Neil Armstrong Letter

 Neil Armstrong, the first man to walk on the moon, passed away in August 2012.   He is one of many VIPs of our nation and so merited a post about him on my blog at that time.   A few days after his death, Glenn Beck read on his radio program an amazing letter previously written by Mr. Armstrong to a young man.  The letter is dated 16 June, 2008, and was addressed to the son of some of friends.

I have not been able to get this letter off my mind and thought I would share it on my blog. The letter illustrates the importance of operating within our sphere of influence to build and strengthen the rising generation. Please note how Mr. Armstrong makes history come alive for this young man and how humble and grateful he sounds.   He gives wonderful counsel and serves as a great example for all of us.   I am grateful the young man or his family thought to share this priceless letter, which is as follows.

It was such a pleasure to meet you on our recent visit to your home.  My wife, Carol, and I were pleased to learn about your school work, your interests, and your activities.

My own childhood was somewhat different than yours.  I was born on a farm and lived in small towns.  We had a radio for news and entertainment, but television and computers had not yet been invented.

In school I liked most all of my subjects, but I particularly liked science and mathematics.  In the fourth grade, I became interested in airplanes and began to build and fly model aircraft.  Aviation excited me, and I decided that I wanted to design airplanes.

About that time, the Japanese bombed an American Naval Base in Hawaii called Pearl Harbor and destroyed many Navy ships and Army aircraft.  This attack marked our entry into World War II.  The United States was at war with Japan and their allied nations, Germany and Italy.  Gasoline, meat, sugar, and many other things were rationed, which meant that each family could not buy just anything they wanted or as much as they wanted as everyone does now.  Winning the war required everyone to sacrifice and to limit their consumption of things that were necessary for the war.  My classmates and I often collected paper and scrap metal for the war effort.

It was a very difficult and very tragic time.  Over 400,000 Americans were killed during the war.  Worldwide, about 70 million people lost their lives.

In the 7^th grade I had a job working in a cemetery, mowing grass and raking leaves.  Later I worked in a bakery, a grocery store, and a hardware store.

I had decided I wanted to be an airplane designer but, in order to be a good one, I thought it would be helpful to be a pilot.  So, when I was 15, which was the year the war ended, I used some of my money I had been earning to pay for flying lessons.  The rest I saved for college.

In high school, I selected my courses to support my goal of becoming an airplane designer.  That worked out well for me when the Navy held a competition for a college scholarship combined with becoming a Naval Aviator.  I was lucky enough to be one of those selected which allowed me to go to the university of my choice.  I selected Purdue University in Indiana which had an outstanding school of aeronautical engineering.

The Navy taught me to fly military aircraft including the new jets.  A war between North and South Korea had broken out and the United Nations sent in troops to try to end the war.  The Soviet Union (Russia and some of its neighboring countries) and other communist nations were supporting North Korea.  I was sent to the war as a Navy pilot flying from an aircraft carrier.  I returned to Purdue from the war to finish my engineering studies.

In my Navy experience, I learned about the exciting field of testing new airplanes.  This captured my imagination because it was a field where I could use both my engineering knowledge and my flying skills.  I decided to switch my goal from airplane design to flight testing.

I was fortunate to get a flight testing job – flying new, high performance airplanes including some that were rocket powered.  I genuinely enjoyed my work and learned a great deal.  When the Soviet Union launched the first satellite, named Sputnik, it started what was called “The Space Race”.

The Russians seemed to be far ahead of the Americans.  In addition to the first satellite, they flew the first animal into space, a dog named Laika; they sent the first space probes to the Moon, Mars, and Venus.  And they were the first to put a human into orbit, Yuri Gagarin.

Americans decided to compete with them by trying to be the first to send a human to the surface of the moon.  That was a very exciting idea, and I decided I wanted to be a part of that program.  I applied and fortunately was one of those who [were] accepted.

The early American human space flight efforts were composed of the Mercury program, the Gemini program, and the Apollo program.  I missed the Mercury program but was able to fly in both the Gemini and Apollo spacecraft.  It was difficult and exciting work, and I enjoyed it immensely.

When I was your age, I read about fantastic voyages to the moon in books by H.G. Wells and Jules Verne, but they were just fantasy.  I never could have guessed that people would fly into space during my lifetime.  Even as a young adult, I would not have believed it.  And you will not be able to predict the opportunities that you will have in your lifetime.  Preparing yourself so that you can take advantage of the changes you cannot predict is difficult.  It is probably best to learn about a lot of different things.

In my work, I depended on many people.  In space flight, whether it be a fellow crewman or a flight controller in Mission Control on Earth, I was often trusting that person with my life.  When you depend on others you want to be able to trust them.  You will want to know that they say what they mean and they mean what they say.  And they will want to feel the same way about you.  Your word should be beyond question.

There is much uncertainty to life.  Good health may be taken away from you without warning.  Material possessions may be lost due to circumstances beyond your control.  The one thing that cannot be taken from you, without your consent, is your character, which includes your beliefs, your ethics, and your principles.  So guard them with care.  They are your most valuable possessions.

The 21^st century has much promise.  Remarkable things may be created and achieved.  And each of you will have the opportunity to play a role in achieving and creating a better world.  I know you will try.  Good luck!!  I wish I had your future.  Sincerely, (signed) Neil A. Armstrong

Recommendations for General Welfare

                The topic of discussion for this Constitution Monday comes from Article II, Section 3:  “[The President] shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient [for the general welfare of the nation].”  This clause is known as the “Recommendations Clause.”  It grants authority to the President to make recommendations to Congress without any violation of the rights of Congress.

                “Explicitly, the clause imposes a duty, but its performance rests solely with the President.  Congress possesses no power to compel the President to recommend, as he alone is the `judge’ of what is `necessary and expedient.’  Unlike the Necessary and Proper Clause of Article I, which limits Congress’s discretion to effectuating only its delegated powers, the phrase `necessary and expedient’ implies wider range of discretion for the President.  Because this is a political question, there has been little judicial involvement with the President’s actions under the clause as long as Presidents have not tried to extend their legislative powers.  In Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer  (1952), the Court noted that the Recommendations Clause serves as a reminder that the President cannot make law by himself:  `The power to recommend legislation, granted to the President, serves only to emphasize that it is the function of the Congress to legislate.’ …” (See Vasan Kesavan, James Pfiffner, and J. Gregory Sidak in The Heritage Guide to the Constitution, pp. 217-218.)  

Cleansing Power of the Atonement

                We celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ because of who He is and the mission He performed.  If He had not performed His atoning sacrifice, He would have been just one of many little babies born into the world.  His mission on earth was to provide a way for you and me and all mankind to return to the presence of our Heavenly Father and to be with Him and our loved ones for all eternity.  The Atonement of Jesus Christ is the reason why we celebrate His birth at Christmas.

                I have been pondering the cleansing power of the Atonement of Jesus Christ.  People often lose hope because they feel that they are beyond the point of repentance and that they can never be forgiven.  These people do not understand the meaning of why Jesus Christ suffered in Gethsemane and on the cross.  When we lose hope, it is as though we are disavowing the power of the Savior and His suffering in behalf of all of us.  He suffered for all of us, but He also suffered for me and you as individuals.

                President Boyd K. Packer of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a master teacher and story teller.  He wrote and illustrated a small book entitled A Christmas Parable [1993] which is one of my favorite Christmas stories.  It is the story of a farmer and his wife and their own Christmas miracle.  As you may know, a parable is “a brief, simple story told to illustrate or teach a moral or spiritual truth,” and this Christmas parable fulfills that description.

                It was Christmastime and money was short.  The farmer had experienced three bad years on his farm, and he realized that he would lose his farm if there was another bad year.  He usually enjoyed Christmas, but this year “Christmas bothered him.  And it bothered him that Christmas bothered him.  Christmas was home and family and fireplaces and happy times with presents and good meals and memories of better times. Christmas symbolized things that mattered most to him.”

                The farmer and his wife tried to encourage each other even though they were both worried and losing hope.  The farmer fell into bed exhausted and was soon in deep sleep.  He dreamed that he was working on some of his equipment when his wife called him to supper.  He stopped at the sink to wash but the dirt would not come off of him.  He scrubbed harder but more dirt appeared.  He noticed that dirt and stains from years past were on his hands and arms and even on his face, and he also noticed faint odors from his work on the farm.  He looked at the stains and remembered when each one was put there.  He wondered why the stains were there and why he could not wash them off.  The farmer was grateful to awaken and find that he had only been dreaming, but he could not forget the dream.

                The farmer was a good man who loved his wife and children, but he went to Church only on special occasions even though he was a baptized member.  His wife insisted that he had to go to Church this day because he needed it.  He could not resist his wife’s counsel and went with his family.  “He sat uncomfortably with [his wife] in the Gospel Doctrine class.  The struggling teacher had only modest teaching ability.  The lesson was on baptism, but he was not interested in that.  His mind was on the disturbing dream of the night before.”

                The teacher read a scripture, and two of the words “hit him with great force.”  Those two words were “washed clean.”  “And after they have paid the penalty of their transgressions, and are washed clean, [they] shall receive a reward according to their works, for they are heirs of salvation” (Doctrine and Covenants 138:59).

                The unskilled teacher defined baptism as “an ordinance to wash away our sins.”  Then another scripture was read:  Now I say unto you that ye must repent, and be born again; for the Spirit saith if ye are not born again ye cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven; therefore come and be baptized unto repentance, that ye may be washed from your sins, that ye may have faith on the Lamb of God, who taketh away the sins of the world, who is mighty to save and to cleanse from all unrighteousness” (Book of Mormon – Another Testament of Jesus Christ, Alma 7:14).

                Another scripture was read:  “Then Peter said …, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost (Acts 2:38).

                Some of the words in the scriptures – washed, sins, baptism, cleanse from all unrighteousness, and gift – made the farmer feel that the lesson was about Christmas.  He felt something that day, the same feeling that he felt at Christmas.

As he went about his week, he kept thinking about his dream and the lesson.  A few days later he read the message on a Christmas card:  “Behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife:  for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.  And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus:  for he shall save his people from their sins” (Matthew 1:20-21).

                “For the first time he understood!  He knew what that meant.

                “He was a man with little-boy feelings about Christmas.  The birth of the Christ had always been more or less present for him in that season.  But now the symbols of Christmas which he loved had real meaning.  Gifts form the wise men now represented something, as did the tree and the star.  But now, the promise of redemption had entered the scene.  He had lost nothing from the appealing traditions of Christmas; in fact, they now had greater meaning.

                “He understood!  For the first time he understood what the gift was!

                “The problems of life were not lessened by his new understanding, but there was a new power working within him.  The problems remained, but the troubled heart did not.  He had new kinds of conversations with his wife….

                “After the reunion, for the first time he told his wife of the dream.  They talked into the night of what it meant.  Now he understood that, just as he could wash up for supper, there was a way to become spiritually clean.  Because of the first Christmas and what followed it, he could get clean and he could stay clean.

                “They talked of another reunion awaiting them beyond the veil. To enter there one must be clean, spiritually clean.  He listened as his wife explained the Atonement and the Resurrection.  He understood!  For the first time, he understood!  Because of that first Christmas, they would live eternally.  They could enter in and be together there – a family.  This was the gift!”

                This is a wonderful story, which I read every year at Christmas time.  It is fiction, but it comes true in the lives of many different people in many different places and many different times. 

Bishop Richard C. Edgley, First Counselor in the Presiding Bishopric, related an experience where he saw the same miracle take place in the life of a young man.  He explained that he was on assignment to speak in a stake conference and to interview a prospective missionary while he was there.  He read some of the background as to why this young man needed to be interviewed by a General Authority, and his heart ached with the realization that the young man had committed serious transgressions.

                Bishop Edgley went into the stake president’s office for the interview and was approached by a “handsome young man with a wonderful countenance” when he was expecting “a very troubled young man.”  He asked the young man in private, “Why am I interviewing you?”

                “He recounted his past.  When he was through, he began to explain the steps and the personal suffering he had gone through.  He talked about the Atonement – the infinite power of the Atonement.  He bore his testimony and expressed his love for the Savior. And then he said, `I believe the Savior’s personal suffering in Gethsemane and His sacrifice upon the cross were powerful enough to rescue even a man like me.’” 

Bishop Edgley approved the young man to serve as a missionary.  He understood “the young man’s hope was based not only upon a knowledge and testimony of the Atonement but also upon a personalization of this gift.  He understood that it was for him personally!  He knew the power of the Atonement and the hope it gives when all might seem lost or hopeless.”   (See Ensign, April 2012, p 80.)

I know that the Atonement of Jesus Christ was performed for each of us as individuals.  I know that it was broad enough and deep enough to encompass all of us.  I also know that it will be inactive until we activate it in our individual lives by turning to our Lord and Savior, even Jesus Christ and living as He would have us live.  I know that He loves us and stands with outstretched arms waiting for us to come to Him.  I love Him and have hope that I will be worthy return to His presence with my family.

                                                                      

Rules for Life

                Families, communities, and nations are strengthened when we teach the rising generation the basic rules of life.  We must teach the young people proper behavior and give them understanding as to what is expected of them.  When we have high expectations, young people rise to meet those expectations, but when we keep our expectations low, the rising generation does not rise at all.  My father taught his children that each generation should be better than the previous one, and my children are much better than me.  I believe that their children will continue the trend because of what I see in their homes.

                There is a list of rules for high school students flying around the Internet, which have been attributed to Bill Gates.  While Bill Gates is a very intelligent and successful business man, he did not write these rules.  In fact, he is not even the first to quote the rules.  According to Snopes dot come,  Ann Landers printed the first ten rules (uncredited) several times, and radio commentator, Paul Harvey, read the list on his program.

                Snopes claims that the list was created by Charles J. Sykes, author of the 1996 book entitled Dumbing Down Our Kids:  Why American Children Feel Good About Themselves But Can’t Read, Write, or Add.  Sykes also wrote 50 Rules Kids Won’t Learn in School:  Real-World Antidotes to Feel-Good Education in 2007.

These rules remind me very much of what I taught my children.  When they were out of school for a day, a week, or the summer, they would complain when I gave them assignments.  “We’re on vacation!”  My reply was, “You are on vacation from school but not life.  Get to work!”  Sykes’ rules would make a good foundation for New Year’s resolutions.  I suggest that parents at least read the following rules from Sykes to their children at least annually.  Parents must act like adults in order to help the rising generation.

Rule No. 1:  Life is not fair.  Get used to it.  The average teen-ager uses the phrase “It’s not fair” 8.6 times a day.  You got it from your parents, who said it so often you decided they must be the most idealistic generation ever.  When they started hearing it from their own kids, they realized Rule No. 1.

Rule No. 2:  The real world won’t care as much about your self-esteem as much as your school does.  It’ll expect you to accomplish something before you feel good about yourself.  This may come as a shock.  Usually, when inflated self-esteem meets reality, kids complain that it’s not fair.  (See Rule No. 1.)

Rule No. 3:  Sorry, you won’t make $40,000 a year right out of high school.  And you won’t be a vice president or have a car phone either.  You may even have to wear a uniform that doesn’t have a Gap label.

Rule No. 4:  If you think your teacher is tough, wait ‘til you get a boss.  He doesn’t have tenure, so he tends to be a bit edgier.  When you screw up, he’s not going to ask you how you feel about it.

Rule No. 5:  Flipping burgers is not beneath your dignity.  Your grandparents had a different word for burger flipping.  They called it opportunity.  They weren’t embarrassed making minimum wage either.  They would have been embarrassed to sit around talking about Kurt Cobain all weekend.

Rule No. 6:  It’s not your parents’ fault.  If you screw up, you are responsible.  This is the flip side of “It’s my life,” and “You’re not the boss of me,” and other eloquent proclamations of your generation.  When you turn 18, it’s on your dime.  Don’t whine about it, or you’ll sound like a baby boomer.

Rule No. 7:  Before you were born your parents weren’t as boring as they are now.  They got that way paying your bills, cleaning up your room and listening to you tell them how idealistic you are.  And by the way, before you save the rain forest from the blood-sucking parasites of your parents’ generation, try delousing the closet in your bedroom.

Rule No. 8:  Your school may have done away with winners and losers.  Life hasn’t.  In some schools, they’ll give you as many times as you want to get the right answer.  Failing grades have been abolished and class valedictorians scrapped, lest anyone’s feelings be hurt.  Effort is as important as results.  This, of course, bears not the slightest resemblance to anything in real life.  (See Rule No. 1, Rule No. 2 and Rule No. 4.)

Rule No. 9:  Life is not divided into semesters, and you don’t get summers off.  Not even Easter break.  They expect you to show up every day.  For eight hours.  And you don’t get a new life every 10 weeks.  It just goes on and on.  While we’re at it, very few jobs are interested in fostering our self-expression or helping you find yourself.  Fewer still lead to self-realization.  (See Rule No. 1 and Rule No. 2.)

Rule No. 10:  Television is not real life.  Your life is not a sitcom.  Your problems will not all be solved in 30 minutes, minus time for commercials.  In real life, people actually have to leave the coffee shop to go to jobs.  Your friends will not be as perky or pliable as Jennifer Aniston.

Rule No. 11:  Be nice to nerds.  You may end up working for them.  We all could.

Rule No. 12:  Smoking does not make you look cool.  It makes you look moronic.  Next time you’re cruising, watch an 11-year-old with a butt in his mouth.  That’s what you look like to anyone over 20.  Ditto for “expressing yourself” with purple hair and/or pierced body parts.

Rule No. 13:  You are not immortal.  (See Rule No. 12.)  If you are under the impression that living fast, dying young and leaving a beautiful corpse is romantic, you obviously haven’t seen one of your peers at room temperature lately.

Rule No. 14:  Enjoy this while you can.  Sure parents are a pain, school’s a bother, and life is depressing.  But someday you’ll realize how wonderful it was to be a kid.  Maybe you should start now.  You’re welcome.

Gun Control and Freedom, Part 2

                The liberty principle for this Freedom Friday is the simple fact that gun control destroys freedom.   We know from history that gun registration leads to confiscation of guns; we also know from history that governments commit mass murder against their own unarmed citizens.  Our Founders understood the connection between an armed citizenry and freedom and intentionally wrote the Second Amendment in order to provide American citizens with a way to protect themselves from a tyrannical government.

                Every time a mass murder takes place, Liberals and Progressives start clamoring for more gun control.  Within hours of the massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, the media was focused on the weapons used and led the demands for new gun laws, and Liberal and Progressive politicians are only too happy to meet those demands.

                Charles Krauthammer published an interesting article at the Washington Post about the root causes of mass murder.  He wrote, “Every mass shooting has three elements:  the killer, the weapon and the cultural climate.”  After discussing the gun control demands which arose after the Newtown killings, he wrote, “Monsters shall always be with us but in earlier days they did not roam free.”  He explained how as a psychiatrist in Massachusetts in the 1970s he had committed mentally ill patients but “labored under none of the crushing bureaucratic and legal constraints that make involuntary commitment infinitely more difficult today.”

                Krauthammer explained that we have many mentally ill people wandering our streets who are collectively known as “the homeless.”  In our politically correct society, we were forced to give them their freedoms and allow them to circulate through our communities as one of their “Rights” under the U.S. Constitution.  Krauthammer said that only a “tiny percentage of the mentally ill becomes mass killers,” but they apparently have to actually kill someone before they can be forcibly treated.  They can then be committed if they do not commit suicide first.

                “Random mass killings were three times more common in the 2000s than in the 1980s, when gun laws were actually weaker.  Yet a 2011 University of California at Berkeley study found that states with strong civil commitment laws have about a one-third lower homicide rate.”

                Krauthammer suggested that the mass murders are connected to our culture of violent movies and video games:  we should not be shocked when “a small cadre of unstable, deeply deranged, dangerously isolated young men go out and enact the overlearned narrative.”  He wrote that if “we’re serious about curtailing future Columbines and Newtowns, everything – guns, commitment, culture – must be on the table.”  In other words, just controlling the guns will not stop the problems; yet, all we hear from the media and the politicians is that we must get control of the guns. 

                Except for the awful mass murders, we do not have an epidemic of gun violence.  Krauthammer wrote that “over the last 30 years, the U.S. homicide rate has declined by 50 percent.  Gun murders as well.”  He explained that the mass murders “are infinitely more difficult to prevent.  While law deters the rational, it has far less effect on the psychotic.  The best we can do is to try to detain them, disarm them and discourage `entertainment’ that can intensify already murderous impulses.

                “But there’s a cost.  Gun control impinges upon the Second Amendment; involuntary commitment impinges upon the liberty clause of the Fifth Amendment; curbing `entertainment’ violence impinges upon First Amendment free speech.

                “That’s a lot of impingement, a lot of amendments.  But there’s no free lunch.  Increasing public safety almost always means restricting liberties.”

                Every time something serious happens, Americans trade away some liberties.  After the terrorist attacks of 9/11 we gave away some of our freedoms and ended up with the TSA invading our bodies at the airports.  How many more of our freedoms are we prepared to give away for more public safety now?

We must learn from history or we will repeat it.  Hitler first went after the guns in Germany and then started gathering the people to exterminate them.  He then went into other countries where the citizens had been deprived of weapons to protect themselves.  He did not go into Switzerland because he knew the citizens were armed and ready to meet any invasion.

I judge the seriousness of any claim by the people who are making the claim.  When I learned that China was calling for American citizens to be disarmed, I knew for sure that we needed to keep our right to bear arms.  

It is a fact that armed citizens help to keep their nation free.  We must be careful about the freedoms we trade away in order to enjoy a safer society.  We must remember that those who want to take our guns are the very people who want to control everything that we do. 

               

Fiscal Cliff

                I believe that our nation is in a serious fiscal position and the elected leaders are not solving the crisis.  The media has been almost constantly harping on the “fiscal crisis” since Barack Obama was re-elected.  I think it very strange that we heard nothing about the economy during the presidential campaign but we hear nothing but the fiscal crisis now that the election is over?  The situation is so “dire” that Obama had to cut his Hawaiian vacation short and call Congress back into session.  I do not feel one bit sorry for them because they have had months and even years to solve the problem but kept “kicking the can down the road.”

                The Blaze reported on “a last-minute meeting held on Friday to avert the quickly-approaching `fiscal cliff,’ a combination of tax increases and deep spending cuts to take effect next year unless Congress comes up with a budget plan.”  When the meeting ended, everyone left in silence.  There were “no comments” from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.),  House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), or House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).  “Based on the fact that both Sen. Reid and Rep. Boehner declined to comment on the details of the meeting, it’s probably safe to assume that neither side is any closer to getting what it wants.”  “Indeed, it would appear that the only thing accomplished by today’s meeting is that Senate leadership was told to get its act together by House leaders.”  Boehner aide’s was reported to say,  “The group agreed that the next step should be the Senate taking bipartisan action.”  The aide said that Speaker Boehner “insisted” that the Senate “must act on the previous House bill and either pass it or amend it.”

                President Obama did of course have something to say; he usually does and his comments are usually negative.  Shortly after the meeting broke up, Obama held a press conference to say that he is “mildly optimistic” that our leaders can reach a deal but that “nobody’s going to get 100 percent of what they want.”

                Obama then launched into his negative mode in voicing his displeasure with Congress:  “Ordinary folks, they do their jobs.  They meet deadlines.  They sit down and discuss things and then things happen.  If there are disagreements they sort through the disagreements.  The notion that our elected leadership can’t do the same thing is mind-boggling to them.  It needs to stop.”

                This Congress could very easily go down in the history books as the least unproductive Congress in the history of our nation.  In spite of their unproductiveness and the fact that our nation is in a fiscal crisis, our Dear Leader issued an executive order to end the pay freeze on federal employees.  In other words, he just gave some federal workers a raise, including Vice President Joe Biden, members of both the House and the Senate, and judges at all levels!  The new wages will be effective on the first day of the first applicable pay period beginning after March 27, 2013.

                The simple fact that Obama is increasing the pay of federal workers during a fiscal crisis seems to prove the point that the “fiscal cliff” is a diversion.  Scott Powell is one person who believes that the “fiscal cliff” is a diversion from the real problems of our government:  “The fiscal cliff is less a crisis than a creation that diverts the attention of policymakers, the media and the public away from the big picture abyss that threatens the United States and shifts focus to the smaller and more immediate tax and spending debate associated with the year-end expiration of the Bush tax cuts.

                “The central problem facing the U.S. that few understand is the growing systemic risk from the unsustainable trajectory of deficit spending and debt accumulation and the $225 trillion derivatives exposure largely held by a handful of U.S. banks that are too big to fail….

                “But what is striking about the current debate is how relatively small the numbers are compared to those associated with the greater problems of systemic risk that could precipitate a financial collapse….

                “What is needed now is leadership and conviction to do the right thing for all Americans.  We will get through the fiscal cliff one way or another, but then the real work needs to commence.  Outside Washington, there is a palpable sense that the U.S. economy is rigged and in a precarious state.  The Republican majority in the House of Representatives can start to reclaim the moral high ground by exercising the courage and commitment to educate the public about the nation’s fiscal reality and explain the corrective options available to steer clear of the abyss of financial collapse.”

                Jim O’Sullivan is another person who believes the talk about the “fiscal cliff” is just a diversion:  “The US economy is already over the fiscal cliff and falling at an increasing rate.  Today’s economic questions should be focused on its rate of descent; will the rate increase or can it be arrested before the rocks below are reached.  After the election the economy has continued to implode, yet its downward plunge has been largely ignored by the mainstream media (MSM).  Apparently the MSM’s economic orthodoxy is now only entered on fiscal cliff narratives.  The MSM’s focus on the cliff gives Obama, their hero, economic cover since the cliff story is the economic story and not the terrible economic results occurring weekly and monthly.

                “Currently it is difficult to find economic data related to the past two months (or past three years) which is positive; whether it is meaningful growth in employment, an increase in the labor participation rate, a consistent uptick in GDP, a reduction in the workforce dropout rate, a reduction in government spending or a reduction in the deficit et. al.

                ”Many fiscal cliff narratives have incessantly talked about tax increases/decreases, spending, debt, deficits and the intransigence of the President or the Republicans (mainly Republicans) to compromise.  With compromise a deal to move the country forward on important economic issues can be attained. Certainly future economic performance will be significantly affected by many of the outcomes related to the cliff negotiations.  Yet the narratives seldom mention the Obama administration’s past or current record on economic issues … a dismal report card that demonstrates no sustainable success on any level over the past four years.”

                After listing some examples of “statistical evidence that the Obama economy is already in a free-fall,” O’Sullivan wrote:  “Yet maybe the most telling informational deficiency is the shortage of reporting on the economic stimulative effects of previous income tax and capital gain tax reductions.  Reductions that then resulted in growing tax revenues and appreciable increases in prosperity for the American people.  In fact MSM stories have tried to debunk the realities of the Coolidge, JFK, Reagan, Clinton and Bush 43 tax reductions that kick started past sagging economies.  The media’s reluctance to discuss tax cutting or the subsequent economic surges that followed their execution has largely removed these strategies from public debate.”

                O’Sullivan discussed the results of above referenced tax reductions and then concluded:  “Given the above realities, a fair hearing on an alternative approach for an economic resurgence using marginal tax rate reductions deserves discussion.  But sadly the MSM will continue to emphasize only statistics that highlight the positives of the torpid Obama economy (as will Obama) and continue to anesthetize the public to the magnitude of this administration’s failed economic policies rather than report on or discuss a time tested tax strategy.  The truth is that the economy is already over the fiscal cliff.  Obama’s incompetence did the pushing and his fiscal cliff strategy will accelerate the economy to destruction on the fast approaching rocks below.”

                David Limbaugh believes that the financial health of our nation could have been solved long ago IF Barack Obama and the Republicans were working for the same thing.  “The reason President Obama and Republicans can’t come to an agreement on the fiscal cliff negotiations is that they don’t share the same goals.  This is also the key to understanding why President Obama appears far less worried about going over the cliff.

                “Republicans are focused on restoring the nation’s financial health by promoting economic growth and reducing our horrendous deficits and debt.  President Obama’s primary aim is to complete his project of fundamentally transforming America….

                “The budget debates essentially boil down to the Republican’s desire to return the nation to financial health vs. Obama’s desire to use the government’s taxing and spending powers as tools to remake America in his image rather than to facilitate economic growth or balance the budget.”

               Our nation went over the “fiscal cliff” at midnight on New Year’s Eve, but the U.S. Senate passed a bill http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2013/jan/1/deficit-fiscal-cliff-bill-actually-spends-330-bill/ about 2:00 a.m. on New Year’s Day with only eight votes against it.  This deal was designed to save money, but it includes $330.3 billion in new spending over the next decade.  It also includes $25.1 billion in new cuts with only $2 billion cut in 2013.  The bottom line of the new bill is that it makes our deficit worse by $4 trillion over the next decade.  The bill went to the U.S. House of Representatives where the members were actually given time to read the bill before any votes were scheduled.  The House passed the bill yesterday with more than half of the Republicans voting no.

                The simple fact is that our nation does not have an income problem; it has a spending problem.  We must stop the spending!  I believe that we are so far down the slippery slope that we may not be capable of recovering from the destruction brought about by our incompetent leaders. Our nation could recover from the damage if we had a nation of people who took personal responsibility for themselves and their families and then were willing to make the necessary sacrifices for the nation.  We have too many people who believe that the government should take care of them from cradle to grave and too many people with their hands out for Obama phones, food stamps, unemployment, etc.  We have too many people who are willing to believe the lies that Obama tells them even while he is leading them to destruction.  I believe that we are going to suffer some very difficult times before we see good times again.  We better wear our seatbelts because we are in for a rough ride!

                                                                                                                                                                                            

Gun Control and Crazies

                The Newtown, Connecticut, massacre was performed by a mentally-ill young man, but his act has brought out a lot of other “crazies.”  Many of the people with crazy ideas are media personnel.  How crazy is it for a newspaper to publish the names and addresses of everyone in their area who has a gun?  How crazy is it for the media to use Alinsky tactics on NRA’s Wayne LaPierre simply because he proposed putting armed security in every school?

                LaPierre’s idea was called “a train wreck” by MSNBC, “insane parody… a crazed presentation” by Maureen Dowd of the New York Times, “unhinged” by Gail Collins at the Times, “disturbing and dangerous” by Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), and “the craziest man on earth” by the Daily News.  How did LaPierre respond?  “If it’s crazy to call for putting police in and securing our schools to protect our children, then call me crazy.”  

                I personally believe that putting police in our schools is a good idea.  School children already practice lockdown drills for the possibility of attack.  I believe that a police officer in the school would help students feel more secure.  Before any incident happened, children could get to know the policeman as a person and a friend.  If an incident happened, the policeman would be right there to take charge.  Did you know that the children and teachers who survived the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut, waited for 20 minutes before the police arrived?

                We already have guards around everything we consider valuable.  Our military bases are protected by armed guards.  Our federal buildings have metal detectors manned by armed guards.  Our court buildings have metal detectors and armed guards.  Our President and other national and state leaders have armed guards.  We can bet that the school attended by the Obama girls has armed guards in addition to the secret service officers.  LaPierre and I believe that our children are our most valuable resources and deserve protection also.

                LaPierre is not the only one receiving the “Alinsky Treatment” from liberals and progressives.  Larry Pratt, Executive Director of Gun Owners of America, is also a target.  CNN’s Piers Morgan said that Pratt was “unbelievably stupid,” “dangerous,” and “shame[s] your country.”  

                        The “Alinsky Treatment” comes from Rules for Radicals and instructs the followers of Alinsky to pick the target, freeze the target, personalize the issue, and demonize the target.  These men are being demonized because they believe in the right to keep and bear arms, a Right guaranteed by the Supreme Law of our land.

                PJ Media published an interesting and enlightening article by Jack Dunphy, an officer with the Los Angeles Police Department.

                “I suspect that those who seek a legislative solution to crimes such as this one are on a fool’s errand.  It would be difficult to tabulate the number of laws the gunman broke in the course of his murderous spree that morning; to think the enactment of one or a dozen more laws would deter such a man is to engage in childish fantasy.  And talk of banning `assault weapons’ is equally naïve, not least for the fact that the very term has no real definition other than to describe rifles that some people find scary-looking.

                “I am neither a member of the National Rifle Association nor an avid shooter.  But I have carried a gun as a tool of my trade for more than 30 years, and  have come to appreciate the advantages of being armed in those moments when a deadly threat presents itself.  That said, I am not among those who would place a weapon in the hand of every teacher….

                “But the mere possibility that one or two staff  members at a school might be armed may offer just enough deterrence to inspire second thoughts in any but the most determined assailants.  And if such a determined assailant proceeds with an attack, is it beyond the pale to hope for intervention by an armed teacher? … [I]s that scenario not preferable to what actually occurred?

                “There are limits on what the law and government agencies can do to protect the public.  Though I’ve been a cop for 30 years, nearly every day of which has been spent on the streets of Los Angeles, I can recall only a handful of times when I was able to interrupt a violent crime in progress, either by responding quickly to a radio call or by coming across it randomly while on patrol.  You’ve heard the expression:  when seconds count, the police are minutes away.  It’s trite but no less true.”

                Officer Dunphy said that there is only so much we can expect from our government.  Remember, the surviving children and teachers in Newtown waited 20 minutes for the police to arrive.   LaPierre, Pratt, and Dunphy are not “crazy;” they are wise to encourage us to prepare to protect ourselves and our families.

                The main stream media feeds us the information that they want us to have.  They keep harping on the Sandy Hook massacre and the need for gun control, but we hear little mention about the murders that took place in Webster, New York, on Christmas Eve.   An ex-con set his house on fire and used an “assault” rifle to kill two firefighters and injure others who responded to the fire.  While the sniper was killing the responders, the fire burned other homes in his neighborhood.  He reported that his desire was to “do what I like doing best, killing people.”  He had previously spent time in prison for beating his mother to death, and  his sister’s body was found in the ashes of the home they shared.  The media does not harp about this murder scene even  though the same  type of rifle – a Bushmaster – was used by both  murderers.  This ex-con had  numerous weapons even though he could not own or possess them legally!  This is a crisis, but it is not a crisis that can be exploited by the gun control advocates.

                There may be a racial component to the clamor for gun control because shootings by blacks seldom make the news.  There were seven people shot in the city of Chicago, Illinois, on Christmas Eve, but the media made little mention of the killings.  Murder is a routine matter in Chicago, and there were 500 shootings in Chicago in 2012.  “The vast majority of the shooters are black, and the vast  majority of the victims are black.  Many of the victims are under the age of 18 … A few are under age 10.  You’ve never heard of any of them.

                “But when an evil white person with a history of mental instability shoots up a school, killing 20 children, most of whom were white, the media is suddenly concerned with gun control.

                “Perhaps that’s because the  media is racist.  Or perhaps it’s something else.  If the media pays attention to the shootings in Chicago, it will have to talk about the fact that Chicago is heavily gun controlled.  It will have to discuss the fact that guns are illegally flowing into areas of heavy gun violence.  And it will have to talk about the impact of social ills like single motherhood, gang recruitment and  poor public education.

                “Instead, the media focuses on Sandy Hook, Aurora and Columbine.  Focusing on such statistically aberrant scenarios rather than the more widespread gun violence that plagues our cities allows the media to target one of  its most hated groups:  the National Rifle Association.

                “This is what the left does:  they pick a target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it.  They use individual cases as a baton to wield against groups they hate….

                “… The left’s attack on the NRA is ludicrous.  Neither the Sandy Hook massacre perpetrator .. nor his mother … was a member.  The state of Connecticut has long rejected the NRA’s legislative influence.  The NRA takes zero – zero – tax dollars.  Yet somehow, the NRA has been targeted as the root of all evil.

                “Why?  Because the NRA represents the strongest single proponent of gun rights in America….”

                “So what does that have to do with Chicago versus Sandy Hook?  The media knows that in all shooting scenarios, the conversation quickly polarizes into two positions:  ban guns or discuss other myriad social and legal issues that lead to shootings.  In communities plagued by high levels of social ills like Chicago, the second  position is the more obvious one.  In cases of placid communities getting shot up by a nutcase, the left can talk gun bans more easily.”

                Even though the situation  in Chicago is easier to correct, the Left is more willing to let black “gang members shoot each other in Chicago” than let a good crisis go to waste.  The problems in Chicago will continue because the media and politicians are not interested  in getting to the root causes of the problems – single parents, violent movies and videos, and just plain evil in our communities – and solving the problems.

                The 1995 Gun-Free School Zone Act  was passed with the intention to make schools safer by banning guns, but the number of massacres at schools has increased.  Law-abiding citizens obey the gun bans and are then “sitting ducks” because  criminals do not care about laws.  Killers select their targets because they are gun free.  The Batman movie was premiering at seven different theaters near the killer’s apartment.  The killer  selected the only one that banned guns.   The killer in Newtown selected a school that was a gun-free zone.

                Yet the crazies on the left continue to go after guns.  A new gun control bill will be introduced by Nancy Pelosi in an effort to get “assault” weapons off  our streets.  Cities and counties such as Camden, N.J., Ithaca, New York, and Tomplins County, New York are conducting “gun buyback programs” in efforts to remove  unwanted guns from  the communities.  I recently heard that authorities in New Jersey are not currently allowing guns to be transferred at all, but I do not yet have a reference.

                Who are the real crazies in our nation?  The people who propose that we prepare to defend ourselves and homes and put armed  police officers in our schools to protect our children or the people who think that they can  prevent violence by locking up all the guns?  Those who are wise will look at the root causes of the violence and attack those areas rather than the law-abiding citizens of our nation.