Yaeh, Liberals and Conservatives can work together - but not in DC

Its the air. Its the water. Its the long term exposure to the fumes that encircle the capital on a daily basis. Whatever the reason, it is evident that those in Washington, DC do not know the meaning of working together for the best interest of America.

And I don't mean on some ideological basis. I mean working on getting people back to work, companies back on track and the pride of a nation back to being what it was and always should be.

I am so sick and tired of a president who doesn't know that he doesn't know. I am sick and tired of a Congress who is more intent on weinning the next election than winning the war on unemployment. I am sick and tired of all the sicophants from all political parties who would cut off the noses to spite their big toe. Yes, not only doesn't that make sense but one has ntohing to do with the other. Exactly.

I am not feeling very charitable right now (as I am among the - mostly - unemployed), and I will lambaste ANYONE who gets in the way of my soapbox.

Boehner, Reid, Obama, Romney, Eric Erikson, Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney, Sean hannity, Obermann, all of y'all can just stick a fistfull of dirt if you are not willing to do your jobs, to do your best, to get America on TRACK. Not a liberal track, not a conservative track, not a track that roams the landscape of the upcoming election or the "winning" of some philosophical issue.

Philosophical issues do not hold fmailies together. Political chest thumping does not put food on the tabel. Nor does it keep gas in the car. And it sure don't make people happy with their lot in life if that lot includes beating the pavement for the fiftieth week in a row without getting so much as a nibble.

Obama. Mr President. Listen close. America is not your personal experimenting ground. Do your experimenting during better times. Or better yet, as you sit in retirement and write your memoirs. This is not the time for you to be whining about how no one is willing to work together out of one side of your mouth while you stump and browbeat and make snippy remarks about your "opponents" in DC and beyond. You should be worrying about how much you don't know about business and economics. You should be looking at all those stupid lousy decisions to squander your opportunities to have been a pretty decent President by getting America and Americans back on track.

Congress. It is really pissing me off how you are so small and self centered that all you care about is "the next election." ~ "We're gonna win the White House!" ~ "We've got to stop their take over attempts!" ~ "The other guys are screwing America!"

Guess what, you petty little tweeps, YOU are screwing America.

How about this. How about we (the American voting population) tell you that we are not going to vote for ANY of you, not matter what your party affiliation, next election?! How about we let you know that you will not have a job after next election cycle?! At least not one paid by us. THEN will you stop bickering and get down to doing the job we put you in there in the first place for? Will you start getting the bills together that make sense? Will you stop STOPPING the next opposite party legislation and clean it up to mkake it workable?

I want to work. I am willing to do most any job. (I really have a problem with shoveling slop for 8 hours a day. Not because "its beneath me," but because i would be throwing up for nine hours a day. You have to know your limitations.) But you are making it so businesses don't know what you're doing next. They can't plan on hiring. They can't plan on expanding. They can't start up those new businesses. Because you are making the next month, let alone the next year or next five (which is the minimum they plan for as a rule), uncertain. They don't know what the hell you guys are going to do next. What bill you are going to put up, shoot down, villify or praise.

Stop it. Stop it now. Tell us if us promising NOT to elect you will get you serious about doing your job.

If a worker in America did the lousy job y'all do, we'd be fired in a heart beat. THINK ABOUT IT!

Agree with me or not, I just don't give a rat's behind. Think for yourselves. Look at all the things this President, this Congress, these media types, those potential candidates . . . look at what they are doing and NOT doing. And THINK FOR YORSELVES! But hey, this is just me, fuming, and Thinking Out Loud.

Anyway, have a great day.

Charles

Harry Reid to destroy US Senate

Harry Reid has decieded, in his almighty status as head of the US Senate, to destroy a deliberative body that has stood for centuries as a means of legal jurisdiction and citizen representation.

In a move to protect his Democrat colleagues, he turned around a Senate rule that allowed for conversation, albeit often fraught with arumentative and fractious debate, into a pass for anyone having to make tough votes that may get them booted their next election cycle.

For this move alone, Reid and all his croney buddies should get the boot. Their should be recalls and citizen outrage.

But what will happen?

Nothing. Because the President, the Congress and so many rich loud mouth politico wannabes will squash any attempt to do so. They will do it with page 23 news of Reid's move, lashing out at anyone who makes an issue of it and burying any news article that attempts to inform the general public that it is being done.

This is what is wrong with this country. Not the TEA party movements, not the talking heads of media circus shows, not the legitimate disagreement between people who have a differing view of things. It will not be done by business, it will not even be done by unions (although they are quite often behind the squashing of real dialogue and all about disinformation). It will be by the power mad leaders of this country who care more about their position, their jobs, their public image than they do about America and Americans.

Just as Nancy Pelosi did in the opening of the Democratic majority House in 2008 by making sure no Republicans could offer bills or amendments, Harry Reid has decided that no Republicans can offer amendments or force a vote that will make his Democratic buddies look bad.

Shame on you harry Reid for abandoning the ideals and principles that made this country and the august body of Congress great! Nail another coffin in the future of America that you have so diligently worked so hard to destroy in your selfish and self absorbed bid to stay in power. Shame on you and anybody who blindly follows you into creating a hell WE all have t live in!

And don't think I don't believe for a second if the shoes were reversed that the entrenched Washington machine of the Republican Party would not chomp at the bit to do the same thing.

All these politicians are just as guilty of destroying this country and losing focus on what it truly means to be American, to work for a better America - one where there is a future as proud as its past.

(Before you naysayers and America bashers start enumerating the foibles of America's past and their faults, I do not overlook them - I just choose to see the big picture that DESPITE the missteps of America's history, it is STILL the greatest nation in comparison to the rest of the world.)

AGree with me or disagree with me, I don't care. Just open your eyes, stop letting others do your thinking and realize the damage being done by those in power who have forgotten their duty. But hey, this is just me, Thinking Out Loud.

You have yourself a great day.

Charles

The GOP Field

Chris Christie is not running. Sarah Palin is . . . who knows where she is at these days. Rick Perry shot himself in the foot with a homophobic statement and other "missteps". Ron Paul is sounding better - which is scary in and of itself. Newt Gingrich never really has a chance. Michelle Bachmann doesn't deliver the total unity of the GOP to go against Obama in 2012. Santorum, Johnson, Hunstman are all the second tier stuff that don't make it past Iowa or New Hampshire or South Carolina. Herman Cain is, well, Herman Cain. I really don't know what to make of him. Does anyone? But a serious contender for the 2012 slot against the Big "O" (and I don't mean Oprah - not this time)? Nah, doubt it.

SO where does that leave us? Romney? Please, the guy is so not ready fro prime time players it is not even funny.

There is no one out there to go up against the Democrats candidate. And I sure as heck am not voting for Obama.

So where does that leave anyone who doesn't want Obama to get a second chance to mess things up worse?

Green Party candidates Mesplay or Stein? Or Constitutional party types like Roy Moore or Virgil Goode? R Lee Wrights for the Libertarians? Or Alexander for the Socialists? How about Nader, Ventura or Schriner (this will be the journalist's 4th and last try at the Presidency)? Why not go with Robert Burch, the Naked Cowboy of New York?

(Yes, these are all either candidates or have said they were running - excpet for Nader and Ventura - for President in 2012.)

I think Hillary Clinton would have a good chance of beating her boss for the nomination and the Presidency. But like a good little Democrat, she will not run. Not that I'd vote for her . . . maybe.

But it is very discouraging to see there is little chance of finding someone out there worth voting for.

I won't stay home. But I am having a hard time deciding. Maybe I will run this time. Maybe. Who knows.

Anyway, the usual spiel . . . disagree or not, it doesn't really matter to me. Just as long as I got you thinking for your own selves. because heck, this is just little old me, Thinking Out Loud.

Have a great day.

Charles

DADT - Stop bickering already!

I have said this before and will say it again. Don't Ask, Don't Tell should be a strictly military decision. It should be a policy decision based on the impact of having it or doing away with it will have on the military. In days past, it was an issue of security. If someone was ashamed of being gay, a foreign country or interest could use it as leverage. but in today's environment, this is not such an issue. Being gay is more accepted in the public. It does not have the stigma of say the 50's or 60's. Therefore it should be the military that decides if it makes sens to keep or not. And how to implement changes as necessary.

It should not, however, be a political issue. It should not be a political "football." It should not be political in any way. It should never be a political promise one way or the other. It should not be a campaign trail talking point. It should not be something debated by Congress, debated by a President in the press.

What I am talking about is the recent ballyhoo over the booing of an American soldier, who happened to be gay. I mean Rick Perry saying he would re-instate it if elected. I mean all the squabble back and forth by Presidential wannabes and political hacks, from the New York Times editorial room to the halls of the Congressional offices.

And I mean President Obama's recent derision of Republicans, too.

It should not be used by anybody to gain either political favor nor political office. Although I agree with the President's sentiments, I disagree with him making a public display. This is partisan politics at its usual. (I can't say at its worst because it all sucks.) Political bimbos from Pelosi to McConnell are constantly making public statements that are not only none of their business but none of their business of state. It is political posturing. Plain and simple.

For the record, I find it reprehensible that anyone who willing served their country during peace or war should not be accorded more respect than any politician or statesmen or public figure of any kind. The next time you drive from one state to another without having to "produce your papers," think of those who have served and are serving. The next time you fill up your gas tank or shop at WalMart or drink a beer (or soda or whatever) on your back porch, or the next time you publicly disagree with your elected officials and don't fear being arrested in the middle of the night, remember the military. These men and women who selflessly serve to protect the freedoms this country enjoys, either by direct confrontation or by simple presence (otherwise known as detente or a Mexican standoff), deserve our respect and admiration.

It shouldn't matter if they are black, white, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, Filipino, nor if they are Catholic, Protestant, Wicca, Jewish or Buddhist. And it should not matter if they are gay or not. They - without forced necessity nor peer pressure - served and protected your freedoms, your liberties, your choice to not serve. And they ask nothing in return. But they deserve so much more than nothing.

That said, it is not my intention to blast any particular party. It is my intention to remind EVERY public official to act like the "representatives of the people" that they are. If they don't stand up for anyone in our military, it is a telling indictment of their character. I will write them a letter or NOT vote for them. But for the President, or any public figure, to single out anyone for this lack of reaction, is wrong. He should have said that ANYONE in public office should be upset by this booing. But he didn't. He made it political. He made it partisan. And for this, I simply sigh, shake my head and chalk up another "poor leadership" moment for President Obama. And in the next election, I will weigh all of these moments (and there are a lot), against the other candidates. And make my choice.

I hope that anyone who agrees or disagrees with me will comment. Because this is something that should concern every American. This is the reason for such partisan bullc**p in Washington. This is the reason we can't get anything done. We need to move forward. We need jobs. We need a stable economy. We need people in public office to act in the best interest of America and Americans, not themselves or lobbyist or special interest. If doing what is right does not win them an election, so be it. President Obama said he didn't care if he was a one term President, so long as he was able to do something to improve America. But he lied. He w3ants to be elected a second term. And he will use partisan politics to do so. Just like all those4 other liars and hacks in Washington DC.

Agree with me or disagree with me, tell me I am full of it or cheer me on for telling it like it is. It doesn't matter to me, so long as I get you to thinking for yourself and not just being a robot of the establishment. Because, hey, this is just me, Thinking Out Loud.

Have a great day.

Charles

Steve Isreael and Dems Hug Unions and Screw America

"Will you stand with President Obama in creating jobs?"

This is the question in a recent email from Steve Israel, Chairman of the DCCC. In the email was a very disturbing image. (And I don't just mean the image of standing with a President who really has no clue how to "create jobs" in America.)

"Dems 2012 . . . Union-Made in the USA!" Union-made??! Now if that does not confirm all I have been saying about how Democrats and liberals are in the pockets of unions, I don't know what is. This is so very scary a thought. Unions controlling our country.

Not to say that almost all politicians are in the pockets of special interest groups, but just imagine how scary a country controlled by unions would be. Gone wold be your ability to work for whoever you want, wherever you want to work without being beholden to some political, money greedy thugs. (Yes, my opinion of unions is very strong in the negative direction and I have experience to back up my great dislike. Maybe I'll detail it here some day . . . like a whole post dedicated because the tale is scary and bit long.)

Take the NLRB and unions attack of Boeing and South Carolina.

Sout Carolina is a right to work state. You can quit and/or they can fire you, without preamble. But companies are very employee-centric in states like this. Andwith SC's 10.5% unemployment rating, they need to attract business however they can, to get their citizens back to work. Boeing, seeing the huge potential of a dedicated workforce, a state willing to help them and none of the union BS they have to deal with in states like PA or WA. Employees wages can be geared toward the area economic situation and employees don't have to lose a chunk of their money to unions.

AND what unions wil not tell you is that states like this CAN have unions in them. But it is up to employees to both opt in to these unions and opt out if they don't like it. Becasue unions don't want workers to determine what is best for themselves.

And with all the protections under law in place, the usual reasons for unions are non-existent.

Union-made politicians. Man, if that don't give you nightmares, I don't know what will.

Now, onto President Obama creating jobs. He still does not know how to do it. He's never done it. And, by all indications, he never will. He is still blowing hot air about 'shovel-ready' jobs even though he admitted there are no such things. And construction jobs for specific projects in mind are not continuing jobs, they are temporary band-aies to get workers back to work. In this field only. For secretaries, bakers, doctors, and so many other professions that make up almost 80% of the workfroce, these types of jobs are not in the cards.

Mr. President, get outof the way, stop making stupid stump speeches and get with the program. Start talking to the industry leaders who WILL create jobs to find out how it is done. Stop stabbing the job creators in the back with your class warfare rhetoric. If you thought that everyone in America shuold give their fair share than do on of two things, or both, if you're courageous enough. Make EVRYONE pay taxes, not just the 'wealthy'. And / or make taxes simple. Do away with loopholes, make the tax rate a definative thing. 10% for everyone. No ifs, ands or buts. 10%. And everyone pays. Because right now you have 50% of America not paying ANY taxes. Where is your political stump speeches about how THESE citizens are not contributing? It is in the politically correct category of "don't upset the apple cart, don't make enemies of your constituent base, don't make it seem like you hate poor people." Instead just hate rich people, ignoring the fact that has been pointed out to you time and time again. It is the wealthy business owners who create jobs. Not the government, not the poor, not the lower income middle class.

I could go on, but I thnk I made my point. If not, comment and tell me what you think I am wrong about or what you think I missed. I won't mind. I won't get upset. I won't stop answering your questions (unlike some politicians who refuse to speak with media outlets or citizens who ask the tough questions). Because this is just me, Thinking Out Loud.

Have a great day.

Charles

Exciting News

I have exciting news.

And it has nothing to do with Barack Obama's jobs plan (which I've already spoken out about before the latest news from GOP). It has nothing to do with Huntsman sucking up to the sports minded fans of South Carolina (like going to Clemson and Univeristy of South Carolina games is NOT going to offset each other). Or Hillary announcing there is "less than zero" chance of here going up against Obama in 2012 Primary (don't you love politicians who say such things . . . makes you wanna shout LIAR!).

No, my news is actually about me. I have been walking around with an elated feeling that even politics can't sway from me.

After all the articles, blogs, reviews, short stories I have published over the years, I have finally published BOOK ONE. (I call it that because I have every intention of following this up quickly with non-fiction, fiction and many more books. Let the flood waters spill!)

It is a poetry anthology of poems and pictures about my time as a truck driver. Aptly titled, Behind the Wheel: A Trucker's Poetry Book, I hope to dispel some preconceptions about truckers, life on the road and what these dedicated professionals have to deal with in regards to family, friends, job and life on the road in general. You can check it out (it is an e-book you can download on many platforms) if you'd like. I know I would LOVE it if you checked it out.

Now that I have broken that barrier in my life, I will be publishing more. Including the soon to be completed non-fiction "memoir" of the 2008 political campaign up to Barack's first year in office. Thinking Out Loud: The Book should be done editing next week and I will be getting that one out there.

Anyway, thank you all for your support of this blog. It is to you and the people over at WM Freelancers on LinkedIn that I gained my courage to do this. (I did the dedication to my family for Behind the Wheel, but it will be to you all that I will be dedicating the next one. After all, it was my readers, both casual and dedicated, that have inspired me to keep writing my thoughts on all things in America from a conservative viewpoint.

I will be back to wax politic and philosophical. For now, this is just me, Thinking Out Loud, and beaming from ear to ear.

Have a great day. I am.

Charles

Jobs, yes . . but is that all he should say??

President Barack Obama addressed a joint session of Congress about his jobs plan.

The question whether he should have addressed this to a full Congressional session and have it televised as such to the American public is moot. The ready answer is no. It was political showboating and a manuever to win an election. And even though he spoke of not doing such a thing, this only made his stand weaker. But it is neither here nor there at this point. It is what it is. It happened. Get past it.

The plan he put forward had both conservative and liberal elements. Can we say MIDDLE OF THE ROAD POLITICS? Yes we can! Was this speech intended to boost his declining poll ratings? Yes it was! Does that change that part of what he spoke was true? Hey, even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Obama looked Presidential . . . for most of the speech anyway. Had he steered clear of his union endorsement, his social agenda crap and his small jabs at his opponents, he might have actually impressed me more as a president worth more of a historical sidebar than he was the first black president. But he could not help himself.

To the plan itself, it has some merits and should certainly be examined and tuned by the legislators whose job it is to legislate. But it should not, nor should any legislation aside from a national declaration of emergency or war, be "passed right away." The American people, for whom the President said this was all about, should have a chance to look at it. The legislators, on whose shoulders the responsibility to rectifying small gaps in knowledge and making sure it does not "cost" the people in the long run falls, should take time to look at it. (Not a session or a month or several weeks - it should never take THAT long to look.)

But to "pass it right away," to "pass it immediately," without the due consideration a hefty and ambitious plan such as this is deserves, would be as big an injustice as much of the recent legislation that has passed "so we can know what is in it." The President may have looked mostly Presidential, but that doesn't equate to dictatorship. And we should never allow it. Follow our leadership when it deserves it, question our leadership all the time. It is the only way to keep the powermad illness that can overtake even the most public service person. They are, after all, only human.

I hope the President much success (hey, I've been out of work at a day job since 11/09), as it means success for the American people, the nation and the continued existence of the institution of a free and democratic society. But there are two things that I know.

One appearance of leadership among all the political bickering and silent sideline stances this president has shown in the past two and a half years can not make up for it. I look forward to his one term presidency ending in 2012.

And secondly, his lack of decorum for the obvious political posturing this speech presented despite his condemnation of such actions is tacky to say the least. He should have left all that out. He should have left all the union boosting out. He should have addressed both the beltway political gamesmanship as well as the outside the beltway political gamesmanship. He mentioned the lobbyist for the corporation but failed to scold the union comments by the likes of Jimmy Hoffa (who really should take an extended expedition to join, er find, his father).

His failure to address this and actually include his pro-union ties in his speech took so much credibility away from his claims of clearing away the politics of DC in favor of the job they were sent there to do.

Were I to give this speech a grade (which seems so en vogue these days to giver politicians "report cards"), I would give it a B+ for the ideas and effort. I would give it a C- for credibility. And I would give it an F for avoidance of biased political rhetoric.

Agree with me, disagree with me, it really doesn't matter to me. So long as I can get you to see past the pretty rpose and double meaning hidden in every political speech adn think for yourselves beyond the borders of political parties and ideology, than I have accomplished my goal. Because hey, this is just me, Thinking Out Loud.

Have a great day.

Charles