Jeb Bush’s Money is Useless

Talk about all the money in politics and the influence it buys, it  just doesn’t seem to be helping former Florida Republican Governor Jeb Bush in his efforts to reach the White House.

As Bernie, Hillary and the rest of the Political Left rages against the U.S. Supreme Court allowing political campaign contributions by corporations and Political Action Committees (PACs) and raging that Wall Street cash is changing the face of the 2016 Presidential Election, Jeb Bush must be sitting and staring at his television wondering why the hell it hasn’t done him a bit of good.

With a sixth place finish in Iowa with 2.8 percent of the vote, Jeb was left pulling up the rear behind Rand Paul and Ben Carson. Not a good result for the Man Who Would be President.

But what about all that money?

It has been reported that Jeb! has already spent over $31 Million in his own campaign cash and his Political Action Committee, “Right to Rise” has doled out between 90 and 103 Million dollars. 

That's a lot of Cake for 2.8 percent of the vote in Iowa. If you gave money to Jeb Bush's campaign, you might be feeling like you had made a bad investment. And in reality, you did. 

But if Jeb! thinks that’s bad, wait until next Tuesday in New Hampshire.

All that money, the root of all that is wrong in politics if you listen to the political wags, hasn’t gained Jeb Bush the trust of the American people. Quite the opposite, it has been a colossal waste. In contrast, the New Hampshire primary favorite, Donald Trump, has spent less than $20 Million.

Perhaps it isn’t the money then. All the money in the world isn’t going to buy you a vote if people don’t believe you or your message. And Jeb Bush’s message has been disturbing to a majority of American voters. This is a fact borne out by the lack of voter’s interest in his candidacy.

The former Crazed Mayor of New York City , Michael Bloomberg, (he's still Crazed, just no longer Mayor) has been spending money hand over foot to get more anti-gun ownership legislation passed and it hasn’t done him any good either. In this time of random terrorism on soft civilian targets to go along with every day criminal activity, people aren’t inclined to give up their right to own a firearm. Add to that, given his high profile governorship of the nation's largest city, people know Mr. Bloomberg has more money than brains and if he should jump into the race for the 2016 presidency, it will really prove that money isn't everything when it comes to American politics.

So as it stands, people just aren’t interested in the product Jeb Bush is selling, namely himself. They don't like the substance of his ideas and the package of his veneer. They don’t want amnesty for illegal aliens, they really don’t want another big spender, they aren’t interested in more military intervention in the Middle East, they don’t want continued expansion of government and they certainly don’t want to create a political dynasty by sending yet another misguided Bush family member to the White House.

Otherwise they would have voted for him.

Jeb Bush and his group has dished out plenty of cash to get his message across to the American people and the people apparently have heard his message loud and clear and they’ve sent one back to him.

Forget it!

Scotland Should Secede

Isn’t this what Mel Gibson was fighting for way back in 1995, a free Scotland?

Sure England is no longer the England of old where they held onto power on the island by slaughtering and starving everybody who opposed them but it would be great to see Scotland have a home of their own that they can administer the way they desire.

The right to self-determination is not given by governments; it is bestowed at birth. And yet so few of us get the chance these days to exercise this right that when we see someplace else getting it, we go all wobbly. Sorta like the Crab Pot mentality that psychiatrists are so fond of pointing to. To me it’s just another example of making the slaves love their slavery. They won’t want to give up the comfort of having no responsibility towards how their lives are run. It is easier to have everything laid out for you, isn’t it?

For all the hand-wringers, nothing would change much if Scotland should vote itself back into an independent state. All the infrastructure, the navy bases, the oil platforms and such would stay right where they are. The only difference would be that England or whoever else that would use them would now have to pay Scotland for the use of them. What’s the big deal? Oh yeah, England would have to pay rent on that big old castle in Edinburgh that the Queen uses twice a year. They’ll probably have to sign a 100 year lease or something and if they do then Scotland should run a credit check.

Of course there are going to be issues, pains and expenditures but it will all be worth it.

It is funny how the wags come out and try to put down such a wonderful idea of having Scotland go back to its people.

Since this subject came up, I can think of a few more places that should be given back to the people who were there first.

Hawaii: This is a no-brainer. The history of the United States taking Hawaii from the organized and civilized people who ran the place is indisputable The Hawaiians haven’t been the same since. We can restore the pride of their civilization by giving back their autonomy over the island. It isn't like they aren’t going to let anybody come over and spend money there. The only downside I can see to this is that we would have a devil of a time arranging 49 stars on the flag.

Tibet: China walked in and took over. There was some uneasiness about it and a few nations said something but that has all faded into the background. The Chinese ran a rail line into the region and is flooding the place with Chinese nationals and pushing out the Tibetans. The Chinese police literally kick protesting Tibetans to death in the streets and leave them there. These days only the exiled Dali Lama is making a public stink about it. All just an annoyance at this point.

Kurdistan: The Kurds should have their own country. They’ve earned it. They fought for it and they’re still fighting for it. Turkey was against it since they were afraid that their Kurdish population would want to secede to the new state but now they seem to be joining forces with them against the Islamic radical element from whom they see a greater threat. All they have to say is anybody who wants to join the new Kurdish state can LEAVE. That keeps Turkey being Turkey. This would also provide a market for Turkish goods with a stable neighbor.

It must be very exciting to be a Scot right now. There is optimism, fear, trepidation and great anticipation. It is something many in Scotland never dreamed of happening before. But the dream can be made real through their own hands if they wish it to be so. It is Democracy in action.

Wish we all could do that.

Russia Annexes Crimea, Saves $ 98 Million

No wonder Russia wanted Crimea. No wonder Ukraine didn’t want to let the region go. Russia was paying Ukraine $ 98 Million to keep their ships in port in Crimea. And when the troops got paid, I’m pretty sure that they didn’t all send the money back to momma on the Volga. The local Crimean businesses made a bundle on having the Russian naval base there.

So now Russia is that much richer and Ukraine is that much poorer.

But the trouble is only beginning for Ukraine. The Ukrainian version of “George Bush’s Fault’ is going to manifest itself as other cash-starved or soon to be cash-starved regions of Ukraine vie for a chance to vote on a referendum to rejoin Russia. Now the Ukrainian region of Donetsk wants one.
This is obviously all Vladimir Putin’s fault.

The rest of Ukraine seems just as divided. There are factions that wish to rejoin Russia and there are the Ukrainian Nationalists who wish to stay an autonomous nation and join the EU.  This is going to have to be sorted out and having a vote will be a good start. The trick is to pull it off without the country descending into chaos.

The situation in Ukraine is beginning to play out in a fashion reminicent of the old "Bloody Kansas" turmoil in the days leading up to the U.S. Civil War. This was when the Kansas territory was given a chance a vote whether to join the Union as a "Free" state or a "Slave" state and bloody clashes took place between Free State and Pro Slavery factions. This lead to increased polarization, deeper divisions and then to civil war.

The Ukrainian insurrection that toppled its president is nothing less than a revolution. Not a particularly bloody one but with the absence of power, history has shown, there is an increasing risk there will be a clash between powerful groups to fill that gap and as we have seen, they are very wide apart in their views to say the least.

This is Vladimir Putin’s fault.

There have been many promises made by the U.S. and the EU as to guarantees of support both financially, politically and militarily. These are not going to happen nearly to the satisfaction of Ukraine’s interim government which is not only having to deal with a vote of their own and the loss of Crimea but also the potential of a breakup of the rest of the country.

Somehow I don’t think the losing parties in the Ukrainian elections are going to take it sitting down.

This is Vladimir Putin’s fault.

So whether you think the Crimean vote was legitimate or coerced or whatever, Ukraine is going to have bigger problems down the road with whichever group gains control of the country. The loss of Crimea is a big blow financially but if they don’t address other more pressing issues first, the Crimean vote will look like a good idea and then other regions will follow suit.  

Who’s fault will that be?

 

 

The Status Quo of Republicans and Democrats

For way too long in this country we the people have been thinking in only a two dimensional fashion. We think that in the realm of politics there is only two sides, the Democrats and Republicans or as I refer to them, the Demilcans and Republocrats and finally, I’m not alone.

There’s a hand in my pocket. What do I care if it’s a Democrat hand or a Republican hand? There’s a hand in my pocket!

Hasn’t anybody noticed that no matter what party the president is from, the same things happen? Obama wants to legalize the illegal aliens currently residing in this country, boo hiss. Ronald Regan DID legalize 10 million illegals when he was president. What’s the difference? Both presidents spent money that wasn’t produced yet. GW Bush spent more money than any other president right up until Barack Obama broke that record this year. And what did they spend all this money on? Entitlements and Stimulus. Money that went out and has never found it's way back. Money for THEIR interests, not the interests of the American public.

Each “Party” spends taxpayer money. The Democrats on their social “services” which serves to buy the vote of the “downtrodden” of the American culture and, of course, fuel the public jobs sector which vote in lockstep with the people who keep the money coming. They’re all about Welfare, Public Education and Government Services such as Unemployment, Medicaid and Medicare. All giveaways designed to strengthen their political hold.

The Republicans spend on “Defense” and the “War on Drugs” and other Red, White & Blue pursuits and have also created their own public sector loyalties. This may explain why we’ve been at war since I’ve been alive and have huge bloated bureaucracies like the Department of Defense and the giant Corrections sector.  Then there are all those “Resort” style military bases we have all over the world complete with clubs, spas and weight rooms. All set up to bolster their political position.

And each party has managed, through it’s building up of government and by spending Billions in taxpayer dollars, to increase taxation and regulation to the point where businesses are strangled. The cost of doing business in America is just too high. 

Enter the Libertarians. Libertarians know that no matter who occupies the office of the presidency, he’s essentially the same guy. He works for the same people and the same interests that put him where he is and the same things happen for the American public: War or Welfare. 

The Tea Party is made up of mostly working people registered as Independents and it is they who are fueling the current Libertarian revival. There is much common ground but without having to read a book to explain the way they feel let it be simply put that they are a representation of a public that is sick of seeing their interests ignored and their money gone to pay for the usurping of the basic principles of work, prosperity and sacrifice. This movement has come about because of a government that no longer promotes the principle that a person stand on their own two feet, be responsible for their actions and not doing even it’s most basic job of protecting the rights and beings of it’s citizens. We are a public grown tired of a government that acts more like an Empire than a representative Republic. 

The last thing we need right now is another Demilcan or a Republocrat in the White House. There’s another choice out there.

Ron Paul’s First Mistake…

This year has proven a boon to Libertarians everywhere. Long in the political shadows, Libertarians have looked to Ron Paul’s resurgence in a war weary nation ten years on in wars that see no end in sight.

Mr. Paul has never been more articulate, succinct and, for the most part, brief in explaining his Libertarian ideals and values as he has been this year. This is far beyond his 2008 efforts what found him at times struggling to put into words the principles that unite our belief system. It is these core values that make Libertarianism a consistent thought process and Ron Paul has been our leading spokesman for decades.

But last night he made a critical error.

He tried to answer a difficult question that he did not have enough time for.

It is obvious that Ron Paul is not against America. It is also obvious that he is not blaming the American people for 9/11 and he should have just said so when challenged by Rick Santorum. But the long answer does not work on television debates and so he got nailed.

To say that our dealings with the Arab world had no bearing on the attacks of 9/11 would lack credibility. The U.S. is Saudi Arabia’s biggest trading partner and the Muslim radicals are no friends of the house of Saud but to use this to justify the murder of over 3000 people is only the lip service of tyrants.

Al Qaeda has attacked every foreign country that has entered their country for whatever reason. To say the U.S. has dealt with Arabia unfairly, building a nation of sand and oil deposits into a country of riches albeit poorly distributed, and that the UAE is an exploited region is an unimaginable stretch. Osama bin Laden is a great example since he was raised in a very well-to-do family as an aristocrat really.

Outside of the ruthless U.S. backed rule of the Shah of Iran, it is folly to compare the conflagration of 9/11 to our dealings with Arabia itself, the home of the Taliban/Wasabi cult. They had no legitimate justification for their attacks.

And Ron Paul never got the time to explain it and he knows it. Now he may never get another chance.

Right up until his gaff, he had nailed the question and was cheered. There is indeed a difference between Military spending and Defense spending. We do have too many military bases all over the world and it’s costing us Billions of dollars and adding not one farthing to the Treasury. This has to end. It will end one way or another because we can’t go on in this fashion. 

He is right again when stating that if we as a nation continue in this way we will have nothing but turmoil overseas. This has proven to be so very true since we have had nothing but war since I was born. 

I know Ron Paul as a man of principle and as an American first. I never for a moment believe that he thinks America is to blame for 9/11.

I just wish he said it.