Posts tagged ‘crisis’

The Arguement for a Union

conshnd2

Here is post two in my Federalist Paper series.

Letter 3 – a continuation of Concerning Dangers from Foreign Force and Influence

The premise here begins to explain why a United States as opposed to a divided state would be less likely to be involved in wars and conflict. The ability to maintain treaties and agreements with the six nations that had already made such arrangements with the states would be easier enforced by one nation instead of 13 individually governed countries. The national government would also benefit from having excellent minds for all the states serving the whole country. Theoretically giving a more balanced, wise government for the nation than each separate state might have from their own residents.

The arguement is made that, “as either designed or accidental violations of treaties and of the laws of nations afford just causes of war, they are less to be apprehended under one general government than under several lesser ones, and in that respect the former most favors the safety of the people.” So the premise is that countries we had negotiations and treaties with would be less likely to go to war with us as a nation in the case of a violation, than they would if an individual, smaller state violated the agreement. That one strong, good government afford more safety for the citizens than smaller individual countries. Letter three deals more with what would be considered “just” causes of wars and conflict.

Letter 4 – again more on the same topic, Concerning Dangers from Foreign Force and Influence

This letter deals more with wars created for “unjust” motives. More along the lines of personal issues, rivalries in trade or commerce (or even just imagined). A strong national government as opposed to smaller weaker governments would be more able to hold such conflicts at bay. The discussion continues to lay out reasoning why one United country would be better able to protect itself.

I thought this closing paragraph of letter 4 was a very good read. How applicable is this to today? Are we efficient, well run, credit-worthy, discreet in our finances, contented, etc?

But whatever may be our situation, whether firmly united under one national government, or split into a number of confederacies, certain it is that foreign nations will know and view it exactly as it is; and they will act towards us accordingly. If they see that our national government is efficient and well administered, our trade prudently regulated, our militia properly organized and disciplined, our resources and finances discreetly managed, our credit re-established, our people free, contented , and united, they will be much more disposed to cultivate our friendship than provoke our resentment. If, on the other hand , they find us either destitute of an effectual government (each State doing right or wrong, as to its rulers may seem convenient), or split into three of four independent and probably discordant republics or confederacies, one inclining to Britain, another to France, and a third to Spain, and perhaps played each other by the three, what a poor, pitiful figure will America make in their eyes! How liable would she become not only to show they contempt, but to their outrage; and how soon would dear-bought experience proclaim that when a people or family so divide, it never fails to be against themselves.

March 4, 2009 at 8:05 pm 1 comment

A Bit of Joe and Campaign Spending – what an excess

So I just don’t buy the “I am one of you” stuff that Obama tries to perpetuate. He is not your average middle class guy. He lives in a house he paid $1.6 million for. (ok, i know that in california that is still a shack – but in most of the rest of the country that is a big ole nice house)

And just in case you were wondering here are the specs on the house. It is not tiny.

This 3-story, 96-yr-old Georgian is close to the hustle and bustle of Chicago’s South Side. But with 4 fireplaces and a 1,000-bottle wine cellar, you may never want to leave. Sold for $1.65 million in 2005. Upgrade your property when your next-door buddy (before his felony trial, of course) sells you part of his plot!

Will not even touch on the next-door neighbor bit.

So now for relating to the middle class on income- In 2000 the Obama’s income was about $240,000.  By 2006 they were up to a whopping $984,000. Not forgetting in 2005 they passed $1.6 million.

And they don’t appear to be the most charitable as far as their giving of their vast income goes. The max they gave through 2006 was about 6% of their income. So he is not really going out of his way to give to the middle class or to those less fortunate.

So I am not sure I buy that he is really in touch with his constituents. I think he is just as out of touch with reality as you can possibly be. Don’t you just wonder what he would actually think had he been left to form his own opinions?

On the whole Joe the Plumber mess. Just because he got stuck saying something that now the democrats have to cover for.

Barack actually said this,
“It’s not that I want to punish your success. I want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they’ve got a chance for success, too. My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom up, it’s gonna be good for everybody. I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.

Nice. So he has not really been spreading his wealth around, but he wants to make sure that the rest of us do. Frankly I would like to spend the next four years just skating through comfortably and hold off on becoming considered “wealthy” until government understands that people who work hard for their money and earn it will share with others. At a higher percentage point than Obama and his family do. Because they will appreciate what it took for them to get there. I don’t understand why it is okay and considered “the right thing to do” to give hand outs to people who are capabale of working and providing for their families. (I understand there are always exceptions to the rule)

But back to Joe, this is my favorite description of the ridiculous assertion by some democrats that Joe the Plumber was a plant.

Ace says………

TEN YEAR REPUBLICAN SCHEME PUTS COVERT “GOPERATIVE” JOE THE PLUMBER IN EXACT HOUSE WHOSE DOOR BARACK OBAMA WAS DESTINED TO KNOCK UPON

I got news for you: Whatever door Obama knocked on, Joe “The Plumber” Wurzelbacher (aka Agent X-88 Delta) would answer. Agent X-88 (and his “son,” the midget French acrobat/psychic assassin “Joey”) lived in all the houses in the neighborhood, each connected to the rest by a series of underground tunnels.

Now on to my campaign spending rant.

He has raised a massive $650 million dollars. What is that about? That is more than both candidates spent combined in the last election! What an indulgent waste. He went back on his pledge to take public financing which McCain stuck with. Combine that with the deep pockets of Hollywood, who are by nature fanatic liberals totally out of touch with reality, and there is no way for McCain to combat that. And frankly he should not have to.

Why does it feel like the vote is for sale?

That whoever can spend the most, sell the most, be the celebrity is going to win?

This is not just a popularity contest. If we were voting for Mr. America that might be one thing. But this is for the president. It is not a game show. Why not actually focus on issues instead of trying to outspend each other and put on a bigger “show”. McCain will never be able to outspend you Mr. Obama and frankly I am glad for that. I would actually be more bothered if my candidate were spending as much as you.

With our country in hard economic times I find it disturbing that you are choosing to use this money to do such ridiculous things like putting ads in video games, buying prime time space the week before the election, etc.

I could come up with some more useful things you could do with $650 million dollars to help your base. The “hurting middle class”. And if you have this thing as wrapped up as your pundits like to think you do, then why are you going to the obscene lengths that you are to spend more money? And take more money from those who are hurting? You don’t need any more money to promote yourself. Give it back. That would show more character than keeping it and squandering it on ads that are unnecessary.

October 20, 2008 at 5:04 pm Leave a comment


Blog Stats

  • 63,464 hits