Socialism: Coming to a Community Near You!

I had an upsetting phone call from a good friend the other day. He mentioned how he and his wife were in the process of investigating a potential move to Arizona, and how they planned to juggle the timing and finances to their advantage. Here's what he said that bugged me: they would hold on to their jobs until they were 'downsized' - which is planned for January 2011 by their respective employers - so that they could then collect unemployment benefits. He stated, "it's free money, so we might as well take advantage of it."

@&^%$%*&@^%#$^*&^&%$$#@!!!!!!

(excuse my french . . . )

It's bad enough that this guy could make that statement with a straight face - he is an educated, professional person who knows better and who would rail loudly against someone of color making that exact same statement - but to add insult to injury, he and his wife are independently wealthy. Their retirement funds are in the multiple millions of dollars. They will live quite comfortably off just a portion of the interest each month, and never touch the principal once they are no longer actively working.

For a guy to whom the values of the free market system are a blessing from God, this socialistic attitude is profoundly disturbing. My friend also considers himself to have a distaste for the ideals of socialism - yet, here he is making plans to use it! What gives?

It reminded me of a conversation with another person back when the government "cash-for-clunkers" program was in full swing. This person spoke angrily against the mindset that produced this terrible idea - then shared how he and the little woman had tried to use it to get a new vehicle for themselves, but didn't quite qualify.

Is it any wonder America is such a mess, when the common people have decided to toss any principles they might (claim to) possess out the window?

If something is right, then it is also right to embrace it. If something is NOT right, it is also NOT right to embrace it. That has always been a fundamental principle in the good ol' U.S. of A. and contributed greatly to our collective success as a country. But when a majority of folks decide that they'll only keep their principles intact as long as it doesn't inconvenience them - something is terribly terribly wrong.

Taking a stand for what is right can often place you in the minority. For a man of principle, that doesn't matter: he stands on those principles, come what may, because he knows he can look at the man in the mirror and hold his head up high with the satisfaction of knowing deep in his soul that he has done what is right because it is right.

It is a sad state of affairs to realize that men of principle have become an endangered species. We have morphed from doing what is right to doing what is personally expedient. No intestinal fortitude required.

In a small township where a few of my relatives live, a garbage contract was recently accepted by their township trustees. This contract included a provision for the township to pay for twice-per-month trash pickup, and also allows township residents so inclined to add the other two weeks in each month for only $21 per quarter. Whatta deal!

Except that this personal option comes at an additional cost of tax dollars. A quick check into the particulars of what happened reveals that other garbage collection vendors had offered the same 2x per month pickup service for significantly less cost per month, but were shut out of the final process. The justification for this from the trustees was that the contract accepted was the best deal for township residents because of the personal $21 per quarter option for those interested. In other words, they justified spending a few hundred tax dollars more per month because that gave residents access to $21 per quarter for additional trash pickup.

Anyone know where you can find in the Ohio Revised Code that government representatives are supposed to find ways to take more tax dollars from all to subsidize a few?? Anyone? Anyone??

When even township officials embrace this twisted mindset, our country is surely going to hell in a handbasket.

*this is a slightly revised posting, as my cousin informed me that I had the quarterly amount on that township garbage thing listed incorrectly the first time. sorry for any confusion

Campaign Season Hits

Ah yes - the temperature is a bit cooler, the air is crisp; leaves are beginning to turn, and the annual crop of campaign signs is blooming all over the place.

Must be Campaign Season!

And I, for one, can't wait for it to be OVER.

We all complain about how awful our political leaders are, but why would a nice guy ever want to put himself through the gauntlet of campaigning? Not one of us are perfect (last time I checked, the only perfect One was resurrected some 2000+ years ago) and thus anyone who tosses his hat into the ring of politics must be prepared for some other yahoo to point out - loudly and in technicolor - every little pimple on his public keister.

And while we collectively complain about campaign mudslinging, too many of us secretly like it. Oh sure, we SAY it offends our tender sensibilities - but we consistently listen to and vote for the guy who throws the most mud. What's wrong with this picture? Is it any wonder that we can't get a "good" guy to run for public office?

Now I'm not suggesting that we be kept from knowing about serious breaches of the public trust or other items truly pertinent. What I am saying is that it would sure be great if we could somehow convince those running for public office to do so only on their merits for the job - and not on how awful the other guy is/might be.

Wouldn't that be amazing if every candidate refused to do anything but speak of his/her qualifications for the job? If every candidate turned a deaf ear to those who would encourage him to dish the dirt on his opponent(s)? Wow - just think of it. . . we might actually be able to cast our vote by basing it on who we truly feel would best fit the job - what a concept!

Where I live, one of the candidates for local office has put out a little brochure that he hands out at campaign stops. This guy is a truly viable candidate for the job he seeks - but he uses very little of this printed material to explain his qualifications. Most of the print is used in drumming up fear or concern over the other guy(s) who are running. Very unnecessary, and lowers my level of respect for him.

Another guy has publicly stated (I heard it myself) that he is going to "take the high road" in his campaign, and plans to stick to his qualifications when he goes out to talk with people. I just hope he doesn't allow himself to be goaded into anything less than that by his constituents. Time will tell.

All of the crapola that I hear from one candidate about another makes my head hurt. Nov. 3rd can't come fast enough for me.

Who Pays for Your Final Days?

I live in a rural area of stereotypical folk who get up every day and work hard, pay their bills on time, and save up for retirement and to leave an inheritance for their kids. These people plug away day in and day out, year in and year out, enjoying the good times and stoically enduring the bad. They don't look to anyone for a handout of any kind, and if a neighbor is in need everybody pitches in to help.

It surprises me how many of these salt-of-the-earth men and women completely lose their reason when they begin to realize they won't be able to care for their aging parents at home forever. Suddenly, they're calling attorneys and accountants - looking for ways to "hide" their parents' assets from "The Government", because everybody knows that "The Government" will "take everything you got" to pay for nursing home care! Tyranny! Thievery!

To which I say, "Whoa!!"

Somehow in America we have come to the uncontested conclusion that when we get old and need to go to the old folks home, "The Government" should pay for it. All of it.

Why is that? Most of them never expected "The Government" to take care of them before this circumstance. (that's why this county is full of Republicans) Why do they suddenly look to the feds when they're becoming feeble?

Here's my take on the matter. The money we earn goes to pay for our shelter, food, and transportation. We save some for retirement, so that when we're not able to work full time any longer we will still have enough money for our shelter, food, and transportation. That money should continue to be used for our shelter and food and transportation until we die. Period. If we're able to accomplish that outside of any nursing home walls, so much the better! If our situation requires us to spend our last days INside a nursing home, our assets should still foot the bill for our care. If there happens to be something of value remaining after the funeral, then our kids can split it between them.

Why should yours and my tax dollars (which is where "The Government" gets it) go to pay for someone in a nursing home before all of their assets have been spent? While I do not mind helping someone out when they are truly down on their luck, I have a big problem with footing the bills for anyone who really has the funds to pay for themselves. It's all part of personal responsibility, to my way of thinking.

I realize that means the children's inheritance would likely be used up by the parents that earned it. But - isn't that the way it should be?

What do you think?

Swantopia!

Hey, everybody - I just read today's edition of The Toledo Blade, and guess what: the community of Swanton is apparently untouched by today's economic woes!

Wow! Who woulda thunkit?? (with apologies to Hooda . . . )

That is the only explanation I can think of, for their school board to give their teachers a 3.7% raise this year and a 4.1% raise the next year.

Yup - must be a charmed place indeed, to be able to shuck out that many taxpayer dollars, with banks failing all around us, the stock market in the bidet, and unemployment rates of around 10% in the county at large. Must be the laws of economics simply do not apply to the good citizens of the Swanton Local School District.

Now I understand their clever ploy of allowing people to refer to the area as "Swantucky", and even benefiting from tee shirt sales that say the same. They WANT everyone to dismiss them as ignorant dolts, so that they can keep all of this prosperity to themselves!

Well, I say we foil their snarky little plan - let's all move into the Swanton school district! Yeah! Let's snap up all of those houses in foreclosure, and empty commercial buildings in town!

Only, don't bother moving to the area if you've got kids. According to statements by one board member in that Blade article, the school district is going to be in the tank in just a couple of years because of this generous teacher contract, so the education itself is bound to suffer when more teachers and programs have to be dumped in order to balance the books.

Say. . . didn't the same thing happen out there a few years back? I seem to recall the Swanton system being the highest paid group in the county . . . until they went into fiscal caution, and cut people and programs left and right.

Hmmm . . . maybe we'd best wait a bit before we settle down over there. Sounds like it could get ugly again. Perhaps that "Swantucky" moniker remains appropriate after all.

Page Two: Who's Responsible?

I don't usually do a follow-up on earlier posts but did anyone see the clip on Channel 11 last night on the 11 o'clock news about the grant rejected by the Swanton school board?

This is what caught my attention: at the very end of the clip, Neil Toeppe (Executive Director of the SACC) was shown stating, "“there was a lot going to kids, the administration was a small component that (the board) is using as a smoke screen to cover their unwillingness to address the issue publicly.”

Is he serious? Is he actually stating that an annual amount of $4,705 out of a total $511,000 constitutes "a lot going to kids" while $506,295 for salaries, computers & equipment, and travel is "a small component" for administration?? (I did the math using that summary page - you can read it by clicking here)

This clip also had a guy named Mullan who is affiliated with something called the Community Coalition, who said it was "disturbing that 5 people would unanimously turn down free money " (um, Earth to Mullan: there is no such thing as 'free money')

Reading that summary page, it is clear that the SACC and the Community Coalition were the ones who stood to gain the lion's share of that half million dollars. They are both listed by name, as administrators and evaluator of the grant. Funny - none of the video they shot mentioned any of that . . .

There was a short mention by Toeppe of his concern for his 2 grandsons who are coming up through the Swanton school system, with regard to the grant being rejected. . . So Mr. Toeppe, pay attention here, cuz I'm talking to You and all of those who share your opinion that somehow a school system is responsible for the alcohol/tobacco/drug use of their students: PARENTS are responsible for teaching their kids to stay away from drugs and alcohol. PARENTS are responsible to make sure their kids aren't into mischief or trouble outside of school. PARENTS have the greatest impact on their kids' behavior, whether good or evil.

Maybe you've never considered this before, but it is not the responsibility of ANY government entity to parent our kids! It is not the responsibility of the Swanton school district to parent your grandsons, Mr. Toeppe - it is the responsibility of their mom and dad, one of whom is your offspring.

Now maybe if we eliminated the Department of Education completely, and did away with all of these grants where so much money was thrown at a problem, our families would be able to keep more of the money they earn. By being able to pay less in taxes that are delivered by the bushel to entities like the SACC, maybe hundreds and thousands of 2 income households would be able to pare back to 1 income and still be able to eat and pay their personally incurred bills.

And maybe, just maybe, sanity would be restored to the United States and its democratic republic snatched from the brink before it slides forever into the socialistic mire it toys with today. For make no mistake, Mr. Toeppe - the principle you espouse is indeed socialism, where Government is in charge from cradle to grave. I deeply resent those of your ilk who whine ever louder for Government to assume their personal, individual responsibilities, as the money to do so is taken from my pocket and the pockets of my neighbors in ever-increasing taxes while our freedoms are slowly eroded to dust.

PARENTS need to do whatever it takes to keep their kids straight. If that means the parents must limit or cease their own intake of these substances in question, so be it. If that means the parents need to plan supervised parties at home for their kids and their friends, they should do it. If that means the parents must insist on doling out chores or side jobs to their little darlings in order to keep them from imbibing after school (now there's a quaint idea), then, by God they should do so!

I sincerely hope that the citizens of Swanton are intelligent enough to see through your b.s., Mr. Toeppe, and that they are the kind of parents who actually raise their own kids without the benefit of your poker games and pizza parties at taxpayer expense.

Just Say "NO"

An interesting situation has come to the forefront of our consciousness via TV tabloid coverage on all 3 local channels, plus an article in the Toledo Bland, er, Blade.

Seems there is a $511,000 grant that has been awarded by the U.S. Dept. of Education to the Swanton School district through the Swanton Area Community Coalition (SACC) that the Board of Education is thinking of declining.

Whoa!

The proposed function of this grant is for reduction of alcohol use in students. Hmmm . . . sounds like a cause most would support. How could you refuse money for this worthy endeavor?

Neil Toeppe, Executive Director of the SACC, issued a press release, and apparently contacted everybody and their uncle with ties to the local media to put the full court press on the school Board in order to not-so-subtly insist that they accept the grant. He apparently also provided the summary page of the grant to the media as well, and a few have it available online. If you want to read a copy, click on this link to Channel 24

Now, I don't claim to be the sharpest tool in the shed, but even a cursory reading of this summary page shows an interesting fact: the lion's share of the money is earmarked for the SACC, and not the school district. Can you say "boondoggle" ??

It appears that barely 10% of the funds awarded in this grant would actually go to the school for student benefit. All of the rest goes towards administrative salaries, equipment, travel, etc. either through or directly for the SACC and its members. Looks like a sweet deal for them - no wonder Toeppe is salivating over half a million greenbacks over a 3 year period!

Frankly, I am wondering how the heck this thing was ever approved by the US Dept of Ed in the first place. Does no one read these grant proposals before rubber stamping them? How could this much money of taxpayer dollars be awarded to a very small non-profit organization for salaries and travel expenses? It boggles the mind.

Grants are not "free money" - they are all taxpayer funded. That's you and me, and our neighbors. I am mighty annoyed that this type of pork is allowed to occur. Is it any wonder our federal government is bankrupt, with the way they throw our money around??

Kudos to the Swanton Board of Education for investigating the finer details of the grant, and being willing to Just Say "No". If more Boards across this nation would have the intestinal fortitude to do the same, just maybe we could turn this country around.

Mike Adams' Apology to the Arab World

Dr. Mike S. Adams, a professor of criminology at the University of North Carolina, Wilmington, penned this article which was published in Townhall.com on 14 June 2004. At the risk of being - yet again - politically incorrect, I reproduce it here. Please note: an email making the circuit (again) which altered it and credited Retired U.S. Marine Corps General Chuck Pittman is false. This is the real McCoy:

My Apology To The Arab World

Mike S. Adams June 14, 2004
Author’s Note: the following editorial contains mildly offensive language. Given the subject matter, the author is sorry that it does not contain highly offensive language.

Lately, I’ve been hearing a lot about the Iraqi prisoner abuse scandal. The pictures of those “abused” prisoners have been plastered all over the front pages of papers around the country. Some of my conservative friends have interpreted the excessive coverage as proof that papers like the New York Times are actually rooting against America in its current war on terror. Even those who aren’t willing to go that far say that such coverage is helping the enemy to recruit a new generation of terrorists to inflict harm upon our troops.

Despite these views, I have decided to make a formal public apology to the entire Arab world in the aftermath of Abu Ghraib. It is my hope that the following apology will help bring some clarity to the situation and, who knows, maybe even lasting world peace:

Dear Arabs,

I am truly sorry that Americans decided to take up arms and sacrifice their own youth in the defense of Muslims in Bosnia, Kosovo, and the first Gulf War. After we clear up this mess in Iraq, we will refrain from any such activity in the future.

I am truly sorry that I did not hear any of you call for an apology from Muslim extremists after 911. After all, the hijackers were all Arabs.

I am truly sorry that Arabs have to live in squalor under savage dictatorships throughout the Middle East. I am also sorry that the “leaders” of these nations drive their citizens into poverty by keeping all of the wealth in the hands of a select few.

I am also sorry that these governments intentionally breed hate for the U.S. in their religious schools while American schools do the exact opposite.

I am sorry that Yasir Arafat has been kicked out of every Arab country and has attached his name to the Palestinian “cause.” I am also sorry that no other Arab country will offer nearly as much support to Arafat as we offer to them.

I am sorry that the U.S. has continued to serve as the biggest financial supporter of poverty stricken Arab nations while wealthy Arab leaders blame the U.S. for all of their problems.

I am sorry that left-wing media elites would Rather (pun intended) not talk about any of this, thereby perpetuating your anger towards us. It’s probably really bad for your blood pressure.

I am also sorry that most of you lack the medical resources to measure your blood pressure.

And, of course, I’m sorry that few of you have indoor plumbing. That’s bad for your health, too.

I am sorry that the U.N. cheated so many poor people in Iraq out of their “food for oil” money so they could get rich while the tortured, raped, and poverty-stricken citizens of Iraq suffered under Saddam Hussein.

I am sorry that some Arab governments pay the families of homicide bombers after their children are blown to pieces in pursuit of Arafat’s “cause.”

I am sorry that these homicide bombers have as little regard for babies as the local office of Planned Parenthood.

I am sorry that so many people are unable to differentiate between the gang rape rooms and mass graves of Saddam Hussein on the one hand, and the conditions of Abu Ghraib on the other.

I am sorry that our prison guards do not show the same restraint that Arabs show when their brothers in arms are killed. By the way, you shouldn’t be sorry about that.

I am sorry that foreign trained terrorists are trying to seize control of Iraq and return it to a terrorist state. I am sorry we have not yet dropped at least 100 Daisy cutters on Fallujah in order to stop that effort.

I am also sorry that cleaning up the mess in Iraq is taking so long. It only took Saddam Hussein about 30 years to accomplish all he did in the realm of human rights.

Come to think of it, that’s about ten years less than the duration of our War on Poverty in the U.S. Come to think of it, I’m sorry we haven’t sent all of our gang bangers from South Central Los Angeles to Fallujah.

I am sorry that every time the terrorists hide, it just happens to be inside a “Holy Site.”

I am sorry that Muslim extremists have not yet apologized for the U.S.S. Cole, the embassy bombings, and for flying a plane into the World Trade Center, which collapsed in part on Saint Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church, which is one of our Holy Sites.

I am sorry that we have not taken a portion of the diet of Michael Moore and shipped it to one of your starving villages in the Middle East. You need it Moore (pun intended) than he does.

I am sorry that your only supporters are professors, journalists, and other assorted Leftists who also support homosexuals, bisexuals, transsexuals, partial birth abortion, and everything that you abhor in this world.

I am sorry that everyone else in America is against you.

Finally, I am sorry that I am going to have to end this apology by asking you to kiss the right side of my conservative butt. I’m probably just having a bad day.

For that I am truly sorry.