This is what I believe in and fight for; this is where my government belongs; this is conservatism. The progressive/liberal attitude today does not reflect the mood of the constitution nor the mood of the people, but merely the mood of change.
The words Regan spoke in 1975 are a stark reminder of what we face from the slow boil of socialism; it is unnerving, really, that Regan’s words can still mean so much in 2009, but less so when you consider the unchanging nature of the progressive agenda.
Read through this speech and find the parallels I found. This speech was brought back to my attention via a reminder, and some interesting commentary, from Bookworm Room. It truly is interesting indeed.
Read the rest of this entry »
For the past month I’ve been in the process of putting this new version of my site together. But why? The old one was acceptable but little trafficked.
Additionally, I really needed to put a site together that might better sell my services to potential clients. The site before was a giant portfolio, more or less, and that was it; you had no idea if I offered a service or product or if I was a cook or what.
At any rate, I’m still in the process of working this design out, so give me a little time, we’ll get it down.
Update: 5/15/09 I’m doing it again, less than three months later. Why? Well, the new version wasn’t as good as I thought.
This is in response to Glen Edquist’s letter to the editor on Monday (“Voters should send Upton packing in 2010”).
Congressman Upton’s no vote, while seeming to signal his nonsupport of the working middle class, might in fact be for a legitimate reason: the bill, as presented, was full of spending that would likely not serve to immediately stimulate the economy–which is the purpose of the bill. Much of what is in the bill amounts to projects that need to go through the normal appropriations process, rather than be pushed through in a giant omnibus bill. This is not nonsupport of labor; it is nonsupport of uncontrolled spending.
What might make more sense in our current situation is the alternative bill presented by freshmen Rep. Walt Minnick, D-ID, called the [Strategic Targeted American Recovery and Transition Act (START). According to this plan, $174 billion would be all that is necessary, with $100 billion in targeted tax cuts, $20 billion for school modernization, $4 billion for job training and work-force reinvestment, and $50 billion for highway, bridge and road projects.
Additionally, START would require that all funds not spent by 2010 be sent back to the Treasury, and halts stimulus spending when the GDP increases in two of the previous three quarters. This plan is designed to target job creation and stimulate spending.
START is just one alternative. Perhaps another plan with similar intentions would work better, but the problem with the stimulus package passed by the House and Senate isn’t that money is being spent. The problem is the shear magnitude of spending earmarked for something other than stimulus, and this is what I feel Congressman Upton’s position was in voting no on the stimulus package as presented to the House.
Note: This was my letter to the editor published in our local rag on Saturday February 14th, 2009.