Wednesday, November 28, 2007

America's lack of Understanding about Islam

The American people have a problem understanding Islamofascism, and until they understand the threat it poses, we will be unable to respond appropriately. Islam ism is a religion that wants to govern the people, and unlike America's form of government, where for the most part they are truly kept separate, being controlled by a Muslim government means following the religious laws.

Americans have allowed most religions to exist without interference from government. If the followers of Islam could be categorized as socialists, communists, fascists, liberals, or conservatives, we would understand what their intentions were and what it meant to us. But it is difficult to understand a religion that is willing to wage war against a government and that is what we have today.

Even the most extreme religious attacks in our recent history, those against abortion doctors and abortion clinics, were not a war against our government.

What I would love to see us do is to withdraw from the Middle East, and allow the American people to witness what is going on there as a spectator, rather than as a participant. Just yesterday a teacher was arrested for offending Muhammed.

Another woman has been sentenced to three years in prison for falsifying documents. Her forgery? She claimed to be a Christian, unaware that her father had converted to Islam for three months, prior to her birth. How is that for justice?

The Muslim faith is one of zero tolerance, much as the same as we see being exhibited in our public schools today. This type of idiotic process removes from the individual the need to take responsibility for their actions. If these sort of concepts can take hold, then our entire way of life is as risk. It's a risk we cannot afford to take.

Tuesday, November 27, 2007

Live in Georgia and want a Ron Paul Bumper Sticker?

Then email me with your name and address and I will be happy to send you one.

Supplies are limited. So be sure to email early.

Monday, November 26, 2007

Is Ron Paul Too Old to Be President?

I have been asked by several friends if I thought Ron Paul was too effective to be the next President of the United States(POTUS). Is the United States too old to be run by the Constitution? I don't think so.

Where America has gone wrong is looking for a POTUS that was like a decorator. Each one takes over and wants to redo the place with their personal preferences. Yet each time they begin to adjust the country to their own liking, they move us further and further away from the original plan.

Ron Paul wants to take the place, and much like a historical site, return it to it's original appearance. Most of what he would need to do will be done with the point of a pen. Vetoing bills that are unconstitutional. Removing the federal government from roles and purposes that were not in the original plan and that have not been included in one of the amendments that have been approved.

What if something were to occur to a President Paul, and he was unable to serve out his term? Well, the instruction manual is there, plain and clear, for nearly anyone that is committed to it to follow. That is what makes a constitutional presidency so desirable. It means that we run the place with more emphasis on what the constitutions says we should be and less about what the POTUS dreams of making us. That is the way our founding fathers had planned things for us.

If we are successful and get a constitutional president elected, chances are the following presidents will be also willing to follow the constitution. If they are unwilling to do so, we should be unwilling to vote for them. The swearing in ceremony should not be the only time that we hear our POTUS mention the constitution.

Asking if Ron Paul is too old to be President is like asking if the United States is too old to be a Republic. The answer is long as you are willing to follow the document we based this country upon.

Monday, November 19, 2007

Killing Really Big Things

Each day, one of my many routines is to read the most popular stories at Yahoo and Google. It's a chance for me to see what I am missing that I did not catch perusing the news websites I go to. It has become disturbing to me some of the world's largest creatures that are being slaughtered, and the joy those who killed them seem to have.

Above is the picture currently at Yahoo news of two men smiling showing off the catfish that they caught. At 646 lbs, they have certainly made the catch of their lives. Man triumphs over fish.

It really saddens me that we are systematically hunting down and eliminating the biggest of the world's specimens. How many years must it take for a catfish to grow to that size? And because it happens upon two fisherman one day, so much for that.

In Florida recently, an alligator killed a man swimming in it's water. So what happened to it? It was killed. I am not saying the reverse should be true, but I am beginning to consider that we should not be making famous, even if for a few days, those that are removing the largest creatures alive from existence.

I know this will not be the last big creature killed and posted on the news. I just hope others begin to question what we are gaining by killing something just because we can.

Thursday, November 15, 2007

The Constitution, The Bible, and the Airline

Over the last several weeks I have been reading stories reporting on Ron Paul's candidacy for president, and the idea that he is a constitutionalist. What does that mean? That if elected to the highest office in this nation, Ron Paul would specifically execute his job as outlined in the Constitution of the United States. The startled responses by reporters have been consistent in their shock of such a radical idea.

Yet the very fact is quite clear that we have elected over the years individuals, who are sworn to uphold the constitution, yet seem to have no true idea of what it means. I would go as far to say that some candidates do not care what it means while other candidates are planning to purposefully negate the true meaning for their own purposes. So, lying in bed one night, I asked myself why would people support other candidates who seem to have no idea of what the constitution is, when the job's primary purpose is to uphold the constitution? I really have no solid conclusion.

Looking around the world I live in, I wondered how successful a minister or preacher would be if he did not hold up a Bible as the bedrock and cornerstone of his ministry? I cannot think of any examples of any ministers I have seen, either in person or on TV, that did not quote the Bible, or use the Bible as the reason for what they are preaching. The possibility of one of the megachurches in the Atlanta area being led my someone that did not understand, know and support the concepts in the Bible is remote indeed.

What about the commercial world? What if the CEO of Delta never flew? He may be a great leader, a motivating boss. But if he does not fly himself, how many of us would be willing to take a flight on his airline. Certainly not me.

So when you begin to look at the candidates that are running for the office of President, I hope you consider whether or not they really believe in the Operator's Manual for the United States: The Constitution. If they do not, will you really be surprised when our potentially great nation does not function as it should, and seems to be in constant need of repairs?

I know that Ron Paul has read and understands the Operator's Manual for the United States. I hope you recognize how important that is to get this nation back on course.


Wednesday, November 14, 2007

Carbon Credits, My SUV and Guilt

It has been a non-stop barrage of guilt aimed at those of us that drive SUVs. The global warming crisis is a nightly part of the evening news menu, and each report from the global warming scientists predicts a worse outcome than the last.

As someone that thrives on being rational, and leaving the emotion behind in making decisions, I am disappointed in myself in that even I have felt the guilt associated with driving my 1999 V-8 powered Ford Expedition. With room for 8, and all-wheel drive, and 17 MPG on the highway(not an exaggeration, I assure you), I thought I would look for a new SUV. Something a bit smaller, but with better mileage. Let me tell you what a shock it was that I could spend $32,000 on a brand new SUV, like a Toyota Highlander or Nissan Murano, both with V-6 engines, with an improved fuel economy of....are you ready for this......19 mpg for the Highlander and 19 mpg for the Murano!!! (source: Consumer Reports)

The 1999 Expedition is worth only $7900. So for $24,000 I can achieve a 12% increase in fuel economy...what a deal.

The other thing we keep hearing is the need to reduce our "carbon footprint" I find this whole idea rather amusing because there is not any more or less carbon on our planet than their was 30,000 or even a million years ago. And we could all reduce our footprint to zero, and just one volcanic eruption can undo all of that reduction in mere minutes. But it feels good to think we are doing so.

In that light, I stumbled across a website that will tell me how many carbon credits I need to buy to offset my driving.

After all I had heard, I thought this would be interesting. Would I need to spend thousands? Am I really destroying the planet. So, with that in mind, I calculated how much carbon I "produced", and what the offset would be. Was I ever surprised!

For a mere $37.53 cents, I can offset my 6.82 tons of CO2 production. For just over three dollars a month I could erase all my guilt and ignore the cries of Al Gore? What a bargain.

As luck would have it, I am still looking to get a new vehicle: A Toyota Highlander Hybrid. Not for environmental reasons, but because I like all of the gadgets and technology. I wanted to see how much lower my footprint would be, so I went back to the website and did the calculation. The new footprint would be $18.76 a year for my 3.41 tons of CO2. By spending $37,000 additional dollars on a new vehicle and trading in my old, I could save the environment $19 in CO2 emissions. What a deal.

Now I know that there are some other perks with the new car. Safety is a big feature. But I can only imagine that many people are being guilted into the purchase of a new vehicle to save the environment. Yet that is not going to happen. At least they will feel better.

Man Killed By Gator Escaping Police

You have to wonder what would be worth stealing out of a car that was worth dying for. Apparently this man had not clearly thought out what his escape plan would be if this robbery would go bad. Not so bad for him but it was a death sentence to the gator.

The gator was only doing what nature intended for it to do: eat something if it comes along. So it did. For that, it was killed.

If you ask me the gator is a hero and did us all a favor. No one else is going to be robbed by this man. No one is going to have their day or trip ruined because some jerk decides that there is something inside their vehicle that he thinks he is entitled to.

The best part of the story is that the coroner confirms that it was indeed the gator that killed the man. I doubt that anyone on the scene was uncertain of that as they pulled his remains out of the water. But I guess there are always those that will doubt what is obvious.

Just click on the headline above to read the story.


Monday, November 12, 2007

Why Ron Paul Deserves a Look

If you have not heard of Ron Paul, you will. And you will hear about his supporters, who are raising a lot of money on the internet, and a lot of noise at public appearances.

The reason Ron Paul deserves a look are simple. American voters really like simple. You need a scorecard to keep up with the flip-flops on issues, and we all know it. One only has to watch the Hillary Clinton video on You-Tube, where she appears to be on four sides of the same issue.

Once you understand what Ron Paul bases his positions on, even a fourth grader could figure out his positions going forward. It is a simple document called the Constitution of the United States. If it is not mandated or specified in the Constitution, he will not support it. He wants to put the power back into the hands of the states, where it belongs.

Most Americans are tired of our country being the police of the world. We are in places we should not be. We are in places where the locals will have a better chance of sorting things out. If the politicians cannot legislate efficiently for us in our hometowns, what makes us thing we can do so on the opposite side of the world?

It's interesting to watch the media interviews of Ron Paul. The same reporters who have bashed Bush on his Iraq policies, attempt to paint Paul as someone who would do nothing. Paul corrects them and outlines that he supports trade, commerce, friendship, etc. He also states that he will defend this nation as outlined in the Constitution. But he wants to get us out of the nation building business, and most of the people I know feel the same. Bush would have been successful had he removed the threat to us and then left the Middle East. It really is as simple as that.

So, on the upcoming anniversary of the Boston Tea Party, when the online fundraising pushes Paul's tota;s to over $12 million raised, do not be surprised. In fact you should feel elated. Because it means that we have a chance to return our country to some of the principles that made us great to begin with.

The media will continue to doubt his chance to win. Both the conservatives and liberals will attact from both sides. We have already had 12 years of the Bush Family and 8 years of the Clinton Family running this nation. Are we happy with where it is? Hell no. It is time for a different direction.

Ron Paul is going to make a difference in this election whether the media likes it or not. The media should focus on how much Romney, Guilliani, Clinton, and Obama are spending per vote, and compare that to Paul. Big spenders will spend big. Be it for the election, or when they are President. We are ready for a change. The time may be now.

Thursday, November 08, 2007

A Letter to the Governor

As North Georgia endures a record setting drought, and we have been asked to conserve water at just about any cost, the Army Corp of Engineers has opened the spigot from Lake Lanier even more. From 1.2 billion gallons in October, to 1.7 billion gallons today, the Army Corp of Engineers seem hellbent on creating a disaster in Georgia.

Just yesterday our governor dismissed a lawsuit on this topic? Why? Because on Nov 1st the Corp said they would reduce outflows. What changed in six days?

All the water that we have been asked to conserve in November has been released in just 2 days by the Army Corp of Engineers. How smart is that?

Here is a a copy of the letter I sent the governor. I hope that you send him one as well.

Governor Perdue,

Why have you dropped the lawsuit over water releases from Lake Lanier? I have just read that the Army Corp of Engineers is releasing an extra 500 million gallons per day above what was released in October of 2007.

You asked us to conserve, and if we were to hit that goal, the corp will have released all we save for the month of November with their additional releases in just two calendar days!

Will there be no tangible action to protect our water supply from being drained completely? Can we afford to run out of water here in North Georgia for the benefit of those downstream?

Atlanta is the economic engine of this state. I feel it is unwise to allow this important resource to be mismanaged by the Army Corp of Engineers and request that you reinstate your lawsuit. We will not be able to drink an apology from the Army Corp of Engineers realizes what a disaster they are leading us towards.

Please take some decisive action. The release of additional amounts of water is not in the best interest of the state of Georgia, and you have an obligation to do all necessary to protect our state.

Ernest Moosa Jr.

Why We are Losing our Competitive Edge-Taxes

Watching the election process unfold this year, and hearing of the wondrous programs that are being promised to secure votes from politicians from the local to the federal levels, I can only wonder how much longer we will be able to make ends meet.

Quickly as you can, can you tell me what you pay in taxes? Can you give me a percentage of your total income? Can you give me total dollars in taxes? Could anyone? Yet taxes are your single largest expenditure day in and day out, week in and week out. Don't believe me? Then let's take one item, and see if we can determine how much in taxes we actually to purchase it. Let's make the item one gallon of gas.

Gas today is near $3 per gallon. Embedded in that price is 35.7 cents per gallon federal and state sales tax and another 3 cents in local sales tax. So on one gallon of gas, you are paying 38.7 cents in taxes, or 12.9% in taxes.

But that is not the end of the tax burden. You had to earn some money to purchase that gasoline. You would need to calculate federal, state, medicare, and social security taxes required to be able to net the $3 per gallon that you need to purchase.

If you earn $50,000 per year in the state of Georgia, and take out all the taxes, your net is around $30,426, effectively paying 39% of your income. You would need to earn $4.17 before taxes to buy the gallon of gas. Total taxes for this gallon of tax: $1.17 in income taxes and 38.7 cents in embedded taxes in the gas itself. Total so far: $1.557 Well over half the cost of the gallon of gas you see advertised at the pump.

But that is not all. Before the gas gets to the station, the company producing it has embedded taxes in the gasoline as well. Assume a federal and state corporate tax rate of 35%, which the oil company must embed or it would not produce the profit, on a wholesale cost of $2.20 per gallon and you have another 77 cents in taxes. I am not even going to go into all of the taxes paid by the employer to actually produce the gasoline, and we are already up to $2.327 in taxes on a gallon of gasoline, that you had to earn $4.17 to purchase.

Already we have a tax rate of 55.8%. Wow....would anyone have guessed that amount? Is it any wonder we do not have the ability to determine which are the most efficient ways to run our economy? Is it any wonder the government does not want to bring the true cost of taxation into the light so we can see what is going on?

It is rather clear to me that the federal government has absolutely no incentive to reduce gasoline consumption in the United States. It is one big cash cow that keeps on giving and giving. Imagine the threat that solar or wind energy presents because there is no recurring revenue stream. You purchase the solar panel or wind turbine and pay taxes once, and that is it. You continue to get power for years, while the government gets 0$ in future tax revenues. Consider the threat of individual energy independence where the government does not have the opportunity to tax the energy that you produce and consume.

The more of our income taxes take the less competitive we are going to be.