keep an eye on the market for many reasons, not the least of which is that as long as you keep aware of the disconnect between stock prices and reality it can make a good indicator of economic conditions and trends.

Lately I've noticed something very odd. The market has given back nearly all the gains from the past six months of much lauded "recovery" yet there's almost no comment on the news or from our government. There's very little discussion about how the current crisis in Greece will impact the world economy, or the ripples already racing around Europe. I have to wonder why this is being ignored in the mainstream media. They certainly are not unaware, you see minor mentions here and there on a day to day basis, but never a discussion of the overall situation and implications of what's happening.

My own opinion is simple, we're seeing false increases evaporate as the market self corrects. Whether you believe it is market manipulation by some secret group, the super rich, the government or just social psychology at work doesn't matter. The stock market got too far ahead of the actual recovery and is taking the hit to adjust.

I don't think we've had much of a recovery, more a quick pause to catch our breath and see which way things will go. There's great potential for further collapse, but also a chance to stabilize. I do not believe we should see a recovery in the sense of returning the inflated stupidity we had before, too many people were living too far beyond their means and that is impossible to maintain. As a nation and possibly a world we are still living beyond our means, as evidenced by the massive national debt of most nations. This is not sustainable and it will be very painful to fix but even more painful to ignore. You can delay things, but if a real effort isn't made to reduce both the debt in a lasting manner (permanent deficit reversal) the economy cannot actually recover.

Just like a person who runs up a credit card bill they can only pay if they get a steady stream of raises, the US has to stop spending more than they can afford without more debt and start paying it down, regardless of how painful that might be. The key is to do this without doing too much damage to the economy by raising taxes when people are already struggling. My own opinion is that one major area to cut is social safety net programs. It's not pleasant, but if you can't afford to feed yourself it's pretty tough to feed someone else too. I would prefer to see more encouragement for private and non profit group support rather than government. People are much happier giving to a charity of their choice than more in taxes. It would not surprise me to find that reducing the welfare budget and then offering a higher limit on the tax deductions for donations to groups that are making up the difference would result in MORE help for the truly desperate and deserving rather than less.

Thank You Senator Bunning

Written by:remyrw
Published on February 26th, 2010 @ 07:49:38 pm , using 190 words, 100 views
Posted in Commentary

I want to thank Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Kentucky, for standing up for common sense and the welfare of our nation rather than bowing to popular opinion and vote buying politics.

Today he debated, argued and kept the senate from passing an extension of unemployment benefits without finding a way to pay for them. He wasn't opposed to extending them, he even agreed that it was important, but he wasn't willing to let congress spend even more money without cutting it from somewhere else.

I believe the quote was something to the effect of, "If we all agree it is so important we should be able to find the money for it."

Social welfare of any kind is great, if you can afford it as a nation without crippling your economy. If congress wants to extend more safety net they need to find the money somewhere else in the budget, since we certainly don't need MORE of a deficit weighing on our economy. It won't be easy, it won't be pleasant, and whatever part of the budget loses the funds would have problems, but there's only so much to go around.

New gun owners

Written by:remyrw
Published on May 9th, 2009 @ 12:23:04 pm , using 990 words, 3110 views
Posted in Commentary

Obviously from my past posts I'm a gun owner and strong supporter of our Bill of Rights. I tend to be a fan of smaller government but support at least some safety net type programs. Before I go further I'd like to say that while I'm certainly not a fan of our new president overall I DO think he's done decently in some areas. Even made great progress. His actions in promoting better communications and relations with central and south america are a great example. These are our neighbors, our closest trading partners geographically, and potentially great allies. We don't have to be best of friends, and I hardly suggest trusting some of the leadership anytime soon, but that doesn't mean we have to act like they're psychopathic morons of no value to us. I've said in past blogs (before it got wiped) that I think Chavez is a serious danger to stability in this area of the world. However, that doesn't change just because we treat him like a criminal. He is the leader of a major South America nation and while sometimes his rhetoric is rather insulting to us we have to remember who his real audience is and the differences between politics and speech making in his part of the world and ours. Trust him? no. Treat him as a man to be respected and negotiated with for mutual benefit? YES. The same goes for Cuba and other nations we've had poor relations with for years. I'm not a fan of communism by any stretch, but what the heck is the point of our poor relationship with Cuba these days? What benefit is there? Are we worried that commerce with Cuba's going to somehow corrupt our country? History shows that free trade does the opposite, it makes communism fall apart.

Anyway, back to my original reason for posting. As a shooter I hear and read a lot of speculation, worry, fear and concern about the political situation regarding gun control. The anti-gun folks tend to be pretty sneaky and lately has been no exception. We, meaning pro gun folks, tend to disbelieve any known anti-gun politician who says they aren't going to try to enact a new law aimed at us. Nothing personal, but they tend to lie about it. Maybe THEY aren't, but they're going to support their buddy's new law... Or there's some other law they claim isn't directed at us, but just happens to make some shooting sport much more expensive or closes some range... Lately there's been a big shuffle though. I think a lot of democrats have noticed just how much of the population really isn't interested in more gun control, even if they're not specifically pro-gun or nra members. There has been a massive increase in the number of first time gun buyers as well. People who historically didn't care one way or the other, or just didn't feel the need to own one themselves. Well, now they do, and they're speaking with their wallet during a rough economy. That makes it a pretty loud voice. Democrat or Republican or Independant, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are still our core charter. If you try to circumvent one key right, particularly one of the two specifically put in to protect the rest, you make a lot of people very nervous. Free speech gives us the right to say what we think and protest things we dislike. It gives the population the ability to speak out against the government or anything else. While annoying at times, this is an essential right to keeping us free from oppression of any kind. The right to keep and bear arms means the population as a whole is able to protect the freedom of speech if the government tries to shut it down. It's how the founding fathers made sure that no future government could get too invasive. Consider it the emergency brake. That hippy burning a flag and protesting a war is able to do so not because the Bill of Rights says he or she can, but because it also says that the population can forcibly resist the government over reaching it's constitutional limits. The anti-gun hippy and the survivalist are both generally anti-government, for different reasons. But they're not as far apart as they might think. Both of them are after personal liberty and freedom. They also reinforce each other's cause.

What we're seeing is that the politicians who might have been interested in passing more anti-gun laws, of whatever type (these days it's usually not directed at the gun itself), looking at the actual numbers of gun owners, new gun owners, the level of concern among the population regarding the issue... and saying, "enough already, it's not worth the fallout on my career nor the risk of civil unrest." That same emergency brake applies elsewhere if the government pushes too far. The population always has the final say if enough people are sufficiently motivated. Our federal government has started to forget that they're a government of the people, FOR the people, but it looks like they're starting to relearn it. Some states have also begun to point out that the federal government has very specific duties and rights outlined by the constitution, but also very specific limitations that they have been exceeding for a long time. It will be interesting to see what happens with that. Particularly the new laws in Montana (google it if you care, Montana 10th ammendment)

Personally, I'm all for the federal government taking a step back from states and personal rights. I'm also all for reduced fed government spending and taxes (even if states increased taxes to compensate so my outlay was the same). I think the massive number of social, political and economic events going on right now makes things way too volatile for comfort and anything that pours oil on troubled waters is good.

<< 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 >>

©2017 by remyrw
Comments are welcome, but must be sent to me via the contacts link here. Due to spam I no longer allow automatic comment submission. • ContactHelpfree bloggreen hostingFP
b2evo skin design by Andrew Hreschak