9/11 - One Nation, Under God - Repost

Thought I would repost an entry from 9/11 of last year...



One of my favorite bloggers (and fellow political junkie) Lynn Sebourn had an entry today about Todd Beamer and his role in Flight 93's "takeover" by the brave passengers. It reminded me of my own 9/11 story.

We all know Todd Beamer's famous phrase "Let's Roll" before the ultimate crash, but do we remember his other last words with the 911 Operator who stayed with him on the phone before the crash?

I was living in Wheaton Illinois on 9/11. I had just dropped off my children at their schools (both Christian based), and was in front of the building where my first meeting of the day was located when I heard the news on the radio. The next few minutes were a blur, I went to my meeting but we were all too numb to discuss anything...we just sat there listening to the radio.

I called my children's schools and they were prepared and wanted to keep the children all there together. So I went to the one place where I knew I would be around people who were like me, numb. The Wheaton Sport Center, my home away from home. We sat in the lounge watching the events unfold, glued to the screen and thankful we weren't alone, thankful we didn't have a family member on one of those planes or in the World Trade Center.

Then we watched the Flight 93 story unfold and listened to Todd Beamer, one of our own, as he said the Lord's Prayer to the 911 Operator and we knew God was with him.
We couldn't be prouder at that moment. You see he was a Wheaton College graduate, home of another famous alumnus, Billy Graham. This college was one that held it's students to a higher, Christian standard. Todd Beamer was truly one of God's warriors.

So people may say God doesn't have a place in today's society, I say thank God it does...and I hope that we always stay "One Nation, Under God". We certainly need more people like Todd Beamer, honed by a Faith that supercedes self.

Populism & Personal Responsibility

Populism - A political ideology that emphasizes government's role as an agent of the common man, the worker, and the farmer, in struggles against concentrated wealth and power.

Personal Responsibility - Ones ability to take care of oneself by means of, keeping healthy, managing ones emotions, keeping a sound mind, treating yourself with respect, etc.

One of my dearest friends is a journalist by trade and by passion. By all measures, most people would put him in the usual, populist-leaning main stream media category. And I guess, in a way, they would be correct. But he also makes me think too. The other day we almost came to blows over a heated discussion on personal responsibility and healthcare. He made me feel like Attila the Hun for thinking that people have a personal responsibility in their lifestyle choices that ultimately lead to expensive healthcare solutions...he even suggested that I was not a real Christian for feeling this way. That hit a nerve.

In a perfect and loving world, I think that all people deserve healthcare, protection from harm, protection from pain and suffering and the ability to live happily ever after. Peace on earth is on that list too.

But the question of the day still remains...WHO/WHAT is going to give that to you and HOW are they going to do it...and at what COST. Let's explore this further.

WHO/WHAT - Today's Populists believe that the government should be taking care of all these needs. One-stop shopping of sorts. Okay, centralizing decision making can be a good thing. But WHO is making those decisions? People who are poor, underprivileged, farmers, common men? No, usually it is people in the wealth and power business who are doing what they THINK those segments of the society need. I think this is the total irony of the Populist movement. Have you ever been poor and had some well meaning rich person give you a microwave when you really just needed your electricity turned back on? Yep, that is the type of cluelessness we are talking about here. But heck, the fella got a microwave that he can sell on the streets for what he really needs...but there is probably a law (or will be) that will fine him or put him in jail for doing that. My bad.

HOW - Today's Populists believe the end justifies the means as long as we are helping the poor, underprivileged, farmers, commen men etc. We (read government) know what is best for you, so here are some more laws to make sure you follow them or go to jail/get fined...for your own good of course. Have you ever had a judge/policeman/govt official find some law to spank you with so that you completely understand what he/she thinks is good for you? Populist empowered legislators LOVE making rules and laws to make people behave, because everyone knows the poor/common man just can't be trusted to make the "right" decisions or they wouldn't be poor/common, now would they? I really would love to call some of these "do-gooders" out as a plantation owner one of these days.

COST - What cost are you going to pay for having all of your needs taken care of? Freedom....people telling you how to live your life, and making sure you do it that way. Money...people taking most of your paycheck to do what they think is the best use of it. Personal Initiative...why should you have a new thought, idea or self-help plan, everything is being done for you. Will we finally lose the humanity that we were trying to propagate in the first place?

I know I am starting to sound like Ayn Rand these days, but there are unintended consequences for every new law that is passed. Personal Responsibility must make its way back into our legislatures nationwide. I want all the things that the Populists want, I just disagree with the WHO/WHAT/HOW/COST factors involved. And yes, as a Christian, I feel that God is okay with that.

Uncle Sam's Plantation

Star Parker wrote the book Uncle Sam's Plantation

I saw this gal in 2001 at a Dupage County woman's luncheon, I just love her perspective.

By Star Parker:

Six years ago I wrote a book called Uncle Sam's Plantation. I wrote the book to tell my own story of what I saw living inside the welfare state and my own transformation out of it.

I said in that book that indeed there are two Americas -- a poor America on socialism and a wealthy America on capitalism.

I talked about government programs like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training (JOBS), Emergency Assistance to Needy Families with Children (EANF), Section 8 Housing, and Food Stamps.

A vast sea of perhaps well-intentioned government programs, all initially set into motion in the 1960s, that were going to lift the nation's poor out of poverty.

A benevolent Uncle Sam welcomed mostly poor black Americans onto the government plantation. Those who accepted the invitation switched mind sets from "How do I take care of myself?" to "What do I have to do to stay on the plantation?"

Instead of solving economic problems, government welfare socialism created monstrous moral and spiritual problems -- the kind of problems that are inevitable when individuals turn responsibility for their lives over to others.

The legacy of American socialism is our blighted inner cities, dysfunctional inner city schools, and broken black families.

Through God's grace, I found my way out. It was then that I understood what freedom meant and how great this country is.

I had the privilege of working on welfare reform in 1996, passed by a Republican Congress and signed 50 percent.

I thought we were on the road to moving socialism out of our poor black communities and replacing it with! wealth- producing American capitalism.

But, incredibly, we are going in the opposite direction.

Instead of poor America on socialism becoming more like rich American on capitalism, rich America on capitalism is becoming like poor America on socialism.

Uncle Sam has welcomed our banks onto the plantation and they have said, "Thank you, Suh."

Now, instead of thinking about what creative things need to be done to serve customers, they are thinking about what they have to tell Massah in order to get their cash.

There is some kind of irony that this is all happening under our first black president on the 200th anniversary of the birthday of Abraham Lincoln.

Worse, socialism seems to be the element of our new young president. And maybe even more troubling, our corporate executives seem happy to move onto the plantation.

In an op-ed on the opinion page of the Washington Post, Mr. Obama is clear that the goal of his trillion dollar spending plan is much more than short term economic stimulus.

"This plan is more than a prescription for short-term spending -- it's a strategy for America 's long-term growth and opportunity in areas such as renewable energy, healthcare, and education."

Perhaps more incredibly, Obama seems to think that government taking over an economy is a new idea. Or that massive growth in government can take place "with unprecedented transparency and accountability."

Yes, sir, we heard it from Jimmy Carter when he created the Department of Energy, the SynfuelsCorporation, and the Department of Education.

Or how about the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 -- The War on Poverty -- which President Johnson said "...does not merely expand old programs or improve what is already being done. It charts a new course. It strikes at the causes, not just the consequences of poverty."

Trillions of dollars later, black poverty is the same. But black families are not, with triple the incidence of single-parent homes and out-of-wedlock births.

It's not complicated. Americans can accept Barack Obama's invitation to move onto the plantation. Or they can choose personal responsibility and freedom.

Does anyone really need to think about what the choice should be?

"The trouble with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."

The Cost of "Free" - Part 2

When I listen to the libs talk about the Public Option as the end all be all solution for the healthcare reform movement, I am reminded of all the reasons why I don't trust government to do the job...Unfortunately, I also don't trust big business for almost the same reasons.

From Wikipedia:

Lack of economic freedom explains 71% of corruption. Below is a list of examples of governmental activities that limit economic freedom, create opportunities for corruption (incentives for individuals and/or companies to buy privileges or favors worth of money, from politicians or officials) and have in recent economic history also lead to corruption:

Licenses, permits etc.

Foreign trade restrictions. Officials may then, e.g., sell import or export permits.

Credit bailouts.

State ownership of utilities and natural resources. 'In analyzing India's state-run irrigation system, professor Shyam Kamath - - wrote: Public-sector irrigation systems everywhere are typically plagued with cost and time overruns, endemic inefficiency, chronic excess demands, and widespread corruption and rent-seeking.'

Access to loans at below-market rates. In Chile, '$4.6 billion was awarded to government banks in direct subsidies through "soft" loans' between 1940 and 1973.

Size of public sector

It is a controversial issue whether the size of the public sector per se results in corruption. As mentioned above, low degree of economic freedom explains 71% of corruption. The actual share may be even greater, as also past regulation affects the current level of corruption due to the slowth of cultural changes (e.g., it takes time for corrupted officials to adjust to changes in economic freedom).[17] The size of public sector in terms of taxation is only one component of economic un-freedom, so the empirical studies on economic freedom do not directly answer this question.

Extensive and diverse public spending is, in itself, inherently at risk of cronyism, kickbacks and embezzlement. Complicated regulations and arbitrary, unsupervised official conduct exacerbate the problem. This is one argument for privatization and deregulation. Opponents of privatization see the argument as ideological. The argument that corruption necessarily follows from the opportunity is weakened by the existence of countries with low to non-existent corruption but large public sectors, like the Nordic countries.[18] However, these countries score high on the Ease of Doing Business Index, due to good and often simple regulations, and have rule of law firmly established. Therefore, due to their lack of corruption in the first place, they can run large public sectors without inducing political corruption.

Like other governmental economic activities, also privatization, such as in the sale of government-owned property, is particularly at the risk of cronyism. Privatizations in Russia, Latin America, and East Germany were accompanied by large scale corruption during the sale of the state owned companies. Those with political connections unfairly gained large wealth, which has discredited privatization in these regions. While media have reported widely the grand corruption that accompanied the sales, studies have argued that in addition to increased operating efficiency, daily petty corruption is, or would be, larger without privatization, and that corruption is more prevalent in non-privatized sectors. Furthermore, there is evidence to suggest that extralegal and unofficial activities are more prevalent in countries that privatized less.

There is the counter point, however, that oligarchy industries can be quite corrupt ( "competition" like collusive price-fixing, pressuring dependent businesses, etc. ), and only by having a portion of the market owned by someone other than that oligarchy, i.e. public sector, can keep them in line ( if the public sector gas company is making money & selling gas for 1/2 of the price of the private sector companies... the private sector companies won't be able to simultaneously gouge to that degree & keep their customers: the competition keeps them in line ). Private sector corruption can increase the poverty/helplessness of the population, so it can affect government corruption, in the long-term.

In the European Union, the principle of subsidiarity is applied: a government service should be provided by the lowest, most local authority that can competently provide it. An effect is that distribution of funds into multiple instances discourages embezzlement, because even small sums missing will be noticed. In contrast, in a centralized authority, even minute proportions of public funds can be large sums of money.

The Cost of "Free" - Part 1

Boy, I certainly didn't realize how long it has been since my last post. A trip to the coast and a temporary move to Chicagoland can certainly put a crimp in a person's schedule.

But no matter how little I have been able to follow news etc., you can't escape the Health Care Reform discussion (and boy do I love the Town hall clips!).

As I have mentioned previously, I am very fortunate to have some brilliant friends on both sides of the aisle. In fact, if this reform issue were hashed out in a think tank with all of them in the room...I would be confident in the results and would vote "yes" for their solutions. In a perfect world, I would imagine our President would have that same thought process.

Unfortunately, the flaw in this current administration's solution is the "government" factor. Government structure is like the human body. Most everything has a purpose, functions don't have options (and if you come up with one, it usually messes up something else) and when you add weight to it...everything starts going to hell.

Case in point. I just finished a two-day ordeal getting an $18 PO Box. I did the transaction online two months ago then called and asked them to give me a PO Box # so that I could forward appropriate mail (which it appears is not a normal option). Got into town, stopped in to get my key...didn't have the required paperwork. Came in the following day with what I thought was the right paperwork (it wasn't)...was sent away again. At this point, I walk outside and said to myself "to hell with it" and walked back in to ask for another box and deal with the refund later or eat it because of the paperwork involved with that process. Time is money and the insanity of the process wasn't worth my own sanity.

Folks, I was dealing with an $18 PO Box in a relatively small town in BHO's backyard. Why in the world would I want to deal with a government-run health care system when the stakes are higher?

So I guess those people who are advocating for "Free" healthcare are either used to people messing with their time and money, they color in the lines and never ask for "options" on anything or they have so much time and money that they don't worry about those silly little things.

Me, I have to earn a living and I have never colored inside the lines. "Free" doesn't work for me when the government is involved in the process. Let's start thinking of other solutions.

It Matters Who Governs - Monteagle

Many of you have read previous posts where I have ranted about the ineptness of my local government...especially when it came to infrastructure issues. We have had a complete systemic failure in our sewer treatment functions, we have run out of water and we have had horrendous audit reports with issues that haven't been corrected in 20 years. Now if that isn't bad leadership, I really don't what is. But hey, we allowed it to happen. It does matter who governs folks.

Fast forward to the elections of 2008, one woman decided to run for city council. She wanted to make a difference in the community that she loved. She was elected in spite of some of the local naysayers. She was off-handedly given the task of getting grants for the town. What harm could she do there. They didn't know Marilyn Nixon.

Identifying needs, finding grant money, getting the paperwork done and taking the steps necessary to get those grants is an arduous task even for the most functional of local governments. But Marilyn doggedly pursued the courses of action to make it happen. She fortunately had two, sometimes three other votes on the council that saw the logic and the possibilities. It does matter who governs folks.

Yesterday, the state announced that Monteagle was #1 on the list for Clean Water Stimulus money in Tennessee. Our local government had failed so badly at providing vital services, that we beat out all the other deserving local governments in Tennessee for this top dog spot in Obama's "free" cash extravaganza.

But no matter how I feel politically about all this Stimulus bs, I say "Go Girl" to Marilyn Nixon. Sometimes it takes a woman to get the job done. It does matter who governs.

Tennessee is preparing to spend $77 million in stimulus money on clean water and drinking water projects, including several local ones.

Topping the state's priority list of more than 300 projects are eight Southeast Tennessee water improvement projects for which state officials are offering quick funding opportunities.

For drinking water funding, the Ocoee Utility District in Polk and Bradley counties, the Big Creek Utility District in Grundy County and South Pittsburg in Marion County have chances to get a total of a little more than $10 million.

For clean water projects, Monteagle, serving Grundy, Marion and Franklin counties; Ocoee Utility District; Benton in Polk County; plus Cleveland and Athens may receive more than $14.6 million.

Tisha Calabrese-Benton, spokeswoman for the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, said money is allocated through the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. She said the money will be combined with state funds for low-interest loans and grants.

If local communities decline the money or can't make deadlines, other communities will be considered according to the state's priority list, Ms. Calabrese-Benton said.

The federal money -- $57 million for sewer facilities and more than $20 million for planning, design and construction of drinking water facilities -- must be obligated by Feb. 17, 2010, state officials said. Utilities, water authorities or communities must have a signed construction contract or must have begun construction by the same date.

Many area utility officials could not be reached for comment Thursday, but Ocoee Utility District Manager Tim Lawson said his district has decided to put on hold a plan to build a water treatment system. The $1.6 million in funding will go to another project.

"We are proceeding with the drinking water application," Mr. Lawson said.

Two planned extensions will serve several hundred homes in Polk and Bradley counties, he said.

"We just don't think it's feasible for us to be able to start the (sewer) work by February, which we would have to do," Mr. Lawson said.

The state also is set to receive $458,806 to implement water quality management planning projects, including grants to three Tennessee development districts to conduct green infrastructure needs analyses.

Racism

Yes, I believe we have finally come full circle. Where the color of a person's skin dictates special privileges or extra derision. We also seem to be moving into class warfare as well. When times are tough, the devil himself comes out to play. God help us all to see things with love instead of hate.

I received this email recently from a very passionate libertarian, I thought it was an interesting perspective on racism, liberalism and capitalism.

Fellow Americans,

Please know: I am Black; I grew up in the segregated South. I did not
vote for Barack Obama; I wrote in Ron Paul's name as my choice for
president. Most importantly, I am not race conscious. I do not require a
Black president to know that I am a person of worth, and that life is
worth living. I do not require a Black president to love the ideal of
America .

I cannot join you in your celebration. I feel no elation. There is no
smile on my face. I am not jumping with joy. There are no tears of
triumph in my eyes. For such emotions and behavior to come from me, I
would have to deny all that I know about the requirements of human
flourishing and survival - all that I know about the history of the United
States of America , all that I know about American race relations, and
all that I know about Barack Obama as a politician. I would have to deny
the nature of the "change" that Obama asserts has come to America .

Most importantly, I would have to abnegate my certain understanding that
you have chosen to sprint down the road to serfdom that we have been on
for over a century. I would have to pretend that individual liberty has
no value for the success of a human life. I would have to evade your
rejection of the slender reed of capitalism on which your success and
mine depend. I would have to think it somehow rational that 94 percent of
the 12 million Blacks in this country voted for a man because he looks
like them (that Blacks are permitted to play the race card), and that
they were joined by self-declared "progressive" whites who voted for him
because he does n't look like them.

I would have to wipe my mind clean of all that I know about the kind of
people who have advised and taught Barack Obama and will fill posts in
his administration - political intellectuals like my former colleagues at
the Harvard University 's Kennedy School of Government.

I would have to believe that "fairness" is equivalent of justice. I would
have to believe that man who asks me to "go forward in a new spirit of
service, in a new service of sacrifice" is speaking in my interest.. I
would have to accept the premise of a man that economic prosperity comes
from the "bottom up," and who arrogantly believes that he can will it
into existence by the use of government force. I would have to admire a
man who thinks the standard of living of the masses can be improved by
destroying the most productive and the generators of wealth.

Finally, Americans, I would have to erase from my consciousness the
scene of 125,000 screaming, crying, cheering people in Grant Park,
Chicago irrationally chanting "Yes We Can!" Finally, I would have to wipe
all memory of all the times I have heard politicians, pundits,
journalists, editorialists, bloggers and intellectuals declare that
capitalism is dead - and no one, including especially Alan Greenspan,
objected to their assumption that the particular version of the
anti-capitalistic mentality that they want to replace with their own
version of anti-capitalism is anything remotely equivalent to capitalism.

So you have made history, Americans. You and your children have elected a
Black man to the office of the president of the United States , the
wounded giant of the world. The battle between John Wayne and Jane
Fonda is over - and that Fonda won. Eugene McCarthy and George McGovern
must be very happy men. Jimmie Carter, too... And the Kennedys have at
last gotten their Kennedy look-a-like. The self-righteous welfare
statists in the suburbs can feel warm moments of satisfaction for having
elected a Black person.

So, toast yourselves: 60s countercultural radicals, 80s yuppies and 90s
bourgeois bohemians. Toast yourselves, Black America . Shout your glee
Harvard, Princeton , Yale, Duke, Stanford, and Berkeley.. You have
elected not an individual who is qualified to be president, but a Black
man who, like the pragmatist Franklin Roosevelt, promises to - Do
Something! You now have someone who has picked up the baton of Lyndon
Johnson's Great Society. But you have also foolishly traded your
freedom and mine - what little there is left - for the chance to feel
good.
There is nothing in me that can share your happy obliviousness.

ANNE WORTHAM

Anne Wortham is Associate Professor of Sociology at IllinoisState
University and continuing Visiting Scholar at Stanford University 's
Hoover Institution. She is a member of the American Sociological
Association and the American Philosophical Association.

She has been a John M. Olin Foundation Faculty Fellow, and honored as a
Distinguished Alumni of the Year by the National Association for Equal
Opportunity in Higher Education.

In fall 1988 she was one of a select group of intellectuals who were
featured in Bill Moyer's television series, "A World of Ideas" The
transcript of her conversation with Moyers has been published in his
book, A World of Ideas.

Dr. Wortham is author of "The Other Side of Racism: A Philosophical
Study of Black Race Consciousness" which analyzes how race consciousness
is transformed into political strategies and policy issues.

She has published numerous articles on the implications of individual
rights for civil rights policy, and is currently writing a book on
theories of social and cultural marginality.

Recently, she has published articles on the significance of
multiculturalism and Afrocentricism in education, the politics of
victimization and the social and political impact of political correctne
ss. Shortly after an interview in 2004, she was awarded tenure.