THE SKY IS FALLING, THE SKY IS FALLING

Wasn’t it Chicken Little who ran around screaming “The sky is falling, the sky is falling?” Or was that Obama? I am referring to the most recent crisis de jour coming out of the White House, the sequester.

We have been treated to a litany of dire predictions preceding the sequester. We would have to close down our airports, thousands of teachers would have to be laid off, and we would have to empty our jails because we could not support the prisoners. They have already started releasing imprisoned illegal aliens. They intend to release 5000 over a one month period. National parks would have to close. Etc., etc. Blah, blah, blah.

Well, of course, the problems as described by the President were all lies. Why should we be surprised by that? We have been lied to for several years by this administration. Since those lies didn’t work to cause Congress to act to prevent the sequester, plan B now goes into effect. That is to blame the Republicans in Congress for the cuts caused by this sequester. Never mind that this time the sequester was Obama’s idea in the first place or that he is on record saying that if the Congress tried in any way to change it, he would veto that effort. All of which has been reported by big time liberal reporter Bob Woodward, the author of Nixon’s downfall, who incidentally has been threatened by the White House for reporting these facts.

What is really going on here? I think Obama never believed it would come to this. He thought Congress would step in and stop the automatic cuts. Really, he never wanted to cut anything. He just wants to spend and unless Congress approves tax increases, that cannot happen. President Chicken Little can scream all he wants but it is the Congress that has the power to raise taxes.

Let us understand what the sequester is all about. This act requires government agencies to reduce their budgetary expectation by 2.4%. They are not expected to cut their existing budget, just to reduce their increase by a mere 2.4%. All of the fear mongering about this issue is just moronic silliness.

Congressional Republicans should embrace these cuts, not run from them. This could be the start of some real reduction in the runaway spending in Washington. Obama seems to think if he can blame someone else, the Republicans in Congress, for these minor cuts, he might be able to retake the House in the next election. He should instead take a look at the most recent poll which says 83% of those polled believe Washington has a spending problem, not a revenue problem. This could easily be a winning position for Republicans.

There is a clear reality. This country cannot continue to spend the way it has in the past. It is just not sustainable. The Congress should now take advantage of the puny start this act has given them and get busy and show a little backbone. Today it is pennies. Tomorrow it could be true cuts and real savings.

I have decided not to be guided for future decisions by what politicians say. I choose not to believe this President because he has a history of lies that cannot be denied. Let’s face it, he and the other politicians have all earned our skepticism. No, my future decisions will all based on what the financial markets have to say. If the stock market likes it, I like it.

Today the stock market is saying the sky's not falling. We need these cuts. We need the sequester. We just hit a new all time high on the Dow Jones Average. Now that’s a message I can believe.

Ron Scarbro

GOVERNMENT IS THE SERVANT OF THE PEOPLE AND OTHER RADICAL THOUGHTS

Today it seems some Mayors and local elected officials have forgotten what their job really is. Emperor Bloomberg of New York City apparently thinks he knows best in all things from diet to smoking to gun ownership. In reality he is just a spoiled little rich guy with a Napoleon complex. Why the people of New York put up with this clown is beyond my comprehension.

Famous singer/songwriter James Taylor said in a recent interview that maybe it would be best if we all just gave up some of our freedoms for the good of the many. I think this moronic interview had something to do with gun ownership. Whatever. I don’t think people like Taylor would like it very much if the socialist  utopia they see in their pea brains actually came to pass and they had to live there. When they faced the reality that their wealth would be taken from them for “the good of the many,” they might have a different opinion of utopia.

Some state and local governments seem to be getting tired of being dictated to by the Feds. All across the country several states are crafting laws in an effort to stifle the heavy hand of Washington. Laws are being passed easing gun regulation and specifically neutering new Federal gun laws. Texas has passed a law making it illegal for any police agency to enforce any new Federal law restricting gun ownership or possession. The officer could be arrested. Utah has passed a law making it lawful for any legal citizen of Utah who was otherwise not restricted by previous convictions, to carry a weapon openly or concealed with no permit required. Many other states are busily working on new laws to control the feds.

Other state officials are overtly inviting businesses to move their operations out of the heavily taxed states to more business friendly areas. Texas is leading the way offering special consideration to gun makers and ammunition producers as well as other businesses. And it’s working. Texas now is the fastest growing state in the Union. California and other big tax states are losing jobs and revenue from this exodus.

Many right-to-work states are siphoning off companies and jobs by offering automakers and airplane builders a much more business friendly environment.

Arizona is trying to get pro golfer Phil Mickelson to move from California to save big on his state income taxes. Florida already leads the way for many wealthy people’s southward move because of the absence of a state income tax. Imagine if you made a million dollars a year and you could save ten percent by just moving to a different state. What would you do? Ask Tiger Woods, a former Californian who now resides in Florida.

The issue facing us today is the runaway monolithic reach of governments. We are a free people. Government is the servant of the people. Representatives, Senators, and Presidents are hired civil servants who are hired by the people to do the business of government. We are their boss, not the other way around. They have a book of rules, a manual of operations you might say. It is called the U.S. Constitution. We have in place a system to deal with the great issues we face. All we need and all we have ever needed is for all of us, and that includes the government, to follow the rules and obey the law. Let the only special interest be the good of the American people. When that simple rule is followed, life will be much simpler for all of us.

Ron Scarbro

STEALING $750,000 IS NOT A MISTAKE

Ex Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr. Now I’m not going to pick on him because of who he is, no, I’m going to pick on him because of what he is. He is a thief who is  currently under indictment for fraud and conspiracy for illegally using $750,000 of his campaign war chest for personal use. That personal use included, among other things, a gold Rolex watch, furs and furniture. His wife, a former elected Alderman in Chicago, is also under indictment for falsifying income tax returns. She faces three years in prison and reports are that she has already offered a plea agreement. Jackson Jr. faces five years and, as of this writing, has not  yet offered a plea.

You may remember that he basically disappeared from view recently. It was reported that his absence was for treatment for bipolar disorder at Mayo Clinic. You’ll forgive my skepticism if I say that he probably knew what was coming down the pike and was looking for a way to excuse his “mistakes.” I don’t believe he was being treated for anything. I just think he was in hiding and with his advisors, trying to figure out an excuse strategy. Do you suppose one of his advisors might have been his dad, Jesse Jackson Sr?

Here is an individual who had been given every advantage in American life. He had a famous name, he had decent looks, he was elected to the US Congress and was considered one of the Democrat Party’s rising stars. As it turns out though, he is just a common thief. He has betrayed his constituents, his peers in Congress, his children, and his entire family. Do you suppose he learned betrayal and cheating at the feet of his father? Just wondering. And you know the worst of this is that he probably stole much, much more that has not yet been disclosed. This probably barely skims the surface.

Are Jackson Jr’s illegal acts common? Are other politicians stealing from their campaign chests to fund lavish lifestyles? Can I be the only person in America who thinks so-called campaign contributions are really just bribes? Aren’t campaign war chests really just amassed personal fortunes? How else would you explain how individuals arrive in Washington DC with little or nothing and retire a term or two later as millionaires? I have always been skeptical about the whole campaign contribution thing. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s probably a duck, wouldn’t you think?

Another thing that disturbs me about politicians is their seeming sense of entitlement. I am sure that Jackson Jr. believed that he should be entitled to the money he took. After all, somebody gave it to him. I am sure he saw himself as a big shot Congressman. Why shouldn’t he have furs and a gold Rolex watch?

Jackson Jr has offered his version of sincere apologies for his mistakes. The first thing I would like Mr. Jackson Jr. to know however is the meaning of the word mistake. Misspelling a word is a mistake. Taking a wrong turn on the highway is a mistake. Forgetting an important person’s name might be a mistake. Stealing $750,000 is a lot of things but it is not a mistake. Stealing $750,000, ladies and gentlemen, is grand larceny. And grand larceny is punishable by five years in the slammer.

Maybe, just maybe other thieves and future thieves might see what awaits people who make these so-called mistakes. Maybe, if justice is served, they will all understand that acts such as these are not mistakes at all. They’re just common crimes committed by common criminals. That’s all.

Ron Scarbro February 20, 2013

I THINK I PREFER THE FIRST LIE

When the Benghazi tragedy happened we were treated to a litany of explanations by several officials about what it was and what caused it. Initially, Obama, Hillary, and of course, Susan Rice all spoke the talking points that this was a mob action caused by some obscure video on the internet. After all, the election was at hand and the administration couldn’t tell the American people that we were attacked by an enemy that they had publicly stated was on the run and basically impotent. Obama addressed the UN and the rest of the administration went on the TV shows. Their protestations were loud and clear. Sadly, they were lies. Bald faced, out and out lies.

Well, as is always the case, the truth is now starting to come out. More facts are now being divulged and the cover up is getting to be more difficult. Hillary had to finally face an inquiry from the Congress. I watched it. I heard what she had to say. I listened as she said that it did not matter that we were lied to. All in all, her appearance was typical. She toted the company line and hid behind the talking points. I could say that I was disappointed but that would be a stretch. I try to live by the “Eleventh Beatitude,” “blessed is he who expects nothing for he shall not be disappointed.” She certainly did not exceed my expectations. She did the Hillary Clinton thing.

Now we have the testimony of Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta, and with it a whole new version of so called truth. One of the most striking admissions from Panetta was that while we indeed did have fighter jets available and within thirty minutes of the Embassy under  attack, it would have taken several hours to prepare them for actual fighting. What? Are you kidding me? You want me to believe that we are so ill prepared that we could not put fighters in the air on a moments notice ready and able to take out a bunch of rag tag donkey herders? This is not the military in which I once served. This is not the military that represents the most powerful country on earth. Try buzzing the White House in a small plane and see how long it takes for you to be accompanied by a bevy of fully armed fighter jets. No, Panetta’s version sounds more like another excuse for incompetence.

So, here we have the many and varied versions of this story. There will probably be more coming soon. The Administration is going to continue offering explanations until the story either goes away or the total truth finally is revealed. I have listened intently to all the stories. I have tried to believe their explanations, but I cannot. What were obvious lies when the matter first broke have been completely discredited. I suspect most of the current “facts” will suffer the same fate.

As I consider all the positions proffered by Obama and his minions, I have come to a decision. I think I prefer the first lie. It is much easier for me to swallow that mobs of morons representing radical factions of an ancient religion stumbled upon an unprotected embassy and, being stirred up by a YouTube video, decided to kill four Americans. The alternative would be that we are in The Middle East with an ill prepared military unable to respond to threats unless we have a several hour window to prepare ourselves. That is totally unacceptable. That is a particular lie that I absolutely cannot believe, period. No, I’m going to go with the first lie.

Ron Scarbro

CHANGING WARDENS

All over the Middle East revolutions are happening. It has been happening for centuries. One group or one religion doesn’t like the group in power so they start riots and kill huge numbers of civilians in an effort to overthrow their government. Other countries around the world choose up sides and support one side or the other. One dictator is deposed or killed and another one is installed. It’s like changing wardens in prison. You’re still in prison. Swapping dictators never means freedom. It only means oppression under a different dictator. Exchanging one form of oppression for another form of oppression is never freedom.

Oppression comes in many forms. There are certainly theological dictators. There are military dictators. There are even financial dictators. Consider, if you will, the very origins of our country. Many felt we were being oppressed by the British Crown. We were being taxed without having any representation. In other words, we had no say in the way our affairs should be handled. That famous rum smuggler, John Hancock, on the occasion of the British government confiscating his smuggling ship, Liberty, basically started the conversation which ultimately wound up with the creation of our Declaration of Independence. We informed King George that we were creating our own country and would henceforth handle our own affairs. The British, of course, took exception and it took two bloody wars before they finally decided maybe messing with us was a bad idea and they should just leave us alone and the rest is history. We didn’t just change wardens. We didn’t just change prison cells. We decided we would be free. Free to make our own decisions on taxation and spending. Free to choose our own representatives. Free to never again live under a monarch. So far, so good.

So, does the Middle East even want to be free? Do their women even want to go out in public dressed any way they want or to drive automobiles? Do they want to have the opportunity to sit down at coffee with a male who is not their husband without the worry of being stoned to death? Do the people want their female babies to continue to be surgically butchered in some twelfth century ritual? I don’t know the answer. I do know this though. Swapping dictators is not going to materially change their lives or their prospects. Theological oppression is still oppression. Whether your dictator claims to be representing God or just the government, it makes no difference. A dictator is still a dictator.

We are sending millions and millions of dollars in aid to the Middle East. In other words we, as taxpayers, are funding this theological oppression. It is doubtful that any of those third world countries could prosper or even exist without our aid.

What should be our responsibility? Should we care how they choose to live their lives? Should we care about their religious rituals? Should we have any say in their choice of government?

My preference is simple. Send them nothing. Let some other country support their nonsense. We have our own problems.  

In our country, when we are finished with our leaders, we don’t execute them. No, we give them a fat pension, let them write books, and attend ribbon cutting ceremonies. Then we freely elect their replacement. That’s a lot more civilized, don’t you think? Swapping out dictators is a lot like changing wardens. It doesn’t grant you freedom. It only guarantees a continuation of your oppression.

Ron Scarbro February 6, 2013

YOU DON'T NEED THAT

A few years back when the SUV craze was really getting going, certain groups criticized people for driving them. They were using too much gasoline and they were polluting the world. After all, they asked, who needs a four-wheel drive vehicle that carries seven people? These people aren’t going off road or climbing mountains in the snow or trudging through the mud. They, by driving these gas hogs, are just being unfair to all the rest of us. The most difficult driving they might experience is high curbs at the Macy’s parking lot.

The similarity between this criticism and the oft offered opinion that people don’t need assault weapons is striking. Who needs a gun that will hold thirty rounds of ammunition? To go deer hunting with an assault weapon is akin to sharpening a pencil with a chainsaw. The groups who hold these views also seem to be the same people who feel their opinion should take precedence over your opinion. Never mind that owning a semi-automatic rifle is completely legal as is owning a multi round magazine for ammunition. No, that doesn’t seem to matter to them, only their opinion.

Well what if I said that in my opinion a person should never own a home with four or five bedrooms and two or three or more bathrooms. What if I said a person should never own a car that goes over seventy miles per hour? After all, that is the speed limit in most of the country. Why do you need a lot with over an acre of space? Don’t you realize that there are people who have little or no yard space? Why would you have a closet full of shoes or clothes hanging there? You cannot possibly wear but one set at a time. Some people have homes in both the north and in the south. Can you be two places at once?

It is pretty clear to me that people have what they have because that is what they want. No couple checked with me to see if I approved of the fact that they wanted a three thousand square foot home for just the two of them. My opinion wasn’t sought for people who wanted to buy a fast car. People don’t ask my opinion because it is none of my business what they have. People also don’t ask me to comment on their desire to own an AR15 assault rifle with a thirty round magazine. Why? Because it is none of my business.

I do not own an “assault weapon” as defined by the media. Personally I believe any weapon is capable of assault depending on the intentions of the possessor of that weapon. Timothy McVeigh did his mayhem without a gun of any kind let alone an assault weapon and of course one can still buy fertilizer and rent trucks. I don’t own an assault weapon because it is my choice not to own one. As a free citizen of this great country, to own one or not to own one is my choice and I don’t personally care what anybody else thinks about my decision. I am a gun owner and again that is my choice. What you do is your business.

The problem is clear. Too many people feel their opinions should trump everyone else’s. Some even want to trump the Bill of Rights. You and I are free people. We decide what is best for us. Unless of course you have a wife and when you look longingly at a glazed donut she says, “You don’t need that.” Believe it and leave the donut alone.

Ron Scarbro January 30, 2013

HOW MANY GUNS ARE THERE?

Some years ago I had the opportunity of walking through a number of fields with a game warden to help in the process of counting pheasants. I thought at the time that this had to be a rather unscientific way of counting birds. Quite frankly we didn’t see or hear that many. This is what I learned however. The warden told me that for every pheasant he saw or heard, he multiplied by nine. He advised me that they had been able to prove their method over many years of trying to establish correct numbers of pheasants.

The significance of this counting method comes into play when one attempts to discover just how many guns are in the hands of US citizens. According to an article in “The Christian Science Monitor” dated January 3, 2013, the total number of guns last counted in 2009 was 310 million. That means essentially one for every man, woman, and child in the US. Now does anyone really think that everyone who owns guns actually reported to the pollsters exactly what and how many they had? If you believe that, I have some great, recently filled in, swamp land to sell you. I think a much more accurate count should be 310 million multiplied by a number like say, nine. I know of people who have rooms full of both guns and ammunition.

Here is the significance of this information. If anyone in Washington actually thinks that issuing an order, Presidential, executive, or any other, ending gun ownership in this country would result in gun owners actually turning in their guns, they need to have their collective heads examined. It ain’t gonna happen, period. First of all, nobody really has any idea of the actual number of guns in this country. Secondly, any such order would be illegal. We are guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the US Constitution the right to own and bear arms. And, may I add, the primary reason for this amendment is to prevent any government, foreign or domestic from illegal acts such as this.

Can you just imagine being one of the agents assigned to go out and collect the guns? I think I would rather gather up rattlesnakes barehanded. That would be much easier.

There is a clear reason why no foreign country has ever tried to invade America. The Commander in Chief of the Japanese Imperial Navy Isoroku Yamamoto during WWII is reported to have warned against an invasion of the US because there was probably a gun behind every blade of grass. Those guns are indeed there and they are there to protect this country from invaders from foreign countries as well as from our own government. When the second amendment was written it was already clearly understood that American citizens could and should be armed. This amendment was never about granting citizens the right to own and bear arms. The purpose of the amendment was only to codify that right.

I wrote recently that the noise was only going to get louder and louder. That for a certainty is happening. I can only hope that calmer heads prevail. All Members of Congress need to take heed. There is much more at stake here than just your job in Washington. Messing around with American citizen’s basic rights would rile up an already unhappy majority. I believe that is the last thing you want or need right now.

Ron Scarbro January 23, 2013