Mosque in Manhattan

There has been a very heated debate over this Mosque that is planned to be built near the site of the World Trade Center attacks, ground zero. The plan has inflamed wounds time has not yet healed, IF they can ever be healed. The attacks were in the worst terror attacks in the history of the world and they were executed in the name of the same religion that wants to build a worship center near the site where massive buildings and human life were left in rubble.

The plan for this Mosque has allowed a bit of a role reversal for the two political parties in the United States. I have always said that Democrats do things that feel right but do not pass the logical test while Republicans champion ideals that make sense but give the appearance of being cold hearted. In the case of this mosque, the Republicans oppose the plan because it just does not seem right to replace the Twin Towers with a symbol of the terrorists themselves while Democrats use the rule of law to defend the rights of the Muslims who want to build this place of worship of a religion cited as justification for the horror. Definitely a role reversal, but who is right?

There is no doubt that any American should have the right to do with their property what they choose, so why the debate? The outrage lies in the intention of the property owner. They claim that this structure will be used to bring religions together but why do they feel the need to choose a location which causes such violent reaction to so many Americans. Its true that most Muslims are peaceful good citizens but the fact that the property owner choose this site to build this structure of peace definitely makes Americans challenge their intentions. If their intentions are good then why not choose a different location. If their intentions are evil then it becomes the ultimate insult to all affected the the disastrous attack. For that reason I believe we need to look beyond the rule of law when asked to accept the plan.

Questions must be asked not usually asked when someone is asking to do what they want on their own property. We need to know what is in their hearts. The only way to get a glimpse of their soul is by examining their past actions and saying and relationships. Nothing can tell you more about a person than the company he keeps. We need to examine the sayings of the people he looks to as spiritual advisers, they papers they have published and the books they have written. We need to know where the money is coming from. If they are funded by people who share similar believes as the 9/11 attackers we need to know.

On the surface, I find it hard to find a reason to deny this property owner the right to build what he wants on the property he owns but the perceived insult to so many Americans to build a tribute to the terrorists who perpetrated this attack which changed the world requires American leaders to look even deeper than the whole this disaster created.

THE FAILED PRESIDENCY

Many are already writing the Obama Presidency off as a failure. The main reason for this is because he has failed to show any reasonable sign the economy has turned around into a recovery even with the excessive amount of spending and debt accumulation. The President's approval ratings are falling to a level his predecessor had achieved at the end of his presidency which is what propelled Obama to the White House. Even press secretary Robert Gibbs was honest enough to admit that the democrats will probably loss control of the House at the mid-term elections in November and has been chastised for stating the obvious.

The President made a lot of promises, and I know I have highlighted many of these before, but he has failed to deliver on any of them except by what the public viewed as a very corrupt manner in the health care bill. Even that will not accomplish what he promised in reducing costs. The effect of the health care bill will be more universal coverage but at an extreme cost which I believe was the goal so that more people will be driven to a government controlled plan. The public option will become the only option at the expense of the tax payer or the debt.

Transparency - this government has been anything but. "No back room deals", yet the health care bill was nothing but back room.

No lobbyists in his administration - several lobbyists were immediately hired after inauguration.

No tax on middle class - the first tax affected the middle class more than any other when he taxed tobacco.

Post bills on-line so be the public can see them before they are voted on, NOT.

Better relations with the world community - maybe our enemies view us in a better light but it's been at the expense of our friends.

What propelled the President into the White House is exactly what will be his demise. It's the economy stupid! The President ran on platform of a centrist. A guy who will bring civility to the government by working to bring both parties together on issues yet he did the exact opposite. He used his super-majority in both house to impose his extreme liberal positions onto the country. The problem is, his policies have caused the recession to extend longer and become deeper than anyone expected. Not only did his policies hurt the economy by taking money out of the private sector and injecting it into the public side, but he has also brought about instability by creating an uncertainty in the market. Tell the business owners, the movers of the economy, the job creators what the rules are and they will find a way to make profit but it's the fear of how the polices the President is proposing will affect their business that has caused everyone to sit back in idle mode. The President is telling everyone that the economy is on its way to recovery and they should start hiring again but also talks about plans that will increase their energy costs or pose a penalty for hiring more employees. He was elected because of a bad economy but even as the economy wants to start a recovery the threat of the liberal changes he wants to make work against the recovery.

I'm not sure if it's incompetency or ideology, but as of now all signs are pointing to failure for President Obama.

ARIZONA IMMIGRATION

We have all heard all the rhetoric about the new Arizona immigration law. Many organizations have called for a boycott of any eent in the state. Many called for MLB to move the All Star game, some called for the Los Angelos Lakers to alter their travel habits to spend as little as possible when they play their playoff games in Phoenix and a couple of artists have canceled their concerts in Arizona because of the new law. Even the President of the United States has made jokes about the new immigration law.

What is so evil about this law?

The Arizona law:

"For any lawful contact made by a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of this state or a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person, except if the determination may hinder or obstruct an investigation."

So if a law enforcement officer of the state makes "lawful contact" they have right to determine if the person is here legally if they have "reasonable suspicion". They cannot stop someone on the way to get ice cream, as the President stated, and check their ID. How does this compare to the federal law?

The Federal Law:

"TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER II > Part IX > § 1357
§ 1357. Powers of immigration officers and employees

(a) Powers without warrant Any officer or employee of the Service authorized under regulations prescribed by the Attorney General shall have power without warrant—

(1) to interrogate any alien or person believed to be an alien as to his right to be or to remain in the United States;"

Pretty much the same thing yet everyone is up in arms about this law. I was told the law "goes too far" yet it reads very similar as the federal law. So why did Arizona feel the need to write a new law that pretty much covers the same territory as the Federal law? Federal officers enforce federal laws and state official enforce state laws. So for state and local officials to have that authority they need to have the authority and that is what this law does.

At the Miss USA Pageant a couple of days ago Miss Oklahoma was asked the question about whether Arizona should have passed this new law and she replied that she believed the state has the right to pass their own laws:

Arizona is dealing with a problem the rest of the country may not be sensitive about. They say as much as 70% of the illegal immigrants enter through the Arizona border. Border crime is up and the crime are much more violent. The drug wars we hear about in Mexico are spreading their way across the border and the people of Arizona are paying the price for a federal government who has failed to shut down the border. Not only is this an issue of national security but in Arizona it is an issue of the security of the people from Arizona. Not only do they have the right to act but the Governor has an obligation to act in any way they feel is necessary to protect the people of Arizona. The President can be outraged and want to challenge the law or even make jokes about it but it is only in existence because he and the members of congress has failed to do their job.

ADDRESS TO CENTRAL COMMITTEE

First, I want to thank my brother for introducing me today. You never know exactly what a sibling you tormented as a child will say when asked to stand up for you and I really appreciate his support.

Second, I would like to thank all of you for being here and supporting the Republican Party the way you do. I have to admit I did not know all the behind the scenes activities that occur. Win or lose, I plan to be more involved in the party in the future.

Third, I would like to thank my volunteers. Not only the ones who are here today to greet all of you but everyone who has helped me to this point with my campaign, walking the District, preparing literature, making phone calls. So far we have walked __ precincts and knocked on __ doors. This evening you may have been greeted by a 14 year old young man. That is my nephew Jack who is not only here as a greeter but has helped walk the district with me and who made all the pins many of you are wearing. He is not only helping because he is my nephew but he is a true conservative. One of his teachers is a friend and has told me he has challenged some of her liberal ideas in class. So there is “Hope” for the future, if I’m allowed to use the words “Hope” or “Change” these days.

“I am not a politician. I am a businessman who is tired of watching our elected officials are more concerned about reelection than what is good for their constituents.”

That is how I began my campaign approximately 2 months ago. Let me tell you how I got here today and why. I have always been a guy who loves to discuss issues. So when Seth Morgan decided to run for Auditor and vacate his seat one of these people I discussed politics with at a family function and who works in Columbus texted me and said I should run. After a discussion with my wife I decided this is something I wanted to do, time to quit complaining and be part of the solution. I contacted the MC Republican Party, I contacted friends who are in local politics, I contacted a friend currently a state rep. and I contacted Seth. Every one of these people gave me a different message. I was told “it was not my turn”, stay away from the Tea Party, and “go for it!” There was one piece of advice that Seth gave me that I took to heart and I think it is very sound advice I have tried to follow. He said know what you believe and stand by it. You will not please everybody all the time but you will earn their respect if you stand true to your principle.

I own an independent insurance agency in Englewood. When you buy from me you leave my office with a piece of paper and a promise. In my business success comes from service after the sale. Service after the sale is not always a common attribute among politicians. As a business owner I also know what it means to have people dependent upon my good decisions, what it means to balance the books and that you cannot spend yourself out of a budget deficit. The economy hit the insurance industry just like everyone else so you know what we did? We did not give raises but offered bonuses to our employees for helping us increase our revenues, we eliminated some fat from our budget and Steve and I took a pay cut, similar to what Seth proposed and enacted for Ohio legislators. This is nothing earth shattering just a good common sense approach to solving a problem.

Ohio is ranked 47th by the Tax Foundation for being business friendly in front of New York, New Jersey and California, not very good company to keep. Eventually the economy will turn around (in spite of our President’s efforts) and people will start demanding products, manufacturers will start producing more and the jobs will return but Ohio will not get their fair share of those jobs. We are competing with our neighbors on either side who are ranked 11th and 16th. Our individual Income Tax ranking is 48th. We have businesses leaving the state for various reasons including taxation. Half of Ohio college students plan on leaving the state after graduation because that is where the good paying jobs are. Our population is decreasing which means our representation will decrease and we have less of a base to pay for all these taxes. This next assembly will be facing a monumental task of closing a $6-9 billion deficit and the answer should not be new taxes but less government needing those tax dollars.

On the campaign trail a recurring question continues to rise regarding education. I have spent time with one of the governor’s policy advisor on education, discussed the concerns with teachers and parents, have had extended discussions with a tutoring service and I have some ideas on how we can make our students compete in the world again. Currently schools are judged by minimal requirements, how many kids pass a minimal skills test to graduate. Why are we not targeting the kids who have more ability and help them reach their potential? Let’s make sure kids graduate with the basic skills they need to function in society but let’s also make sure the kid who could be an engineer isn’t driving a truck. The true solution to education is accountability. Teachers should be held accountable to teach, administrators should be accountable to hire effective teachers and give them the tools they need to teach, and parents should be held accountable for the child’s motivation and discipline.

I am truly a conservative both socially and fiscally. Marriage is between a man and a woman, no groups deserves special rights, the 2nd amendment guarantees the rights of Americans to own guns and one of the greatest failures as a society is our inability to protect the truly helpless, the unborn. The greatest problem facing America is the breakdown of the family unit partly created by misguided social policy that rewards irresponsible behavior. A large intrusive government is more of a problem than any policy or program they can create. Personal responsibility will take us further than anything the government can do. And let’s face it; no social program can replace jobs. These are the principles that will guide my decisions as I move forward.

Some point to my lack of political experience as an issue, but I believe my biggest strength in this election is that I have not been part of the political bureaucracy. I have been a soccer referee for over 25 years so I understand how to find compromise amongst competing forces. I am willing to enter an arena where my family will be subjected to public scrutiny to take on the challenges facing Ohio and find common sense solutions while finding a way to limit government’s intrusion in our lives. I am a politician and I accept the responsibility that comes along with the job but I do not accept the current “business as usual” approach and vow to work within the confines of the constitution with honesty, transparency and moral conviction. I will not be outworked when it comes to campaigning. I would be honored to represent the Republican Party in the November election and the 36th District the next two years. I would appreciate your support.

Liberal vs. Conservative

I have been asked what I believe and, since I have started to run for office, what I stand for. In short, I tell people I am a conservative. I think that word defines my positions but I guess that is not exactly true so I am going to attempt to define myself by defining a Conservative and a Liberal. I am sure there are many other distinctions but this gets the ball rolling.

A Liberal believes the federal government has the right and duty to make and law it feels fit.
A Conservative believes the federal government's rights are limited and state and local governments have more authority.

A Liberal believes that if the government can just help the less fortunate they can be successful.
A Conservative believes everyone has the ability to achieve as much success as they desire through hard work and good decisions.

A Liberal believes that the government can pave the path for people's success.
A Conservative believes that government hinders the path to success.

A Liberal believes happiness comes from having possessions.
A Conservative believes happiness comes from the feeling of pride from earning those things.

A Liberal believes that our government should be generous.
A Conservative believes our people are the most generous of the world.

A Liberal believes some people deserve preferential treatment.
A Conservative believes everyone should be judged by their ability.

A Liberal believes corporations are the necessary evils of capitalism.
A Conservative believes corporations are part of the wheels of capitalism.

A Liberal wants to protect the employee who does the work.
A Conservative wants to protect the employer who creates the job.

A Liberal thinks unions protect all the workers.
A Conservative thinks unions protect the useless worker and holds down the over achiever.

A Liberal believes the wealthy should shoulder the major burden of taxation.
A Conservative believes everyone should share the tax burden.

A Liberal believes welfare programs are compassionate.
A Conservative believes welfare programs enslave people to the system.

A Liberal believes the government is the only way to protect the welfare of its people.
A Conservative believes the generosity of our society would protect its needy but would not create the entitlement.

A Liberal believes there is a social program for every social problem.
A Conservative believes a social program may solve a problem but creates two more problems.

A Liberal believes government should be responsible for its people.
A Conservative believes in personal responsibility.

A Liberal sees a school where kids are not learning and gives the school more money. A Conservative wants those families to have the option to go to another school.

A Liberal wants to give enemies of state (terrorists) the same rights a citizens. A Conservative wants a terrorist to be called a terrorist and treated as a terrorist.

A Liberal thinks people in the country illegally should be granted citizenship and given the rights of all Americans.
A Conservative does not believe we should reward people who do not have respect for the law of the land.

A Liberal believes the rights of mother is more important than the right of the child until the child takes its first breath.
A Conservative believes in the rights of every person, even the unborn.

A Liberal believes gun ownership needs to be controlled.
A Conservative believes the right to own guns is guaranteed by the 2nd amendment.

A Liberal believes national security comes from making friendly with your enemy.
A Conservative believes national security comes from being prepared to defend your country and the ability to defeat your enemy.

A Liberal looks at all the people who are killed because of a war.
A Conservative looks at all the lives that are saved because of a war.

A Liberal is feels the need to apologize for its country's strong position in the world.
A Conservative is proud of its strong position in the world.

A Liberal is embarrassed at all the mistakes their country has made.
A Conservative is proud of all the great things their country has done for the world.

A Liberal believes any reference to God should be removed from our money, our national anthem, our government buildings and our schools.
A Conservative believes we are One Nation Under God.

A Liberal hates our country because of its faults.
A Conservative loves our country in spite of its faults.

I AM A CONSERVATIVE.

Obama - Year 1 Review

My daughter recently texted me (that's how teenagers communicate these days) and told me that she had to do a report on President Obama's first year in office and needed my help. I texted her back that I would have it to her by Friday. She sent me back an "lol" (laugh out loud) and said it had to was not suppose bias. Now that would be a challenge!

I took this opportunity to actually review he President' first year and what it tells us. We can review each of his campaign promises and determine if he kept of broke the promise, why or the promise was broken or not and where credit can be assign for the successes or blame for the failures. An exercise like that would be too tedious and like my daughter said, would be too difficult without an extreme bias. After the recent State of the Union address, I would rather choose to look at some obvious characteristics of this President's administration which will give us more insight to his first year.

1. From his inauguration speech to his campaign to bring the Olympics to Chicago to the recent State of the Union address, this President has used the first person pronouns more than any President in modern history. The media fell in love with Obama from the first moment he stepped foot on the national stage and built him up to a point that the man has become a narcissist. Apparently, he has read his press clippings and heard guys like Chris Mathews proclaim physical reactions to hearing him speak and believes he is the only guy who can right the ship and lead this nation. In the State of the Union, he took the opportunity to not only scold the republicans but also the democrats and even the Supreme Court. He is the only one doing the right thing and everyone needs to shape up. In response to his falling popularity and failure at the polls since his election, the White House claimed they have not communicated the message as well as they should so the President will become more visible. The guy has made 411 speeches or interviews in his first year! Unless he makes his life a reality show I am not sure he can become any more visible. (I probably shouldn't give NBC any ideas.)

2. President Obama entered office with a popularity rarely seen in American politics. His party had a majority in the House and a super majority in the Senate. The media loved him and refused to vett him like any other politician. The American public was behind him and he had an aggressive agenda yet one year into his term one in ten Americans were now unemployed even after the massive stimulus bill, the health care bill was now on life support after the election Scott Brown to the Senate ending the super majority and other agenda items have failed to make progress. With everything going for him the lack of success shows lack of leadership. He can make Oprah cry after hearing him speak but he cannot even garner a consensus among his own party. If he can't get the choir to follow his lead how do we expect the congregation to be in tune?

3. Candidate Obama made many promises on the campaign trail but the one that resonated with most people was changing the way Washington worked. The American public feels that our government is for sale and that things are done in Washington when it benefits the ones making the laws. The fact that a bill cannot be passed without individual congressmen inserting a pork project having nothing to do with the bill's subject irritates Americans. Yet, the omnibus bill included over 9,000 earmarks and the stimulus plan was more about benefiting the lawmakers and their supporters than stimulating the economy showing that Obama is playing the same game and its politics as usual. If the stimulus was about stimulating the economy then most of the money would have been scheduled to be spent in the first year when the economy needed a jolt. People want to see the government run with principles, similar to the way businesses are run. If the government was a business they would have been bankrupt long ago as opposed to just the morals of the one running the government.

President Obama ran on a ticket of "Hope and Change" and after a year all we can hope for is that the American electorate will make a change as soon as possible. The experiment has failed!

THE AMERICAN ELECTORATE

I think if we take a look at the special U.S. Senate election in Massachusetts to replace the seat vacated by the death of Ted Kennedy after 47 years, we can learn a lot about the American electorate. The outcome of this election can be explained many different ways and depending on your political position you will choose to interpret the results as you CHOOSE but there is something to be learned from this and the gubernatorial elections in November.

Explanations:
1. When the economy is down, the party in charge will lose. True or not, the party in charge gets the credit or blame for the performance of the economy. If their policies actually caused the problems can be debated but their promises can not. If the economy is booming the candidate will credit it's party's philosophical manner of governing as the reason. If the economy is struggling than the candidate's party is the only one that can fix the problem. Yes, the majority party gets too much credit or blame for a dynamic economy but that is self inflicted by the promises made in the campaign.

2. Each race is about individual candidates and not about parties. This definitely has some truth, especially in the case of Martha Coakley but it does not paint the whole picture. As little as a month or two ago the democrat candidate held a 30 point lead in a state where democrats outnumber republicans 3 to 1, so the candidate took the election for granted and stayed out of the public eye. In addition, she made a lot of stupid statements by saying the terrorists were out of Afghanistan where violent attacks are almost a daily occurrence and in calling Red Sox darling Curt Schilling a Yankee fan. But, you have to wonder why Scott Brown was even able to get back into the race. If the people of the state were so happy with the way the majority party was running Washington why would they even look at a candidate who promised to put a stop to the centerpiece of the democrat's agenda, health care reform?

3. The election in Massachusetts, just like the November elections for governors of New Jersey and Virginia, is a referendum on the President and the democratic party in Washington. After the complete domination of the 2008 federal elections the democrats felt that they had the political capital to pass anything and the American public would accept their decisions. The passed a $787 billion economic stimulus, a massive budget and were working on health care reform all within the first year. If they passed it quick enough the American public would forget about it by election time in 2010 or if the economy had turned around as they hoped no one would care. They could blame President Bush for a long time and not accept any of the blame for a faltering economy. What they did not expect is the backlash for the way they went about doing their business. Americans do not want to see massive deficits. They do not want to see individual states or certain interest groups receiving special benefits on the backs of the rest. Americans got tired of hearing that the previous administration is the cause for all that ails the country after they just allowed them to spend their children's future and have seen no benefit to the economy.

I think there is a bigger lesson that can be learned from all the elections and the polls. Although I am confident that my political philosophy will make the country better and stronger for years to come, I believe the American electorate does not want to be governed from the far right anymore than want to be governed from the far left. The fact that the liberal democrats in the congress shut out the conservatives all together left a bad taste in the people's mouth. They saw through the rhetoric and could see that the liberals would only allow them at the table if they supported their liberal ideals. Republicans were no better when they were in control. In both cases, its our way or you are labeled a obstructionist.

The United States has a two party system because we do not want to be dominated by one set of ideals. Socialist regimes are single party systems. We like the idea that two philosophies are merged into one governing plan. If we start to be governed too far one way or the other the electorate makes a correction. There is never a mandate for one party to go to the extreme. That is the recipe for losses at the polls. Anytime one party has control of all the branches of the federal government they had better invite the other party to the table and find a compromise of ideals or soon the table will be turned and they will be the uninvited guest.