About Me

Name: Tim Blessing
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

The Spotlight on Racism

Posted by Tim Blessing on Wednesday, April 02, 2008 7:15:14 PM
Racism exists, but it is below the radar screen.
 
Obama has made it an issue because of his success as a candidate.
 
What does he represent?
 
A purging of this force in American Politics and Society.
 
I do not think he will be President, but I think he will move the bar dramatically for the next serious African American Candidate.
 
If he wins the nomination, however, democrats will be in a quandary of how to position themselves for their own campaigns.
 
Do you work with him or do you separate yourself from him?
 
Obama I have noticed has a temper that does not serve him well when it is caught on camera.
 
Is he himself a racist?  I think he is caught in the ultimate contradiction by having both an African background and European Background.
 
I think he has something of a bit of selfishness in him that is just beneath the surface.
 
A Brilliant Man who does the country some service, but does no one any favors.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Libertarian Republican #34

Posted by Tim Blessing on Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:48:01 PM
Lawmakers at any level are not by nature risk takers.
 
Executive Politicians are by nature risk takers.
 
Libertarian Republicans embrace both approaches.
 
Libertarians are risk takers on the whole gamut of issues.
 
Republicans prefer to conserve what exists at almost any cost.
 
Libertarians usually have the music, but are a minority.
 
Republicans have numbers are not as interested in ideas.
 
Libertarian Republicans belief in the constitution, ideas, and conserving what is best in the system.
 
A dual track thought process that is not easily quantifiable.
 
Libertarians may try different things to see what works from a conservative view point, while Republicans prefer to bulldoze ahead.
 
Both approaches have their individual merits.
 
Libertarian Republicans trying to creatively rollback the welfare state, keep social control to a minimum, and maintain a self-defense posture in foreign policy as much as possible.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Libertarian Republican #33

Posted by Tim Blessing on Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:31:06 PM
Housing is an interesting problem that the Federal Government handles on a tangential basis.
 
There is the department of housing and urban development, which I do not know the functions of in relation to this issue.
 
There is Bankruptcy Court in the areas of Chapter 11 and Chapter 7.
 
Most of these people took loans out on adjustable rate mortgages, which are flexible in their rates.
 
These people who are being foreclosed will move into apartments or public housing as their new homes.
 
This will cause a backlog in the housing market that will further depreciate housing values.
 
A Buyers Market rather than a Seller's Market.
 
The question is will it be so big that the real estate market will totally collapse?
 
I do not have an answer for that issue simply because I do not have all of the relevant statistics.
 
History says we have these boom and bust cycles in real estate.
 
Principle says for the government to stay out of it.
 
It demands rigorous analysis.
 
It is a demand side problem and a supply side problem.
 
Demand will fall simply because people will be paying off prior debts.
 
Supply will increase do to foreclosures.
 
A meltdown on both sides.
 
I suggest bankruptcy court protections simply because we know their track record in dealing with individuals and companies and the system is already set up.
 
A little unorthodox, but legitimate use of government power
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Spotlight on Super Delegates

Posted by Tim Blessing on Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:20:41 PM
If the democrat voters continue splitting the popular vote in the remaining primary states as they have in prior states then they are in a bind on the way to vote.
 
Each of these two candidates are historic: Hillary represents feminism and Obama represents Post Racial.
 
If the Super Delegates are not careful they themselves could have their own careers wrecked by their supporters.
 
For an elected official, their vote should go the way of their state or district.
 
For an activist on some statewide or national committee the question becomes do I want to hold onto my own job when I come up for renomination.
 
If I am an elder statesman or stateswoman then its simply their conscience.
 
Its a tripolar problem that democrats excel at no criticism intended.
 
The longer it goes on the more damage democrats do to themselves to the advantage of McCain
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Spotlight on Soundbites

Posted by Tim Blessing on Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:13:03 PM
Soundbite politics has been around a long time.
 
They can make or break a politician.
 
In McCain's case, this 100 year Iraq sound bite may be meaningless to him, but to the general public tired of war it can be considered lethal to McCain's prospects.
 
If something is repeated a 100 times to the public it become's fact without a counterattack.
 
If I was McCain dealing with this issue I would dodge and parry, which he is doing right now with no noticeable effect.
 
I would start my own soundbite campaign along the lines of this where Obama is concerned: Big Taxer, Big Spender, and Weak on Defense.  No democrat has been able to totally refute those charges.
 
Experience in Defense.
 
Experience in Economics.
 
Experience in family issues.
 
If I was McCain and really wanted to refute this Iraq charge.  I would go to the Christopher Reeve Superman Movies and their introduction music and watch the credits fly by.
 
An excellent backdrop for a candidate like McCain
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Libertarian Republican #32

Posted by Tim Blessing on Monday, March 31, 2008 7:34:04 PM
Al Qaeda has an untouchable based in the frontiers of Pakistan.
 
We cannot get in there because of the environment.
 
Our Soldiers and Marines could go in there at great cost to themselves and Pakistan's domestic stability.
 
A better way is to use B-52 bombers to carpet bomb the region along with missiles fired from Aircraft Carrier Battle groups in the Indian Ocean.
 
We do not need to invade an area hostile to our type of warfare, which is attrition.
 
We need to harness our technology to full effect rather than like some experts say Boots on the Ground.
 
We will never entirely win the war on terrorism the way Bush look's at it because its a very narrow anachronistic approach based on the WW II model.
 
Use our advantages in air and sea power to counteract the effects of the political and natural environment of Pakistan.
 
We need only the Pakistan Government's authorization to do it.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Libertarian Republican #31

Posted by Tim Blessing on Monday, March 31, 2008 7:26:17 PM
I would ask Congress and the United Nations to reverse the trade embargo on Iran.
 
Trade and Commerce do more to reduce tensions with other nations more potently than anything else, except a WW II situation.
 
That brought the Soviet Union together with the Western Nations.
 
Bush could continue to tighten the grip on Iran in economic terms, but it would not solve the problem.
 
Iran could become self-sufficient, but they do have a longer time frame than Bush.
 
Europeans and Russians measure things in terms of centuries, Asians measure things in Milleniums, and we measure things in decades.
 
Bush and anyone like him remember things in terms of 1980, but most Americans have forgotten that time or were not alive at that time.
 
In essence, Bush is frozen in time, while Iran has moved forward and cooled down in terms of its radicalism.
 
Change is never easy.  Just watch Star Trek 6: The Undiscovered Country.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Spotlight on Iraq Ceasefire

Posted by Tim Blessing on Monday, March 31, 2008 7:18:57 PM
Depend's on the idea of whether Al Sadr is a shakedown artist on not.
 
If you ignore him then he turn's his fighters lose on Iraq.
 
If you work with him then that mean's you have to consult him on every issue.
 
If you work with him then a lot of things can get done that are on hold because of terrorist actions.
 
The Clerics in Iraq have a lot of power to do things that their government cannot do.
 
This is how their population see's the situation.
 
You go where the decisionmakers reside rather than where you want them to be.
 
George W. Bush will never get that point because he's too simple in the mind.  Stupid if you will.
 
Dick Cheney should have figured this out with a PHD in Political Science, but he did not and that will cost both of them in history.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Spotlight on Democrats

Posted by Tim Blessing on Monday, March 31, 2008 7:13:19 PM
How long will the democrat campaign last?
 
Depend's on how much money Hillary has coming into her campaign.
 
I noticed today that she's $ 8 Million in debt.
 
If a candidate can't raise money then they can't continue running around doing public appearances.
 
Obama's supporters will continue giving him money even if they are blind to his faults.
 
Hillary does have popularity, but her supporters don't seem as committed to her as Obama's are to him.
 
I just wonder if the garbage of campaigning is what has got to her.
 
Let's say she is deeply interested in the substance of government from the democrat side, but not in the socalled hoopla of electioneering.
 
I have wondered why democrat voters can't see that all of this socalled free government spending come's out of their own personal taxes.
 
Democrats have client groups that want more programs, less defense, and a nihilistic attitude on social issues.
 
Group Politics whereas Republicans tend to be more entrepreneurial and independent operators.
 
Hillary has, I think, discovered that campaigning as the candidate is different then running as the spouse.
 
People put you on a pedestal and expect you to deliever miracles, but that's not how politics works.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Libertarian Republican #30

Posted by Tim Blessing on Saturday, March 29, 2008 10:24:36 PM
I was watching Geraldo's show on Fox tonight.
 
He had some strange stories all in the realm of social issues.
 
The first one was on Eliot Spitzer's former girlfriend who seems to have carefree lifestyle.
 
The second one was on Eliot Spitzer's other call girl who is now in jail on $ 2 Million bond.
 
The third story dealt with DB Cooper who disappeared forty years ago, but his parachute has been found.
 
The fourth story I don't remember.
 
The fifth story deal's with preteens involved in really bloody combat situations.
 
People have some misplaced values that they work with in life.
 
Prostitution has been around since the dawn of history. 
 
Las Vegas seem's to have the only solution to the problem by legalizing it and regulating it through medicine.
 
This kid who was involved in Martial Arts Combat does not have the right belief system and will end up in Prison for committing some crazy crime.
 
Should it be made illegal?
 
The answer has to do with age of majority.
 
Should kids be removed from such a sport because their values system has been corrupted.
 
The answer is a definite yes, but the crime should be directed at the adult who perpetuate's it.
 
The kid need's behavior retraining to fit into normal society.
 
The adults involved in this must be immature, have no conscience, cognitive disorder, Pervasive Development Disorder, or some pathological of an organ in their brains.
 
A Forensic Pathologist would be needed on the men who train these young boys to act this way.
 
It is a subculture in our society that is illegal.
 
Once, a kid is of the age of majority he or she can do as they please.
 
However, if they are under the age of 18 then the state has a vested interested in removing those kids from that environment.
 
These men are like are like pedophiles who get their kicks out of watching young males fight rather than the s. word.  Voyeurism based on violence rather than pictures.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Libertarian Republican #29

Posted by Tim Blessing on Saturday, March 29, 2008 10:02:17 PM
Foreign Policy intrudes on a slow weekend.  Specifically, Iraq seems to be getting hot again.
 
The Iraqi Military is doing its job in battling the Militias, while we help out.
 
It would make sense to ask why they are doing this now?
 
Is it to embarass us, the fragile Iraqi Govt, or the leaders involved in the Arab summit.
 
Whatever, the logic of the situation say's that we are going to be their a long time even after we supposedly succeed.
 
The Malitias seem to serve some purpose for the Clerics throughout Iraq and they seem to have the popular support of the population.
 
If the population support's the Malitias and Clerics rather than the Iraqi Government, Police, and Military then somebody somewhere has got their priorities wrong.
 
The quickest way to get the Malitias to quiet down and get the Clerics onboard is to buy off the Clerics.
 
I learned about this in the Military that the Clerics run these terrorists for some reason.
 
Is it easier to pay a few million dollars to the Clerics to clamp down on social unrest rather than spilling American Blood.
 
The Clerics have influence throughout the Muslim World unlike our Ministers here in the West.
 
In Muslim Countries, Church and State are merged with the Clerics having influence based on their knowledge of the Koran and their ability through charisma and public speaking to interpret it.
 
Both Religious and Political Leaders whereas in the West we divide Church and State.
 
I suggest paying the Muslim Clerics Association a $100 Million to end the social unrest.
 
Buy them off to save lives particularly our soldiers and marines lives.
 
Its not the glory of war, but insight into how to deal with an intractable problem.
 
It worked in Lebanon 25 years ago, Iraq 2 years ago, Iran over the last 2 years, and Pakistan.
 
My source at Fox News and my own independent research.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Libertarian Republican #28

Posted by Tim Blessing on Saturday, March 29, 2008 5:28:14 PM
Social Issues fit a broad spectrum of issues that use to be the province of philosophers and clergy.
 
The Bible being the premiere book in the United States on social issues.  The problem is that their is so many other sources of information that while it has staying power it is more along the lines of a first among equals rather than the ultimate source.
 
I have gone to Church on a regular basis for 17 years with only 3 bad encounters during that time.
 
I have my own ideas on the Bible in that it is more of a Historical Document for me rather than a book of magic.
 
From what I have seen, it can warp the people with weaker minds and unfortunately I have dealt with more than my fair share of those people.
 
I have taken in the Methodist Church a line of courses called Diciple Study.  Courses that were 30 weeks long and there are 5 individual courses.
 
I have a knowledge of the Bible from the 1st 4 of those courses, but I am no scholar.
 
People who are trained in the Bible seem able to teach it without getting lost in the morass of detail that the Bible represents.
 
The Bible is a book of living.
 
There are 66 Books in the Bible.
 
Each one has an underlying theme that at one point I knew most of them.
 
Genesis is simply the origin story in the Bible.  It means in the beginning.
 
The Old Testament is broken down into 3 parts: The Torah, The Prophets, and The Writings.
 
Its complex Literature that most people do not have the time to master.
 
The Torah is simply the ideas of Moses or the 1st 5 Books of the Bible.
 
The Prophets are divided into two parts: the major prophets and the minor prophets.
 
The Major Prophets are Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Jeremiah.
 
The Minor Prophets are the other 12.
 
The Writings are the rest of the old testament.
 
The Catholic Church seem's to be integrating Norse Mythology into its system of belief.
 
The New Testament include's the Four Gospels, Acts, Paul's Letters, The Other Letters, and Revelation.
 
The Bible is a Book of Living, which we all want to live to our fullest.
 
I find Science Fiction, Norse Mythology, and Political Science as good sources for a belief system.
 
My current job is a lot like the Judge Samuel in the old Testament although not at his level.
 
Libertarian Republican, Creativity within History and Philosophy. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Libertarian Republican #27

Posted by Tim Blessing on Saturday, March 29, 2008 5:02:53 PM
The Second Amendment
 
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.
 
The Army National Guard is a well-regulated Militia.
 
A Free State would be the United States and all of its subcomponents.
 
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
 
What does that mean to a justice of the Supreme Court?  If I am a Liberal Democrat Judge I say that it is a collective right rather than an individual right.
 
If I am a Conservative Judge, I see it from the individual's perspective meaning I can own a gun.
 
Guns have been part of our culture since our ancestors first came to this continent.
 
Rifles were used for hunting, self-defense, and target practice then as they are now.
 
Revolvers or such guns have been a part of our culture since the beginning of our history.
 
I would self-defense and hunting are the meaning of this amendment's purpose.
 
Its the technology of gunmaking that has gotten seriously out of whack since the founding of the nation.
 
Machine Guns, Rocket Launchers, hand grenades, guns with siliencers, and other variations on this technology.
 
Yet, a literal interpretation of this amendment preclude's any laws against the production, sale, use, or resale are unconstitutional.
 
I know from reading Nixon's works that he saw the Founding Fathers as Conservative Revolutionaries fighting a limited war for Democratic Government.
 
Does the individual have the right to own guns?  Yes, for self-defense or hunting.
 
Is this restricted to a group forum meaning the people?  I would say that the Founding Fathers believed in Guns, knew their value from the Revolutionary War Format, but I think in Realpolitik Terms people at that time were as adamant about their guns as they are now.
 
What is the middle ground?  It depend's on the technology argument in relation to the section: the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Libertarian Republican #26

Posted by Tim Blessing on Friday, March 28, 2008 7:57:11 PM
The First Amendment
 
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof'; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
 
There can be no state imposed religion on the American Public although we do use religious rituals in our public ceremonies.  This has be litigated to death in the court system for the last 40 years.
 
The most pronounced example of this is taking religion out of public schools.
 
If you take religion out of public schools then you take secular humanism out of public schools.
 
If you teach philosophy in public schools then the courts have no business interfering in public education on this point.
 
The courts take the side of one person in these cases or a small group rather than looking to majority rule.
 
I go to church every Sunday, but there are some things I don't agree with  in the service and do not participate.
 
The state cannot impose religion on people, but it can't prevent the free exercise thereof.
 
That establishment clause has been beat to death whereas the Free Exercise Clause has been violated by the Courts.
 
Religious Philosophy guide's most people throughout their live's.
 
I guess it come's down to the individual's right to not participate to the majority's right to its version of public expression in public ceremonies.
 
Too much wait has been given to the Establishment Clause and not enough to the Free Exercise thereof Clause.
 
Freedom of Speech implied at the beginning of the Republic to Political Speech and now it has metamorphized into all kinds of speech.
 
Does it include magazines, television, internet, and all other forms of communication.
 
Probably it would not with the original intent of the founders.
 
Freedom of Speech imply's a privilege with manners attending the use of language.
 
You cannot cry fire in a crowded theatre when there is no fire.  Someone might get hurt, which is open to prosecution.
 
Can you say that you want to murder the president?  No, because by law any threat against the President of the United States is open to prosecution and jail time.
 
Can you say that you would like Congress to impeach Bush?  Yes, that is protected speech.
 
Speech that is related to violence against another individual or extreme in nature is considered bad manners and could be grounds for prosecution in criminal court or civil court.
 
Public Figures have a problem in this area because they open themselves up to public scrutiny.
 
There are, however, two types of public figures: politicians and/or celebrities.  Politicians have to deal with all kinds of scrutiny because their in charge of government.
 
Celebrities who do not chose to enter the public arena have more power to move against the press.
 
The Press say's it can't be regulated by the Federal Government I wonder what they say about the Interstate Commerce Clause in the Constitution.
 
The right of the people to peaceable assemble.
 
That mean's the riots in the 1960s is illegal.
 
That mean's the anti-nuclear protests in the early 80s where legal.
 
What Code Pink does to government property is illegal because it represent's violence.
 
Non-violent protests can go on all the time, but the 1960s represent an insurrection that can be put down with military force.
 
Destruction of property can lead to civil action and/or criminal action if we get technical about it.
 
The Right to petition the government for redress of grievances
 
The latest example of that is extreme African American Groups to get raparations for slavery.
 
I would assume with all of the legislation passed in the sixties that issue would have been settled.
 
Native Americans could file for redress of grievances on this aspect of the First Amendment.
 
Its a normal procedure by the system, but what constitute's redress of grievances: money or other form of compensation.
 
Property Owners could operate on this principle who lose their property for any number of reasons.
 
The key is how to do resolve the issue: Court or Congress.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Spotlight on McCain

Posted by Tim Blessing on Friday, March 28, 2008 7:24:42 PM
McCain is doing what most American Politicians have done for time immemorial.  Developed a biography.
 
His military background is his strongest point of argument on experience and it permeates throughout his family's history.
 
Marketing of a life story.  No different from Clinton in his book: My Life.
 
This starts small in the waning days of the dual primary campaign with his two opponents bashing each other.
 
Clinton did this in 1996 when he lay out policy ideas, while the Republicans were stalled.
 
McCain win's on his National Security experience, while losing on economics.
 
That's where a Vice Presidential Candidate provide's a lot of cover and it doesn't have too be Romney.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous12…2930313233343536373839Next »