SamSaid!

I was a little kid when I first heard the story about killing the goose that laid the golden egg. For a number of years I simply regarded the old story as a fable, but then in adulthood the point of the story became clear. Capitalism is  by far – the best  socio-eco system in the history of civilization. More good has come from this system than anything else conceived by man. It has one failing   —- while benefiting 85-90% of the populace, there are others for whatever reason who are left behind. Now our left wing friends are our to undermine or destroy capitalism because the fruits of success are not distributed “equally” —  i.e., to  the have-nots of society. I don’t quarrel with the noble idea of caring for our fellow man. But I strongly disagree with the notion that the solution is “robbing Peter to pay Paul”.

The taxing authority is a very powerful tool of government. Taking from one to give it to another is a major step toward killing the goose that lays the golden egg. Loading the burdens of society on the backs of business operations has its limits in terms of finance, quality, spirit, pay and all of the other benefits of employment. “Share the wealth”, they say. That is a nice euphamism for the State to decide how you live your life. The State will decide how much of your income you can keep. Our capitalism system can carry only so much of the cost of government and when the cost burden gets too high the Goose will die and there willno longer be any golden eggs. Too dramatic??  I don’t think so. As long as our politicos continue to blame and bad-mouth business for the ills of society the downhill slide becomes steeper. the old axioms still hold true   —-tax, tax, tax –  spend, spend, spend,  —  Tax, Tax, Tax.   And the left wingers give it the ho-hum. “Its only tax money  –  doesn’t belong to anyone.”

Now that we are blessed (?) with the leadership of Bam Bam for the next 4 years, I am reminded that there are two types of Presidents. Do-ers and Talkers. Mr Obama did not rise to his present station based on a long string of achievements or accomplishments.  His track record is as transparent and shallow as a sheet of seranwrap. There is no record of “Do-ing” either in the Illinois phase or in the US Senate. He is a Talker  –  and a good one. Sometimes (Reagan, Churchill)  Talkers can become good Do-ers  –  but not very often.     Anytime a President depends largely upon his skills as a persuader he is skating on thin ice, especially in a age of wide-open communications in the mass media. Harry Truman got it right, “The buck stops here”. And remember, we are still cleaning up the messes of the last Prince of Glib.

In our political system in the TV Age, the best Pitch-man almost always wins  –  Kennedy, Reagan, Clinton— and so it is with Obama.  The game plan  —  “tell ‘em anything . The idea is to get elected. Explain it away later”.     A Uniter?
He deserves a chance, but keep your hands on your wallet. You can’t get tax money from people who don’t pay taxes in the first place.

From the time I initially became eligible to vote, I have never failed to cast my vote in State or National elections. Some times I knew that my vote would not make a difference, i.e., “my guy” had a big safe margin and didn’t need my vote, or else he was so arrears that one vote made no difference. But I voted anyway. I strongly support the idea that there should be standards of voting eligibility and that fraudulent voting be dealt with strongly.  Each time I approach the ballot box, I wonder whether some derelict will cancel my vote via $25 bucks and a pint as the reward for a “friendly vote. Mistakes occurr and I recognize those few incidents. But the idea that unscrupulous politicians try to forge or buy votes really rankles me.  Election after election we read or hear about phony ballots and our leaders wring their hands and profess outrage. But in the election aftermath not much seems to be done about it  —  see ACORN. Those who might profit from voting fraud are not much interested in changing the rules.

Personally, I see nothing wrong with a national requirement for a picture ID as a voting requirement. Inconvenient to some?  So??  If democracy requires safeguards to prevent fraud and dishonesty,  Is that unreasonable ?  If I need a photo ID to cash a check or register my car Is there something wrong with that?  Or should I expect the government to tell me, don’t sweat it – it doesn’t happen that often. I say, if it happens one time it might be my vote that is negated.  Am I off the reservation on this one??

In election campaigns or other forms of public debate, sooner or later one or the other of the combatants will play the “race card”. You would think that after decades of debate, preferences, education, statutes and court decisions, some of the heat would leave this sore point. Not so.  Some things never change.

Here in 2008 we have a prime example. If 90% of blacks vote for Obama, that is a clear example of the activism of an informed electorate; but if 70% of white people vote for McKain, that clearly shows racial bias.   Everybody got that ??