Why We are Failing Miserably to Fix America

I had been planning to do this article last week, but simply didn’t find the time to do it the way that I wanted to do it, so it got pushed to tonight. I have found myself increasingly frustrated as I watch the goings on in Washington DC. It isn’t simply because the Dems are in charge and I don’t like what they are doing, although that certainly does play into my frustrations. The GOP is every bit as bad at getting us back to where we need to be. I found that the frustration I was feeling was because what I feel is breaking the back of the American economy is the progressive movement’s continued moves to increase the size and scope of government. The bottom line, no matter what it is that you believe politically, is that we simply cannot afford to do all the things that we are attempting to do. Health care, welfare, extended unemployment benefits, more regulations on top of the regulations that were already not being enforced, two wars that we should no longer be in, stimulus, and pork, pork, and more pork. Our federal government has gotten to the point where they are spending money like Britney Spears. And there doesn’t seem to be a psychotic father to step in and take over control of the finances.
What is the Proper Role of Government?

When Do States Tell Feds to Piss Off?

I was reading an article this evening about the fact that the Governors of several states getting together to ask the federal government for help financially, even if it means that we increase the national debt to do so. It got me thinking about how we have gotten to this point, and consequently what should the federal government be required to do because of it. And make no mistake, there is no single right answer, because the situation varies from state to state. It causes me to ask a few distinct questions around state and federal relationships. First, at what point should states be telling the federal government to piss off in terms of required social programs or costly legislation? At what point should the federal government be returning the favor for states that do not hold themselves fiscally responsible? And finally, when is the point that some states should be withholding help to the federal government that is passed on to states that acted fiscally irresponsible? I will explain all of these questions a little further below. But the fact is that we have found ourselves in a situation where it seems like the vast majority of states lack the ability to fiscally sustain themselves, some through reckless spending and others through forced spending from the federal government mandates.
Where Do We Draw the Line in Government Spending?

Alan Grayson… Idiot Child of the Left

I didn’t have a ton of time to write again tonight. I had actually decided that I was going to skip the night and try to get some other stuff I have been procrastinating on done. But then I stumbled across this article, another of the open letters Representative Alan Grayson seems so fond of writing over there at the Huffington Post (one of the few places that will give a voice to fruit cakes like Grayson). As you all know, I have no beef with HuffPo. They have some interesting articles and some good ideas that come from a very intelligent group of writers. Unfortunately, they also have become a place where hatemongers such as Bob Cesca and Fools such as Grayson are given a podium from which to spew their nonsense. What they will not do, however, is allow for any dissenting opinions to be offered to counter folks like Cesca and Grayson. And that is a shame, because the surest way to ensure that your writers won’t be taken seriously by anyone other than those who already agree with your ideas is to limit the ability to to offer rational responses.
An Answer to Alan Grayson’s ignorant Rantings

Seeking False Purism…. Flaws in the American Mindset

I know, it is Tuesday night and everyone is opening up their browser this morning and expecting the open mic thread that usually greets them on Wednesday morning. I was sitting around reading news on my dinner break tonight, reviewing the different primary races out there, and the status of each prior to election day. It spurred some thought from me so I figured I would offer a quick article around that subject instead of the open mic thread. Fear not though, I will do the open mic on Wednesday night instead of Tuesday. Instead, I want to talk about an article that I read a couple of weeks ago and was reminded of this evening. The article was originally on Fox News. The subject was the fact that despite the deep partisan pitfalls that every voter says that they despise, the elections come closer and middle of the road candidates get thrown out in favor of those that fall further towards the “far” edge of the parties.
Why is Party Purism a Litmus Test for Candidates?

Arizona Gets SUFA Riled Up… Racial Profiling and Open Borders

I have to say that I was a little surprised to see such a robust discussion happening over yesterday’s article. I had originally intended to not write an article this evening, to simply let the Arizona debate rage on. However, with over 300 comments already, it would begin to get tough to navigate through. So I figured instead of simply replying to individual posts, I would instead write s sort of follow on article that addresses some of the things that were said yesterday, and allows for the conversations to continue with a somewhat fresh start (at least in the number of comments to read through). It was interesting to see how entrenched some folks are in their positions, some so much so that they were unable to see past it to other sides of the debate. That is unfortunate, as it is essential that we all begin to see different perspectives if we are going to somehow find a way to get through all the madness coming out of government these days.
We Continue our Discussion on Arizona and Illegal Immigration

And Next…. The FCC Will Pass a Drug Trafficking Tax

I know, that headline got your brain moving in a really weird way first thing in the morning. The words in the sentence simply don’t fit together. I mean, what the hell does the Federal Communications Commission have to do with Drug Trafficking regulation or taxing? The answer: Absolutely nothing. But it would be a heck of a revenue generator for the organization. Can’t happen, right? I would normally say no. But in light of what I am about to share I am beginning to question that premise. I used to think that an organization couldn’t simply randomly decide to tax or regulate something that it has nothing to do with. Then I ran across an article tonight on Fox News with the headline, “World Health Organization Moving Ahead on Billions in Internet and Other Taxes.” You read it right. I am not making this up. The World Health Organization, in an effort to both raise revenue and further redistribute wealth from countries like the US to poor countries, has decided to move ahead with an internet tax. What?
AND New York Passes Tax on Yugoslavian Fishing Exports

Does Miranda Help or Hurt Us?

Over the last couple of years, we have seen a ton of clamoring from both sides of the political spectrum over the fact that those who have committed alleged terrorist acts have been read their Miranda rights upon capture. Those on the right tend to lean towards their actions falling under an act of war, and therefore, the defendant should not be treated as a criminal, but instead as a war criminal (where no Miranda is necessary, but informing of a right to counsel is under some circumstances). Those on the left tend to feel that those who commit acts of terror are criminals just like any other, and therefore, they should be read their Miranda rights as required. I want to first state that I personally don’t think that the reading of Miranda rights to these terrorist suspects means a single thing. After all, it certainly doesn’t seem to stop us from getting the information that we are after….
Why Miranda was a Mistake, and Shouldn’t Be an Issue Here

The Case For Legalizing Marijuana

This was a topic that seemed to really cause a stir a week or so ago when it was brought up. It seems that there are many who would stand in the way of legalizing marijuana, in fact there were more comments saying so on this site than I would have expected. During those discussions, I kind of kept myself clear, not getting into the debates too heavily. I did so because I knew from the reactions that I was going to write an article about this. Tonight I offer that article. It appears that there are many myths and false statements around this debate. Further, it appears that I have unwittingly struck yet another topic where folks that otherwise seem to espouse freedom fall in the realm of contradiction. I wrote an article a couple of weeks ago stating that many people do not really want freedom. I think this is one of those topics that show exactly that sentiment. There sure is a lot of demand that people conform to someone else’s standards on this topic. So let’s take a closer look. AND TAKE NOTE THAT THERE IS A NEW POLL OVER THERE ON THE LEFT ON THIS SUBJECT!
Why USWeapon Says Legalize it NOW!

Guest Commentary – Tangible Asset Tax

Thursday night and the ever popular guest commentary! I am pretty happy about having tonight’s guest commentary. As I often tell everyone here, this blog is certainly my thoughts, but I never wanted it to be a place where other ideas and thoughts are not welcome. I am always hoping that people will submit stuff from the opposite side of the political spectrum from mine. And tonight we have a guest commentary from a commenter that you all know, Chris Devine! I won’t attempt to define his political stance for him, but I have always viewed Chris as someone from the left, and we all know that is the polar opposite of where I stand. But true to form, Chris has offered a guest commentary topic that is interesting and well thought out. I look forward to seeing what everyone thinks of his idea and hearing what pitfalls people might identify.
Chris Devine Offers an Interesting Tax Alternative

How Many Really Want Freedom… Follow Up

When I wrote the first part of this article the other night, I thought it an important discussion to have because of the implications in today’s complicated world. I extend the conversation tonight because I still believe this to be true. There were some good discussions yesterday, and I thank everyone for adding their thoughts. With tonight’s continuation I am not really adding much in the way of new ideas. I am instead offering some clarifications and additional thoughts on the comments from yesterday. There were some good thoughts brought up and some interesting questions asked. So I will answer one of the big, important ones in the article and then I will answer some more in the comments that follow. I will begin with a more clear definition of what I am talking about when I say true freedom, as Ray correctly called me on the fact that I didn’t do so, which breaks a rule of mine. If you want to discuss an issue, you have to make your definitions clear so that your point isn’t lost.
A Continuation of Yesterday’s Discussions

How Many REALLY Want Freedom?

I have been thinking a lot lately about the concept of freedom and liberty as it pertains to the discussions that we have here at Stand Up For America. I read the responses that come in to the things that I write. Often I can find plenty of people who are more than willing to agree with me or tell me how wrong I am. But what I have have been attempting to ascertain is the level of commitment that people have to the principles that they espouse on this site. Remember, quite a while ago, I spoke to the idea that some things I would write would be discussions about how things should be while others would be more concerned with dealing with where we really are. Well, what I offer tonight is a bit of a combination of the two. Because in the discussions that we have been having around the way things are, I have begun to feel like the way things should be is not something most are comfortable with.
Freedom is Just Too Hard

Tax Day Special… The False Hope of Code Changing

Like many Americans, I approach Tax day each year a little more annoyed than the year before. I have done my own taxes for many years. And once I was married, I took over preparing taxes for two. It is not a new concept for me. I feel like I have a simplistic grasp on the process, although I would never come close to qualifying as an expert. What I find is that each year it becomes more complicated than the year before. New tax codes, special breaks, and searching for documentation for every nickel you might have earned over the last year all come together to create a headache for anyone sitting at their computer attempting to figure it all out. I find this fact troubling for one specific reason…. I am a pretty smart guy. I don’t want to toot my horn too loudly. But I have managed to keep a 4.0 GPA through all my degrees, I have an IQ that qualifies me for special groups, I have a tremendous memory, and I generally can figure out just about anything I want to figure out. So why is it that what should be the simple act of filing my taxes is enough to make me feel like I am back in “Quantitative Application of Statistical Theory” again?
The Myth of Taxation Made Simple

Why START II is a Waste of Debate Time

As we enter a new week, I don’t want to take away too much from attempting to finish the Corporate taxes conversations because I haven’t gotten much of a response from the left yet, and I figure that will happen more today. But I do want to have a new topic, and thus wanted to address something that wasn’t too massive a topic to handle at the same time. This weekend has flown by for me, with a lot of yard work with Mrs. Weapon, which was nice. Added to that was some good time spent out on Saturday, hitting the farmers market here, and while there having a fried catfish sandwich at the North Carolina Seafood market. I must tell you it doesn’t get much better than that. Overall I have had a very busy, but awesome weekend with Mrs. Weapon, something that doesn’t get to happen too often (I usually work the weekends). Add in some time with legendary couch slayer, Canine Weapon, and the weekend was complete. But when I had time, I read up on the START II treaty negotiations and found myself thinking, “who cares?”
Why START II Doesn’t Matter

Corporations Don’t Pay Taxes

People do! There have been extensive conversations over the last year around the different perspectives that each party operates on in terms of taxes. One of the major reasons that, when I did choose to be a part of a political party, I couldn’t support the Democratic party, was their outlook on economics. The ideas of wealth “trickling up”, consistent increases in regulation of the private markets, and redistributing wealth are all against the very core of what I believe, and in the case of trickling up wealth, against logical reason. In many of my arguments with those on the left, I have brought the subject of this article up, offering it as a reasonable assessment of where there is a fatal flaw in their plan. I never get a response after that. The subject gets quickly changed, or in forums I am simply never answered by that person at all. So I am going to present the argument again, and explore the concepts. I welcome any challenge to my thoughts, as I want to know if there are things I am missing…
The Makers vs the Takers

Medical Ethics Questioned in Florida

I figured I would keep it somewhat light here on a Sunday night when I imagine that many folks don’t have to go into work on Monday morning. Oh how I wish I was one of you. But I will be schlepping into work, wishing I was home doing some blog writing. I saw this article from Fox News, and read a couple of others on the subject at the NY Times and Huffington Post. It appears that Alan Grayson, Democrat bigmouth dujour, has decided that he is going to file a complaint against this doctor because the doctor put a sign up on the front door to his practice that said if you voted for Obama, then you can go and find another doctor. What doesn’t seem to matter to Grayson is the fact that the doctor apparently didn’t do anything that qualifies as complaint worthy according to the folks who make that decision in the state of Florida. But the question isn’t whether Grayson has the right to file a complaint, although we are going to touch on that. The question instead is whether this doctor is within his rights to post such a note. And further, even if he is within his rights, is this an unethical stance for a doctor to take?
Does a Doctor Have the Right to Decide Who He Will or Will Not Treat?

Tuesday Night Open Mic for March 30, 2010

Alas, I already find myself at the Tuesday Night Open Mic. It has been a quick start to the week. The conversations thus far have been interesting. The individual liberty discussions were especially good, but we didn’t get to the core of the issues quite yet. We danced around some of them. I will be bringing that article forward in a couple days instead of posting another article so that the discussions can go further. Open mic brings a host of different topics, from global warming taking a larger international hit to the President attempting to mischaracterize the tea party movement. Sprinkled in there we have Arriana Huffington completely missing on her reasoning for the decline of innovation in America and the courts issuing a stupid verdict in the case of the hatemongers from Westbor Baptist (it is not a) Church. We also have a little bit of government claiming that fearing the government is a good thing and a good old politician playing a politician’s game, and sucking at it. As an added bonus I brought over a Black Flag offering from late Tuesday that many may have missed.
Open Mic Begins with a Click

Challenging Our Own Premises – Individual Liberty

Another series of articles that I have been planning for some time. What I wanted to do was analyze the different things that we take for granted given our beliefs about what government should or should not be doing. Individual Liberty will be the test challenge to see if this series has potential or whether readers find it to be a waste of time. There is a good reason to challenge our premises. We have several. Most believe that “life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness” are rights guaranteed to us by natural law, and thus written into the Constitution. Others believe that other things should or shouldn’t be included. Property, for example, seems to be one that gets a challenge. Some believe that health care is a right, equal opportunity is a right, or initiation of violence is a morally corrupt practice under any circumstance. The purpose of the series will be to challenge each of those things people think are given. I will skip health care for now, as we have discussed that one recently. But the others, should you readers want the series to continue, will be covered one at a time. For today, though, we focus on Individual Liberty.
Challenging the Concept of Individual Liberty

Tuesday Night Open Mic for March 23, 2010

Tuesday night comes and it couldn’t come a moment too soon. I have never hid the fact that I like the open mic nights. Not only can I talk about topics in a short form without a lot of research, but I get to see all the stuff that everyone else wants to talk about. And as an added bonus, we come off a day where there was lots of discussions around the health care situation. During the day Wednesday I may weigh in more on health care (if I do decide to do this I will move it to this thread). But I also wanted to address some other topics, such as the one that JAC began towards the end of Monday that I promised I would post tonight. Meanwhile, Canine Weapon decided tonight that our couch was a pillow, and a pillow was a toy, so he literally tore open the couch and deposited stuffing throughout the living room. There is a move that will cost us a couple grand to rectify. Fortunately, it was the old couch, not the new one. Took him all of 15 minutes to completely destroy it. The joys of puppyhood.
I say Open Mic, Canine Weapon says Open Couch Buffet

OK, A Little Health Care

But not the real article I know that you are expecting. I am still reading through all the “changes” and “fixes” that have been done. Trying to re-evaluate and see if there is anything that I can find that I like about what has been passed. So my true evaluation of the bill is forthcoming, but could take a bit. 3000 pages is a lot of reading. What I am finding extremely frustrating is the consensus from those on the left that the passage of this monstrosity is a good thing. It is almost as though they have no concept of what is in the bill. I am failing to comprehend how on earth anyone could think that this is a good bill that we should be celebrating the passage of.  Strike that.  I absolutely understand why the politicians think it is a good thing. But I am talking about everyone else. It simply baffles the mind.
Help me Understand What is GOOD About This Bill

Is Voting a Right? Should It be “Regulated”?

I have been reading a lot of philosophical stuff on politics lately. More of the big picture stuff as opposed to the current issues of the day. The health care reform stuff has me so frustrated I don’t even know where to begin. So I instead try to focus on the bigger picture and how to make things work. I know that most of you expected me to write about the health care madness that passed this evening. But I don’t even know where to begin. I will offer my thoughts soon. So instead, a different topic. I have seen some discussions about this topic before but I have never weighed in significantly with what I think. The primary reason is that I am quite torn on this subject. I understand the “right” to vote on a purely philosophical level. A government that serves the people must have all the people’s voices. And I absolutely understand how proposed rules on who can vote harken back to the despicable days of when blacks were kept from voting through tests and requirements. But I think this is a topic worth discussing. I tend to see the group that participates here at SUFA as a fairly intelligent group. So I don’t apply it to anyone here. But the question is: Is it wise to allow everyone to have an equal say in the election process?
Why Many in American Should Not Have a Say in a Federal Election

Racism Claim Goes International, Israel Trumps Biden for Jerk Status

I have a guest commentary submitted but I haven’t taken the time to take a look at it as of tonight. So I figured I would touch on this topic and see what people have to say. If you weren’t aware, Vice President Joe “foot in mouth” Biden has been in the middle east this week on a trip meant to jumpstart peace talks between Israel and Palestine. Unfortunately for anyone who thought that such a trip could be a positive, they chose Biden to be the American dignitary of record. That never ends well. But the administration made an even more baffling choice when deciding what “news” personality they were going to take with them to the middle east. They chose to take along MSNBC’s Chris Matthews. Now, I don’t want to be critical, but what exactly spurred that decision? Matthews hasn’t participated in anything that resembles news in quite some time. He is little more than a partisan hack from a highly partisan network. Or maybe they just wanted to find out if Matthews got a tingle up his leg over Benjamin Netanyahu. But I gotta tell ya…. Matthews didn’t disappoint.
Matthews Takes Racism Claim International

Let’s Find a Fix 1 – Unemployment (Continued)

I have to admit that I am pleased with the progress that was made in discussing this subject over the first couple of days. The thread was getting pretty long so I figured I would do a bit of a recap here and start with a somewhat clean thread. That way people aren’t scrolling forever to find the stuff they want to further discuss. So I figure I am going to do a somewhat short recap here in what will pass for the “article”. I will then go through the comments and pull out comments that we should continue to flesh out a bit. Obviously, I am going to be picking out the stuff that I think should be brought forward. Please don’t hesitate to bring something else over if you want to discuss it further and I didn’t bring it over. Additionally, I am going to post a few specific thoughts of mine with questions in the beginning comments. My hope is that we can come to some sort of agreement on the answers to them, but I realize that may not be the case.
A Short Recap and lots of Thoughts

Let’s Find a Fix 1 – Unemployment

OK, to this is the beginning of the series I was promising that would focus on the realities that we are facing in today’s America. Instead of the usual premise that government is bad, and thus should keep its hands out of everything, for the sake of this series, I would like to start from a different premise. That premise is that the world is what it is. Government is involved in everything. So the focus now has to shift away from the purely philosophical (although that doesn’t negate it, just changes the focus). What I mean is that it is OK to start from a point where we say, “government should not be involved” as where you would like to find a solution. But if we say that, we need to find a way to get there from here. I would like this to be a really open discussion with as many different ideas as possible. And no condescending to those who offer their thoughts. We have very different views all represented here. The idea behind my site was that we would have a place to discuss solutions despite the two party’s attempts to keep us separated by rhetoric. Time to get to doing that. So here are my rules for how we play this out:
Finding Workable Solutions to Today’s Problems

Tuesday Night Open Mic for March 2, 2010

We reach open mic in what has been an interesting week of discussion thus far. This week we will be discussing, at least in my offerings, the ultra racists Farrakhan and his epiphany that those on the right want to make Obama a one term President. We will also discuss Pelosi and her call to ignore the voice of the people and do what the party says. We will throw in a little gun control discussion and I will re-hash the article that Mathius noted yesterday discussing the supposed link between political affiliation and an individual’s IQ score. I must say that I was a bit disappointed yesterday that no one attempted to find a solution to the problem. The tactic instead seemed to be to attempt to rule my analysis of the offending article as theatrics, as though I was the one calling for Congressional action. As we look forward to the upcoming series, the intent is to attempt to find solutions to the problems that are presented. Solutions that will work. I so often get accused of not often enough having discussions about how to fix the problems. Yet when I do, I find that I am treated like Republicans at a health care summit. My discussion about solutions is ignored and we instead focus on the messenger.
Read the Open Mic Topics

My Boss Says Vote GOP!

I was reading through articles during my dinner break this evening, just seeing what was out there. After discussing the different views on the parties yesterday, and apparently finding that I have made quite a few folks angry with me for my characterization of Conservatives, I had planned on beginning my promised series this evening. I have postponed it simply because I don’t want it to get bogged down by the back to back article nights. Once the series starts I will not have an article posted the night after a series installment. I want the discussions to continue towards conclusion, which often takes more than a day. So that series will probably be starting Thursday night in leiu of a guest commentary so that it can carry on throughout the weekend. Part 1 is finished so it is merely a matter of strategic posting. But I degress. Tonight I read this article that focused on a further consequnce of the recent Supreme Court Decision that ruled corporations are entitled to free speech protections.
Is This Claim Legit and What Should be Done if Yes?

Elitism Occurs on ALL Sides of the Aisle

About two weeks ago, Mathius posted an article from the Washington Post that was titled “Gerard Alexander: Why are liberals so condescending?” I found the article quite interesting, as it really did a good job of summing up the frustration that folks feel with liberal elitism. I promised him a response to this. He wondered what an article would look like that came from the other side. While this is not really that article, because I cannot think like a true conservative, I will offer my thoughts on the conservative movement as well. So what I am going to do is offer my thoughts on both liberals and conservatives. I will use those two terms loosely, because I do understand the difference between a progressive and a liberal. But I want to be more general, lest I end up spending all my time attempting to define who I am talking about. I also add the caveat that I do not necessarily apply these thoughts to ALL who fall into those categories. For example, I may say liberals kick puppies, but I am aware that not all liberals kick puppies. Only Mathius does that, and it is because when he wakes sweaty from that nightmare, he really does believe it is a Raptor.
2012 and Mentally Blocked?

Initial Thoughts on “The Summit”

I could literally sum up my entire thoughts on the health care summit held at Blair House yesterday with just a line or two. They would be: The was nothing more than theater put on by the two parties. There was nothing accomplished and this was a complete waste of time and money. Of course if I summed it up in two sentences like that, this would not be a very interesting blog to read now would it? I am simply not prepared to dissect the entire 7 hours worth of bullshit that went on there quite yet. And I am not even sure that it is worth dissecting. However, if after this short piece, you would like me to delve further into what went on, I will. I live to serve. Instead I am going to offer some very quick observations and thoughts on what I saw of the summit. I watched a good portion of it. Morbid curiosity. It was big news so I feel like I had to at least touch on it tonight. But I will keep it short. Because it is guest commentary night and I don’t want to take away from the article that was submitted.
7 Hours of My Life That I Can Never Get Back

Charity and Sacrifice in a Free Society

With no time to write this evening I offer instead an article I read a while ago on the American Thinker website. We often talk of how the poor suffer in this country. And we obviously differ in our approaches as to how to deal with this situation. Those on the left tend to believe that it is government’s duty to prop up the weakest among us. Those on the right tend to believe in Charity. Black Flag believes government shouldn’t exist and that charity would suffice to solve the problem should the government no longer be in the way. While I don’t share BF’s desire to see zero government, I do share his belief that charity can take care of the issues that plague our poor. There is no need to for a government handout program, which is what welfare has become. I share the article and invite discussion around it because I believe that the article succinctly lays out the consequence of the altruism that today’s politicians bring to bear on the American public.
Rand, Hayek, and Hamilton on Individual Liberty

GOP Wants to Deny Human Rights

We begin another week with me wondering what exactly is the path forward for the United States. There are so many wrongs and only a few rights lately. The tough part is that the wrongs are often being committed for the “right” reason. Just a quick look through the sites I frequent tonight show me the President looking to take action against financial institutions, which I understand, but it will have horrible consequences. I will be writing about this coming soon. Another article talked about using reconciliation to pass health care. Again, I have and will continue to write about this subject (The tough part here is that so few details are actually being offered by the administration or Congress, leaving the argument “there is no bill to criticize” on the table for all who want to avoid the debate). But I ran across this article last week. It didn’t get a lot of press that I saw. But I felt that it must be covered, because this is an instance where, in my opinion, we are wrong and for the wrong reasons. At what point to we become no better than those we denounce?
We Cannot Lose Our Humanity to Save Humans

It Isn’t the Volume… It’s the Song

I have spent the better part of the last 15 months reveling in the sound of my own voice as I write a blog, hoping to change the world. Or at least the world of politics as we know it. Or at least the minds of a few people who can be reasoned with and who accept logic when it stares them in the face. For the record, I include all the readers of SUFA in that category. Not because we all agree and sing cumbayah together, obviously. But because we have come together, people of different points of view, and rationally discussed issues that matter to us. I believe that most Americans want the same things, albeit in different ways. Sure we have our moments of contention, but overall, I think the vibe here is good and we are making progress in understanding each other, and more importantly, in understanding Washington DC and the mess it has become. Don’t get me wrong, we have a long way to go in America. I need about 150 million reading SUFA to really make things change. Give me time…..
Why Both Sides are Mistaken if they Believe Volume is the Problem