Osama bin Laden is dead and President Obama missed an opportunity for greatness

Let me start off by saying President Obama made the right decision. Eliminating Osama bin Laden was the right thing to do. I have made no secret my dislike for our President's policies, but he made the right choice this time. All of the events leading up to the decision aside, it fell upon the President to ultimately decide what to do. I would have rather seen him captured than killed, but if that's how it fell out then that's how it fell out. Sometimes you have to accept the decisions of the personnel in the field and stand by them. Monday morning quarterbacking what someone should have thought in the middle of a firefight sometime after midnight a half a world away from your comfortable bed is not how the military should be handled.

That being said, good for you, Mr President.

What he missed out on was his speech. Instead of focusing on how he made the decision and he was right to do so, he could have made strides towards ending the bitter division in our government. He could have said something along these lines:

"This is a victory for the nation. This is a victory for the men and women in uniform who performed their jobs with their usual mix of professionalism and consummate skill. This is a victory for the policies of my predecessor, without which we would not have garnered the intel that brought us to this monumental day. I have learned that good ideas are not the sole property of one political party, so from this day forward I encourage Congress, Democrat and Republican alike, to remove the party affiliation from the proposed idea and take it on its own merits. Good ideas should be put into action, regardless of source. Bad ideas should be eliminated or moderated. From this day forward my administration will lead by example in this area. Our task is not over. Our nation is not secure, but we are safer now. Let us continue the work before us to make our nation secure."

Then do it. Actually do something positive about eliminating the vitriol that has become so commonplace in our governing and legislative process. I keep hearing those on the left screaming about how Bush failed and Obama succeeded. They keep hammering that waterboarding and "black ops" prisons weren't needed to gather the information.

To fully believe this, you would have to assume that nothing Bush did contributed in any way to the intel that was gathered leading to this monumental place and that is not true. We wouldn't have had Kaleed Sheik Mohammad if not for Bush's policies. He did not provide any intel until after he was waterboarded. That intel was confirmed by other sources that were kept in those same "black ops" prisons.

This was truly a victory for the American political process for we had a Republican President start a job that a Democrat President finished. Neither one could have succeeded without the other. Those are the facts, like them or not. Mental gymnastics trying to make the facts conform to preconceived notions helps no one.

I am not saying Bush did not state repeatedly that Osama bin Laden was not his top priority. I am not saying that Obama did not state repeatedly that Osama bin Laden was his top priority. Both of those are facts. I am saying that the goals each had was reinforced and unattainable without what came before. We need to see that, accept it and realize that we are much stronger united than we could ever be divided.

President Obama could have used this moment to unite the nation behind him, guaranteeing him a second term and ushering in an era of co-operation that the Nation desperately wants and needs but he didn't. He still could, but with much less of an impact. That's a missed opportunity that I hope doesn't come back to haunt us.

We are the United States of America. Its about time we started focusing on what Unites us.

Shay's Rebellion and What it Means in 2011

For those of you educated in the public school system, Shay's Rebellion took place in Western Massachusetts during the 1780s after the American Revolution. It became an important event in US history when taken together with other rebellions at the time because the cause was taxes. Daniel Shay was the man behind the rebellion; a veteran of the Continental Army (they fought on our side) who resigned after being wounded and left for home unpaid. Upon arriving at home, he ended up in court for unpayment of debt (likely due to having been unpaid while serving in the Continental Army) and saw many many others in the same situation.

Being a revolutionary sort of person, he mounted a rebellion made up of the folks who were being taken to the cleaners. At one town meeting, a farmer phrased it this way:

"I have been greatly abused, have been obliged to do more than my part in the war, been loaded with class rates, town rates, province rates, Continental rates and all rates...been pulled and hauled by sheriffs, constables and collectors, and had my cattle sold for less than they were worth...The great men are going to get all we have and I think it is time for us to rise and put a stop to it, and have no more courts, nor sheriffs, nor collectors nor lawyers."

Note that when he says "rates" he's referring to what we call taxes. What does he mean by that? Well, let's look at a bit of Massachusetts history, shall we? 1778, the first attempt at a state Constitution was shot down in the vote to ratify. In 1780, a state Constitution is ratified over the objections of many small towns and communities, setting a precedent in state politics that exists to this day. 1781, the state's paper money (money at the time was issued be each state) issued in 1778 drops to 1 fortieth of its issued value. So a state dollar was be worth 2.5 cents. And you thought our inflation was bad!

The courts are filled with people from the wealthy families who predominantly reside in the eastern part of the state and that does nothing to endear these now impoverished farmers who plead their cases and are largely ruled against. Such is the situation that protests are started in Western Massachusetts by Samuel Ely in 1782 against both the court system and state policies. The following year (1783) Job Shattuck from Groton, MA leads a group armed with clubs and staves against the tax collectors. In 1784 the courts are flooded with cases of unpaid debts like our good friend Daniel Shay. In 1785 a man in sentenced to 70 days in prison for unpaid debts.

Daniel Shay blows his top, grabs some men and they charge the courts of Northampton, Great Barrington, Concord, Taunton and Springfield in 1786, disrupting proceedings and shutting them down. The governor of Massachusetts responds with the Riot and Milita Acts; a proclamation declaring Danny and his boys (I couldn't resist) to be traitors. It goes further by stating that any gathering of more than 12 armed people in public is illegal and empowered sheriffs to kill anyone participating in said gathering. That's called elimination of the right to fair trail. Samuel Adams (well after his first brewery failed) declared that any rebellions against the republic should be put to death. The state legislature suspends the right of Habeas Corpus, or release from unlawful detention. Job Shattuck is wounded while resisting arrest, shipped to Boston and imprisoned without trial or bail.

By 1787 Danny's boys, called Regulators, are organized into 6 regiments throughout Hampshire country. A governmental militia is sent west and they fire upon the Regulators at the Springfield Armory. A state of rebellion is declared and by February the fighting is over and the rebellion is quelled.


The fallout: Shays and the Regulators are captured, imprisoned, fined and two are hung for looting. The majority are given conditional pardons in exchange for surrendering their firearms and giving an Oath of Allegiance. By mid 1788, all members of the Regulators including the leaders are pardoned. That same year the US Constitution is ratified by 11 of the 13 states (except Carolina and Rhode Island). The Bill of Rights is signed into law shortly thereafter.

But why tell us all this you ask? Surely I could have spent my time here doing something other than typing all this out. Yes but look at what started the rebellion: excessive taxation, devaluation of money and lack of restitution in court. Sound familiar? How much have your taxes gone up? How much has the dollar frankly tanked? Do you think the courts are on your side?

Lucky, the majority of our population hasn't just participated in an open and armed revolt against one government already. We aren't - and shouldn't be - ready for open warfare in the streets and armed rebellion.

That doesn't mean we can't peacefully rebel. We need to hold our representatives and senators responsible for the votes they cast on our behalf. We need to pay the Bill of Rights and take responsibility for those rights we are guaranteed and not lay claim to those that aren't. Educate yourself on what liberties the government is not empowered to infringe and ensure those you vote for do not try to demean, diminish or delete them. This nation of the people, by the people and for the people needs to be run by the people. Do not let them create a false nobility or ruling class. You do not need a degree to run for office. You don't need millions of dollars (but it helps). Your vote matters. Use it wisely.

Far too many have shed far too much blood for you to demean it with willful ignorance.

Random thoughts

Okay, so its been over half a year since I last blogged anything. I don't think that's terrible or a tragedy since few people if any will ever read this but in the interest of keeping it somewhat active, I'm sure I'll find something to rant about.

Many people know I'm a geek (I say it often enough). I own a 2007 Chevy Aveo 5 the cheap one. Its a decent car that has had the crap beaten out of it but it still runs after two accidents and over 120,000 miles so I can't complain. That and its a standard and gets awesome gas mileage.

For the fun of it, I decided to name it the "Little Blue Pirate" and because that's how our sense of humor goes, my wife and I decided once we'd paid it off to put some fierce pirate stickers on it. She saw these and I put them

on. Not exactly what you'd expect to see on a tiny little fuel efficient commuter vehicle, which pleased us to no end.

But as I said earlier, I'm a geek. That means I needed something to declare my geekiness to the world in as obvious and loud a fashion as

possible. If for no other reason than because its fun. So my beautiful bride came through again with this 'tribal Batman' symbol from Rad Dezignes. Actually, its the Nightwing symbol superimposed on the Batman symbol which really feeds my inner geek since Richard Grayson is now Batman. Well, for the time being anyway.

Anyhow, the thing is huge. Its meant for a laptop and

its like 22" x 8". I'm putting it on my hood.

She also found another pirate sticker of a skeletal pirate that we're going to put on the rear window. I've found a couple other pirate decals I want to put on.

I think this is the next pirate sticker I want. I like the swords.

That's about all for a rant today. Maybe I'll post more later.

"Later" being a relative term of course. ;)

Bullies and bullying

In the fine state of Massachusetts, we have a problem with bullies. Or so it would seem. In the past year, two children in western Massachusetts alone committed suicide as a result of being bullied. I heard a talk radio show speaking about it and there was much outrage about What Needs To Be Done and Who's Responsible. The usual suspects were trotted out: the parents, the school administration and the legislature and they are all at fault, but the proper response is not the one being discussed.

This 'disturbing trend' cannot be resolved by more Zero Tolerance regulations that do not work. This cannot be resolved by yet more legislation requiring more programs about bullying. These programs do not work; the bullies ignore them and those being bullied know the adults will never do anything about it. The parents can raise all the objections and call everyone they want to call but nothing will change.

Why? Because the problem is not the bullies; its the culture we've created for our children. Bullies always have and always will exist. We stand as good a chance of eliminating addictions as we do bullies. Its a personality trait and its part of human nature. What we've done by eliminating failing grades and forcing little league teams to not keep score and making everyone play is disable our children's ability to cope with adversity.

In the charge to protect our children from the disappointments we suffered as children, we are failing in our duties as parents. I was bullied as a child. Eventually, I struck back at some of the bullies but learned to tolerate others. I was encouraged by my father to stand up for myself, he didn't stand up for me because he knew that would only make things worse.

Think about that; you were a child so you know its true. These "Zero Tolerance" rules and ridiculous programs all hinge on the bullied child telling on the bully, which only arms the bully. You encourage a child to stand up for himself and your creating an adult. You coddle them and your maintaining a child.

It is the duty of the parents and schools to work together to produce productive members of society; adults capable of living and maintaining a career and a family. We are failing at that sacred charge. Every parent who calls the school to complain about a bully without first arming their child with the courage, strength and skills to stand up to that bully is a failed parent. Every school administration that holds assemblies telling the entire student body 'how to deal with a bully' is failing as administrators. Every administration that takes the stance of 'if you knew what that child was going through at home, you'd understand' is failing as an administration.

Bullies need to be dealt with directly and individually and most effectively by the person being bullied. It doesn't matter what the child is going through at home, that does not give them the right to take it out on others. Allowing that as an excuse does nothing to teach the child individual responsibility. Telling that to a parent only increases their sense of outrage. Telling a child they need to report bullying to an adult excuses them from dealing with their problem as an individual, absolving them of responsibility.

Bullies form important life lessons for a child; for the bully and the bullied.

For the bullied, it is at these young ages that a child learns to stand up for himself, to learn that by his own actions he can determine the outcome of a situation. It empowers him. He learns that he can, through force of will, have an affect on the world around him. It prevents him from meekly accepting the difficulties of life but facing them head-on. A child with such experience learns that he sets his own rules on acceptable behavior from those around him.

For the bullies, they learn there are consequences to their actions. They learn that just because they are bigger or stronger that they cannot do whatever they want. They learn that sometimes there is a price to be paid for what they think is simply just fun. They learn to empathize with others, especially if someone they picked on suddenly bloodies their nose.

I know, "you're advocating violence!" Yes, I am. In our interactions with others, there must be a common understanding of communication. Sometimes, that language is violence. Yes, we should always strive to avoid such conflict but neither should we shrink from it. Confrontations do not always mean violence, but everyone must be prepared for that if the situation requires it.

"But J, adults can always avoid violence."

No, not really. What Saddam Hussein did prior to being removed from office was bully the UN. The only response after years of his continued bullying was violence. He chose that response. Thankfully, President Bush had the testicular fortitude to do what was necessary when faced with a bully: call their bluff. Bloody their nose.

Without arming our children with the knowledge that there are consequences to our actions and that there are unpleasant tasks in life that need to be done, we are creating eternal children who will never be capable adults. These children will be the ones who look to others to lead them from the difficulties in their lives. These children will be dependent upon others to provide them with jobs and a sense of security. These children will not be leaders our nation will need in the future. They will not be representatives of the entrepreneurial spirit that enables the USA to be a world leader in innovation. They will not be willing to take the risks that reap great rewards in life. These children will be the future that results in the destruction of our great nation.

It is how we face adversity that defines the society we live in. Every one of us, every day faces these decisions and therefore defines our society. How we are perceived as individuals is determined by how we react to difficulties in our lives. The US as a nation would not be able to help our neighbors in Haiti if our military was not prepared, trained and equipped with the tools necessary to do so. We as individuals would not be able to assist our neighbors unless we too, are prepared, equipped and trained to do so.

The bullies in my life taught me that every situation requires a different solution. In some cases, I responded with violence, in others it wasn't necessary. What I learned is that bullies had no power over me unless I gave it to them. That lesson defined how I reacted to other struggles and adversities in my life.

We should be empowering our children. Bullies are not the problem, they're an opportunity for our children to learn vital life lessons. We should never let such opportunities pass us by.

Localities and Local issues

The town I live in is one of two currently being courted by Mohegan Sun for the building of a resort casino. We are also facing the possible closing of the middle school.

Who said local politics weren't fun?

On the school front, the superintendent of schools held an informational meeting with the town to illuminate the possible closing of the middle school, which would mean some 400 students would suddenly need to find space in either the already over-crowded high school or the already over-crowded elementary school. There are a number of problems, among which is that the superintendent is stating that they have no control over about 96% of their budget. These are fixed costs like utilities, busing, and Individual Education Plans for student requiring special care (which carries the weight of law in Massachusetts). The remaining 4% is discretionary funding which is books, papers, pens, pencils and other paraphernalia of learning. As a father of four children, I wonder at that number since I know we provide paper, pens and pencils and I've seen the same text books show up with child after child.

He is stating that the schools received a 58% cut in funding in total from the state in various ways. He was asked by the state education board to prepare four budgets: a level budget and budgets with a 5%, 10% and 15% cut in funding. He stated that the administration is not receiving any raises this year in an effort to mitigate the budget.

Good for them - I've gone without a raise for two years running and this year doesn't look good either. Pardon my lack of sympathy, but its about freaking time. Consider that last year the administration had an 8% pay raise if you average it out over all administrators and the year before was 10%. Even if I had gotten a raise I would have been lucky to see 3%. Boo freaking hoo for the administration.

The people of this community have been making do with less for years. I won't get into the national or state politics that caused that because that's not what this post is about. The end result is that since 2008 people in this community on average have not seen an increase in their income but have seen an increase in spending. Gas taxes have gone up. Sales taxes have gone up. The price for oil, gasoline and natural gas has gone up. The price for food has gone up. The price for clothing and other goods has gone up. That's not even talking about the credit card interests. I personally am facing possible foreclosure on my house and I still have a good paying job. That's mostly due to sudden emergency expenditures like an exploding boiler, a leaky roof, failed appliances and plumbing repairs that I did myself. We were unable to secure any loans other than for the boiler. Our credit cards have had the interest rates increased and the credit limits decreased. We are behind in all our debt. I haven't mentioned it because we're not alone, and we're better off than some if not most. I only mention this now because its about time the government in some way starts to feel the pinch.

There was no sympathy at all for what the schools were going through, only outrage. Outrage because we were led to believe that this would be a question and answer session where we would have the opportunity to discuss the issue. Outrage over the wisdom and safety concerns of placing ten and eleven year olds in the same building as seventeen and eighteen year olds within weeks of a report of a twelve year old getting raped by a seventeen year old. Outrage over the sense that no one in the school administration seems to feel anything about it at all; no concern, guilt, anger, humiliation or even frustration. A token attempt was made to place blame on the town government but everyone in the audience has been (or should be) aware that the town has been one step from bankruptcy for years now.

I fail to see how the school administrators can feel closing the school will do anything positive in regards to their budget. The bulk of their budget from their own numbers is spent on IEPs and other fixed costs which will not be affected by closing the school building. This has the feel of a scare tactic meant to panic the public, a public that is already stretched to the breaking point with tension, worry and very real fear. This was a bad move.

Now onto the casino! Free-flowing money, food, drinks and scantily clad beautiful women are what you think of when you hear casino. That's what the advertisers and the movies have drilled into our heads. A pseudo-classy world of fun and excitement and romance that could exist within our town borders. We are led to believe that having a billion dollar resort casino would bring much-needed jobs, traffic to area businesses and relief to the town coffers.

HA!

The area they want to put the casino in is across the street from the entrance to the Massachusetts Turnpike. This is a resort casino - a one-stop shop complete with restaurants, gas stations, stores and hotels so that casino patrons will never have to leave the casino for any reason whatsoever. So much for traffic to area businesses.

Casino jobs require training and experience that you really can't get anywhere else. Do you know all the rules of blackjack, five or seven card stud, 21, pitch and poker? Can you deal cards? Do you know how to run a high-tech security center? Are you familiar with the laws regarding gambling in Massachusetts? (Right now there's only one: its illegal but the current state legislature will change that and no doubt to the benefit of the casino that's lining their pockets) Can you spot someone cheating from across a crowded room or someone underage using a fake ID? Casino jobs involve very unique and particular skills. Jobs may end up coming to our area but not immediately and not high-paying ones. So much for much-needed jobs.

We live in a state that is notorious for raising taxes on businesses. So notorious that we've been hemorrhaging businesses and jobs for years. People have followed the jobs and left this state; we are one of I think five states to have actually seen a population decrease. Why would any business want to come to Massachusetts? Tax breaks. The governor wants to have state-run casinos, but if that were purely the case why would a casino spend the sort of cash that Mohegan Sun has spent courting my area and New Bedford? The answer is that they have to believe very strongly that they're going to get some sort of sweet-heart deal. Chances are that the state is going to give the casinos a bye on their taxes for a few years. The state is betting on making that up in other sources of revenue.

Silly state - don't you know better than to bet against a casino? The house ALWAYS wins in the long run.

Long time no blog

Okay, so I haven't blogged in a while. I have my reasons but I'm not sharing them. So there.

Foreign Policy

The days of the US taking a single-minded approach to foreign policy is past. I'm not convinced it was ever a good idea but regardless, its an idea whose time has come and gone. I'm not a fan of President Obama and did not vote for him, so let me just say that right out of the gate. He is doing everything he said he'd do in his campaign and that is to change the face of the US government. I disagree with the direction he's taking but that's why I didn't vote for him. I'm not going to get into his domestic policies in this particular rant: there's enough fodder there for quite a few posts/rants. This particular post is in regards to his rather disastrous thus far foreign policy.

It is popular among certain groups of intelligentsia to malign the United States or previous administrations and that's fine for them to do as private citizens. No nation is perfect and we have plenty of skeletons in our closet, however I do not want to see my President, the leader of the United States going into other countries and apologizing for the previous administration. That's airing dirty laundry that doesn't need to be aired and it's taking a pot-shot at someone who is no longer a threat to your own policies. It has no place on the international stage. If a Democrat wants to stand up in Congress and say they hate all Republicans, fine - I'll applaud their honesty if nothing else. But to have the sitting President go in front of the leaders of other nations and basically say "hey that guy I replaced was an idiot and I'm sorry you had to deal with him" isn't being politically savvy. Its not a way to get other leaders on our side. It doesn't buy political points with anyone. All it does is make it look like you cannot get past the previous administration and are more interested in pointing fingers than getting results. If behind closed doors you say it in the course of negotiations, that's fine. Stating it in a speech is amateurish and childish.

When is someone going to do something positive with South America? Here's a quick catch-up to those who haven't been paying any attention to our fellow Americans south of the isthmus. Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez is more than just a petty dictator who hates America and will malign the United States to anyone willing to listen: he has dreams of turning South America into one unified government under his despotic rule.

He came to power in Venezuela after failing in a coup to take over the nation in 1992. He then went to visit his friend and colleague in Cuba, Fidel Castro and came back with a number of Cubans loyal to him. They became citizens of Venezuela and through the use of the Bolivarian Circles voted him into office in 1998 mostly by strong-arming those who weren't going to vote for him, much like ACORN does here in the United States, only more successfully. The same tactics have been used in his "re-elections" that good ole' Jimmy Carter "certified".

The official story however is that he worked hard after being released from prison to earn the trust of the public. He created the Fifth Republic Movement on the ideas of basically dismantling then recreating a new republic. He claimed that the constitution at the time preserved the two parties in control of Venezuela. Basically he took "hope and change" to an extreme and used community organizations organized by people from Cuba get himself into the top spot.

Once in office, his Bolivarian Circles became his grassroots organization: they found his political opponents who he then suppressed and denied services to. They intimidated the politically ambiguous into voting for him and act as a sort of Hitler Youth for his administration. He started making overtures to other governments and created the Union of South American Nations which he rightfully thinks will be the first step to creating a single continent-wide country. He has also been working with FARC to undermine the governments in other South American nations that are not on good terms with him. His allies in Ecuador and Brazil are particularly stringent in their support of their fellow socialist/communist. At one point, Venezuela and Ecuador had their military units stationed along Columbia's border as a threat.

But wait! you say - isn't Columbia pretty much owned and run by the Drug Cartels? Not really, not anymore. Presidente Alvaro Uribe of Columbia has been rather successful in driving them out or lowering their influence, so much so that much of Mexico's problems stem from the fact that Columbia is no longer a safe haven for them run by a puppet government. Columbia is perhaps our staunchest ally south of the border at this point.

So why should we care?

Draw the connections. Venezuela has ties directly and through Cuba to Russia and China and therefore to North Korea. As a member of OPEC, Venezuela also has ties to Iran, Lybia and Saudi Arabia and therefore to Hamas. Hugo Chavez has been very vocal in his support of FARC and has 'demanded' that the US and the UN Human Rights Council removes them off their Terrorist Watch lists. Venezuela also undermines the United States' foreign policy at every opportunity at one point even calling the sitting President of the US the Devil himself.

Good thing President Obama apologized to the world then, isn't it? Never mind that the alliance is forming right under our very noses of a global network of terrorist supporters. Never mind that the very act of apologizing places you in a position of weakness. Never mind that because of the still tunnel-vision aspect of foreign policy North Korea, who has nukes and missiles to put them on, has been relegated to be dealt with by Russia and China who are both supporters of North Korea.

Our enemies are circling and forming alliances. They are approaching foreign policy with a global view and unless and until we do the same and assume a position of strength, we will continue to set ourselves up for failure. If we're lucky in another fifty years, historians will be wondering if President Obama turned a blind eye to what was happening so that we'd have an excuse to enter World War III just like our historians wonder the same about President Truman and World War II.