On the Sunday evening before Christmas, our church has a mixture of fun and the serious all in celebration of Christ's birth. Various members sing songs, read poems, or do skits as part of the service. As part of our 2008 celebration, I composed the following poem, a new episode in a collection of poems I have written called "The Highland View Chronicles". For those of you who do not know the names in the poem, be assured I consider each of them dear friends. Nothing I have written should be perceived as being a "slap" against any of them.
The Highland View Chronicles: Twas the Sunday Before Christmas
Borrowing rhythm, thoughts, and words from Clement C. Moore’s “Twas the Night Before Christmas”
Twas Sunday before Christmas
When all through the church,
No one volunteering left
Carlie in the lurch.
The banners were hung
On the platform back wall
In hope that someone
Might give Carlie a call.
The members were nestled
All snug in their pews
While Carlie was waiting
For some hopeful news.
Mama House was worried
For her little girl.
See, Carlie’s job kept her
Life in quite a swirl.
Would anyone sing, would anyone act?
Carlie had not a clue.
There might be an upset member
Who turns around and sues!
When out in the hall
There arose such a clatter
I turned in my pew
To see what was the matter.
My eyes opened wide
To the scene in the back.
But my ears heard a sound
Which my brains did rack.
The light in the hall
To the group gave a glow.
It revealed the people
Who stood there below.
When, what to my
Wondering eyes should appear
But Jerry and
All of his family dear.
With this older leader,
Not so lively and quick
I knew in a moment
It wasn’t St. Nick.
More rapid than beagles
His family they came.
And he whistled, and shouted,
And called them by name!
“Now Brandy! Now Jenny!
Luke and Joshua!
On Erin! On Michelle!
On Zach and Anna!”
“To the front of the church!
To the top of the stage!
Now dash away! Dash away!”
Jerry did page.
As dry leaves that before
The wild hurricane fly
When they meet with an obstacle
Mount to the sky.
So up to the pulpit
The Kregers they flew,
With their mother Joann
And their father too.
And then, in a twinkling,
I heard from my past
The screeching of Jerry
When a song he would blast.
As I plugged up my ears
And prepared to cringe
I noticed that Carlie
Seemed to come unhinged.
Catrina played the keys
With such graceful skill
Her music even touched
My hard hearted will.
Though fearful I was
To unplug my poor ears
The song she played
Allayed all of my fears.
As my fingers did leave
Their previous home
The Kregers began to sing
Their voices did roam.
Throughout the auditorium
Their song did rise.
And I marveled as the scene
Passed before my eyes.
A miracle took place
As they each did their part.
‘Twas not with their voices
But within my own heart.
The song was beautiful,
A blessing to hear.
It was not the tune, but
The words in my ear.
The message of the carol
That they sang that night
It made the service simply
Perfect and just right.
The Kregers, you see, sang
About our great Lord.
They filled our hearts and minds
With God’s Holy Word.
“For in Bethlehem town
Christ is born this day”
Are words even I can
Find a means to say.
Carlie was glad, for
the Kregers saved the night.
Each of us thought the
Service was a delight.
Others followed them with
Songs of old Christmas cheer
And the hour passed quickly,
Too quickly for some there.
The pastor then concluded with
A few brief remarks.
Noting that angels had given
The first Christmas “Hark!”.
And then our dear preacher
Offered up a prayer
The service was over
And we were out of there.
But I heard him exclaim,
‘ere he left out of sight’
“Happy Christmas to all
And to all a good night.”
Composed December 20, 2008; delivered at Highland View Baptist Church on December 21, 2008.
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Christmas Poem - 2008
Over the past several Christmas seasons, I have attempted to write a new poem each year. I do so in order to glorify the Lord as well as keep my brain as active as possible, attempting to stretch it into arenas in which I do not spend a lot of time. There have been a couple of years where there was no poem. For me, writing a poem is not something I can just do. I must be in the mood and feel the words flow or I get easily discouraged and walk away from the effort.
At any rate, I did sit down Saturday evening after writing a poem for our church, and compose a 2008 Christmas poem. For those of you who are interested, here it is. I checked my meter against Christmas carols and found my meter essentially matches that of "While Shepherds Watched Their Flocks" (meaning you should be able to use that tune to "sing" the following words if you so wanted).
And Jesus is His Name
A Christmas Poem for 2008
Shepherds were there watching their flock
In fields near Bethlehem
When the Angel of God appeared
God’s glory shone on them.
God’s glory shone on them.
“Born today in David’s city
The King of Kings is He.
The Lord of Lords, the Prince of Peace
Man’s Savior He will be.
Man’s Savior He will be.”
“Glory to God in the Highest”
The angels did proclaim.
Glory of the begotten one
And Jesus is His name.
And Jesus is His name.
The baby is the Son of God
As well as David’s son.
The Alpha and Omega He
Great God and Holy One.
Great God and Holy One.
That child is the Prophet of old
That Moses did foretell.
The Author of our one true faith
And Finisher as well.
And Finisher as well.
“Glory to God in the Highest”
The angels did proclaim.
Glory of the begotten one
And Jesus is His name.
And Jesus is His name.
He’s the one and only High Priest
Satisfying God’s wrath.
Mediating ‘tween God and man
Praying on our behalf.
Praying on our behalf.
The Father gave the child His Name
And Jesus it would be
To show how He would save His sheeps’
Eternal destiny.
Eternal destiny.
“Glory to God in the Highest”
The angels did proclaim.
Glory of the begotten one
And Jesus is His name.
And Jesus is His name.
At any rate, I did sit down Saturday evening after writing a poem for our church, and compose a 2008 Christmas poem. For those of you who are interested, here it is. I checked my meter against Christmas carols and found my meter essentially matches that of "While Shepherds Watched Their Flocks" (meaning you should be able to use that tune to "sing" the following words if you so wanted).
And Jesus is His Name
A Christmas Poem for 2008
Shepherds were there watching their flock
In fields near Bethlehem
When the Angel of God appeared
God’s glory shone on them.
God’s glory shone on them.
“Born today in David’s city
The King of Kings is He.
The Lord of Lords, the Prince of Peace
Man’s Savior He will be.
Man’s Savior He will be.”
“Glory to God in the Highest”
The angels did proclaim.
Glory of the begotten one
And Jesus is His name.
And Jesus is His name.
The baby is the Son of God
As well as David’s son.
The Alpha and Omega He
Great God and Holy One.
Great God and Holy One.
That child is the Prophet of old
That Moses did foretell.
The Author of our one true faith
And Finisher as well.
And Finisher as well.
“Glory to God in the Highest”
The angels did proclaim.
Glory of the begotten one
And Jesus is His name.
And Jesus is His name.
He’s the one and only High Priest
Satisfying God’s wrath.
Mediating ‘tween God and man
Praying on our behalf.
Praying on our behalf.
The Father gave the child His Name
And Jesus it would be
To show how He would save His sheeps’
Eternal destiny.
Eternal destiny.
“Glory to God in the Highest”
The angels did proclaim.
Glory of the begotten one
And Jesus is His name.
And Jesus is His name.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
409 South Van Buren and Christmas
Recently, my brothers and sister have been exchanging some e-mails related to our earlier home in New Athens. 409 South Van Buren was the home I lived in the first 10 plus years of my life before we moved to the familiar house on Hanft Street. Several of you children should remember the Hanft house, the one across from the school. I suspect Jacob and Mandie might also recall it to some degree. None of you, though, knew the Van Buren home. A few times when we were in town I pointed out the house, which still stands, to some of you.
The Van Buren home was to me what 1504 Carla was to Sonja and, perhaps, Jeremy: the first home they remember. It will also have a special place in my heart.
Below are some excerpts from the e-mail exchanges just to shed some light on my childhood for those of you who may have an interest. To understand them you need some idea of the home layout.
The Van Buren home was a wood frame house with two stories (and an unfinished basement). The first floor had 4 rooms. When you entered the back yard door, you were at the bottom of the steps leading to the second floor. To the right was the kitchen/dining area plus the stairs to the basement. There was also a small half bathroom here. Moving through the kitchen you came to an open room which, for a time, was used by my grandpa and grandma Pitchford as their bedroom. Turning left took you into a living room with a door facing Van Buren. All of my Christmas memories of this house had the tree in this room with my father’s “O” gauge train running underneath and around it. Turning left again led you into another room which housed our television, at least in some of my memories. So the downstairs formed one big circle. There were no doors, therefore, we were able to run circles in the house.
If you went up the steps to the second floor, the first room on the left was my mom and dad’s room. Straight ahead was my brother, Keith, and my bedroom. It had a large window overlooking Van Buren Street. If you took a right at the top of the steps, you would make another right down a hallway. To the left off that hallway was my sister’s room. At the end of the hallway, above the back door, was the bathroom.
When you walked out the front door, you found yourself on a large concrete porch. At that time the porch was not screened in. Bushes and trees surrounded some of it. To me, the porch became a war fort from time to time and a great place for a Kool-Aid stand at others.
That’s the basic layout. Obviously, the room assignments changed over the years as new babies arrived and you will see that in some of the extracts. But what I have written above is how I remember the home.
I hope you enjoy the walk through time.
The Van Buren home was to me what 1504 Carla was to Sonja and, perhaps, Jeremy: the first home they remember. It will also have a special place in my heart.
Below are some excerpts from the e-mail exchanges just to shed some light on my childhood for those of you who may have an interest. To understand them you need some idea of the home layout.
The Van Buren home was a wood frame house with two stories (and an unfinished basement). The first floor had 4 rooms. When you entered the back yard door, you were at the bottom of the steps leading to the second floor. To the right was the kitchen/dining area plus the stairs to the basement. There was also a small half bathroom here. Moving through the kitchen you came to an open room which, for a time, was used by my grandpa and grandma Pitchford as their bedroom. Turning left took you into a living room with a door facing Van Buren. All of my Christmas memories of this house had the tree in this room with my father’s “O” gauge train running underneath and around it. Turning left again led you into another room which housed our television, at least in some of my memories. So the downstairs formed one big circle. There were no doors, therefore, we were able to run circles in the house.
If you went up the steps to the second floor, the first room on the left was my mom and dad’s room. Straight ahead was my brother, Keith, and my bedroom. It had a large window overlooking Van Buren Street. If you took a right at the top of the steps, you would make another right down a hallway. To the left off that hallway was my sister’s room. At the end of the hallway, above the back door, was the bathroom.
When you walked out the front door, you found yourself on a large concrete porch. At that time the porch was not screened in. Bushes and trees surrounded some of it. To me, the porch became a war fort from time to time and a great place for a Kool-Aid stand at others.
That’s the basic layout. Obviously, the room assignments changed over the years as new babies arrived and you will see that in some of the extracts. But what I have written above is how I remember the home.
I hope you enjoy the walk through time.
My initial e-mail:
I was wondering if Keith or Jane can remember what dad put up at the Van Buren house outside. What I recall is:
1. Large blue lights outlining the house (they looked awesome! Always liked the solid blue over the mixed colors he used at the Hanft house).
2. The Santa scene with the flashing Rudolph nose (I think it flashed). He put that on the second story facing Van Buren against Keith and my window. Later this was on the garage door on Hanft for a while.
3. They may have had some of those red bells in the windows but I don't remember.
4. Did they put lights around the windows on the inside of the house? I don't recall
them.5. Lastly, did dad have the Christmas Card at Van Buren? My gut says "no" but, for some reason, I keep thinking he actually did and put it up on the corner of Belsha and Van Buren.
Jane’s response:
My memory is about the same as yours and I remember being in the small bedroom with the windows blocked by Santa and rudolph. … And I was in that bedroom from as early as I can remember until I was -- what 14 or 15?? I remember being sick with chicken pox in there and didn't Sweetsie have her pups in that chair I had in there?? Or maybe that was a cat earlier. Where did you boys sleep until you moved in there? … I don't remember a card there, but since I was only interested in ME, I don't remember paying much attention to much during my teen years. I do remember those red bells hanging around.
My response:
I don't know where we slept prior to that room. Probably with mom and dad! Those windows were cool because you could look out and watch the cars on Van Buren. I didn't mind Rudolph blocking them because that meant it was almost Christmas. My earliest bedroom memories are of that room at the top of the stairs with the playroom in the attic area to the left as you entered the room. I do recall riding my rocking horse in that playroom one winter. The only room I ever recall you being in was the room off to the right as you got to the top of the stairs, off the hallway which led around the stairs to the bathroom which overlooked the back yard. One Christmas season, I recall being in your room briefly. You were playing some Christmas album (Nat King Cole?). I asked you some Santa question which I don't remember (e.g., "How did Santa get into our house since we didn't have a fireplace?") and I don't recall your answer. At least you didn't tell me Santa was not real. Maybe I was in that room until Keith moved out of mom and dad's room and then the two of us took over your room. I don't recall any of that, though.
Jane’s response:
We seemed to be a bedroom switching family. here is how I remember bedrooms:
First one I was in was the small one at top of stairs. the future one, "the North Room" was closed off because no heat in there.
Grandma and Scotty were in the room off to the left at top of stairs. I used to get into bed with Grandma in the morning … Mom and Dad were in the room to the left as you came in thru the back door. And you babies were in there, too. Your beds were against the stairwell wall. I can also remember sleeping in there when I was sick with measles. Dad wouldn't let anyone else give me medicine and he kept the room dark. He also bought my first record which I believe was stories and songs.
Then, Dad fixed up the North Room (built a closet at one end) and i moved in. With the door opened, it stayed warm enough, but in the summer, I used to close it and the huge window fan Dad built would blow lots of air in. Of course, the other room didn't receive any of it and Dad was always on me to open my door.
Grandma and Grandpa ended up in the room off the kitchen.
These probably weren't all the moves. but these are ones I remember. I too, remember the train room Dad built off the small bedroom. It was really neat.
A question from Cheryl:
Didn't your Dad have to attach a piece of wire from the ceiling to the Christmas tree so it wouldn't tip over? Was it because of a cat or kids? I remember Keith talking about running in circles through the rooms from your Mom.
Another note from Jane:
I would love to go thru that house again.. Yes, the kids always ran around the house in circles. It had 4, what seemed to be, large rooms: kitchen, another room that Grandma and Scotty slept in for a while, the living room, and the next room that Mom and Dad and boys (when babies, I guess) slept in. The rooms were connected by large open arches. And they all had big windows. I loved the front porch, too. Scotty and I sat out there on the steps and played a game he "invented": counting cars. I had one direction, he the other. We would do that for what seemed hours, especially if it was raining. I also performed on the front porch while wearing Mom or Grandma's clothes.
The upstairs bedroom had these 2 big closets. One had a bottom shelf that I liked to climb in and on. I think Mom kept the sheets, etc., on it, but the closets were full of their clothes. I especially liked wearing the pink dress with big black dots. I think they each had one.
The stairs going up/down were in the center of house. Dad put in a half bath outside the basement door; just a stool and sink. then, in basement, he built a shower stall that he used.
We also did the laundry in basement with an old fashioned washing machine. All the tubs were arranged in a circle. The washing machine had a wringer at top that moved around in a circle; so, the clothes in hot, soapy water were put thru wringer into the hot rinse water, which went into a second tub of water, which went into a third, then the basket, which was carried up the back stairs and hung on a clothes line. or, in bad weather, hung on lines in basement. Dad also had a room back in a corner, that he used to develop film. I don't remember him doing that for very long.
We had a big old furnace and at first, coal was dropped down, but then, Dad put in a "stocker"???and maybe it took some different coal.
We had a big radiator in the kitchen, and during winter months, our wet hats and mittens would lay on it. And our wet shoes and boots under it.
The tree had to be wired to the ceiling and the hooks stayed up all year. We always had a dog and or cat but I think it was just the boys always decorating it or checking under it. Dad always had his train under it and maybe the tree stand in the middle of the board wasn't too sturdy; can't remember all of this.
We moved to the new house the summer I graduated, 1960, so Keith was 8, Bruce 10.
As i said, I'd love to go thru that house again and see how, if any, changes were made to it.
I believe we moved there shortly after Mom and Dad married. I only remember a little of living in the house on the other street, so don't think we were there too long.
Christmas Caroling
Every year our church spends 90 minutes or so one Wednesday evening in December singing Christmas carols at the doors of our shut-ins, ill, and/or seniors. Tonight was our 2008 engagement and we had a wonderful time. Pastor Gary plotted our course and Brother Jay served as our leader. I find those of us singing the carols are blessed as much as (if not more) than those to whom we sing.
This year we once again visited the local retirement home to sing to one of the residents. Our pastor guided us up one flight of stairs, down a couple of hallways, and to the lady's door. I always get turned around in this building and tonight was no exception. Brother Jay began our first song and everyone sang with gusto.
While in the midst of one of our songs, the door opened, a lady stuck out her head, and said "Where are you from?". I was down the hallway a bit but didn't recognize the face. We sang a couple of more songs, wished her a Merry Christmas, and was off. The pastor said we needed to go up one more level. As it turns out, no one knew the lady we just met. Our church member lived in the apartment one story above!
So, we had the privilege of singing carols to a complete stranger. It was funny to think about it at the time (still is). But God had his reasons for us stepping up to her door. I pray He blesses that lady in a special way this Christmas for being so polite to a group of strangers singing to her the week before Christmas!
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Thanksgiving 2008
Tomorrow we celebrate the truly American holiday of Thanksgiving. Despite all the present day “interpretations” of the first Thanksgiving celebration held in New England, we know our early American ancestors were not simply thankful to the Indians who helped them survive in their new home. Ultimately and primarily, the Pilgrims were thankful to God.
Every day demands we thank our Lord for His blessings. In fact, every moment we live is a blessing from God for which He deserves our thanks. “In everything give thanks for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you” the Apostle Paul wrote (1 Thessalonians 5:18). However, Thanksgiving Day truly highlights all the Lord has done for us and provides us with one day where we can especially thank Him.
For this Thanksgiving Day, I want to thank the Lord for two special blessings: faith and family. The faith I have in Him to care for my eternal soul is a faith which came from Him. Why He chose to move in my life is beyond my comprehension. Why the Holy Spirit called me to salvation and regenerated my soul in a new spiritual birth is a mystery I’ll never fully understand (John 3). Yet through God’s saving grace and this new birth, He gave me the repentance and faith I needed to turn from sin and trust in Christ. I agree with Jonah: “Salvation is of the LORD” (Jonah 2:9). Thank you and praise you, Heavenly Father!
The second blessing I wish to highlight in my thanks to the Lord is my family. And what a family He has given me! Never in my wildest dreams as a teenager did I ever think I would have a family. Being a social introvert, very overweight, and far from the Lord, having a family was an impossible vision to me. But, praise the Lord, look at our family today!
After saving my soul, the Lord brought Debbie into my life. Regrettably, I take her for granted much too often. Next to the Lord, no one has had such an impact on my life as she. Debbie is my closest and dearest friend and the one person who fills the gaps in my life. I can not imagine living on this planet without her by my side. Being married to her is the greatest earthly blessing I have ever received. I love her so much, even more so than when we were engaged 36 years ago next week. Yes, I realize there is no marriage in heaven and that our love will be directed to Jesus, as it should be. But I do pray the Lord would permit me to worship and serve our Lord in heaven with Debbie by my side forever! Thank you, Lord, for this wonderful woman, wife, and friend!
The Lord’s blessings, though, overflow my cup. Not only did he give me such a wonderful person with whom to spend my life, He then blessed us with nine terrific children! I still have trouble believing that: nine children, praise the Lord! Each of them different with unique personalities and yet loved equally by their mother and father. Each of them with different gifts and abilities yet the pride of their parents in whatever they do. And, just to “sweeten” the blessing further, the Lord has saved each of them. There is no way I can ever express how much my children mean to me. I cannot find the words. Nor is there any way I can ever express my full thanksgiving to the Lord for blessing us with them. If any of my children ever, for one moment, thinks their father does not love them, let them know now and forever, they are seriously mistaken. Thank you, Lord, for these great children!
And, still, the Lord has not ceased to pour out His blessings to me through my family. Since last Thanksgiving He has given me two more grandchildren bringing our total to nine! What a blessing each of them is to me. Obviously, grandparents never get to spend much time with each of their grandchildren. But the lack of time does not diminish the love a grandfather has for them. Truly it is a blessing to sit and hold a new grandchild, a new family member who carries our family’s love, memories, and dreams into another generation. Truly it is a blessing to be able to talk with an older grandchild and hear what they think about life and the Lord. May God bring each of them to saving faith in Christ! Thank you, Lord, for these awesome grandchildren!
Our God has been so kind and so good to me, infinitely more than I ever deserve. He has poured out blessing upon blessing on one who deserves only condemnation and wrath. How can I not be thankful to Him?
Thank you, Lord Jesus, and may you be glorified in my faith and in my family, both of which have come from you.
Every day demands we thank our Lord for His blessings. In fact, every moment we live is a blessing from God for which He deserves our thanks. “In everything give thanks for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you” the Apostle Paul wrote (1 Thessalonians 5:18). However, Thanksgiving Day truly highlights all the Lord has done for us and provides us with one day where we can especially thank Him.
For this Thanksgiving Day, I want to thank the Lord for two special blessings: faith and family. The faith I have in Him to care for my eternal soul is a faith which came from Him. Why He chose to move in my life is beyond my comprehension. Why the Holy Spirit called me to salvation and regenerated my soul in a new spiritual birth is a mystery I’ll never fully understand (John 3). Yet through God’s saving grace and this new birth, He gave me the repentance and faith I needed to turn from sin and trust in Christ. I agree with Jonah: “Salvation is of the LORD” (Jonah 2:9). Thank you and praise you, Heavenly Father!
The second blessing I wish to highlight in my thanks to the Lord is my family. And what a family He has given me! Never in my wildest dreams as a teenager did I ever think I would have a family. Being a social introvert, very overweight, and far from the Lord, having a family was an impossible vision to me. But, praise the Lord, look at our family today!
After saving my soul, the Lord brought Debbie into my life. Regrettably, I take her for granted much too often. Next to the Lord, no one has had such an impact on my life as she. Debbie is my closest and dearest friend and the one person who fills the gaps in my life. I can not imagine living on this planet without her by my side. Being married to her is the greatest earthly blessing I have ever received. I love her so much, even more so than when we were engaged 36 years ago next week. Yes, I realize there is no marriage in heaven and that our love will be directed to Jesus, as it should be. But I do pray the Lord would permit me to worship and serve our Lord in heaven with Debbie by my side forever! Thank you, Lord, for this wonderful woman, wife, and friend!
The Lord’s blessings, though, overflow my cup. Not only did he give me such a wonderful person with whom to spend my life, He then blessed us with nine terrific children! I still have trouble believing that: nine children, praise the Lord! Each of them different with unique personalities and yet loved equally by their mother and father. Each of them with different gifts and abilities yet the pride of their parents in whatever they do. And, just to “sweeten” the blessing further, the Lord has saved each of them. There is no way I can ever express how much my children mean to me. I cannot find the words. Nor is there any way I can ever express my full thanksgiving to the Lord for blessing us with them. If any of my children ever, for one moment, thinks their father does not love them, let them know now and forever, they are seriously mistaken. Thank you, Lord, for these great children!
And, still, the Lord has not ceased to pour out His blessings to me through my family. Since last Thanksgiving He has given me two more grandchildren bringing our total to nine! What a blessing each of them is to me. Obviously, grandparents never get to spend much time with each of their grandchildren. But the lack of time does not diminish the love a grandfather has for them. Truly it is a blessing to sit and hold a new grandchild, a new family member who carries our family’s love, memories, and dreams into another generation. Truly it is a blessing to be able to talk with an older grandchild and hear what they think about life and the Lord. May God bring each of them to saving faith in Christ! Thank you, Lord, for these awesome grandchildren!
Our God has been so kind and so good to me, infinitely more than I ever deserve. He has poured out blessing upon blessing on one who deserves only condemnation and wrath. How can I not be thankful to Him?
Thank you, Lord Jesus, and may you be glorified in my faith and in my family, both of which have come from you.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
My Grandchildren
Children's children are the crown of old men; and the glory of children are their fathers. Proverbs 17:6
My 9th grandchild, little Lydia Leigh, was born this week. She is truly a blessing to her parents and a delight to all her relatives. As I watched my son and daughter-in-law hold and love their first child, my feelings were the same as they were when each of my other grandchildren was born. You most likely think I am going to say I felt “joy” or “excitement” or “love” or some other similar word. Well, I did feel all of those emotions and many others. But the primary thought which crossed my mind and gripped my heart with Lydia’s birth is the same one I have had with the birth of each grandchild: accomplishment.
Graciously, God gave us nine wonderful children, eight of whom I was actually in the room when the child was born, four for whom I actually cut the cord. What a tremendous feeling it is to be a father! That feeling does not wane from the first to the last child. It is an awesome experience and floods you with so many emotions. I don’t believe anything can top it except, perhaps, motherhood! Nevertheless, fatherhood also brought with it an immediate feeling of terrific responsibility. You ARE the father! Ultimately, you are responsible for your family including this new life.
But, too soon your child is an adult, then married, then having a child of their own. Whether the child is your son or your daughter makes no difference. The child they bring into this world is your grandchild. They are now the father (or mother); you ARE the grandfather!
Yes, there is still a sense of responsibility but not nearly the kind experienced as a father. Sure, you need to help, as you can and as you are permitted, raise this child in the nurture and admonition of the Lord but that responsibility primarily now lies with your son or daughter, not you. What I specifically sensed was that feeling of accomplishment. The baton has been exchanged with your child. Or, as President Kennedy said, “The torch has been passed to a new generation.”
You raised your children the best you could though now, looking back, you realize how often you failed in that endeavor. They are now the parents. A new generation arises. The family goes on. Praise the Lord, what an accomplishment, an accomplishment possible only because of the grace of God.
My children’s children are my crown and I thank the Lord for each one of them.
May the Lord Jesus always bless each of them: Jacob, Amanda, Kaitlyn, Kelsey, Brody, Gracie, Bryson, baby Levi, and now, little Lydia.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Congratulations President-Elect Obama
The following paragraphs form a letter I sent to our newly elected President this morning via e-mail. Given all my prior posts opposing him, I thought it only proper that I post this letter as well.
November 5, 2008
President-Elect Obama,
Congratulations on your campaign and your victory! Your election is further proof of the greatness of the United States of America!
I did not support your candidacy and did not vote for you yesterday. Your past legislative record and your remarks throughout your career alarm me. I have written blog entries and letters opposing you throughout the past few months and will continue to oppose the policies you outlined in the campaign. Nevertheless, I respect you as my next President and will pray for God to give you wisdom in your position as the leader of the free world.
Your election fulfills the dream of the Civil Rights movement. The African-American community, once slaves to white Americans and often punished and even killed as such, have now seen America erase that dark spot in the election of one of their own as President. Praise God such racial slavery has been removed from our nation! But, Mr. President-Elect, there still remains a civil rights battle in our country. There are still those in the United States who are in bondage and at the whim of their masters. They need their rights restored and I call on you as President-Elect to make this your number one priority. The group to whom I refer are our unborn children.
Every day in our nation since 1973, 4000 unborn Americans have their right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness destroyed because their mother exercises her “freedom to choose”. The life of the mother, rape, and incest account for a small percentage (less than 5%) of the abortions performed in our country. Thousands of unborn Americans lose their right to life everyday at the hands of a mother who doesn’t want to be burdened by them.
Mr. President-Elect, women do not lose their “right to choose” if the practice of abortion is ended. When women engage in the sexual act they exercise their choice and must accept the possible consequences of that act, namely, a new, unborn American.
I call on you, President-Elect Obama, to lead the charge in our nation to eliminate the barbaric practice of killing our unborn citizens and, instead, to restore their right to live equally with other Americans.
Sincerely,
Bruce D. Walker
St. Charles, MO
November 5, 2008
President-Elect Obama,
Congratulations on your campaign and your victory! Your election is further proof of the greatness of the United States of America!
I did not support your candidacy and did not vote for you yesterday. Your past legislative record and your remarks throughout your career alarm me. I have written blog entries and letters opposing you throughout the past few months and will continue to oppose the policies you outlined in the campaign. Nevertheless, I respect you as my next President and will pray for God to give you wisdom in your position as the leader of the free world.
Your election fulfills the dream of the Civil Rights movement. The African-American community, once slaves to white Americans and often punished and even killed as such, have now seen America erase that dark spot in the election of one of their own as President. Praise God such racial slavery has been removed from our nation! But, Mr. President-Elect, there still remains a civil rights battle in our country. There are still those in the United States who are in bondage and at the whim of their masters. They need their rights restored and I call on you as President-Elect to make this your number one priority. The group to whom I refer are our unborn children.
Every day in our nation since 1973, 4000 unborn Americans have their right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness destroyed because their mother exercises her “freedom to choose”. The life of the mother, rape, and incest account for a small percentage (less than 5%) of the abortions performed in our country. Thousands of unborn Americans lose their right to life everyday at the hands of a mother who doesn’t want to be burdened by them.
Mr. President-Elect, women do not lose their “right to choose” if the practice of abortion is ended. When women engage in the sexual act they exercise their choice and must accept the possible consequences of that act, namely, a new, unborn American.
I call on you, President-Elect Obama, to lead the charge in our nation to eliminate the barbaric practice of killing our unborn citizens and, instead, to restore their right to live equally with other Americans.
Sincerely,
Bruce D. Walker
St. Charles, MO
Monday, November 3, 2008
Why Vote for Obama?
Over the weekend some folks asked me about the letter I sent to the editor of the St. Charles Journal which was published in the October 29. Here is the text of that letter.
So you are going to vote for Sen. Barack Obama. I congratulate you for exercising your right to vote.But before you do so, may I ask you one question? Why Obama? Change? He gives good speeches? He's young"?Consider the following:
So you are going to vote for Sen. Barack Obama. I congratulate you for exercising your right to vote.But before you do so, may I ask you one question? Why Obama? Change? He gives good speeches? He's young"?Consider the following:
- Sen. Obama has done nothing of significance in the Illinois or U.S. Senate.
- Sen. Obama has not reached across party lines in the past.
- Sen. Obama will raise taxes. Despite his claims, he always votes for tax increases.
- Sen. Obama will redistribute wealth, which, in turn, will raise prices and cost jobs.
- Sen. Obama will raise the capital gains tax, which will also raise prices and cost jobs.
- Sen. Obama will pull out of the Middle East and reduce our military strength.
- Sen. Obama supports the killing of the unborn. He supports partial birth abortion, an unnecessary and cruel practice.He also supports not caring for aborted babies who survive the abortion attempt.
- Sen. Obama will implement national health care requiring more taxes. Furthermore, when has the government ever successfully run any agency?
- Sen. Obama will not support new oil drilling or new nuclear plants in our country.
- Sen. Obama will appoint liberal justices who will legislate from the bench.
- Sen. Obama will give the Democrats control of both the legislative and executive branches of our government. Nothing will stop liberals from implementing their agenda.
Please vote. But, seriously, why Obama?
Thursday, October 23, 2008
The Patriarch's Pen: Election 2008, Article 3
This is my third blog post on the candidates for the Presidency in this year’s election. I have already presented my reasons why I will not vote for Senator Barack Obama as well as the various 3rd party candidates. The only candidate I have not discussed is Senator John McCain. He is the subject of this post.
First, let me be upfront on Senator McCain. He was not my choice for the Republican nomination during the primaries. I am not a John McCain fan. There are many reasons why I could vote against him. Here are a few:
1. McCain-Kennedy. This was the infamous “comprehensive” immigration bill which resulted in such a public outcry that it was wiped off the face of the earth. No matter what you call it, the bill was an amnesty bill and a major strike against Senator McCain.
2. McCain-Feingold. Supposedly a campaign reform bill, McCain-Feingold essentially helps incumbents maintain their seats.
3. McCain-Lieberman. The Climate Stewardship Act which would have depressed the economy more than saved the environment.
4. The Gang of 14. Senator McCain was one of the leaders of this informal group of 7 Republican and 7 Democrat Senators who worked together on President Bush’s justice appointments. In my humble opinion, Senator McCain was far TOO bi-partisan with this group, leaning toward the Democratic side way too often.
5. His energy position. Senator McCain has been against off shore drilling and drilling in ANWAR for some time. To his credit, he has changed his position on off shore drilling and now supports it since our nation badly needs this oil. I am hopeful Governor Palin, who supports drilling in ANWAR, will change his mind on that matter as well.
If Hilary Clinton had been the nominee running against John McCain, the above items would probably have driven me to vote for Chuck Baldwin even if that meant giving the Presidency to Clinton (believe me, that aggravates my stomach even to think about it). But Senator Clinton did not win the Democratic nomination, Senator Obama did. If there was another candidate more conservative than John McCain AND who could realistically defeat Barack Obama, I would vote for him. But, there isn’t. So I am left with John McCain.
My remarks should not be interpreted to imply there are no reasons why I would vote for him. He does have several positive stances with which I agree.
1. He is pro-life. As he stated at the Saddleback Forum earlier this year, Senator McCain believes life begins at conception. There have been concerns expressed over some of his views on cloning, but, when contrasted with Senator Obama’s radical view on the life of the unborn, Senator McCain’s position is outstanding.
2. He is pro-military. Senator McCain argued for some time to expand the size of our forces in Iraq and he has been proven correct in that assessment. Foreign leaders know McCain as President is not someone who will back away from a fight. Even more importantly, Senator McCain supports the military and understands the need for strong technology for the defense of our country. Again, his position compared to Senator Obama’s position is like day and night. Obama’s desire is to reduce the military, McCain’s is to strengthen it.
3. He is against pork barrel spending. Although I am disappointed with his vote to approve the most recent bail out package to which the Democrats attached some pork barrel spending, Senator McCain has generally fought against such additions to bills as they came through Congress. He is one of the few Senators who have consistently fought against pork barrel spending and I believe he will continue that commitment as President by vetoing such bills when they arrive on his desk.
4. He is experienced. This is a no brainer. Neither Senator Obama nor Senator McCain has executive experience in the political world. But no one can argue that Barack Obama has the experience level of a John McCain. For example, Senator McCain has made numerous trips to the Middle East even in the past few years. Senator Obama has made one and that one was a political photo shoot. John McCain, for better or for worse, understands how Washington works.
5. He will appoint justices who do not legislate from the bench. Given his track record with the “Gang of 14”, I must admit I’m a little concern about his future judicial appointments. He has publicly declared he will appoint only judges who judge and do not legislate from the bench. Again, McCain’s pledge when compared with Obama’s stand on judicial appointments is 180 degrees different.
6. He does work “both sides of the aisle”. For years John McCain has proven he will work with members from both parties in Congress. I believe at times (e.g., “Gang of 14”), he bends too far to the side of the Democrats. But, like it or not, when McCain says he is bi-partisan he means it. Barack Obama claims he will unite everyone and work both sides of the aisle but, honestly, Senator Obama has done nothing of the sort during his time in politics.
7. He chose Sarah Palin as his running mate. Without question, John McCain’s selection of Sarah Palin as his Vice President won my support to the ticket. Given Obama’s far left philosophy, I was slowing warming to Senator McCain as the only hope of defeating Obama. But when he picked Palin that settled it. To me, this choice illustrated McCain’s political savvy and his good judgment.
Unlike the bad press Governor Palin has received, she is a very intelligent woman who has done a remarkable job both as an Alaskan mayor and as the state’s Governor. She has the highest approval rating of any governor in the country and probably one of the highest of any state or national politician. She is strongly pro-life, fiscally conservative, and a reformer by nature. Governor Palin has more executive experience than either Presidential candidate as well as her Vice President opponent, Senator Joe Biden. She has done far more in her state of Alaska for her people, than Senator Obama has done for the people of Illinois either in the state house or the United States Congress.
Given the choice of a far left wing candidate who supports killing the unborn (and, in some cases, even those already born!), espouses socialism, is weak militarily, and has no experience or a moderate candidate who supports life, is strong militarily, espouses capitalism, has a running mate who is even more traditional and conservative, and can defeat the socialist candidate, I must vote for John McCain and Sarah Palin and I will do so proudly and gladly.
I encourage everyone to exercise their right and vote. But I do encourage those who are seriously considering Barack Obama take a time out, forget the national news media, and check out the Senator’s extremely liberal positions. Are those positions what you really want for our country?
First, let me be upfront on Senator McCain. He was not my choice for the Republican nomination during the primaries. I am not a John McCain fan. There are many reasons why I could vote against him. Here are a few:
1. McCain-Kennedy. This was the infamous “comprehensive” immigration bill which resulted in such a public outcry that it was wiped off the face of the earth. No matter what you call it, the bill was an amnesty bill and a major strike against Senator McCain.
2. McCain-Feingold. Supposedly a campaign reform bill, McCain-Feingold essentially helps incumbents maintain their seats.
3. McCain-Lieberman. The Climate Stewardship Act which would have depressed the economy more than saved the environment.
4. The Gang of 14. Senator McCain was one of the leaders of this informal group of 7 Republican and 7 Democrat Senators who worked together on President Bush’s justice appointments. In my humble opinion, Senator McCain was far TOO bi-partisan with this group, leaning toward the Democratic side way too often.
5. His energy position. Senator McCain has been against off shore drilling and drilling in ANWAR for some time. To his credit, he has changed his position on off shore drilling and now supports it since our nation badly needs this oil. I am hopeful Governor Palin, who supports drilling in ANWAR, will change his mind on that matter as well.
If Hilary Clinton had been the nominee running against John McCain, the above items would probably have driven me to vote for Chuck Baldwin even if that meant giving the Presidency to Clinton (believe me, that aggravates my stomach even to think about it). But Senator Clinton did not win the Democratic nomination, Senator Obama did. If there was another candidate more conservative than John McCain AND who could realistically defeat Barack Obama, I would vote for him. But, there isn’t. So I am left with John McCain.
My remarks should not be interpreted to imply there are no reasons why I would vote for him. He does have several positive stances with which I agree.
1. He is pro-life. As he stated at the Saddleback Forum earlier this year, Senator McCain believes life begins at conception. There have been concerns expressed over some of his views on cloning, but, when contrasted with Senator Obama’s radical view on the life of the unborn, Senator McCain’s position is outstanding.
2. He is pro-military. Senator McCain argued for some time to expand the size of our forces in Iraq and he has been proven correct in that assessment. Foreign leaders know McCain as President is not someone who will back away from a fight. Even more importantly, Senator McCain supports the military and understands the need for strong technology for the defense of our country. Again, his position compared to Senator Obama’s position is like day and night. Obama’s desire is to reduce the military, McCain’s is to strengthen it.
3. He is against pork barrel spending. Although I am disappointed with his vote to approve the most recent bail out package to which the Democrats attached some pork barrel spending, Senator McCain has generally fought against such additions to bills as they came through Congress. He is one of the few Senators who have consistently fought against pork barrel spending and I believe he will continue that commitment as President by vetoing such bills when they arrive on his desk.
4. He is experienced. This is a no brainer. Neither Senator Obama nor Senator McCain has executive experience in the political world. But no one can argue that Barack Obama has the experience level of a John McCain. For example, Senator McCain has made numerous trips to the Middle East even in the past few years. Senator Obama has made one and that one was a political photo shoot. John McCain, for better or for worse, understands how Washington works.
5. He will appoint justices who do not legislate from the bench. Given his track record with the “Gang of 14”, I must admit I’m a little concern about his future judicial appointments. He has publicly declared he will appoint only judges who judge and do not legislate from the bench. Again, McCain’s pledge when compared with Obama’s stand on judicial appointments is 180 degrees different.
6. He does work “both sides of the aisle”. For years John McCain has proven he will work with members from both parties in Congress. I believe at times (e.g., “Gang of 14”), he bends too far to the side of the Democrats. But, like it or not, when McCain says he is bi-partisan he means it. Barack Obama claims he will unite everyone and work both sides of the aisle but, honestly, Senator Obama has done nothing of the sort during his time in politics.
7. He chose Sarah Palin as his running mate. Without question, John McCain’s selection of Sarah Palin as his Vice President won my support to the ticket. Given Obama’s far left philosophy, I was slowing warming to Senator McCain as the only hope of defeating Obama. But when he picked Palin that settled it. To me, this choice illustrated McCain’s political savvy and his good judgment.
Unlike the bad press Governor Palin has received, she is a very intelligent woman who has done a remarkable job both as an Alaskan mayor and as the state’s Governor. She has the highest approval rating of any governor in the country and probably one of the highest of any state or national politician. She is strongly pro-life, fiscally conservative, and a reformer by nature. Governor Palin has more executive experience than either Presidential candidate as well as her Vice President opponent, Senator Joe Biden. She has done far more in her state of Alaska for her people, than Senator Obama has done for the people of Illinois either in the state house or the United States Congress.
Given the choice of a far left wing candidate who supports killing the unborn (and, in some cases, even those already born!), espouses socialism, is weak militarily, and has no experience or a moderate candidate who supports life, is strong militarily, espouses capitalism, has a running mate who is even more traditional and conservative, and can defeat the socialist candidate, I must vote for John McCain and Sarah Palin and I will do so proudly and gladly.
I encourage everyone to exercise their right and vote. But I do encourage those who are seriously considering Barack Obama take a time out, forget the national news media, and check out the Senator’s extremely liberal positions. Are those positions what you really want for our country?
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
An e-mail from my Congressman
Today I received a response to an e-mail I wrote to my Congressman, the Honorable Todd Akin, during the time of the economic bailout discussions in Washington. My e-mail encouraged Congressman Akin to vote against the bailout plan of Secretary Paulson which he did. I thought you may be interested in the Congressman’s response to my original correspondence.
Dear Reverend Walker:
Thank you for contacting me regarding my vote on Secretary Paulson's proposed $700 billion bailout plan. My office has received more correspondence on this question then on any issue in the past 8 years.
For this reason, and because of the technical nature of the issue, I have prepared a more lengthy response than I would for most issues. The bottom line is that I voted "NO" on the proposal. A more detailed explanation follows.
In mid-September, U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson came to Congress with an unprecedented demand. He told us that the American economy was on the brink of catastrophe. Our only hope was to give him $700 billion, immediately, with no strings attached. Seven hundred billion dollars amounts to an indirect tax of $7,551 per taxpayer. It is the cost of the war in Iraq for five-plus years, and it is close to what America spends on foreign oil in a year. Paulson's plan was to use the money to buy "toxic assets" from banks and other financial institutions. These assets were considered "toxic" because their value was so uncertain that there was no market for them.
Paulson's demand placed Congress on the horns of a dilemma. One was financial Armageddon. The other was a $700 billion indirect tax on American taxpayers. Common sense dictates that when two bad alternatives are proposed, one should look for a better alternative. Unfortunately, Secretary Paulson was not interested in discussing any alternatives.
Over the next few days, Congressmen of all political stripes scrutinized the nature of the problem and possible solutions. Conservatives were concerned about the massive increase in deficit spending and what precedent would be set if the Federal Government purchased bundles of private loans. Many Members of Congress were skeptical that the government could be trusted to come up with a satisfactory pricing mechanism for the toxic securities because there was no way to establish a value. Some Democratic Members of Congress also had serious concerns regarding the Wall Street bailout.
There is no doubt that we need to insure the soundness of the American dual banking system and our markets with:
1)The least amount of bad government regulation, - Fannie & Freddie along with suspension of the Mark-to-Market rule when no market exists.
2)The most amount of disclosure, - no naked short selling without the "up-tick rule."
3)More accountability for bad actors - if they make bad loans, poor investments or borrow what they cannot repay - then they should pay the price.
4)Rewards for those who behaved responsibly and penalties for those who didn't - no golden parachutes.
Early in the last decade, Congress mandated that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac increase the number of purchases of mortgages made to lower-income borrowers. Under President Clinton, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) gave Fannie and Freddie even higher numeric goals for low-income borrowers. At the same time, banks were also forced to implement loan quotas for lower income households through the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA).
Additionally, early in 2001, as the economy headed into recession, the Federal Reserve began a series of interest rate cuts, bringing the interest rate down to 1% and holding it there for a year. These actions drastically expanded lending; particularly in the real estate market. However, because housing prices were rising, the defaults stayed relatively low. In the meantime, mortgages and loans were being made, sold, and bundled without regard to the likelihood that the borrowers would be able to repay. The bundled securities, called "mortgage backed securities," were incorrectly given AAA ratings and sold all over the world.
In 2003, an article in the New York Times reported, "The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago." Unfortunately, many Democrats argued that there was no impended crisis. In fact, at the time, the current Democratic Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, Barney Frank ,stated, "these two entities, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not facing any kind of financial crisis."
By 2004 and 2005, the Republican-controlled Congress saw the danger and passed legislation to tighten regulation of Freddie and Fannie. I voted in favor of this legislation. Unfortunately, Senate Democrats blocked any effort to improve the law.
Over the past year, increasingly more homes came onto the market than buyers and the homebuilding industry began to show signs of stress. Home values started to drop and builders could not find buyers for their new homes. Before long, the value of homes was dropping below the cost of loans. As a result, some consumers who were overextended on their credit started defaulting on their mortgages. Investors began to lose confidence in Freddie and Fannie, causing their stock prices to tumble (down about 80%) over last year. Because so many banks and financial institutions were invested so heavily in these securities, it resulted in the need to bailout Fannie and Freddie. Furthermore, these same banks and investment firms that had bet on mortgage backed securities began to be in serious trouble - and so were their customers. Banks that were rumored to be in trouble began to see an increase in withdrawals by their customers - triggering fears of bank runs. With so much money tied up in bad investments, even healthier banks were reluctant to make new loans.
When banks stopped buying mortgage backed securities because they could no longer determine their real value, this placed the banks that owned these securities at risk.. Federal accounting rules state that a capital asset on a bank's books must be daily "marked to market." However, when there is no market, law requires these assets to be shown as "zero" in value. This causes problems for banks by depressing their capital reserves value. For example, if a bank owns 1 million dollars of mortgages on houses that used to sell for a total of $1 million but now are worth $800,000, then the bank has a manageable problem. However, if under the "mark to market" rule, that value is artificially re-set at zero, the rule can actually cause a bank failure. If a bank's capital gets too low, the bank must be closed or sold as we saw in the case of Wachovia Bank.
Secretary Paulson proposed a $700 billion taxpayer funded "solution" to this problem. I and about one hundred other conservative Members of Congress sought other alternatives. We met former FDIC Chairman Bill Isaacs who was in charge of handling the Savings and Loan crash under President Ronald Reagan. He explained that we did have tools to solve the banking problem without this massive public bailout.
One of Chairman Isaacs' suggestions included changing the current accounting rules (mark-to-market) so that assets owned by the banks could be more reasonably valued. This would help the banks' capital problems, preventing unnecessary tightening of the credit markets. This approach also meant that owners of riskier assets would be responsible for their own financial decisions.
Much to my disappointment, this approach to dealing with the financial crisis was largely ignored. The first high profile bailout vote took place on Monday September 29th. Surprising Republican and Democrat leadership, the bailout package failed, rejected by over two-thirds Republicans and over a hundred Democrats. This vote reflected the tenor of what a majority of Congressional offices were hearing from their constituencies including my own.
Over the next few days, the Senate approved the bailout and added a bunch of tax extenders - authorizing the extension of various tax breaks that were set to expire The House voted to approve this package on Friday, October 3rd, after an unprecedented level of lobbying by financial groups and the White House. Once again, I voted against the bailout.
Our economy is in critical condition, and the price tag on the "bailout" could add nearly a trillion dollars to our national debt. During these tough votes, I try to set politics aside and consider what is best for my constituents and the country. In this case, I asked myself if the legislation would:
solve the problem it was meant to address? Doubtful
prevent the types of investment practices that had caused the problem in the first place? No
solve the problem using the simplest and least expensive solutions first and only spending billions in public money as a last resort? No
punish those who made financially responsible decisions? Yes
reward those who made poor financial choices? Yes
represent a major intrusion by the Federal Government into private markets? Yes
increase the national debt? Yes
set a pattern for future public bailouts of private losses? Yes, I believe it would.
Based on these questions, a "NO" vote was the principled position for a conservative. Like other high profile votes I have taken since being in Congress -- including the 2005Medicare Modernization Act - this vote placed me at odds with President Bush and leadership in my own party.
I appreciate the serious nature of our economic situation. However, it is dangerous to abdicate principles under pressure. For that reason, I co-sponsored H.R. 7223 which represents a reasoned response to our economic challenge. H.R. 7223 would have reformed the financial market regulatory system and empowered private investors to fund the financial market's recovery. I believe this plan represented a "workout" rather than a bailout by leveraging limited tax dollars to encourage private investment and stabilize our markets.
I hope this information is helpful in understanding my perspective on this important legislation. Once again, I appreciate the time you took to contact my office.
It is a privilege to represent you and I hope that you will not hesitate to contact me regarding any matter where I might be of assistance. If you would like more information on issues, or would like to share further thoughts with me via e-mail, you may visit my website.
Sincerely,W. Todd Akin
Member of Congress
Dear Reverend Walker:
Thank you for contacting me regarding my vote on Secretary Paulson's proposed $700 billion bailout plan. My office has received more correspondence on this question then on any issue in the past 8 years.
For this reason, and because of the technical nature of the issue, I have prepared a more lengthy response than I would for most issues. The bottom line is that I voted "NO" on the proposal. A more detailed explanation follows.
In mid-September, U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson came to Congress with an unprecedented demand. He told us that the American economy was on the brink of catastrophe. Our only hope was to give him $700 billion, immediately, with no strings attached. Seven hundred billion dollars amounts to an indirect tax of $7,551 per taxpayer. It is the cost of the war in Iraq for five-plus years, and it is close to what America spends on foreign oil in a year. Paulson's plan was to use the money to buy "toxic assets" from banks and other financial institutions. These assets were considered "toxic" because their value was so uncertain that there was no market for them.
Paulson's demand placed Congress on the horns of a dilemma. One was financial Armageddon. The other was a $700 billion indirect tax on American taxpayers. Common sense dictates that when two bad alternatives are proposed, one should look for a better alternative. Unfortunately, Secretary Paulson was not interested in discussing any alternatives.
Over the next few days, Congressmen of all political stripes scrutinized the nature of the problem and possible solutions. Conservatives were concerned about the massive increase in deficit spending and what precedent would be set if the Federal Government purchased bundles of private loans. Many Members of Congress were skeptical that the government could be trusted to come up with a satisfactory pricing mechanism for the toxic securities because there was no way to establish a value. Some Democratic Members of Congress also had serious concerns regarding the Wall Street bailout.
There is no doubt that we need to insure the soundness of the American dual banking system and our markets with:
1)The least amount of bad government regulation, - Fannie & Freddie along with suspension of the Mark-to-Market rule when no market exists.
2)The most amount of disclosure, - no naked short selling without the "up-tick rule."
3)More accountability for bad actors - if they make bad loans, poor investments or borrow what they cannot repay - then they should pay the price.
4)Rewards for those who behaved responsibly and penalties for those who didn't - no golden parachutes.
Early in the last decade, Congress mandated that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac increase the number of purchases of mortgages made to lower-income borrowers. Under President Clinton, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) gave Fannie and Freddie even higher numeric goals for low-income borrowers. At the same time, banks were also forced to implement loan quotas for lower income households through the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA).
Additionally, early in 2001, as the economy headed into recession, the Federal Reserve began a series of interest rate cuts, bringing the interest rate down to 1% and holding it there for a year. These actions drastically expanded lending; particularly in the real estate market. However, because housing prices were rising, the defaults stayed relatively low. In the meantime, mortgages and loans were being made, sold, and bundled without regard to the likelihood that the borrowers would be able to repay. The bundled securities, called "mortgage backed securities," were incorrectly given AAA ratings and sold all over the world.
In 2003, an article in the New York Times reported, "The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago." Unfortunately, many Democrats argued that there was no impended crisis. In fact, at the time, the current Democratic Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, Barney Frank ,stated, "these two entities, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not facing any kind of financial crisis."
By 2004 and 2005, the Republican-controlled Congress saw the danger and passed legislation to tighten regulation of Freddie and Fannie. I voted in favor of this legislation. Unfortunately, Senate Democrats blocked any effort to improve the law.
Over the past year, increasingly more homes came onto the market than buyers and the homebuilding industry began to show signs of stress. Home values started to drop and builders could not find buyers for their new homes. Before long, the value of homes was dropping below the cost of loans. As a result, some consumers who were overextended on their credit started defaulting on their mortgages. Investors began to lose confidence in Freddie and Fannie, causing their stock prices to tumble (down about 80%) over last year. Because so many banks and financial institutions were invested so heavily in these securities, it resulted in the need to bailout Fannie and Freddie. Furthermore, these same banks and investment firms that had bet on mortgage backed securities began to be in serious trouble - and so were their customers. Banks that were rumored to be in trouble began to see an increase in withdrawals by their customers - triggering fears of bank runs. With so much money tied up in bad investments, even healthier banks were reluctant to make new loans.
When banks stopped buying mortgage backed securities because they could no longer determine their real value, this placed the banks that owned these securities at risk.. Federal accounting rules state that a capital asset on a bank's books must be daily "marked to market." However, when there is no market, law requires these assets to be shown as "zero" in value. This causes problems for banks by depressing their capital reserves value. For example, if a bank owns 1 million dollars of mortgages on houses that used to sell for a total of $1 million but now are worth $800,000, then the bank has a manageable problem. However, if under the "mark to market" rule, that value is artificially re-set at zero, the rule can actually cause a bank failure. If a bank's capital gets too low, the bank must be closed or sold as we saw in the case of Wachovia Bank.
Secretary Paulson proposed a $700 billion taxpayer funded "solution" to this problem. I and about one hundred other conservative Members of Congress sought other alternatives. We met former FDIC Chairman Bill Isaacs who was in charge of handling the Savings and Loan crash under President Ronald Reagan. He explained that we did have tools to solve the banking problem without this massive public bailout.
One of Chairman Isaacs' suggestions included changing the current accounting rules (mark-to-market) so that assets owned by the banks could be more reasonably valued. This would help the banks' capital problems, preventing unnecessary tightening of the credit markets. This approach also meant that owners of riskier assets would be responsible for their own financial decisions.
Much to my disappointment, this approach to dealing with the financial crisis was largely ignored. The first high profile bailout vote took place on Monday September 29th. Surprising Republican and Democrat leadership, the bailout package failed, rejected by over two-thirds Republicans and over a hundred Democrats. This vote reflected the tenor of what a majority of Congressional offices were hearing from their constituencies including my own.
Over the next few days, the Senate approved the bailout and added a bunch of tax extenders - authorizing the extension of various tax breaks that were set to expire The House voted to approve this package on Friday, October 3rd, after an unprecedented level of lobbying by financial groups and the White House. Once again, I voted against the bailout.
Our economy is in critical condition, and the price tag on the "bailout" could add nearly a trillion dollars to our national debt. During these tough votes, I try to set politics aside and consider what is best for my constituents and the country. In this case, I asked myself if the legislation would:
solve the problem it was meant to address? Doubtful
prevent the types of investment practices that had caused the problem in the first place? No
solve the problem using the simplest and least expensive solutions first and only spending billions in public money as a last resort? No
punish those who made financially responsible decisions? Yes
reward those who made poor financial choices? Yes
represent a major intrusion by the Federal Government into private markets? Yes
increase the national debt? Yes
set a pattern for future public bailouts of private losses? Yes, I believe it would.
Based on these questions, a "NO" vote was the principled position for a conservative. Like other high profile votes I have taken since being in Congress -- including the 2005Medicare Modernization Act - this vote placed me at odds with President Bush and leadership in my own party.
I appreciate the serious nature of our economic situation. However, it is dangerous to abdicate principles under pressure. For that reason, I co-sponsored H.R. 7223 which represents a reasoned response to our economic challenge. H.R. 7223 would have reformed the financial market regulatory system and empowered private investors to fund the financial market's recovery. I believe this plan represented a "workout" rather than a bailout by leveraging limited tax dollars to encourage private investment and stabilize our markets.
I hope this information is helpful in understanding my perspective on this important legislation. Once again, I appreciate the time you took to contact my office.
It is a privilege to represent you and I hope that you will not hesitate to contact me regarding any matter where I might be of assistance. If you would like more information on issues, or would like to share further thoughts with me via e-mail, you may visit my website.
Sincerely,W. Todd Akin
Member of Congress
Friday, October 17, 2008
The Patriarch's Pen: Election 2008, Article 2
The Presidential election of 1912 was an interesting one. When, in 1908, Theodore Roosevelt honored his 1904 pledge not to seek another term, he threw his support to his Vice President, William Howard Taft. Taft won the election but, in Roosevelt’s eyes, betrayed the progressive program Roosevelt had instituted. Roosevelt sought the 1912 Republican Party nomination but, when the GOP gave it to Taft, Roosevelt and his supporters left the GOP to form the Progressive Party (also known as the Bull Moose Party).
The Democrats took 46 ballots to select their candidate. The favored Champ Clark of Missouri, current Speaker of the House, could not gain the necessary votes on the first ballot and the battle was on. When influential Democrat William Jennings Bryan threw his support to New Jersey Governor Woodrow Wilson, the tide began to turn and Wilson was ultimately selected.
President Taft was never very enthused about the Presidency. He aspired to a position on the Supreme Court (which he later received) and did not exert much effort in the 1912 campaign. The fireworks were primarily between Wilson and Roosevelt, both known reformers.
The GOP split resulted in a landslide Electoral College win for Wilson. The final tally for the 1912 race was:
Wilson: 435 electoral votes; 6,293,152 popular votes
Roosevelt: 88 electoral votes; 4,119,207 popular votes
Taft: 8 electoral votes; 3,486,333 popular votes
Debs: 0 electoral votes; 900,369 popular votes (Socialist Party)
Chafin: 0 electoral votes; 207,972 popular votes (Prohibition Party)
Theodore Roosevelt was a 3rd party candidate who beat a major party candidate though failing to win the election.
My point of all this: NONE of the 3rd party candidates running in 2008 is Theodore Roosevelt. They CAN NOT win the election.
One of my son-in-laws has noted that they can win if folks vote for them on Election Day. That is absolutely true assuming they are on the ballot in all 50 states. But this is theory. Most Americans can’t even name one of the 3rd party candidates this year. If we are pragmatic about the matter, we will admit, despite the theory, Senator Obama or Senator McCain will be the President-elect on November 5.
Does this mean voting for a 3rd party candidate is “wasting your vote”? I guess it depends on what you mean by wasting. If you are voting your conscience when you select one of these individuals then your vote is right and not wasted.
There are, at least, four candidates running for the Presidency other than the “big two”. I am listing them with some brief personal remarks based on information I have from their campaigns. For more information, check their web sites.
Charles O. “Chuck” Baldwin: Baptist minister. Solidly pro-life. Eliminate or greatly reduce several government agencies (including education, FEMA). Eliminate all family income taxes (he says they are unconstitutional). Eliminate or greatly reduce other taxes. Strong on crime. Get government out of business. Support traditional energy resources as well as research on alternatives. Gun advocate. No federal government health care. Against illegal immigration. Scale back foreign aid. Withdraw from Iraq. Essentially get out of international military matters. Permit private accounts for Social Security.
Robert L. “Bob” Barr Jr.: Pro-life with minor exceptions (e.g., rape and incest). Reduce funding of some government agencies but greatly increase defense funding. Greatly reduce personal income tax across the board. Decrease or eliminate other taxes. Strong law enforcement. Strong drug enforcement. Parental choice in education. No government health care. Against illegal immigration. Withdraw from the United Nations. Take action if Iraq does not comply. Permit private accounts for Social Security.
Ralph Nader: Says pro-life with minor exceptions (e.g., rape and incest) but also says “supports the principles articulated in Roe v Wade and its progeny). Eliminate funding of national missile defense. Increase alcohol taxes, capital gains taxes, cigarette taxes. Eliminate the death penalty. Decriminize marijuana use. Allow vouchers for education choice. Strengthen regulation and enforcement of the Clean Water and Clean Air Acts. Strengthen emission controls. Support the Kyoto treaty to limit global warming. Immigration reform but supports illegal immigrants having all the rights and privileges of United States citizens. Government oversight of business especially in terms of pensions and health care.
Cynthia Ann McKinney: Sorry, but after reading her Green Party’s platform, I have no further comment.
I believe it is safe to say Baldwin and Barr are the more conservative while Nader and McKinney are more liberal. Therefore, my opinion is IF YOU COULD ONLY CHOOSE BETWEEN Obama and McCain, those voting for Baldwin or Barr would vote McCain and those voting for McKinney or Nader would choose Obama. So, if you vote for Baldwin or Barr you are, essentially, taking a vote away from McCain. And, if you vote for McKinney or Nader, you are taking a vote away from Obama.
Like it or not, none of these 3rd party candidates are going to win. Personally, I like the positions of Chuck Baldwin even more than I do those of John McCain (more on McCain later). But if I cast a vote for Baldwin (who can not win) then McCain (who can win) loses a vote.
In 1996 President Clinton ran against Senator Bob Dole. I have never been and never will be a Bill Clinton fan. I also didn’t care much for Bob Dole but held my breath and voted for him in hopes of defeating Clinton. Of course, that hope was not realized. While I do not like President Clinton, I would have easily voted my conscience in 1996 by voting for Chuck Baldwin, if he had run. Yes, Baldwin would not win. Yes, I would be taking a vote from Dole. Yes, I would be helping Clinton win. Oh, well…
So, you might ask, why aren’t you going to vote your conscience in 2008 and choose Chuck Baldwin instead of John McCain? I can answer that question in 3 words: Barack Hussein Obama. Obama is far worse than a Bill Clinton. At least Clinton wasn’t an outright socialist.
While I like the policies of Chuck Baldwin, my conscience says I must vote for a candidate who can keep Obama out of the White House. I must do whatever I can, in good conscience, to beat Obama. The only candidate who can do that is John McCain.
The Democrats took 46 ballots to select their candidate. The favored Champ Clark of Missouri, current Speaker of the House, could not gain the necessary votes on the first ballot and the battle was on. When influential Democrat William Jennings Bryan threw his support to New Jersey Governor Woodrow Wilson, the tide began to turn and Wilson was ultimately selected.
President Taft was never very enthused about the Presidency. He aspired to a position on the Supreme Court (which he later received) and did not exert much effort in the 1912 campaign. The fireworks were primarily between Wilson and Roosevelt, both known reformers.
The GOP split resulted in a landslide Electoral College win for Wilson. The final tally for the 1912 race was:
Wilson: 435 electoral votes; 6,293,152 popular votes
Roosevelt: 88 electoral votes; 4,119,207 popular votes
Taft: 8 electoral votes; 3,486,333 popular votes
Debs: 0 electoral votes; 900,369 popular votes (Socialist Party)
Chafin: 0 electoral votes; 207,972 popular votes (Prohibition Party)
Theodore Roosevelt was a 3rd party candidate who beat a major party candidate though failing to win the election.
My point of all this: NONE of the 3rd party candidates running in 2008 is Theodore Roosevelt. They CAN NOT win the election.
One of my son-in-laws has noted that they can win if folks vote for them on Election Day. That is absolutely true assuming they are on the ballot in all 50 states. But this is theory. Most Americans can’t even name one of the 3rd party candidates this year. If we are pragmatic about the matter, we will admit, despite the theory, Senator Obama or Senator McCain will be the President-elect on November 5.
Does this mean voting for a 3rd party candidate is “wasting your vote”? I guess it depends on what you mean by wasting. If you are voting your conscience when you select one of these individuals then your vote is right and not wasted.
There are, at least, four candidates running for the Presidency other than the “big two”. I am listing them with some brief personal remarks based on information I have from their campaigns. For more information, check their web sites.
Charles O. “Chuck” Baldwin: Baptist minister. Solidly pro-life. Eliminate or greatly reduce several government agencies (including education, FEMA). Eliminate all family income taxes (he says they are unconstitutional). Eliminate or greatly reduce other taxes. Strong on crime. Get government out of business. Support traditional energy resources as well as research on alternatives. Gun advocate. No federal government health care. Against illegal immigration. Scale back foreign aid. Withdraw from Iraq. Essentially get out of international military matters. Permit private accounts for Social Security.
Robert L. “Bob” Barr Jr.: Pro-life with minor exceptions (e.g., rape and incest). Reduce funding of some government agencies but greatly increase defense funding. Greatly reduce personal income tax across the board. Decrease or eliminate other taxes. Strong law enforcement. Strong drug enforcement. Parental choice in education. No government health care. Against illegal immigration. Withdraw from the United Nations. Take action if Iraq does not comply. Permit private accounts for Social Security.
Ralph Nader: Says pro-life with minor exceptions (e.g., rape and incest) but also says “supports the principles articulated in Roe v Wade and its progeny). Eliminate funding of national missile defense. Increase alcohol taxes, capital gains taxes, cigarette taxes. Eliminate the death penalty. Decriminize marijuana use. Allow vouchers for education choice. Strengthen regulation and enforcement of the Clean Water and Clean Air Acts. Strengthen emission controls. Support the Kyoto treaty to limit global warming. Immigration reform but supports illegal immigrants having all the rights and privileges of United States citizens. Government oversight of business especially in terms of pensions and health care.
Cynthia Ann McKinney: Sorry, but after reading her Green Party’s platform, I have no further comment.
I believe it is safe to say Baldwin and Barr are the more conservative while Nader and McKinney are more liberal. Therefore, my opinion is IF YOU COULD ONLY CHOOSE BETWEEN Obama and McCain, those voting for Baldwin or Barr would vote McCain and those voting for McKinney or Nader would choose Obama. So, if you vote for Baldwin or Barr you are, essentially, taking a vote away from McCain. And, if you vote for McKinney or Nader, you are taking a vote away from Obama.
Like it or not, none of these 3rd party candidates are going to win. Personally, I like the positions of Chuck Baldwin even more than I do those of John McCain (more on McCain later). But if I cast a vote for Baldwin (who can not win) then McCain (who can win) loses a vote.
In 1996 President Clinton ran against Senator Bob Dole. I have never been and never will be a Bill Clinton fan. I also didn’t care much for Bob Dole but held my breath and voted for him in hopes of defeating Clinton. Of course, that hope was not realized. While I do not like President Clinton, I would have easily voted my conscience in 1996 by voting for Chuck Baldwin, if he had run. Yes, Baldwin would not win. Yes, I would be taking a vote from Dole. Yes, I would be helping Clinton win. Oh, well…
So, you might ask, why aren’t you going to vote your conscience in 2008 and choose Chuck Baldwin instead of John McCain? I can answer that question in 3 words: Barack Hussein Obama. Obama is far worse than a Bill Clinton. At least Clinton wasn’t an outright socialist.
While I like the policies of Chuck Baldwin, my conscience says I must vote for a candidate who can keep Obama out of the White House. I must do whatever I can, in good conscience, to beat Obama. The only candidate who can do that is John McCain.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
The Davy Crockett Bail Out
Several years ago I read this article in my childrens' textbook on government but it had slipped my mind until last night when I stumbled across it again. Take a few moments to read it in light of the recent Congressional actions attempting to correct the financial chaos in our nation.
David (“Davy”) Crockett, the nearly legendary Tennessee frontiersman, was elected to several terms in the United States House of Representatives in the 1820’s and 30’s. One evening, Congressman Crockett and some of his colleagues were talking on the steps of the Capitol. They saw a bright glow in the distance and realized that the nearby village of Georgetown was burning. The congressmen rushed to the village and helped to put out the blaze. The next morning, Congress set aside all other business and voted to give $20,000 from the government treasury to aid the families whose possessions had been burned in the fire. Davy Crockett voted in favor of the gift.
The following summer, Congressman Crockett was campaigning in his home district when he met a wise farmer named Horatio Bunce, who “… was widely known for his remarkable intelligence and incorruptible
integrity, and for a heart brimful and running over with kindness and benevolence, which showed themselves not only in words but in acts. …” Davy Crockett later reported of Mr. Bunce, “If everyone who professes to be a Christian lived and acted and enjoyed it as he does, the religion of Christ, would take the world by storm.” Mr. Bunce did not have much formal education, but he had a great deal of common sense. He was well acquainted with the operation of the federal government and was careful to keep up with all the Washington news. He knew that Congressman Crockett had voted in favor of the $20,000 gift. The farmer informed Crockett, “I shall not vote for you again.” Mr. Bunce told the colonel that Congress’s giving $20,000 to those fire victims was an unconstitutional act. Since Colonel Crockett had voted in favor of the gift, he had voted against the Constitution. Mr. Bunce said, “It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle … Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose.” He added, “The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of Constitution.”
Colonel Crockett recognized the truth of what Mr. Bunce was saying and promised to mend his voting record. Mr. Bunce pledged to help Crockett in his reelection campaign, and the two became close friends. A much wiser Davy Crockett returned to Washington. From that point on, he tried to keep Congress in the business of Constitutional government and out of the business of unconstitutional charity, which can be handled much more wisely by concerned individuals and groups than by a central government.
Hicks, Laurel, and George T. Thompson, Michael R. Lowman, George C. Cochran. American Government and Economics in Christian Perspective. (Pensacola: A Beka Books, 1984), 137.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
President Obama
Based on the latest CBS New York Times poll, those of us who are not supporting Barack Obama might as well stay home on election day. The poll gives Obama a 14 point lead over John McCain in the race for the White House. With three weeks to go, he should be invincible.
Of course, I suspect the poll was conducted among the staff of CBS and the New York Times (with a few outside conservatives thrown in for good measure). Since the other national polls have Obama up only by 5 or so, it is safe to say the CBSNYT poll is dubious at best. So, if you are supporting McCain, forget the polls and make certain you vote.
I still maintain hope that Americans will wake up and realize what they are getting if they elect Obama. Yes, I know, John McCain has his faults (more on this in a future post). But I find it hard to believe that Americans would elect a man like Obama to be the next President. Surely we have more sense than that. Why would you vote for him?
1. In just 4 years (almost 2 of them spent running for President), Obama has earned the title of the most liberal man in the United States Senate. His running mate is number 3 on that list.
2. He has never accomplished anything of importance in his political career either in the Illinois Senate or the United States Senate.
3. He is a committed socialist, a position which has become more apparent in recent days with his remarks about redistributing the wealth.
4. He supports not only abortion but also permitting babies who survive abortions to die (i.e., he opposes protecting infants born alive).
Oh, well, I have listed these elsewhere in this blog so I don't need to go into the entire list again. Suffice it to say, I have hope the American people will wake up and, on election day, NOT elect Obama to the Presidency. I can guarantee you one thing: if Obama is elected, I will be hoarding all the money I have. Forget eating out. Forget sporting events. Forget entertainment venues. Forget traveling. Forget expensive gifts. An Obama Presidency is going to cost each of us a lot of money despite his talking points ("if you make less than $250,000").
Of course, I suspect the poll was conducted among the staff of CBS and the New York Times (with a few outside conservatives thrown in for good measure). Since the other national polls have Obama up only by 5 or so, it is safe to say the CBSNYT poll is dubious at best. So, if you are supporting McCain, forget the polls and make certain you vote.
I still maintain hope that Americans will wake up and realize what they are getting if they elect Obama. Yes, I know, John McCain has his faults (more on this in a future post). But I find it hard to believe that Americans would elect a man like Obama to be the next President. Surely we have more sense than that. Why would you vote for him?
1. In just 4 years (almost 2 of them spent running for President), Obama has earned the title of the most liberal man in the United States Senate. His running mate is number 3 on that list.
2. He has never accomplished anything of importance in his political career either in the Illinois Senate or the United States Senate.
3. He is a committed socialist, a position which has become more apparent in recent days with his remarks about redistributing the wealth.
4. He supports not only abortion but also permitting babies who survive abortions to die (i.e., he opposes protecting infants born alive).
Oh, well, I have listed these elsewhere in this blog so I don't need to go into the entire list again. Suffice it to say, I have hope the American people will wake up and, on election day, NOT elect Obama to the Presidency. I can guarantee you one thing: if Obama is elected, I will be hoarding all the money I have. Forget eating out. Forget sporting events. Forget entertainment venues. Forget traveling. Forget expensive gifts. An Obama Presidency is going to cost each of us a lot of money despite his talking points ("if you make less than $250,000").
Here are just a few web sites which provide some comparisons of the candidates and the party platforms.
- Family Research Council
- Project Vote Smart
- American Family Association
- Platform Comparisons
- Huntley Brown "Why I Can't Vote for Obama" (well written article on Jeremy's blog)
May the Lord have mercy and spare us from an Obama Presidency.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Phoenix - Conclusion
Our Arizona adventure has ended safely. The flight landed 20 minutes early last night and we were home by 1:15 a.m. this morning. Jessi and Mike both worked on Monday so the rest of us stayed with the boys. They were very good. Brody colored some pictures for me which I brought home. Bryson fell asleep and, as it turned out, we left while he was still in bed. I picked Jessi up from her dental office, drover her home, and then we left.
As usual, I overestimated how long it would take us to get to the airport, return the car, ride the shuttle, check-in, and get to the gate. So we left fairly early. As it turned out, we could have hung around with Jessi and the boys for about another hour. Next time I will know better.
Our rental car, a Nissan Rogue, drove very nicely. It had great pickup when you hit the accelerator. We couldn't find real air vents so mom and I in the front froze while Beth and Tina in the back burned. But I enjoyed the car.
Since we arrived early, we checked in then went to the Chili's in the airport. The food was great but I ate too much and regretted it for the rest of the evening. Along with the cold I came down with during the trip, I was miserable most of the flight.
As usual, I overestimated how long it would take us to get to the airport, return the car, ride the shuttle, check-in, and get to the gate. So we left fairly early. As it turned out, we could have hung around with Jessi and the boys for about another hour. Next time I will know better.
Our rental car, a Nissan Rogue, drove very nicely. It had great pickup when you hit the accelerator. We couldn't find real air vents so mom and I in the front froze while Beth and Tina in the back burned. But I enjoyed the car.
Since we arrived early, we checked in then went to the Chili's in the airport. The food was great but I ate too much and regretted it for the rest of the evening. Along with the cold I came down with during the trip, I was miserable most of the flight.
Becky and Elise were awake when we arrived home. They had the house looking very well! Mom and the girls sat up for a while and talked but I bailed for bed.
We really had a great time and are so glad we were able to go. It was nice being with Jessi, Mike, and the boys. It was also a lot of fun going to all the places we did during the week.
Thanks to Mike and Jessi for allowing us to crash at their place. Thanks to Becky and Elise for taking care of the house while we were gone. Thanks to Jeremy and Elise for working out the van situation for our return trip. Thanks also to Sonja for taking my class (and for her humerous text messages afterwards). By the way, daughter, without any preparation for the test and without sitting in my class for one minute, you scored an 80 out of 110 (72%)! Since 10 of the points you missed were for a memory verse, you score is quite good. Out of 20 students in my class, your score surpassed 8 of them! Lastly, thanks to Sarah for taking the tests to work so I could pick them up today and grade them!
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Phoenix - Part 3
The trip is almost over as I pen this entry. Bethany, Tina, and Brody painted some pottery Friday evening and we just found out it is ready early. That's good because it means we can carry it home with us.
We spent about 2 hours at a local park yesterday morning. The kids had a lot of fun. Mike had to go to work at noon so we dropped him off and went home. Jessi, Debbie, and the girls went shopping in the afternoon while I watched the boys. They were very good for almost 2 1/2 hours. There was a 5 minute span in which Brody and Bryson had a confrontation and, as a result, Brody spent some quiet time in his room. As a result, I was evaluated to be a "mean" babysitter.
Last night we went to McDonald's for grandpa's promised trip to the boys. The boys were more interested in playing in the playroom than eating.
Today we went to the Phoenix Zoo. We were there over 3 hours and had a picnic lunch to boot. The zoo is a nice one and we had a good time. Their giraffe display is very nice and we caught them up close while they were eating. Unfortunately, it costs to get into the zoo. That is one thing I really appreciate about the St. Louis Zoo.
That will essentially cover our trip. Tonight is relaxation and tomorrow will be getting ready to leave. We're uncertain how much time to allow since we also have to return a rental car. We are also uncertain exactly how we are going to get our Missouri van to the St. Louis airport to pick us up since we will be arriving VERY VERY late! But we'll work it all out.
I've managed to pick up a cold while we've been here. Yesterday was really a bad one for my sinus. I seem to have improved since noon. I just don't want my head too plugged up when we get on that plane tomorrow evening!
I'm sure the girls will post several pictures and videos once we get back home.
Friday, October 10, 2008
Phoenix - Part 2
After typing the first entry yesterday, we followed Mike, Jessi, and the boys to Jessi's work. Jessi picked up her pay check and introduced us to those who were working. We also saw her work area.
Next we drove to the bank (a U. S. Bank!) where she deposited her check and I made a ATM withdrawal. Then it was off to the pre-school where Brody and Bryson attend. It's a very nice school. Brody waved at some of his friends who were there that day.
The last "work site" was the Desert Ridge 18 AMC Theater which Mike manages. It's a very nice theater with a huge lobby and concession stand. Mike showed us around including taking us into one of the theaters which almost holds 300. What a large room!
The most important thing we did, though (at least from the boys' perspective), was to stop off at the McCormick-Stillman Railroad Park. Jessi's family had never been there so it was an adventure for each of us. The park is free and is quite large. They have old railroad cars in the park which you can check out. There are several pavilions if you want to do a picnic lunch. The park has a large playground facility which the boys totally loved. It includes an area with a water spray so the kids can cool off (it was 98 while we were there).
They have an old time carousel which only costs a $1 to ride. Jessi sat in a non-movable seat with Brody (he doesn't want on the horses). I put Bryson on a horse in front of Brody and stood by him. He was quite excited until we started going around. Then he did his best to get off. So, I gave him to Jessi and he sat on his lap. Not wanting the horse to feel badly, I jumped on and rode the animal for the remainder of the trip! By the time we completed our journey, the horse was tamed and stopped trying to buck me off. That may be the first time I have been on a "horse" for 20+ years.
Lastly, we rode the miniature train they have. The ride goes throughout the park and includes a couple of railroad/pedestrian crossings, 3 or 4 small trestle bridges, and concludes with a tunnel (in which all the kids on board screamed). The entire trip lasted about 11 minutes which is a nice length. All but Mike rode and I estimated the train could carry about 100 people total.
After that it was homeward bound. The folks wanted Taco Bell so I pulled in through the Drive-Thru and picked up some food. I hate Taco Bell but was hungry so I ordered some burritos. Big mistake later on. We went home, ate, and everyone crashed. Last night was spent watching the Dodgers/Phillies game and the CSI premiere (except by the boys and me).
It's mid-day here and we're taking a relaxing day. Brody and I were up before 7. Mike got up around 8 and went to work. Everyone else slept in. I managed to talk the boys into watching some "Tom and Jerry" cartoons which are so much more entertaining than the cartoon shows they make these days. Jessi, mom, and I hit the grocery store. We just finished lunch and now its quiet time.
All in all we are having a great visit!
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Phoenix - Part 1
Just a brief update. Mom, Beth, Tina, and I arrived in Phoenix Tuesday evening. From the time we deplaned, retrieved our luggage, took the shuttle to the rent a car lot (a longer trip than the one at LAX!), picked up our car, and arrived at Jessi's, it took 90 minutes!!! But we made it well.
The flight out was somewhat bumpy for the first 30 minutes due to the St. Louis weather. Mom held my hand the first 10 minutes in such a way that 3 of my fingertips were blood red and the rest of the finger were pale white! Our seating worked out well since the plane wasn't packed. Mom and I had an empty middle seat as did the girls.
I reserved a full size car and they had none left. So they gave us a free upgrade to an SUV (a Rogue?). It does have great pick up and drives fairly well.
Jessi, Mike, and the boys are doing well. The boys are growing up very fast. Actually, Bryson was already asleep so we didn't see him until Wednesday morning. Since we didn't have supper, we ran to the local McDonalds only to find out their 42 oz drink is $2.00! Mom's iced tea turned out to be bad and my 42 oz. Diet Coke ended up being a regular Coke which I could not drink. Oh, well...
Yesterday (Wednesday) the boys went to school, Mike worked, Jessi worked, and the rest of us drove 3 1/2 hours to the Grand Canyon. I saw the Canyon when I was a kid (was it in 1961 or 1964 or both?). For everyone else, this was a first. They were quite impressed as is everyone who sees the Canyon for the first time. The girls took several pictures and video and will likely post them on Facebook after we get home next week. We had a great time and the weather was quite nice.
After a couple of hours, we drove back to Phoenix using a different route. We saw some great scenery but the route added 30 minutes or so to our trip. We finally got back around 6:30 and spent last night chilling out.
Brody is wanting to use the computer to play a game so I am closing this portion of my trip "report". We really have no other siteseeing planned but will certainly take in some sites (probably the zoo).
More later...
Friday, October 3, 2008
Run For Fun??...
Last year Lisa and I decided that we wanted to get into better shape by jogging and decided to work towards running a 5k together. For those of you who are unfamiliar with the mathematics or the event, it's 3.1 miles long and considered an entry level race that people of all ages and athletic abilities can run in with a small amount of training (obviously the amount of training required will be different for each person based upon their overall health and weight). We started jogging on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays and our first run was barely one mile continuous followed by a walk home. Over time, we worked up the distance and continuous time running and found ourselves setting a time goal for the event of an average of 10 minutes per mile.
As the event approached we mentioned it to some of the girls in the family and they decided to walk the course, which is entirely acceptable and done by a lot of participants. It was a little chilly the day of the event but by the end of the first mile we had already begun to shed gloves and hats and had worked up a sweat. By the second mile we had kept our 10 minute pace and were headed back to the start/finish line. We both accomplished our goal of finishing the race without walking and felt good about our times. It was the second time that I had run a 5k, but the first in 10 years and my first at a public event (the other race was an intramural event in college). It was the first time Lisa and I had done a race together (she ran cross country and 5ks in highschool and college). It was a great feeling of accomplishment and we knew we had become healthier and stronger throughout the training.
{I hear you saying "Nice story. What's the point?"
Here's the point:
I know some members of the family have either expressed interest in getting into better shape or have begun to do so over the past few months. With that in mind I am throwing out the following possible activity.
Let's do a 5k together!
Yep, you read that right. I am asking you to work towards participating in a 5k event with me. You can walk it or jog it or do a little bit of both, but the main goal here is to use the event as motivation to get moving and get into better shape. Lisa can't do it this time around or she would (having a three week old baby is a good reason not to do it).
So what's your excuse?
Here's the info you need:
Race Website: http://jinglebellrunstl.kintera.org
Date: Sunday, November 23
Time: Registration begins at 7am. The race begins at 8am.
Location: Holiday Inn Airport West (map)
Cost: Preregsitration - $20 for adults $15 ages 14 and under (not sure if this price will change raceday)
Note: There is also a 1 mile Tot Trot for $5
Proceeds benefit the Arthritis Foundation.
Why this race?
It gives you a little over 7 weeks to get ready for it and it is incredibly flat (no hills at all), so it is one of the easiest in the area to do. Plus, it gets us moving before the winter months and helps us get into better shape which is always a good thing.
There are tons of resources online for plans to get you from couch potatoe to 5k runner in 6 to 8 weeks. Like here and here. (just Google "training for a 5k")
Even if you walk the entire course, you will most likely finish it in an hour or less.
(This means that you can participate in the event, go home and shower and be at church by 10:30 or sooner without much difficulty.)
There are all sorts of people in all sorts of physical shape at this race.
Invite your friends to walk with you.
Challenge your friends to try and run it with you.
Let's do this!
As the event approached we mentioned it to some of the girls in the family and they decided to walk the course, which is entirely acceptable and done by a lot of participants. It was a little chilly the day of the event but by the end of the first mile we had already begun to shed gloves and hats and had worked up a sweat. By the second mile we had kept our 10 minute pace and were headed back to the start/finish line. We both accomplished our goal of finishing the race without walking and felt good about our times. It was the second time that I had run a 5k, but the first in 10 years and my first at a public event (the other race was an intramural event in college). It was the first time Lisa and I had done a race together (she ran cross country and 5ks in highschool and college). It was a great feeling of accomplishment and we knew we had become healthier and stronger throughout the training.
{I hear you saying "Nice story. What's the point?"
Here's the point:
I know some members of the family have either expressed interest in getting into better shape or have begun to do so over the past few months. With that in mind I am throwing out the following possible activity.
Let's do a 5k together!
Yep, you read that right. I am asking you to work towards participating in a 5k event with me. You can walk it or jog it or do a little bit of both, but the main goal here is to use the event as motivation to get moving and get into better shape. Lisa can't do it this time around or she would (having a three week old baby is a good reason not to do it).
So what's your excuse?
Here's the info you need:
Race Website: http://jinglebellrunstl.kintera.org
Date: Sunday, November 23
Time: Registration begins at 7am. The race begins at 8am.
Location: Holiday Inn Airport West (map)
Cost: Preregsitration - $20 for adults $15 ages 14 and under (not sure if this price will change raceday)
Note: There is also a 1 mile Tot Trot for $5
Proceeds benefit the Arthritis Foundation.
Why this race?
It gives you a little over 7 weeks to get ready for it and it is incredibly flat (no hills at all), so it is one of the easiest in the area to do. Plus, it gets us moving before the winter months and helps us get into better shape which is always a good thing.
There are tons of resources online for plans to get you from couch potatoe to 5k runner in 6 to 8 weeks. Like here and here. (just Google "training for a 5k")
Even if you walk the entire course, you will most likely finish it in an hour or less.
(This means that you can participate in the event, go home and shower and be at church by 10:30 or sooner without much difficulty.)
There are all sorts of people in all sorts of physical shape at this race.
Invite your friends to walk with you.
Challenge your friends to try and run it with you.
Let's do this!
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Indiana Vacation
With little time and a forgetful memory, I failed to say anything about our Indiana vacation in this month's newsletter. As most of you know, we drove up to Jane's in northeast Indiana (Butler) on the 24th and returned home on Sunday the 28th. It was a very nice, relaxing trip. I'm certain some of the girls will post pictures on Facebook in the near future.
If you didn't stop you could probably make it in about 7 hours but it took us 8 1/2. We arrived at 9:30 pm their time so the first night's visit was brief. It wsa the first time Elise and I saw Jane and Phil's new home and it is very, very nice. If I recall, there are 3 bedrooms upstairs with a hallway bathroom, a master bathroom, and a bathroom shared by the other two bedrooms. There is a small den (or office) in which they keep their computer. The formal dining room and living room (plus lengthy hallway) separate the master bedroom from the other bedrooms. Finally, you have the kitchen and small eating area. I say small but nothing in this house is small. This eating area contains a table with about 8 chairs plus a rocker, reclinder, two person couch, a fireplace, and a mounted flat screen television.
Off the kitchen is access to what I call a 4 season room, a window/screen area which is basically a playroom for the grandkids. One door leads outdoors and the other onto their deck which faces their woods.
The garage is a two car garage plus a small area for their tractor. The yard looks very nice and the home sets well back from the road (350 of my steps; that's almost 3 minutes for me to walk from the garage to their mail box). Of course, they have a lot of farm land plus the restored barn and silo.
The downstairs of the home is also finished. I saw 2 bedrooms there plus another bathroom. There is a large play area on one side of the stairs and a home theater on the other. The theater area has a couch, some chairs and tables, a fireplace, and a large flat screen projection unit. This room has 4 separate remotes and I found it challenging to turn on the television!
I know I have left things out describing the home but maybe you'll see some snapshots elsewhere. Now resuming our vacation...
Thursday morning I met Phil in Butler and went to the school district admin offices where he works. In the building next door, Phil introduced me to some people heading up a new program in the district called "The Crossing". These folks are teaching drop outs who, in some cases, they find on the streets and bring them in. The program is one of President Bush's "faith based initiatives" and heavily uses the Bible. One of the men I met explained he had formerly led the youth in a local church but was now helping in this effort. The school board has given its blessing to this program and to the use of the Bible to help these kids. This IS a public school! I was quite impressed by the entire program. Has anyone heard of this type of program going on in Missouri?
We basically chilled out most of Thursday and just talked. On Friday morning, the schools were off so Phil was home all day. Debbie, the girls, and I went to Sechlers to pick up some pickles. They are as good as ever. Later in the day, Autumn and her four kids dropped in. Brett and Katie also showed up with their three (including the 7 month old twins). Of course, Laura and her two children live with Jane and Phil. It was pretty wild. I grilled burgers, dogs, and brats on their grilling pit. The pit utilizes wood and charcoal and has NO flame/heat adjusting device. I burned virtually everything. At least I don't believe anyone found any pink on the inside.
That afternoon, Phil drove the tractor around his property and his brother's across the street (presently restored to a natural wetlands). He pulled a hay wagon and most of the kids and I rode on the wagon. The weather was great and the tour was quite interesting. Lots of different animals, fowls, plants, etc.
On Saturday morning, Laura went to Autumn's and brought back Sydney and Simon to spend the night. Greg, Kelli, and Ian stopped by for several hours as well. Early in the day, our troop went back to Sechlers to buy MORE pickles then went into Grabill to check out the antique store. We were there for about 45 minutes but made no purchases. We also stopped at the Old Church Shoppes in Spencerville and Elise bought something. Finally, before returning to Jane's, we stopped in at Miller's Service Station in Spencerville to get a drink. Some of you will remember the place. It's where we bought fountain drinks many years ago but couldn't drink them because they tasted like eggs! This time we bought bottled drinks.
That was pretty much our trip. Our intention was to hang around the house and visit and, with few exceptions, that is what we did. It was nice to see my sister again and the area (my first visit in 5 years). Maybe we can make the trip a little more frequently in the future.
Thanks to Phil and Jane for allowing us to stay with them. We really had a great time.
If you didn't stop you could probably make it in about 7 hours but it took us 8 1/2. We arrived at 9:30 pm their time so the first night's visit was brief. It wsa the first time Elise and I saw Jane and Phil's new home and it is very, very nice. If I recall, there are 3 bedrooms upstairs with a hallway bathroom, a master bathroom, and a bathroom shared by the other two bedrooms. There is a small den (or office) in which they keep their computer. The formal dining room and living room (plus lengthy hallway) separate the master bedroom from the other bedrooms. Finally, you have the kitchen and small eating area. I say small but nothing in this house is small. This eating area contains a table with about 8 chairs plus a rocker, reclinder, two person couch, a fireplace, and a mounted flat screen television.
Off the kitchen is access to what I call a 4 season room, a window/screen area which is basically a playroom for the grandkids. One door leads outdoors and the other onto their deck which faces their woods.
The garage is a two car garage plus a small area for their tractor. The yard looks very nice and the home sets well back from the road (350 of my steps; that's almost 3 minutes for me to walk from the garage to their mail box). Of course, they have a lot of farm land plus the restored barn and silo.
The downstairs of the home is also finished. I saw 2 bedrooms there plus another bathroom. There is a large play area on one side of the stairs and a home theater on the other. The theater area has a couch, some chairs and tables, a fireplace, and a large flat screen projection unit. This room has 4 separate remotes and I found it challenging to turn on the television!
I know I have left things out describing the home but maybe you'll see some snapshots elsewhere. Now resuming our vacation...
Thursday morning I met Phil in Butler and went to the school district admin offices where he works. In the building next door, Phil introduced me to some people heading up a new program in the district called "The Crossing". These folks are teaching drop outs who, in some cases, they find on the streets and bring them in. The program is one of President Bush's "faith based initiatives" and heavily uses the Bible. One of the men I met explained he had formerly led the youth in a local church but was now helping in this effort. The school board has given its blessing to this program and to the use of the Bible to help these kids. This IS a public school! I was quite impressed by the entire program. Has anyone heard of this type of program going on in Missouri?
We basically chilled out most of Thursday and just talked. On Friday morning, the schools were off so Phil was home all day. Debbie, the girls, and I went to Sechlers to pick up some pickles. They are as good as ever. Later in the day, Autumn and her four kids dropped in. Brett and Katie also showed up with their three (including the 7 month old twins). Of course, Laura and her two children live with Jane and Phil. It was pretty wild. I grilled burgers, dogs, and brats on their grilling pit. The pit utilizes wood and charcoal and has NO flame/heat adjusting device. I burned virtually everything. At least I don't believe anyone found any pink on the inside.
That afternoon, Phil drove the tractor around his property and his brother's across the street (presently restored to a natural wetlands). He pulled a hay wagon and most of the kids and I rode on the wagon. The weather was great and the tour was quite interesting. Lots of different animals, fowls, plants, etc.
On Saturday morning, Laura went to Autumn's and brought back Sydney and Simon to spend the night. Greg, Kelli, and Ian stopped by for several hours as well. Early in the day, our troop went back to Sechlers to buy MORE pickles then went into Grabill to check out the antique store. We were there for about 45 minutes but made no purchases. We also stopped at the Old Church Shoppes in Spencerville and Elise bought something. Finally, before returning to Jane's, we stopped in at Miller's Service Station in Spencerville to get a drink. Some of you will remember the place. It's where we bought fountain drinks many years ago but couldn't drink them because they tasted like eggs! This time we bought bottled drinks.
That was pretty much our trip. Our intention was to hang around the house and visit and, with few exceptions, that is what we did. It was nice to see my sister again and the area (my first visit in 5 years). Maybe we can make the trip a little more frequently in the future.
Thanks to Phil and Jane for allowing us to stay with them. We really had a great time.
Monday, September 29, 2008
The Patriarch's Pen: Election 2008, Article 1
I know politics and families do not often mix. Politics is, likely, a subject I should avoid in a family blog or newsletter. Yet, this year’s Presidential election greatly concerns me. Therefore, I want to express my opinion (albeit briefly) about the various candidates just to provide the “Patriarch’s” thoughts on the matter.
This entry concerns Senator Obama. The November newsletter, which will be published just before the election, will discuss Senator McCain as well as 3rd party candidates. Those entries will appear on the Wild Walker World blog during the early party of October.
Why I will NOT Vote for Senator Barack Obama
The following are many of the reasons why I will not and can not support Barack Obama for the Presidency. Apart from item #1, the reasons are listed in no specific order.
1. Senator Obama supports the killing of the unborn. Senator Obama not only supports the pro-death cause, he goes far beyond where most abortionists go. Senator Obama supports partial birth abortions. Furthermore, he supports not caring for aborted babies who survive the abortion attempt. He has denied the latter charge but the facts are clear that is his position. He fears caring for such children will result in a “slippery slope” discussion which might end abortions.
Personally, I need no other reasons than that. I will never vote for any candidate of any party for any office at any time when I know they support killing unborn children. How can I trust my life and my family’s lives to the hands of someone who has no problem murdering these infants?
2. Senator Obama will raise taxes. I know Senator Obama promises a tax cut to everyone who makes under $250,000. But I have also heard he will remove the cap on Social Security taxes, eliminate the Bush tax cuts, keep the death tax, and raise sales taxes. Furthermore, he’ll need money for his national health care program as well as other plans he has. He may send you $1000 as he has promised but I suspect that will not turn out to be a cut overall but just a slight reduction in an overall increase.
3. Senator Obama will pull out of the Middle East. Great, given Russia is working with Venezuela and Al Queda still intends to destroy us. Let’s bring the battle to our own front yards.
4. Senator Obama will reduce the military. He has especially noted his attempts to cut the missile defense technology. Well, President Clinton also cut back the military when he was in office. So, when we needed a military to fight in the Middle East, we had to spend tons of money to rebuild it. A reduced military in light of worldwide terrorism is stupid.
5. Senator Obama believes in redistribution of wealth. His “Robin Hood” philosophy of “taking from the rich and giving to the poor” has been clearly documented. This is not only Robin Hood’s slogan; it is also the slogan of socialism and communism. Where is the motivation for those who earn a lot of money and already invest that money into the lives of others via the businesses they run to continue to make money when the Senator and Congress intends to give it to those who will not work? Furthermore, where is the motivation by those who do not work to seek work when the government is giving them the money from the wealthy? I am not wealthy but I also don’t want the government giving me someone else’s money.
6. Senator Obama will raise the capital gains tax. Increasing capital gains will especially hurt small businesses. Such an increase will force companies to: (1) increase the price of their products (see 2 above), (2) reduce employee pay (see 2 above), (3) replace employees with cheaper foreign labor, (4) reduce staff (i.e., layoff), (5) any combination of the above or (6) close up their business. Furthermore, an increase in the capital gains will reduce the incentive to start new businesses (e.g., companies to find alternative sources of energy).
7. Senator Obama supports national health care. He wants health care for everyone, a health care system run by the government. Here is another socialist program we can not afford. Are the rich paying for this in addition to giving their money to others? Or, will there be some type of new tax (go back and reread #2) to help fund this program? Furthermore, name one program the federal government created and ran which was successful? Think about your trips to the local License Bureau or to a Social Security office. Do you really want your health care funded and directed by the federal government?
8. Senator Obama opposes drilling off shore and in Alaska. He supports alternative forms of energy as does any sane person. But, like it or not, we MUST have oil for the near term. However, he will not support drilling off our coasts or in ANWR meaning we must keep buying from foreign nations including some which are becoming less friendly to the United States. He would prefer taxing the “wealthy” oil companies and, somehow, force them to find alternative sources of energy. If additional taxes are placed on oil, the oil companies will pass them on to you by increased prices (see item 2 above). Furthermore, why is it the OIL companies’ responsibility to find ALTERNATIVE energy sources? They are in the OIL business. We need new businesses to deal with that problem. Oh, I forgot, the increase in the capital gains tax will make new business ventures more difficult.
9. Senator Obama has no proven leadership characteristics and has accomplished nothing in the political world. In neither the Illinois Senate nor the United States Senate, Barack Obama has done nothing of importance. Many of his votes in the Illinois Senate were “present” rather than “yes” or “no”. A leader has to be able to take a stand and Senator Obama has not proven he has that ability.
10. Senator Obama has questionable personal ties. His life and political background has been repeatedly tainted by the close associates he has had: hate spewing preachers, a known and proud terrorist, a crook, Wall Street tycoons, etc. Who will he have to advise him while in the White House?
11. Senator Obama will appoint liberal justices to the Supreme Court. One or two justices will certainly retire during the next administration, maybe more. Senator Obama will appoint and the Democrat Congress (see # 12 below) will approve justices that are liberal in philosophy. This will result in a Supreme Court which creates law rather than interprets law and will do so long after Senator Obama is out of office.
12. Senator Obama would put the Federal government under the control of one party. His election, barring some miracles in the House and Senate races, will give the Democrats firm control of the legislative and executive branches of government. Given the far left philosophy of Senator Obama (called the most liberal man in Congress; by the way, Vice President candidate Joe Biden is listed as the 3rd most liberal man in Congress) as well as the far left bent of many in Congress, such a scenario will result in a far left turn for our nation, a turn from which we may never recover.
In my opinion, Senator Barack Obama is a very dangerous individual for those who love our country and the freedoms we have.
This entry concerns Senator Obama. The November newsletter, which will be published just before the election, will discuss Senator McCain as well as 3rd party candidates. Those entries will appear on the Wild Walker World blog during the early party of October.
Why I will NOT Vote for Senator Barack Obama
The following are many of the reasons why I will not and can not support Barack Obama for the Presidency. Apart from item #1, the reasons are listed in no specific order.
1. Senator Obama supports the killing of the unborn. Senator Obama not only supports the pro-death cause, he goes far beyond where most abortionists go. Senator Obama supports partial birth abortions. Furthermore, he supports not caring for aborted babies who survive the abortion attempt. He has denied the latter charge but the facts are clear that is his position. He fears caring for such children will result in a “slippery slope” discussion which might end abortions.
Personally, I need no other reasons than that. I will never vote for any candidate of any party for any office at any time when I know they support killing unborn children. How can I trust my life and my family’s lives to the hands of someone who has no problem murdering these infants?
2. Senator Obama will raise taxes. I know Senator Obama promises a tax cut to everyone who makes under $250,000. But I have also heard he will remove the cap on Social Security taxes, eliminate the Bush tax cuts, keep the death tax, and raise sales taxes. Furthermore, he’ll need money for his national health care program as well as other plans he has. He may send you $1000 as he has promised but I suspect that will not turn out to be a cut overall but just a slight reduction in an overall increase.
3. Senator Obama will pull out of the Middle East. Great, given Russia is working with Venezuela and Al Queda still intends to destroy us. Let’s bring the battle to our own front yards.
4. Senator Obama will reduce the military. He has especially noted his attempts to cut the missile defense technology. Well, President Clinton also cut back the military when he was in office. So, when we needed a military to fight in the Middle East, we had to spend tons of money to rebuild it. A reduced military in light of worldwide terrorism is stupid.
5. Senator Obama believes in redistribution of wealth. His “Robin Hood” philosophy of “taking from the rich and giving to the poor” has been clearly documented. This is not only Robin Hood’s slogan; it is also the slogan of socialism and communism. Where is the motivation for those who earn a lot of money and already invest that money into the lives of others via the businesses they run to continue to make money when the Senator and Congress intends to give it to those who will not work? Furthermore, where is the motivation by those who do not work to seek work when the government is giving them the money from the wealthy? I am not wealthy but I also don’t want the government giving me someone else’s money.
6. Senator Obama will raise the capital gains tax. Increasing capital gains will especially hurt small businesses. Such an increase will force companies to: (1) increase the price of their products (see 2 above), (2) reduce employee pay (see 2 above), (3) replace employees with cheaper foreign labor, (4) reduce staff (i.e., layoff), (5) any combination of the above or (6) close up their business. Furthermore, an increase in the capital gains will reduce the incentive to start new businesses (e.g., companies to find alternative sources of energy).
7. Senator Obama supports national health care. He wants health care for everyone, a health care system run by the government. Here is another socialist program we can not afford. Are the rich paying for this in addition to giving their money to others? Or, will there be some type of new tax (go back and reread #2) to help fund this program? Furthermore, name one program the federal government created and ran which was successful? Think about your trips to the local License Bureau or to a Social Security office. Do you really want your health care funded and directed by the federal government?
8. Senator Obama opposes drilling off shore and in Alaska. He supports alternative forms of energy as does any sane person. But, like it or not, we MUST have oil for the near term. However, he will not support drilling off our coasts or in ANWR meaning we must keep buying from foreign nations including some which are becoming less friendly to the United States. He would prefer taxing the “wealthy” oil companies and, somehow, force them to find alternative sources of energy. If additional taxes are placed on oil, the oil companies will pass them on to you by increased prices (see item 2 above). Furthermore, why is it the OIL companies’ responsibility to find ALTERNATIVE energy sources? They are in the OIL business. We need new businesses to deal with that problem. Oh, I forgot, the increase in the capital gains tax will make new business ventures more difficult.
9. Senator Obama has no proven leadership characteristics and has accomplished nothing in the political world. In neither the Illinois Senate nor the United States Senate, Barack Obama has done nothing of importance. Many of his votes in the Illinois Senate were “present” rather than “yes” or “no”. A leader has to be able to take a stand and Senator Obama has not proven he has that ability.
10. Senator Obama has questionable personal ties. His life and political background has been repeatedly tainted by the close associates he has had: hate spewing preachers, a known and proud terrorist, a crook, Wall Street tycoons, etc. Who will he have to advise him while in the White House?
11. Senator Obama will appoint liberal justices to the Supreme Court. One or two justices will certainly retire during the next administration, maybe more. Senator Obama will appoint and the Democrat Congress (see # 12 below) will approve justices that are liberal in philosophy. This will result in a Supreme Court which creates law rather than interprets law and will do so long after Senator Obama is out of office.
12. Senator Obama would put the Federal government under the control of one party. His election, barring some miracles in the House and Senate races, will give the Democrats firm control of the legislative and executive branches of government. Given the far left philosophy of Senator Obama (called the most liberal man in Congress; by the way, Vice President candidate Joe Biden is listed as the 3rd most liberal man in Congress) as well as the far left bent of many in Congress, such a scenario will result in a far left turn for our nation, a turn from which we may never recover.
In my opinion, Senator Barack Obama is a very dangerous individual for those who love our country and the freedoms we have.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Have You Looked Up Lately?
As usual, I was out early on my morning walk today but, for some reason, I looked up into the sky as I began my trek. That's when I realized its been a while since I've looked up!
The moon was waning (maybe it was waxing; it wasn't full, that's for sure!) and, even with all the city lights, you could see several stars. It was quite an impressive sight. Every now and then during my walk I would glance up for a couple of seconds. When I reached home, I spent a couple of minutes just standing outside, gazing at the sky.
O LORD our Lord, how excellent is thy name in all the earth! who hast set thy glory above the heavens. ... When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained; What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him? ... O LORD our Lord, how excellent is thy name in all the earth! (Psalm 8:1,
3-4, 9)
Perhaps it would be wise for each of us to take a timeout once a day. Instead of looking within ourselves and dwelling on all of our pains, failures, and shattered dreams, let's look up. Instead of looking around at our financial situation, our neighborhood concerns, and our nation's woes, let's look up. Let's spend a few moments each day looking up at the sky and pondering the One who is worthy of the glory those evening/morning lights declare.
Friday, September 19, 2008
Patriotism per Obama/Biden
Do you want to be a patriotic American? Then PAY MORE TAXES! That’s what Democratic Vice President nominee Senator Joe Biden told us yesterday.
It's time to be patriotic ... time to jump in, time to be part of the deal, time to help get America out of the rut.
I’m sorry, sir. I have no interest in giving more of the money I work hard for to the government which has no idea how to use it. Helping others who have need is great and I do so via the various charities to which I contribute (Senator Biden, by the way, averages less than $400 a year to charitable contributions despite the fact he makes a lot more money than almost any one reading this blog). You, Senator, and your running mate, Senator Barack Obama, want us to give you more of the money which we have EARNED so you can give it to anyone, including those who won’t get off the couch and do anything! And you have the gall to say that’s patriotic?
If you are reading this blog and are planning on voting for Barack Obama and Joe Biden then I ask you take some time and ask yourself why. Ok, you don’t like President Bush. Well, he’s not running. You don’t like the Republicans. Ok, but the Democrats presently control both houses of Congress and are the ones doing nothing to solve any of the problems facing our country. You don’t like John McCain. Ok, but is THAT the reason you are going to vote for Obama? There are other candidates running. I ask you to seriously consider and rethink why you really want Obama. Do you have any idea what he intends to do if elected?
I stumbled across an interesting Internet site last night entitled BarackObamaTest.com. You answer several questions on a variety of subjects and your answers are compared to Senator Obama’s positions. The site doesn’t tell you for whom to vote. It simply returns a value indicating how close Barack Obama is to your position. I took the test and Senator Obama and I agreed on 4% of the issues.
Whether I like President Bush or the Republicans, I will not cast my vote for a candidate which agrees with me on the issues only 4% of the time!
That, Senator Biden, is patriotic!
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
"People Who Get Things Done"
Before class last evening, I was chatting with another professor in the hallway at the school. He commented that he found it interesting that each party was getting a boost from people who are great at giving speeches (Obama, Palin). He said our country needed "people who get things done" rather than those who can give good speeches.
Actually, I think we need leaders who do both. They need to be able to get things done yet also able to communicate what their plans are for this country to the people. I commented to the professor that, in this race, the nominees, for the most part, are people who have gotten things done.
Think about it. Whether you agree or disagree with their policies or actions:
- Senator Joe Biden is a person who has gotten things done.
- Senator John McCain is a person who has gotten things done.
- Governor Sarah Palin is a person who has gotten things done.
- Senator Barack Obama ... hasn't accomplished one thing worthy of note either in the Illinois state house or in Washington.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
