Pew says goverment trust stinks.

Nearly 80 percent of Americans say they can't and they have little faith that the massive federal bureaucracy can solve the nation's ills, according to a survey from the Pew Research Center that shows public confidence in the federal government at one of the lowest points in a half-century.

I talked about the lack of trust in our government back in early February when I set forth my "manifesto" of sorts on how Americans can become better represented in Washington - The People's Republic Ombudsman Party (PRO).

Thanks, Pew.

The president's top strategist, David Axelrod, says that it's not all Obama's fault. Axelrod accuses the Republicans of trying to de-legitimize government. During an NPR broadcast on the Pew survey, Axlerod stated:

"In Chicago, there was an old tradition of throwing a brick through your own campaign office window, and then calling a press conference to say that you've been attacked...I think it's a little bit the same with the Republicans. They meet, they decide we're not going to give the president any bipartisan support, and then they call a press conference to accuse him of not governing in a bipartisan way. And that, I think, grates on people."

Like the Democrats haven't done this in the past? What about "change" and "not politics as usual"...two of Obama's campaign promises? Go ahead, Axelrod - pass the buck, you douch bag. No, it's not all Obama's fault, but it is inherent in politics. And the Obama administration has done nothing to alleviate the public's opinion in government as Obama promised he would do during his presidential campaign.

But hey - it's better than four more years of a Republican administration, right? And people wonder why members of The Tea Party are angry.

Read more!

Texas suicide dude influenced by Tea Party Movement?

Fifty-three-year-old Joseph Andrew Stack III deliberately flew a stolen Piper Cherokee PA-28 into an Austin federal building that housed the local office of the Internal Revenue Service on Thursday.

It seems a number of media outlets (with liberal tendencies) are thinking out loud: "Boy, this Stack dude's suicide letter/manifesto sort of resembles - you know, that Tea Party rhetoric." I paraphrased all that.

A Washington Post blog read: "His (Stack) alienation is similar to what we're hearing from the extreme elements of the Tea Party movement." And Time magazine's online write-up twice included links to a background on the Tea Party movement - but those have since been removed. Removed? Why?

Chris Rovzar of New York Magazine stated, "In fact, a lot of his (Stack) rhetoric could have been taken directly from a handwritten sign at a tea party rally."

"Similar"? "Could have been?" Remind me to approach some random man in the street, punch him in the face because he looks as though he might be thinking about possibly assaulting me...and worry about the ramifications of my actions later.

I hate politicians. I hate the media. Liberals accuse the conservatives of fear mongering and chastise Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck. Then the liberal media turns around and surmises that Stack's beliefs are somehow/maybe/possibly/perhaps/almost like the Tea Party's platform. Ergo (third time I've used "ergo" in a blog post in the last two months), the Tea Party's philosophy is as whacked as a guy who embarks on a airplane suicide mission. Am I assuming too much? Like the liberal media is? That IS what they're saying, right?

New York Magazine attributed its assertion (I don't know that you'd call it an "assertion") to portions of Stack's suicide letter:

"We are … brainwashed to believe that there is freedom in this place, and that we should be ready to lay our lives down for the noble principals represented by its founding fathers. Remember? One of these was "no taxation without representation." I have spent the total years of my adulthood unlearning that crap from only a few years of my childhood. These days anyone who really stands up for that principal is promptly labeled a "crackpot" traitor and worse."

Sound like the Tea Party? Maybe it does. I agree with the above statement. I know a lot of people who agree with that statement. And they're not all conservatives and Republicans. Don't worry - I don't know how to fly one anyway.

Here's another excerpt from Stack's letter: "While very few working people would say that they haven't had their fair share of taxes (as can I), in my lifetime I can say with a great degree of certainly that there has never been a politician cast a vote on any matter with the likes of me or my interests in mind. Nor, for that matter, are they the least bit interested in me or anything I have to say."

Gotta agree with Stack on this one as well - though I might not go as far as to say "never been". Can any of us really be sure of our elected officials' motivations? I realize they're supposed to be working SOLELY for their constituents; I also know that Washington politicians are taking monies from special interest groups for their reelection campaigns and then voting the way those special interest groups want them to vote. Is that working for me - or you?

One more. "It also made me realize, not only how naive I had been, but also the incredible stupidity of the American public; that they buy, hook, line, and sinker, the crap about their "freedom" … and they continue to do so with eyes closed in the face of overwhelming evidence and all that keeps happening in front of them."

Well - I believe, even while this country is trying to pick itself up from last year's economic fuck-up, most Americans feel the United States is the best country in the world. Think about the shit going on in Haiti, Iraq, Iran, Israel, North Korea, Africa, parts of South America - we have it good. But people are pissed. People are out of work. They lost their savings. And homes. This Stack guy is just one man. I don't know...maybe he wasn't whacked. We may not ever know. Maybe he was perfectly sane and simply wanted to drive home a point by giving up his life for his cause.

They've been doing that in the Middle East for thousand of years. And they don't have a Tea Party over there.

Read more!

A radical approach: People’s Republic Ombudsman Party. PRO Now!

A political cartoon by Thomas Nash.

Our current system of representation in Washington is flawed. We need to make a change. I'm making this recommendation in the hope that people might contemplate how we're MISrepresented in Washington.

I think it's safe to say the majority of American people do not trust our politicians in Washington. Pick a poll on the Internet - there's hundreds of them. Fine - I'll pick a few polls:

1. Respondents of a Mondo Times Poll in 2002 were asked if they trust politicians. Yes = 9%. No = 86%. Not sure = 4%.

2. China conducted a poll in 2009 that showed the Chinese people trust prostitutes more than they trust their own politicians. Washington's Blog repeated that survey: Who Do You Trust More - Prostitutes or Elected Officials? 281 people responded. Here are the results:

46% chose prostitutes. 0% picked elected officials. 6% said it depends on whether the prostitutes are in a state which has legalized - and regulates - prostitution. And finally, 45% said, "there's a difference?"

3. The BBC conducted a 2008 poll asking, "Which do you trust the least?" 46% = the government, 26% = the media

4. A recent Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that when it comes to important national issues, 73% of adults nationwide trust the judgment of the American people more than that of America’s political leaders. And by a two-to-one margin, voters believe that no matter how bad things are, Congress can always make them worse.

5. GfK’s 2009 Trust Index showed that politicians were on the bottom of the list with an 18% trust factor, while firefighters were at the top (92%), as were teachers (85%).

6. A Topix poll (I don't have the year but it wasn't that old) asked “who do you trust least of all?” #1 was politicians (52%), #2 was France (12%).

7. Finally, Glamour.com polled its readers in 2009, asking “would you ever date a politician?” 67% said "no".

OK. So no one trusts politicians. My solution? Click on READ MORE! and find out.

First - a little backstory. In 1826, famed American folk hero, frontiersman and soldier, Davy Crockett, was elected to the United States House of Representatives. He was defeated in 1830, then re-elected in 1832. Congressman Crockett stated, "I bark at no man's bid. I will never come and go, and fetch and carry, at the whistle of the great man in the White House no matter who he is."

In 1833, former president John Quincy Adams recorded in his diary an encounter with Crockett (while Adams was serving in Congress following his presidency), whom he quotes as saying that he (Crockett) "had taken for lodgings two rooms on the first floor of a boarding-house, where he expected to pass the winter and to have for a fellow-lodger Major Jack Downing, the only person in whom he had any confidence for information of what the Government was doing."

It was during his service in Congress that Crockett delivered the famous, "Not Yours To Give" speech, which you may read here. In his speech, Crockett was critical of his Congressional colleagues who were willing to spend taxpayer dollars to help a widow of a US Navy man who had lived beyond his naval service, but would not contribute their own salary. There's no way to prove this speech is actually attributed to Crockett; however, there is evidence that the House considered a bill (referenced in Crockett's speech) that Congressman Crockett was on record of opposing in 1828.

In 1834, Crockett suffered another Congressional defeat. He said, "I told the people of my district that I would serve them as faithfully as I had done; but if not ... you may all go to hell, and I will go to Texas." Crockett left for Texas and died at the Alamo in 1836.

So we know elected officials in Washington weren't trusted by at least one member of Congress in the 1830's. And we know people don't trust elected officials in the 21st Century.

On top of this trust issue, our representatives in Washington draw a retirement pension that is considerably higher than the average American worker’s pension (minimum of 5 year’s service nets them no more than 80% of their salary), their health care coverage is completely different than anything the general public has access to or will have access to in the future (politicians pay no deductible and no co-pay – until death – with no geographical restrictions) and their social security plan is different. Many of them don’t even pay income tax. Who wouldn’t be tempted into seeing the allure of a career in politics?

Candidates make campaign promises + We elect them to represent those promises (and our views) in Washington + Our taxes help to pay their salaries = Said representatives pander to lobbyists and special interest groups, resulting in politicians' votes in exchange for monies to fill the said politicians’ re-election coiffures. This leads to corruption on multi-levels (inside and outside government) and a loss of integrity for the elected position. Said elected official remains in office until he or she retires or dies. Period. No big revelation there. That word – “said”…reminds me of politicians. They SAY they’ll do this; they SAY they’ll do that. Trouble is they never really SAY anything worthwhile. Sad.

You may have heard of GOOOH or “Get Out Of Our House”, a non-partisan plan to replace every politician in Washington with Joe the Plumber, Butch the Farmer and Jeff the Actor & Playwright, Blogger & Photographer, Outdoorsman & Brett Favre fan. I just found out about it a couple days ago after I started writing this blog post. Sounds fairly radical, doesn't it? My idea is similar.

Gary Cooper in "Meet John Doe" (1941).

My solution – The People’s Republic Ombudsman Party (I’ll call it “PRO” for the sake of this discussion). The plan: replace half of each state’s career politicians in Washington (both in the Senate and the House) with “John Doe’s” – John Doe the housewife, John Doe the Salesman, John Doe the Barber. Representatives from all walks of life. A John Doe grassroots movement (akin to the movie, “Meet John Doe”). Whenever the concept of having an Everyman hold political office is discussed, one of the first arguments brought up by dissenters is that Joe Blow (or John Doe) has no political experience – no budget planning, no public speaking, no agenda setting, no political savvy know-how whatsoever. My rationale for keeping half the number of career politicians per state in Washington is so they’re able to act as mentors to the PRO party members, guiding them through the introduction of bills, voting procedures, Parliamentary Procedure, etc.

Before I proceed, let me clear up a couple definitions. “Republic” refers to a representative democracy (elected officials who represent the people) as termed by our Founding Fathers. In modern political science, “republicanism” refers to a specific ideology based on “civic virtue” – a cultivation of habits of personal living that are claimed to be important for the success of the community. The Boy Scouts of America oath, for example, promotes civic virtue. “On my honor I will do my best to do my duty to God and my Country and to obey the Scout law; to help other people at all times; to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight.” Sound like a politician’s oath to you? Incidentally, all senators and congressmen swear an oath to the U.S. Constitution, yet they break that oath daily.

And “ombudsman” is a person who acts as a trusted intermediary between an organization and some internal or external constituency while representing the broad scope of constituent interests. U.S. Congresspersons have long performed the unofficial function of an ombudsman, at the federal level, but the task became time consuming. Its criticism was largely based on the fact that it interfered with a legislator's primary duty – to read and be knowledgeable about a bill before casting his or her vote.

So why not relieve the career politician of these ombudsman duties and have the two work together – the career politician and John Doe, while combining aspects of “republic” and “civic virtue”? This approach establishes an added series of checks and balances so that career politicians aren’t wholly compromised by extraneous motivations (all forms of corruption, monies, political gain) and stay the course of working for their constituents – not for their careers.

Executive secretaries can assist the limited-term PRO party members in the day-to-day running of each candidate’s office (just like they do with career politicians). In the event a state has an odd number of Senators or Representatives, the odd man out is a PRO party member (to keep the career politicians honest). This way, the career politicians can’t gang up and out vote the PRO party members. More specifics:

- PRO party members are limited to 2-year terms, at which time they are replaced with new PRO party members.

- PRO party members are elected by the public, after which they go through a rigorous confirmation hearing headed up by the state governor and other non-political persons selected by the governor. PRO party members do not campaign or spend money on campaigning. The public can go to a Internet site to find information on each prospective PRO party candidate. I’m certainly flexible on how the PRO party members are chosen, as long as the public has a vote in the matter and there’s no campaigning.

- In the case of PRO party members, there must be an equal ratio of members who are polar opposites in political philosophy – a mix of moderates, conservatives and liberals.

- To avoid constituents crying unfair/unbalanced representation in their districts, the career politician and the PRO party member represent the same district.

- PRO party members’ job description reads exactly as their career politician counterparts. They have identical job duties and responsibilities.

- PRO party members get equivalent pay, as well as all other benefits awarded a first-year Congressman or Senator.

- PRO party members are guaranteed to return to their previous job prior to completion of their public service.

- If a PRO party member is guilty of misconduct while in office, they are extricated and face legal action, like their career politician counterpart.

FACT: Most Americans do not trust their politicians. FACT: The vast majority of politicians ARE career politicians.

Jimmy Stewart in "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" (1939).

When you consider 400+ varied groups are lobbying for the attention of your elected officials in the hopes of getting votes and making campaign donations, tell me how these career politicians can serve the best interests of their constituency? How can one man serve two masters? Wait – you can. A man can have a wife and a whore. I guess politicians can as well.

It’s a common adage that there are two things in life we can count on: death and taxes. If we as American citizens won’t demand term limitations for politicians; if we as American citizens won’t demand that our politicians work in Washington for the people and not for lobbyists, not for self-serving back-door deals, not for job security and not for perks such as plane travel, liquor and parties, top tier health care and pension plans – then neither “hope” nor “change” brought by the Obama administration or any future administration will change the status quo. Party politics, political red tape and gridlock and corruption will remain the norm. And the John Doe's and Mr. Smith’s of the political arena will do little to affect positive change unless change comes from a unified front.

President Obama recently commented to Washington politicians that if they are going to disagree with his proposed legislation, do it based on PRINCIPLE, not based on partisan politics. With all due respect, Mr. President, I don't think you'll find much principle in Washington. And what you’re asking – it’s never going to happen. Not unless the People’s Republic Ombudsman Party – or something similar – is instituted. Obama promised "hope" and "change" in his presidency. Good stuff - "hope" and "change". Radical thoughts, even.

So is a change in how you and I and generations after us are represented in Washington.

Read more!

"But I don't wanna be thought of as a racist." The "New America".

If you've read this blog, you know I've commented at length on the illegal immigration issue facing this country. I was on my 5-mile walk today and I suddenly thought, "perhaps I'm being too negative". "Perhaps I AM a racist." So right now - with this post - I'm going to attempt to be more positive - and helpful in the process. As the old adage goes, "if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all". So...nice.

Since our government and Corporate America have turned a blind eye to the illegal immigration issue (and thus, ignoring our laws in the process), I say we should all turn a blind eye as well. Open our borders so anyone can come and live in the United States freely, without ever becoming legal citizens of this country. It will be the birth of a new nation...a New America!

While we're breaking that law, how about not having ANY laws. Laws = Old America. All the products we buy should be free. Food, homes, cars, clothes, household goods, computers, books, health care. No rent. No taxes. No surcharges. No fees. There are no laws to set prices remember? If you wanna work you can and if you don't want to, that's fine because everything's free. And if you choose not to work, everyone gets welfare, no matter who you are. And finally, finally we can stop bitching and moaning and sounding like racists about illegal aliens who are getting tuition to attend college in the U.S. because in New America, tuition is free. Gas? Free. That'll make lining up at the pumps real fun these days as they'll be taken over by the gangs that are now running the gas stations and the black market. After all, gang activity would be legal in our New America and there wouldn't be a need for a police force or military to protect us as - well, as no activity is illegal in this country. Guns are free. Drugs are free. Prostitution is legal. Murder is rampant because people can take by force the things they don't have if they so choose. Speed limits and other motor vehicle laws? None. Our New America is a veritable Autobahn. There is no judicial process - no legal system - as there are no rules or laws in place to be broken. My family and I can now hunt and fish for free and rape the land of every living creature with no consequence for the laws of nature. No rules. No regulations. No laws. Absolute freedom. Freedom anyone can enjoy if they live in the New America.

If other countries want to set up corporations here to do business, be our guest. It's free. Soon New America will be another colony for foreign countries to pillage as they see fit. If we're lucky, it won't be too long before our country resembles the landscape seen in the movies Escape from New York or The Road Warrior - or that of Iraq, and no country will want to pillage us any more.

With all these illegal people coming into New America (I guess they're really not "illegal" anymore) what if we run out of food? I mean, the millions of extra mouths to feed would surely become taxing on our food supply. And since everything's free in New America, do we really need money? Granted, it might be tough to import food and other goods into New America unless another country is willing to barter with us. Hmmmm. We could do as Jonathan Swift suggested in his treatise, "A Modest Proposal" - eat all the anchor babies that the newcomers (the former illegal aliens) produce. After all, it's an endless supply - they're used to coming here and having baby after baby after baby, right? They won't really miss their own babies because they can just steal someone else's if they want. And the babies could be used as a commodity - trading babies to countries whose baby production is down could be all the rage. Two babies for a barrel of oil? Three? How many babies for a 2010 Mercedes? With a continual influx of illegal aliens (now legal citizens in the New America) into New America, we'll have baby illegal aliens coming out of our assholes. Eat'm or trade'm! Hey - it's the New America! And everyone benefits.

Did I miss anything? Probably. Life in New America is a wonderful thing, isn't it? See, and you thought I was a racist. Gotta run. I thought I'd try out an illegal alien baby on the barbecue for dinner tonite - a taste of New America.

Read more!

"What in the Hell...?!" #2

So what's this about the guy who sued the Korean drycleaner for $54 million because of a lost pair of pants? And people wonder why our judicial system is a joke. Two days in court were wasted on this dumb-ass's lawsuit. Obviously, he lost and had to pay the defendant's legal fees.

See "What in the Hell...?!" #1 below and you'll know why I'm pissed half my waking hours.

Read more!

The Badger Boys State program

I wanna tell you a little bit about the Boys State program in Wisconsin - specifically, Badger Boys State. Their annual summer session just ended last week and my mind wanders to the summer of 1981 when I was a participant and the summers afterwards when I was a counselor. Fond memories and wonderful people.

I'll get back to you on this...

Read more!

Bienvenideos a America. Aqui hablamos Espanol.

So - immigration. Living in California these past nine years, I guess I'm sorta at the front lines when it comes to the issues of what should our country do about the illegal alien issue.

Keeping in mind the pros and cons of the issue, this is how I see it. Everyone on this planet - EVERYONE - wants to carve out the best life they can for themselves and no one can blame them for it. You. Me. Juan Gomez. Mike Chang. Sean O'Malley and Steve Smith. That being said, if someone wants to come to the US...fine. But they must obey our laws. That means you can't enter the country illegally. I can't go over to Ireland and just stay there like the Mexicans feel they can do here. And it's not a racial issue. Why should they be given special privleges? Laws and codes of morals and ethics are in place so there is order - not anarchy. You stop at a red light. You pay your taxes. You don't shoot a person because he gave you a look. If that all sounds too elementary, then why is having a law in place to keep illegal aliens - from any country - from entering the US without going through the proper channels such a hubbub, bub?

The current immigration bill in Washington that grants "amnesty" to illegal aliens - well, depends on who you talk to, regarding "amnesty". There are provisions in the bill, such as forcing illegal aliens to return home and apply for legal status in our country. Whatever. The point is America IS and has been known as "the land of the free". Fine. However, rules and regulations must be in place to ensure that America - 200 years from now - isn't an overcrowded, shit-hole. And don't say that it can't happen. Honestly, how many us really think in terms of the future of our country? We worry about the here and now, or in terms of the length of our own lives - or the length of our children's or grandchildren's lives.

I think it's wonderful people want to come to America. Just follow our laws and your stay here will be more pleasant. And then you can sign up for the selective service (military); we can tax you, you can help build the wall along the US/Mexico border, etcetera, ad finitum and THEN you truly will be AMERICANS.

Read more!