It seems every time I open my homepage MSN, I see this guy who founded Wikileaks is in deeper trouble. I have read many posts and comments from hundreds of people about Wikileaks publishing some "classified" papers. Some say he is a traitor and other say he is a great defender of freedom. You probably already have your own opinion.
While thinking of all the pros and cons of Wikileaks, I remembered the Watergate cover up. For those who don't know the Watergate story: it was a Republican covert operation. Which included breaking and entering into the Democratic Party Headquarters in attempt to thwart the Democrat campaign for the presidency of the United States. It concluded with the resignation of President Nixon back in the 70's.
Briefly:
Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein were investigative reporters for the Washington Post. An informant called, "Deep Throat" secretly passed information to them about the Watergate cover up by White House Republicans . You can "Google or Bing" for more information on Watergate if you are interested. But for comparison I am going to sum up the opinions and what happened.
Those who loved Nixon, hated Bob, Carl, and the Washington Post, these were mostly Republicans. Nixon denied any knowledge of wrong doing. A famous Nixon line: "I am not a crook" was born here. They sacrificed a few close adviser's to Nixon, trying to deflect attention from Nixon's involvement. In the end it didn't work, Nixon resigned his Presidency.
On the other hand there were those who thought Bob and Carl and the Washington Post were heroes, these were mostly Democrats. They viewed Bob, Carl, and the Post as defending democracy.
After comparing the shouting about Watergate and Wikileaks here is what I'm thinking.
There has been a huge shift in Freedom of the Press and whistle blowing since the days of Watergate. Whistle blowers used to be protected and the press mostly reported the facts. Not so much anymore.
Now the news is just not reported. If you are not informed as to what is going on you do not know what is going on. Those who do bad things do not want you to know what they are doing. This is called a cover up. Labeling something top secret or classified or a matter of national security does not change it from wrong to right.
Withholding information from the people is dangerous to a democracy. Actually a democracy can be ruined because of withheld information.
I started to notice the absence of reporting with the war in Iraq. When President Bush no longer allowed coffins of dead Americans to be photographed or published by the press. As a matter of fact no negative news is allowed anymore wherever our troops are fighting. You may point to Abu Ghraib or a few other things. But I am talking Mi Lie Massacre compared to Bradly Manning. Briefly, Mi Lie was reported and those who did wrong were made to answer (at least a little). Bradly Manning blew the same whistle last year and he is the one in prison. You can "Google or Bing" these two stories and form your own opinion. The point is; what is "right" has been changed by our government, either in the name of national security or classified information.
The results of this information (or lack of information) is obvious. Vets from Vietnam were called "baby killers" when they came home and there was great opposition to the Vietnam War. Vets from Iraq or Afghanistan are called "heroes" when they come home; the war is on the back burner of many peoples minds; and when troops do come home they have a parade for them.
Different news results in different public perception. I believe these two wars are viewed differently because of the information (reported or not reported) in the news.
Sidebar - many many vets from both wars have problems dealing with what went on. What they did, what they saw, and what happened. I am not talking about straight up combat, that is bad enough. I am talking about things they knew were wrong and were helpless to make it right. Some have even been ordered to never talk about it.
Now back to my topic.
Today, our government has turned whistle blowers into the bad guy to protect itself. It was scary enough for Bob, Carl and the Post to report on Watergate with the freedom to report the cover up. Now, a person should be terrified to turn in anyone in the government for wrong doing. At best they will be fired, at worst (so far) they will go to prison.
The focus is not on what wrong was done but who had the audacity to bring it to light. Freedom of the press has grown more limited with direct pressure from our government. Lots of things are now "classified" to prevent the truth from being told and protect those who screwed up, nothing else.
Here's your choices:
1) Call it like it is and pay the price FOR freedom.
2) Hide things you don't want known and pay the price WITH freedom.
You cannot have it both ways. There is a price to be paid no matter what, one is FOR freedom, one is WITH freedom.
Wilileaks is a poor example. Why? Wikileaks only published the information and it was a foreign publisher. They did not steal the information. Who stole the information? Actually, I don't know. But I do know Wikileaks is in a mess because our government wants it destroyed. I doubt the idea of freedom will ever be destroyed. Things like Wikileaks will always pop up. The only way for Wikileaks and others like them to be destroyed is to be open and honest. The self preservation game of individual politicians must stop, but I know it will not.
Not only is our news oppressed by our government, now the government wants to restrict information coming from other sources. Sounds like China to me.
Politicians will do whatever it takes to stay in office. That sounds like China to me also.
This is not a democrat or republican problem. It is systemic. If you haven't given the 1st Amendment, Freedom of the Press, much thought maybe now is a good time to think about it.
Here's your sign.
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Friday, July 30, 2010
Belief in Jesus, Religion, and the Nazis
I have often wondered where the Germans who called themselves "Christians" were as Hitler was killing Jews. What happened? Why didn't they try to stop Hitler and the Nazis?
In a country where the first book every printed was printed, and it was the Bible!!
I have spent some time lately researching this issue. Here is what I have found. This is scary. It seems a short stones throw away from life today.
To my surprise the Nazis were cleaning up the world in ways I had never heard before. The Nazi political agenda was very close to church righteousness positions (both protestant and Catholic) on many subjects. These familiarities allowed a partnership to evolve.
Please be patient as I move back and forth to explain.
First, Hitler is/was a Catholic! However, as a young man he stopped going to confession. In Germany, if you were a church going person you became a member of the church you attended. As a member, your name was on a register and you paid a "church tax". Hitler continued to pay his "church tax", he never took his name off the church register. Interestingly, Hitler was also a supporter of the protestant church. He believed that the protestant church should have a chain of command like the Catholic church. The protestant church was not organized enough to have one voice speak for all protestants. The Catholic church had an Archbishop, or some official who would speak for the Catholic church. Hitler liked that. Hitler told a close comrade "I will always be Catholic" (this was discovered in a friends diary after the war). And finally, Hitler, to this day has never been excommunicated from the Catholic church.
How were the Nazi party and church beliefs similar?
The church was against prostitution, homosexuality, pornography, abortion, and other stuff. So was Nazism! Passionately! The Nazis wanted to clean this stuff up. It was a blight on there beloved Homeland. Sounds familiar today.
The Nazis did not invent anti-Semites (prejudice against the Jews). Since before Martin Luther (a German priest who began the Protestant Reformation in 1517) there was a strong resistance to the Jewesses of Jesus and that the Jewish race was as much a problem to the world as pornography and abortion and other evils. Think about this, the Jews have been kicked all around the world for more than a thousand years. This is history we all should know. It was only after WW II that Israel became a state/country again.
In the late 1920's there was some resistance to the Nazi party from a few clergy. But by the early 1930's the clergy supported the Nazi party. The few left that resisted the "party" were disappeared. By the mid 1930's to the early 1940's there was no resistance from the church. In fact, the church supported the Nazis.
But wait - who is the church? Only the pastors and priests? No. The people are the church. Unfortunately the people also went along with Nazis. Why? How could they do that? Because the Nazis were going to bring righteousness to Germany. Remember Jews had already looked down upon for being a Jew for hundreds of years. Although it seemed wrong, it was acceptably to over looked that Jews were being rounded up and put into camps because they were low on the totem pole.
Amazingly the one thing Hitler and Germany hated more than the Jews, was Communism! If you every wondered why Hitler created a two front war when he attacked Russia, now you know. Wait! I thought Hitler was a communist! No. Hitler hated communism more than he hated Jews. No way! Yes. And next on Hitler's list was Socialism. He hated that too! Communism and Socialism were the real Nazi enemy. Jews and abortionists and homosexuals, they were the "lite" work. Getting rid of these people would create a superior race. You know, get the bad genes out by killing anyone who had them. Made sense to the Nazis. Also, eliminating communism and socialism as a form of government would make way for a righteous government to rule the righteous people leftover.
As Nazism spread, by invading other countries, the Jews and such were put into camps. Even for non-Jews it was very much like the "Spanish Inquisition", become a Nazi or die. Europe became concerned with "Nazi Expansionism" and started to fight back. Hence World War II.
Hitler and the Nazis were trying to make a perfect world according to the way they viewed the world. No Jews, no prostitutes, no abortion, all Nazis - you get the picture.
An interesting fact is that the Nazis believed that the church and state should be one. This made perfect sense. Instead of just talking about righteousness in church, the state could force you by law to be righteous, or put you in prison if you resist. It would be very difficult for a Jew to become unJewish so I guess they were doomed.
Remember the "church tax"? The church registered the names of its members and kept records of name changes. These same so called "Christian" churches gave lists of names to the Nazis so they could roundup the Jews. Ugly but true.
I find it hard to understand how the same people who claim to believe in the same Jesus I do could do this. Jesus said, the greatest commandment is to love God and love your neighbor. So how could a believer in Christ do this?
Here is my thought. Religion (not unlike the law) is a bunch of rules which forces people to act in a certain way in order to belong. To me this resembles a political party. Actually from where I am sitting now the only difference I see is the agenda. Both are just as passionate about their belief systems and some will stop at nothing to force their beliefs on others.
Jesus said, all the law and the prophets (the Bible) are summed up in this , "love God and love your neighbor". I think love is from the heart, it cannot forced by law.
The lesson I learned from all this is how easy it is to buy into something that sounds like what I believe. The easiest way to be deceived is to forget love. When we forget to love we lose our tolerance. Intolerance leads to division, division leads to separation, separation leads to conflict, and conflict results in death.
So where were the so called "christians" "church goers" in Germany as the Nazi party came to power? They were joining, eager to rid the world of all they saw as evil. And Nazism (not love) was the perfect tool to get the job done.
Footnote: The word "Christian" comes from the Bible, in the Book of Acts, where in the city of Antioch the followers of Jesus were called "Christians" because they were acting like Him. They did not call themselves Christian. That would be pretty pompous. They called themselves "believers". But this is a whole nother blog.
In a country where the first book every printed was printed, and it was the Bible!!
I have spent some time lately researching this issue. Here is what I have found. This is scary. It seems a short stones throw away from life today.
To my surprise the Nazis were cleaning up the world in ways I had never heard before. The Nazi political agenda was very close to church righteousness positions (both protestant and Catholic) on many subjects. These familiarities allowed a partnership to evolve.
Please be patient as I move back and forth to explain.
First, Hitler is/was a Catholic! However, as a young man he stopped going to confession. In Germany, if you were a church going person you became a member of the church you attended. As a member, your name was on a register and you paid a "church tax". Hitler continued to pay his "church tax", he never took his name off the church register. Interestingly, Hitler was also a supporter of the protestant church. He believed that the protestant church should have a chain of command like the Catholic church. The protestant church was not organized enough to have one voice speak for all protestants. The Catholic church had an Archbishop, or some official who would speak for the Catholic church. Hitler liked that. Hitler told a close comrade "I will always be Catholic" (this was discovered in a friends diary after the war). And finally, Hitler, to this day has never been excommunicated from the Catholic church.
How were the Nazi party and church beliefs similar?
The church was against prostitution, homosexuality, pornography, abortion, and other stuff. So was Nazism! Passionately! The Nazis wanted to clean this stuff up. It was a blight on there beloved Homeland. Sounds familiar today.
The Nazis did not invent anti-Semites (prejudice against the Jews). Since before Martin Luther (a German priest who began the Protestant Reformation in 1517) there was a strong resistance to the Jewesses of Jesus and that the Jewish race was as much a problem to the world as pornography and abortion and other evils. Think about this, the Jews have been kicked all around the world for more than a thousand years. This is history we all should know. It was only after WW II that Israel became a state/country again.
In the late 1920's there was some resistance to the Nazi party from a few clergy. But by the early 1930's the clergy supported the Nazi party. The few left that resisted the "party" were disappeared. By the mid 1930's to the early 1940's there was no resistance from the church. In fact, the church supported the Nazis.
But wait - who is the church? Only the pastors and priests? No. The people are the church. Unfortunately the people also went along with Nazis. Why? How could they do that? Because the Nazis were going to bring righteousness to Germany. Remember Jews had already looked down upon for being a Jew for hundreds of years. Although it seemed wrong, it was acceptably to over looked that Jews were being rounded up and put into camps because they were low on the totem pole.
Amazingly the one thing Hitler and Germany hated more than the Jews, was Communism! If you every wondered why Hitler created a two front war when he attacked Russia, now you know. Wait! I thought Hitler was a communist! No. Hitler hated communism more than he hated Jews. No way! Yes. And next on Hitler's list was Socialism. He hated that too! Communism and Socialism were the real Nazi enemy. Jews and abortionists and homosexuals, they were the "lite" work. Getting rid of these people would create a superior race. You know, get the bad genes out by killing anyone who had them. Made sense to the Nazis. Also, eliminating communism and socialism as a form of government would make way for a righteous government to rule the righteous people leftover.
As Nazism spread, by invading other countries, the Jews and such were put into camps. Even for non-Jews it was very much like the "Spanish Inquisition", become a Nazi or die. Europe became concerned with "Nazi Expansionism" and started to fight back. Hence World War II.
Hitler and the Nazis were trying to make a perfect world according to the way they viewed the world. No Jews, no prostitutes, no abortion, all Nazis - you get the picture.
An interesting fact is that the Nazis believed that the church and state should be one. This made perfect sense. Instead of just talking about righteousness in church, the state could force you by law to be righteous, or put you in prison if you resist. It would be very difficult for a Jew to become unJewish so I guess they were doomed.
Remember the "church tax"? The church registered the names of its members and kept records of name changes. These same so called "Christian" churches gave lists of names to the Nazis so they could roundup the Jews. Ugly but true.
I find it hard to understand how the same people who claim to believe in the same Jesus I do could do this. Jesus said, the greatest commandment is to love God and love your neighbor. So how could a believer in Christ do this?
Here is my thought. Religion (not unlike the law) is a bunch of rules which forces people to act in a certain way in order to belong. To me this resembles a political party. Actually from where I am sitting now the only difference I see is the agenda. Both are just as passionate about their belief systems and some will stop at nothing to force their beliefs on others.
Jesus said, all the law and the prophets (the Bible) are summed up in this , "love God and love your neighbor". I think love is from the heart, it cannot forced by law.
The lesson I learned from all this is how easy it is to buy into something that sounds like what I believe. The easiest way to be deceived is to forget love. When we forget to love we lose our tolerance. Intolerance leads to division, division leads to separation, separation leads to conflict, and conflict results in death.
So where were the so called "christians" "church goers" in Germany as the Nazi party came to power? They were joining, eager to rid the world of all they saw as evil. And Nazism (not love) was the perfect tool to get the job done.
Footnote: The word "Christian" comes from the Bible, in the Book of Acts, where in the city of Antioch the followers of Jesus were called "Christians" because they were acting like Him. They did not call themselves Christian. That would be pretty pompous. They called themselves "believers". But this is a whole nother blog.
Sunday, March 1, 2009
What are THEY thinking?
Recent news reports have touched on spending habits of some of the recipients of bailout money.
For example Northern Trust received "bailout" money. Yet they continued to sponsor a PGA Golf Tourney. How could this be a problem? I really like golf.
When criticized for taking "bailout" money and then spending money on sponsoring golf tourneys Northern responded by saying, "we did NOT use any of the "bailout" money for the tournament.
What?
Please keep reading.
Big businesses have budgets. It is obvious they do NOT see the entirety of their own business as we "the little people" would. They see their business budget like a sliced pie. But each piece of the pie has nothing to do with the rest of the pie.
If I say "I am broke", I mean I do not have any money. I do NOT mean except for the $500 in my wallet.
When these "very smart people" claim they need a "bailout" they obviously mean they have money for parties, concerts, golf tournaments, corporate jets, multi million dollar salaries,...... whatever, but no money to keep their business running.
Okay,that said get a load of this. Northern Trust earned $794.8 million, or $3.47 per share, in 2008. THEY ARE NOT BROKE!!! They are prospering quite well!
AND THEY GOT BAILOUT MONEY!! Crap, where is my "bailout" money!! What a joke.
Despite remaining profitable, Northern Trust announced in December it would cut 4 percent of its staff, or about 450 jobs. What?
That is correct. A profitable company is making a 4 percent cut in its staff. Why? Maybe to contribute to the unemployment lines. I don't know why they are trying to fix something that is NOT broken. They are making money just the way they are.
Northern Trust is a typical large company, NOT the exception.
Get a load of this.
Most of you know I work for the postal service. I have an associate who has told me his post office has paid out $12,000 in grievance loses since October 2008. Why? Because he cannot hire employees to fill vacant positions (there is a hiring freeze). Crossing crafts is against the National Agreements with the postal unions and to get the mail delivered he must cross crafts. Then a grievance is filed, he must then also pay employees who did not do the work, because other employees outside of the craft were working where they should not be working.
This just keeps repeating; this is nuts! How can it continue? you might ask.
Check this out. Because the money paying for grievance settlements comes from a "different" part of the budget. Does this sound familiar? The Postal Service does not see itself as a "total" company just like other huge companies. Apparently the Postal Service has become very successfully in modeling itself after the private sector.
My brain does not work like the above mentioned. What are THEY thinking?
What I'm wondering.....er
I mean.
What I'm Thinkin'
Sincerely,
Timothy James Maki
For example Northern Trust received "bailout" money. Yet they continued to sponsor a PGA Golf Tourney. How could this be a problem? I really like golf.
When criticized for taking "bailout" money and then spending money on sponsoring golf tourneys Northern responded by saying, "we did NOT use any of the "bailout" money for the tournament.
What?
Please keep reading.
Big businesses have budgets. It is obvious they do NOT see the entirety of their own business as we "the little people" would. They see their business budget like a sliced pie. But each piece of the pie has nothing to do with the rest of the pie.
If I say "I am broke", I mean I do not have any money. I do NOT mean except for the $500 in my wallet.
When these "very smart people" claim they need a "bailout" they obviously mean they have money for parties, concerts, golf tournaments, corporate jets, multi million dollar salaries,...... whatever, but no money to keep their business running.
Okay,that said get a load of this. Northern Trust earned $794.8 million, or $3.47 per share, in 2008. THEY ARE NOT BROKE!!! They are prospering quite well!
AND THEY GOT BAILOUT MONEY!! Crap, where is my "bailout" money!! What a joke.
Despite remaining profitable, Northern Trust announced in December it would cut 4 percent of its staff, or about 450 jobs. What?
That is correct. A profitable company is making a 4 percent cut in its staff. Why? Maybe to contribute to the unemployment lines. I don't know why they are trying to fix something that is NOT broken. They are making money just the way they are.
Northern Trust is a typical large company, NOT the exception.
Get a load of this.
Most of you know I work for the postal service. I have an associate who has told me his post office has paid out $12,000 in grievance loses since October 2008. Why? Because he cannot hire employees to fill vacant positions (there is a hiring freeze). Crossing crafts is against the National Agreements with the postal unions and to get the mail delivered he must cross crafts. Then a grievance is filed, he must then also pay employees who did not do the work, because other employees outside of the craft were working where they should not be working.
This just keeps repeating; this is nuts! How can it continue? you might ask.
Check this out. Because the money paying for grievance settlements comes from a "different" part of the budget. Does this sound familiar? The Postal Service does not see itself as a "total" company just like other huge companies. Apparently the Postal Service has become very successfully in modeling itself after the private sector.
My brain does not work like the above mentioned. What are THEY thinking?
What I'm wondering.....er
I mean.
What I'm Thinkin'
Sincerely,
Timothy James Maki
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Its All About The Oil
What I'm Thinkin'
If you read one of my earlier blogs you will see I stated, once the Bailouts start there will be more requests for money. Here they come.
But what is really happening here?
Here is how it works: businesses and governments all make budgets for the next year, they predict expenses and try to adjust expenses to make a profit or savings. You may even do this with your income.
There is one cost factor that drives the economy more than any other. Oil.
Think about this. Everyone budgets to spend a certain amount of money in each area budgeted for, right. Well, what happens when the price of a barrel oil goes up? Gas prices go up. What happens when gas prices go up? ALL other prices must go up. Have you been to the grocery store lately? The prices jumped and are still up. Why? Gas prices went up.
Take the Postal Service - now in financial trouble. Why? Gas prices. They budgeted for gas for 200,000 vehicles to deliver the mail 6 days a week then gas prices went from $2.00 to $4.00 per gallon. This in itself is a huge portion of the loses that hit the Postal Service. I do not know why they seem to have forgot this.
Think about this; everything is connected to oil.
We trade everything for oil. Its all about the oil.
The weird thing is that everyone has forgotten all about the oil and is blaming our current situation on everything but oil, AND IT'S THE OIL!
Oh, I am not saying the banking and auto industry are not a mess, they are. But all our wealth went to the Middle East.
When will we learn? We need our own energy source. The Middle East has been a huge draw on the wealth of our nation for almost 40 years. Remember the energy crisis of the 70's. What has changed? Nothing. They robbed us then and they are still robbing us.
What I'm Thinkin'
Sincerely,
Timothy James Maki
If you read one of my earlier blogs you will see I stated, once the Bailouts start there will be more requests for money. Here they come.
But what is really happening here?
Here is how it works: businesses and governments all make budgets for the next year, they predict expenses and try to adjust expenses to make a profit or savings. You may even do this with your income.
There is one cost factor that drives the economy more than any other. Oil.
Think about this. Everyone budgets to spend a certain amount of money in each area budgeted for, right. Well, what happens when the price of a barrel oil goes up? Gas prices go up. What happens when gas prices go up? ALL other prices must go up. Have you been to the grocery store lately? The prices jumped and are still up. Why? Gas prices went up.
Take the Postal Service - now in financial trouble. Why? Gas prices. They budgeted for gas for 200,000 vehicles to deliver the mail 6 days a week then gas prices went from $2.00 to $4.00 per gallon. This in itself is a huge portion of the loses that hit the Postal Service. I do not know why they seem to have forgot this.
Think about this; everything is connected to oil.
We trade everything for oil. Its all about the oil.
The weird thing is that everyone has forgotten all about the oil and is blaming our current situation on everything but oil, AND IT'S THE OIL!
Oh, I am not saying the banking and auto industry are not a mess, they are. But all our wealth went to the Middle East.
When will we learn? We need our own energy source. The Middle East has been a huge draw on the wealth of our nation for almost 40 years. Remember the energy crisis of the 70's. What has changed? Nothing. They robbed us then and they are still robbing us.
What I'm Thinkin'
Sincerely,
Timothy James Maki
Monday, January 26, 2009
Global Warming? Baby, It's Cold Outside!
What I'm Thinkin'
I was watching Nat Geo the other night on tv. It was an episode about global warming.
These scientists had drilled some ice core samples from the Antarctic and were discussing how they could read what the weather was like for the past thousands of years. Each year was individually observed like rings in a tree. Each year had its own ring.
They could tell how much carbon dioxide was in the air and how much perception fell and even if there was volcanic activity.
So I am watching this thing intrigued by all the stuff I am learning.
Then....
Then they say something like; when there was little precipitation (clear skies/sunny) it was colder than when there were clouds and lots of moisture. Then they said something like "we have no idea why".
I thought, what the heck! This is not a little thing. But they blew over it and I heard no more about it.
I am not afraid of science. I like it. But 1/2 a story is not a story.
So, this morning I wake up and it is the first sunny day in a long time AND IT'S FREEZING OUTSIDE!
I think, hmmmm. They were right. When it was cloudy it was warmer, now when it's clear, it is very cold. Why?
Heck, I don't know.
It could be the clouds hold in all the heat from the lava under the earths crust or the dark side of space is so cold it makes us colder at night. Whatever.
The earth could be warming just as the scientist say. But why? Could be the natural way of things? Or, mankind is making greenhouse gases messing things up?
I don't know..... Now where did I put my cup of hot chocolate? I'm cold.
What I'm Thinkin'
Sincerely,
Timothy James Maki
I was watching Nat Geo the other night on tv. It was an episode about global warming.
These scientists had drilled some ice core samples from the Antarctic and were discussing how they could read what the weather was like for the past thousands of years. Each year was individually observed like rings in a tree. Each year had its own ring.
They could tell how much carbon dioxide was in the air and how much perception fell and even if there was volcanic activity.
So I am watching this thing intrigued by all the stuff I am learning.
Then....
Then they say something like; when there was little precipitation (clear skies/sunny) it was colder than when there were clouds and lots of moisture. Then they said something like "we have no idea why".
I thought, what the heck! This is not a little thing. But they blew over it and I heard no more about it.
I am not afraid of science. I like it. But 1/2 a story is not a story.
So, this morning I wake up and it is the first sunny day in a long time AND IT'S FREEZING OUTSIDE!
I think, hmmmm. They were right. When it was cloudy it was warmer, now when it's clear, it is very cold. Why?
Heck, I don't know.
It could be the clouds hold in all the heat from the lava under the earths crust or the dark side of space is so cold it makes us colder at night. Whatever.
The earth could be warming just as the scientist say. But why? Could be the natural way of things? Or, mankind is making greenhouse gases messing things up?
I don't know..... Now where did I put my cup of hot chocolate? I'm cold.
What I'm Thinkin'
Sincerely,
Timothy James Maki
Thursday, January 1, 2009
If This Is True, We Are In Trouble
"What I'm Thinkin"
I usually do not blog like this.
I came across this at Military.Com
Jeff Huber is a retired military officer. Read what he has to say. Remember what he says. Lets see if it comes to pass.
If this does come to pass it is a real wake up call for all of us.
I hope he is wrong, but I think he is on to something here.
Just click here to read his article: http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,182037,00.html?ESRC=dod-bz.nl
If the click does not work just copy the address and paste it in your address bar.
"What I'm Thinkin"
Sincerely,
Timothy James Maki
I usually do not blog like this.
I came across this at Military.Com
Jeff Huber is a retired military officer. Read what he has to say. Remember what he says. Lets see if it comes to pass.
If this does come to pass it is a real wake up call for all of us.
I hope he is wrong, but I think he is on to something here.
Just click here to read his article: http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,182037,00.html?ESRC=dod-bz.nl
If the click does not work just copy the address and paste it in your address bar.
"What I'm Thinkin"
Sincerely,
Timothy James Maki
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Union Vs Management = Greed
"What I'm Thinkin"
First, Happy New Year! May you all be blessed.
The battle between unions and management has a long and disgusting history.
The old phrase "owe your soul to the company store" is true. Oppression of the worker is a long history. It came to a peak in the coal and copper mines during the early 1900's. Employees were able to go to the company store to buy things on credit; like food and cloths. The mine would pay them just enough to pay their bill. Sometimes the employees ended the week owing the company store more than they were paid for working that week.
Safety was hardly considered. Mine cave ins killed many miners, safety standards did not exist. The cost of safety was retorted to be to much of a financial burden for management to bear.
Let me put this another way. Greed ruled. Pay as small of wage as possible, safety costs; so don't worry about safety, and over charge them at every opportunity (at the company store) to maximize profit. Oh, and your health Mr. Employee... that's your problem. Managements attitude was terrible. A revolt happened.
Along came the unions. Many wrongs were made right. A decent wage, health coverage, safe working conditions. Great!
All of that being said the pendulum has now swung in the other direction. Now it is the unions who have become greedy. Unions have grown powerful. Their unbridled hunger for more of everything has been out of control years.
Have you ever noticed how close politicians and unions are related? Here is what I mean:
We elect politicians to politic for us. Politicians must do something - like make some more laws or regulations - or they are accused of not doing anything. Right? This is a true story. The problem now; we have so many laws and regulations it is nearly impossible to keep up. Businesses and managers are overwhelmed OSHA, EEO, FLSA, FMLA, Minimum Wage, Tax Laws..... oh Lord, the list goes on and on.
Unions do same. The worker expects the union to fight for more "stuff" when their contract is due. The problem now; unions have taken so much "stuff" businesses can barely survive; only certain workers can do a certain job, time and a half or double time, protecting poor performing employees, accusing management of poor management......oh Lord, the list goes on and on.
Kind of the same, don't you think? More is better. I don't think so.
Anyways.
The fact is unions share no responsibility for the health of a company. And, there are plenty of cases were the unions have taken so much "stuff" they put the company out of business.
Today a union employee can accuse management of anything they want to, and management is guilty until they prove themselves innocent. Management must pay the employee time to make the complaint. Management must pay the union steward time to accept, process, and file the complaint. Management must pay for mediators to hear the complaint.
Unions and employees can file a grievance for absolutely anything they want, union stewards answer to no one; and management must pay for it all.
This story really happened. A manager asked an employee why it "took so long to do a job". It took an employee 9 1/2 hours to do an 8 hour job and this cost 1 1/2 hours of overtime pay. The employee refused to answer, accused management of harassment, filed a harassment charge against the manager, and also filed an EEO for discrimination. The union backed these charges all the way and even encouraged them. Management will pay the union steward to press the charges. Management will end up paying thousands of dollars in wages and mediation fees before the EEO charge is even looked at.
The union has a pretty heavy hand with no accountability. Even if the manager is found to be innocent of the charges, the company pays the costs, not the union. There is no accountability by the union or employee for any false accusations. EVER!
So this is a very effective union tactic to stop management from asking an employee anything that has to do with poor work performance. It becomes very costly for management to try to control overtime. If management tolerates the poor performance and just pays the overtime this encourages more abuse. It is a lose lose for management. Management pays a very high price for trying to find out something as simple as "why did it take you so long to do the job". Not to mention the anguish the manager will go through for personally being falsely accused of wrong doing.
The company pays for the employee's pursuit to be "made whole" (get money for their pain and suffering) because they were violated, and management's defense against the accusations. The unions and employees have nothing to lose and everything to gain. There is no rule, policy, law, or regulation that prohibits false accusations or any punishment to the accuser or union if the allegations are found to be false.
It comes back to greed. Get as much as you can! Especially employees who want to do as little as possible for as much money as they can get. The union protects them; the union says, "don't let management push you around, your a great worker". There is never a cost or penalty for employees or unions taking this position, even if they are wrong. And they can do it over and over again.
Whether the accusations are true or false, management loses. Firing an employee can cost tens of thousands of dollars. Then the ex-employee will probably sue the company for wrongful dismissal. So, who wants to fire someone?
As you can see employees and unions lose nothing when creating trouble for management. In fact they both will be rewarded with more rights and money if they win.
All of this has set the table we are now sitting at; as we continue to eat a poison called, greed.
"What I'm Thinkin"
Sincerely,
Timothy James Maki
First, Happy New Year! May you all be blessed.
The battle between unions and management has a long and disgusting history.
The old phrase "owe your soul to the company store" is true. Oppression of the worker is a long history. It came to a peak in the coal and copper mines during the early 1900's. Employees were able to go to the company store to buy things on credit; like food and cloths. The mine would pay them just enough to pay their bill. Sometimes the employees ended the week owing the company store more than they were paid for working that week.
Safety was hardly considered. Mine cave ins killed many miners, safety standards did not exist. The cost of safety was retorted to be to much of a financial burden for management to bear.
Let me put this another way. Greed ruled. Pay as small of wage as possible, safety costs; so don't worry about safety, and over charge them at every opportunity (at the company store) to maximize profit. Oh, and your health Mr. Employee... that's your problem. Managements attitude was terrible. A revolt happened.
Along came the unions. Many wrongs were made right. A decent wage, health coverage, safe working conditions. Great!
All of that being said the pendulum has now swung in the other direction. Now it is the unions who have become greedy. Unions have grown powerful. Their unbridled hunger for more of everything has been out of control years.
Have you ever noticed how close politicians and unions are related? Here is what I mean:
We elect politicians to politic for us. Politicians must do something - like make some more laws or regulations - or they are accused of not doing anything. Right? This is a true story. The problem now; we have so many laws and regulations it is nearly impossible to keep up. Businesses and managers are overwhelmed OSHA, EEO, FLSA, FMLA, Minimum Wage, Tax Laws..... oh Lord, the list goes on and on.
Unions do same. The worker expects the union to fight for more "stuff" when their contract is due. The problem now; unions have taken so much "stuff" businesses can barely survive; only certain workers can do a certain job, time and a half or double time, protecting poor performing employees, accusing management of poor management......oh Lord, the list goes on and on.
Kind of the same, don't you think? More is better. I don't think so.
Anyways.
The fact is unions share no responsibility for the health of a company. And, there are plenty of cases were the unions have taken so much "stuff" they put the company out of business.
Today a union employee can accuse management of anything they want to, and management is guilty until they prove themselves innocent. Management must pay the employee time to make the complaint. Management must pay the union steward time to accept, process, and file the complaint. Management must pay for mediators to hear the complaint.
Unions and employees can file a grievance for absolutely anything they want, union stewards answer to no one; and management must pay for it all.
This story really happened. A manager asked an employee why it "took so long to do a job". It took an employee 9 1/2 hours to do an 8 hour job and this cost 1 1/2 hours of overtime pay. The employee refused to answer, accused management of harassment, filed a harassment charge against the manager, and also filed an EEO for discrimination. The union backed these charges all the way and even encouraged them. Management will pay the union steward to press the charges. Management will end up paying thousands of dollars in wages and mediation fees before the EEO charge is even looked at.
The union has a pretty heavy hand with no accountability. Even if the manager is found to be innocent of the charges, the company pays the costs, not the union. There is no accountability by the union or employee for any false accusations. EVER!
So this is a very effective union tactic to stop management from asking an employee anything that has to do with poor work performance. It becomes very costly for management to try to control overtime. If management tolerates the poor performance and just pays the overtime this encourages more abuse. It is a lose lose for management. Management pays a very high price for trying to find out something as simple as "why did it take you so long to do the job". Not to mention the anguish the manager will go through for personally being falsely accused of wrong doing.
The company pays for the employee's pursuit to be "made whole" (get money for their pain and suffering) because they were violated, and management's defense against the accusations. The unions and employees have nothing to lose and everything to gain. There is no rule, policy, law, or regulation that prohibits false accusations or any punishment to the accuser or union if the allegations are found to be false.
It comes back to greed. Get as much as you can! Especially employees who want to do as little as possible for as much money as they can get. The union protects them; the union says, "don't let management push you around, your a great worker". There is never a cost or penalty for employees or unions taking this position, even if they are wrong. And they can do it over and over again.
Whether the accusations are true or false, management loses. Firing an employee can cost tens of thousands of dollars. Then the ex-employee will probably sue the company for wrongful dismissal. So, who wants to fire someone?
As you can see employees and unions lose nothing when creating trouble for management. In fact they both will be rewarded with more rights and money if they win.
All of this has set the table we are now sitting at; as we continue to eat a poison called, greed.
"What I'm Thinkin"
Sincerely,
Timothy James Maki
Friday, December 12, 2008
Sad but Funny LOL
What I'm Thinkin'
This has been recently reported, in case you missed it.
Patti Blagoevich, the wife of the current idiot Governor of Illinois, had her own real estate business. She gave it up earlier this year after the feds questioned her association with Antoin Rezko. Antoin has be convicted of money laundering and fraud.
So guess what Patti is doing these days......
She is working as an Investment Banker! Now there is a match made in heaven. I would guess with her potential skills in fraud, money laundering, and real estate this is a perfect fit considering the current banking/mortgage crisis.
Is this nuts? Okay, I would not be doing business there. LOL
What I'm Thinkin'
Sincerely,
Timothy James Maki
This has been recently reported, in case you missed it.
Patti Blagoevich, the wife of the current idiot Governor of Illinois, had her own real estate business. She gave it up earlier this year after the feds questioned her association with Antoin Rezko. Antoin has be convicted of money laundering and fraud.
So guess what Patti is doing these days......
She is working as an Investment Banker! Now there is a match made in heaven. I would guess with her potential skills in fraud, money laundering, and real estate this is a perfect fit considering the current banking/mortgage crisis.
Is this nuts? Okay, I would not be doing business there. LOL
What I'm Thinkin'
Sincerely,
Timothy James Maki
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Veterans Affairs Time Delay
What I'm Thinkin';
Veterans have a tough time being serve by the VA.
As you may or may not know I am a Disabled Veteran. My injury was such that I was Honorably Discharged. At the time the doctors told me go go as long as I could with my injury and when the day comes and it is not tolerable I should go to the VA and get it fixed. It is my right knee. I tore it up pretty good and I have been tolerating it for over 30 years now.
Well, last summer it started giving me more problems than ever before. For example when I sleep it slips out of the joint and locks. Then it starts aching and wakes me up. It is quite a chore to get the thing back in place.
So I think, okay time to get something done. I go to the VA and find out I need to apply for medical treatment even though I already have a 10 percent disability from the VA.
Not a problem. I took the application home and filled it out. I sent it in.
I need to mention that when I went to the VA it looked like a "cattle call".
The room was way over crowded and there was every color, sex, and disability standing, sitting, and in wheelchairs. Some without an arm.... you get the picture.
I felt small in comparison to what I saw.
So... I send the application to the VA. That was back about the 1st or 2nd week of September. It is now the 11th of December and I have not heard a word.
I started investigating the VA to find out what happened, why is it taking so long? I have discovered that the VA has, the day before Veterans Day this year, had 2 lawsuits filed against it for taking so long to process applications for claims. Initial claims take 182 days and appeals take 4 1/2 years!
"The 90-day and 180-day standards sought by the lawsuit are the groups’ estimates of what is reasonable. Federal law does not include any specific requirement about how long claims processing can take".
Holy Moly!! We need a Federal Law to realize this is unacceptable!
Maybe this is why we have so many laws..... that would be another blog. Common sense is just not so common anymore.
What I'm Thinkin'.
Sincerely,
Timohty James Maki
Veterans have a tough time being serve by the VA.
As you may or may not know I am a Disabled Veteran. My injury was such that I was Honorably Discharged. At the time the doctors told me go go as long as I could with my injury and when the day comes and it is not tolerable I should go to the VA and get it fixed. It is my right knee. I tore it up pretty good and I have been tolerating it for over 30 years now.
Well, last summer it started giving me more problems than ever before. For example when I sleep it slips out of the joint and locks. Then it starts aching and wakes me up. It is quite a chore to get the thing back in place.
So I think, okay time to get something done. I go to the VA and find out I need to apply for medical treatment even though I already have a 10 percent disability from the VA.
Not a problem. I took the application home and filled it out. I sent it in.
I need to mention that when I went to the VA it looked like a "cattle call".
The room was way over crowded and there was every color, sex, and disability standing, sitting, and in wheelchairs. Some without an arm.... you get the picture.
I felt small in comparison to what I saw.
So... I send the application to the VA. That was back about the 1st or 2nd week of September. It is now the 11th of December and I have not heard a word.
I started investigating the VA to find out what happened, why is it taking so long? I have discovered that the VA has, the day before Veterans Day this year, had 2 lawsuits filed against it for taking so long to process applications for claims. Initial claims take 182 days and appeals take 4 1/2 years!
"The 90-day and 180-day standards sought by the lawsuit are the groups’ estimates of what is reasonable. Federal law does not include any specific requirement about how long claims processing can take".
Holy Moly!! We need a Federal Law to realize this is unacceptable!
Maybe this is why we have so many laws..... that would be another blog. Common sense is just not so common anymore.
What I'm Thinkin'.
Sincerely,
Timohty James Maki
Monday, October 20, 2008
Support the Troops
What I'm Thinkin';
Support the troops. Absolutely.
I was reminiscing about the Vietnam War this past Veterans Day. When those troops came home the were called murderers and baby killers. Can you imagine that? Horror in war, horror at home.
How does one find themselves in a war? Some people volunteered, some were drafted, some were doing their duty because the loved their country, and others had no prospects or were going to jail if they did not join. Quite a mix. One thing for sure; most had unexpected experiences, things they never imagined when the bullets started flying and the bombs were bursting all around them. War is far more than a 2 hr t.v. show or movie.
One thing I know for sure is not one of us reading this blog, can know what it was like to participate in something like the Hill 937 (Hamburger Hill), unless you were there. Hamburger Hill was only 10 days in the Vietnam war, which lasted years.
There could be veterans reading this who have experienced war. Only those who have been in battle are in a position to talk about it, the rest of us should only show compassion for those who have been there.
Not all soldiers like war. Probably the vast majority hate it once they are under fire. They wish they were far from where they find themselves. Yet, they fight hard for their brother next to them. Those who are wounded cry out for their mother. Those who survive cry for those who did not. War is ugly.
My cousin has a son who served in Iraq. He drove the brass around. One day the media was coming to their area and the brass told my cousin's son not to talk to the media. Why? Because after what he experienced he had other opinions about what was going on in Iraq and his statements would not line up with what "they" want the American people to hear.
I do support the troops. I do not support their mission. I do not blame them for what they are ordered to do. They are soldiers they will carry out their orders as those in my generation did in Vietnam.
There are those who think that if you do not support the war you do not support the troops. That is just not true. I'm Thinkin' there is a huge difference between the two.
Sincerely,
Timothy James Maki
Support the troops. Absolutely.
I was reminiscing about the Vietnam War this past Veterans Day. When those troops came home the were called murderers and baby killers. Can you imagine that? Horror in war, horror at home.
How does one find themselves in a war? Some people volunteered, some were drafted, some were doing their duty because the loved their country, and others had no prospects or were going to jail if they did not join. Quite a mix. One thing for sure; most had unexpected experiences, things they never imagined when the bullets started flying and the bombs were bursting all around them. War is far more than a 2 hr t.v. show or movie.
One thing I know for sure is not one of us reading this blog, can know what it was like to participate in something like the Hill 937 (Hamburger Hill), unless you were there. Hamburger Hill was only 10 days in the Vietnam war, which lasted years.
There could be veterans reading this who have experienced war. Only those who have been in battle are in a position to talk about it, the rest of us should only show compassion for those who have been there.
Not all soldiers like war. Probably the vast majority hate it once they are under fire. They wish they were far from where they find themselves. Yet, they fight hard for their brother next to them. Those who are wounded cry out for their mother. Those who survive cry for those who did not. War is ugly.
My cousin has a son who served in Iraq. He drove the brass around. One day the media was coming to their area and the brass told my cousin's son not to talk to the media. Why? Because after what he experienced he had other opinions about what was going on in Iraq and his statements would not line up with what "they" want the American people to hear.
I do support the troops. I do not support their mission. I do not blame them for what they are ordered to do. They are soldiers they will carry out their orders as those in my generation did in Vietnam.
There are those who think that if you do not support the war you do not support the troops. That is just not true. I'm Thinkin' there is a huge difference between the two.
Sincerely,
Timothy James Maki
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
McCain vs Obama: Pro Life, Pro Choice, and War
What I'm Thinkin';
I do not understand how those who are against abortion can support a war.
John McCain intends to continue the "Bush" war in Iraq. In December 2005 Mr. Bush announced that approximately 30,000 Iraq civilians had been killed in the war. Currently the civilian death toll has been estimated at 655,000. Mr. Bush and his Administration have stated this number is to high, but they do not know nor do they want to know the real number of civilians killed.
Pro-life fights for what is believed to be the life of an unborn child, very noble. But then to have little to nothing to say about an estimated 655,000 people, who were definitely living human beings, being killed by our bombs and bullets in Iraq?
Pro-life condemns abortions. Yet, I never hear pro-lifes concern about civilians killed in war. What is even more bewildering to me? I meet pro-life advocates who support war!
Since the Vietnam war the US has only counted its own casulties in war. We do not number the enemy killed or civilians. Why? Because this helps to create the illusion of our own righteousness. Without hearing the "bad stuff", we imagine that only the bad guys are being killed. You know, like the "smart bomb", it is shown to us like it only kills the enemy. This is not true. War is not clean. War is very dirty. We even kill our own troops in "friendly fire". How much more the civilian who was in the wrong place at the wrong time, or we just hit the wrong target? We will hear little to nothing about it.
Abortion may be killing; some say it is, others say it is not. I think we all could agree war kills people, including civilians.
There is a difference between Obama and McCain when it comes to life. McCain supports war and Obama supports "choice" for abortion. Choice does not mean a women "must" have an abortion. It means they have a choice. In war civilians do not have "choice", they just die.
I have to say, if Christians spent as much time evangelizing as they do fighting over abortion there would be more women choosing "life", because of their faith. I would suggest instead of calling people murderers that they tell people God loves them and Jesus died for their sins. I would not even mention abortion, the Holy Spirit will take care of that.
Civilians are the greatest casualty of war. Babies, kids, women, elderly.... it does not matter. Remember Japan? The Bomb? Or how about London in WWII? In the country where the war is happening civilians die.
I hear most Americans oppose the war in Iraq. Does this stop the war? No. In this respect we are the same as other countries; when political leaders want war there will be a war, even if the citizens of that country do not want the war.
I am sad over 4,000 Americans have lost their lives in Iraq.
We are the most advanced war machine in the world: if we lost 4,000 soldiers I wonder how many innocent Iraq civilians have really died? You know, the ones we went to liberate.
Sincerely,
Timothy James Maki
I do not understand how those who are against abortion can support a war.
John McCain intends to continue the "Bush" war in Iraq. In December 2005 Mr. Bush announced that approximately 30,000 Iraq civilians had been killed in the war. Currently the civilian death toll has been estimated at 655,000. Mr. Bush and his Administration have stated this number is to high, but they do not know nor do they want to know the real number of civilians killed.
Pro-life fights for what is believed to be the life of an unborn child, very noble. But then to have little to nothing to say about an estimated 655,000 people, who were definitely living human beings, being killed by our bombs and bullets in Iraq?
Pro-life condemns abortions. Yet, I never hear pro-lifes concern about civilians killed in war. What is even more bewildering to me? I meet pro-life advocates who support war!
Since the Vietnam war the US has only counted its own casulties in war. We do not number the enemy killed or civilians. Why? Because this helps to create the illusion of our own righteousness. Without hearing the "bad stuff", we imagine that only the bad guys are being killed. You know, like the "smart bomb", it is shown to us like it only kills the enemy. This is not true. War is not clean. War is very dirty. We even kill our own troops in "friendly fire". How much more the civilian who was in the wrong place at the wrong time, or we just hit the wrong target? We will hear little to nothing about it.
Abortion may be killing; some say it is, others say it is not. I think we all could agree war kills people, including civilians.
There is a difference between Obama and McCain when it comes to life. McCain supports war and Obama supports "choice" for abortion. Choice does not mean a women "must" have an abortion. It means they have a choice. In war civilians do not have "choice", they just die.
I have to say, if Christians spent as much time evangelizing as they do fighting over abortion there would be more women choosing "life", because of their faith. I would suggest instead of calling people murderers that they tell people God loves them and Jesus died for their sins. I would not even mention abortion, the Holy Spirit will take care of that.
Civilians are the greatest casualty of war. Babies, kids, women, elderly.... it does not matter. Remember Japan? The Bomb? Or how about London in WWII? In the country where the war is happening civilians die.
I hear most Americans oppose the war in Iraq. Does this stop the war? No. In this respect we are the same as other countries; when political leaders want war there will be a war, even if the citizens of that country do not want the war.
I am sad over 4,000 Americans have lost their lives in Iraq.
We are the most advanced war machine in the world: if we lost 4,000 soldiers I wonder how many innocent Iraq civilians have really died? You know, the ones we went to liberate.
Sincerely,
Timothy James Maki
Monday, October 6, 2008
Amnesia of the Masses
What I'm Thinkin';
It was not very long ago when there was a huge push to invest Social Security funds in the stock market. Remember? It was early in 1999, not even 10 years ago.
I am compelled to write about this with the current state of the Stock Market. Imagine for a moment if Social Security funds were invested in this mess.
The real tragedy is that "we the people" forget so quickly. Amnesia.
That was a narrow escape. A wake up call. When are we going to learn; wherever there is money, thieves want to steal it. They missed getting the Social Security funds so they just came another way.
700 Billion dollars. Now I hear that 700 Billion is not going to fix whatever is broken. I knew that, a gut feeling. Many people did. Those who "really" knew (the economists) could not stop it. Why? Because they could not be heard above the screams and cries, "we must act now or all will be lost!"
"Fear economics"; will happen again.
I wonder if we will have amnesia when the thieves come back for more? I hope not.
Sincerely,
Timothy James Maki
It was not very long ago when there was a huge push to invest Social Security funds in the stock market. Remember? It was early in 1999, not even 10 years ago.
I am compelled to write about this with the current state of the Stock Market. Imagine for a moment if Social Security funds were invested in this mess.
The real tragedy is that "we the people" forget so quickly. Amnesia.
That was a narrow escape. A wake up call. When are we going to learn; wherever there is money, thieves want to steal it. They missed getting the Social Security funds so they just came another way.
700 Billion dollars. Now I hear that 700 Billion is not going to fix whatever is broken. I knew that, a gut feeling. Many people did. Those who "really" knew (the economists) could not stop it. Why? Because they could not be heard above the screams and cries, "we must act now or all will be lost!"
"Fear economics"; will happen again.
I wonder if we will have amnesia when the thieves come back for more? I hope not.
Sincerely,
Timothy James Maki
Saturday, October 4, 2008
Politicians; Representatives or Servers
What I'm Thinkin';
I hear politicians say they want to "serve" the people.
I need a representative.
These are not the same.
We have been "served" a bailout.
Had we the people been "represented" we would not have a bailout.
We continue to be "served" the war in Iraq. Yet the vast majority of people do not support the war in Iraq. Where is our "representation"?
Fear driven politics are very popular in these modern times, not to mention the hurry hurry hurry tactics. Swindlers and con men use these same techniques to trick people out of there life savings.
I would like a "representative" who actually did what the majority of the average people want. I say this even if I am not in the majority.
We often hear we, the United States of America, are a democracy. We are NOT. We are a Republic.
In a Democracy everyone votes on every issue. In a Republic a "Representative" is selected to represent the people.
In my opinion we are a Republic without representation.
Sincerely,
Timothy James Maki
I hear politicians say they want to "serve" the people.
I need a representative.
These are not the same.
We have been "served" a bailout.
Had we the people been "represented" we would not have a bailout.
We continue to be "served" the war in Iraq. Yet the vast majority of people do not support the war in Iraq. Where is our "representation"?
Fear driven politics are very popular in these modern times, not to mention the hurry hurry hurry tactics. Swindlers and con men use these same techniques to trick people out of there life savings.
I would like a "representative" who actually did what the majority of the average people want. I say this even if I am not in the majority.
We often hear we, the United States of America, are a democracy. We are NOT. We are a Republic.
In a Democracy everyone votes on every issue. In a Republic a "Representative" is selected to represent the people.
In my opinion we are a Republic without representation.
Sincerely,
Timothy James Maki
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)