I was sitting in my office today between classes and found myself staring at a calendar on the wall. It was the right month, but I realized I really hadn’t noticed the picture. It showed a beautiful little girl resting her chin on her hand. And the eyes… they were alive. How had I missed this, the month was nearly over? Then I saw the words:
“It is better to be the child of God than king of the whole world” (St. Aloysius Gonzaga).
The message struck me. The truth of it settled nicely into my heart. Most often men or women who seek to rule the world are driven by mortal passions as opposed to God’s will. Therefore, even though all existing world leaders are also children of God, they most often do not act like it. Power really does tend to corrupt and as Lord Acton has so famously said, “absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
But wouldn’t it be a tremendous blessing to the world if the leaders of nations actually lived, and believed, and acted like they were children of God? I think so. Sadly, we’ll have to wait for the coming of God’s Only Begotten Son… the One who actually believes that it is better to be the child of God than the king of the whole world.
I hope He comes soon.
Monday, August 29, 2011
Monday, July 25, 2011
Mr. Obama: Mr. Compromise Once Again
I sat and watched Mr. Obama tonight. Maybe you did too. He engaged me with his genuine plea to work together. He admitted that Washington is dysfunctional, over-spends, and is self-serving. Mr. Obama invited everyone to sacrifice, including himself, to save America. It was great.
When it was over I began to wonder, where was this president during the past three years? Where was he when Obamacare was shoved down America's throat? A Democratic Congress pulled every trick in the book to pass that law even though most Americans were clearly opposed to the idea. And Mr. Obama signed it into law. So where was the compromise then? Where was the “working together” attitude then? It didn’t exist.
So there it is again. Mr. Obama is all of the sudden in the mood to work together for the good of America. Why? Because it is convenient for him. I’ve accused Mr. Obama before of being "A Convenient President." It is how he needs to appear before the people right now. He needs some positive press and will do what is necessary to get it. However, when the need passes, he’ll return to business as usual and will do things that meet Mr. Obama’s agenda, not the people of the United States.
This may seem to be pretty down on the president, but I can’t help it. Time and time again he has said things that appeal to Americans in general, but then turned around and does something different. I guess I should clarify. He may not “do” things himself, he actually allowed the formerly democratic dominated Congress or now the Senate to do all the dirty work… without a word from him.
Now I know I’m just a basicguy, but I have a warning. If Mr. Obama is pawning for a compromise, there’s something in it for him. It’s convenient to compromise right now because he’s lost the democratic controlled Congress and his political ideology is losing ground in America. So, he needs something, and I suggest that we not give it to him.
When it was over I began to wonder, where was this president during the past three years? Where was he when Obamacare was shoved down America's throat? A Democratic Congress pulled every trick in the book to pass that law even though most Americans were clearly opposed to the idea. And Mr. Obama signed it into law. So where was the compromise then? Where was the “working together” attitude then? It didn’t exist.
So there it is again. Mr. Obama is all of the sudden in the mood to work together for the good of America. Why? Because it is convenient for him. I’ve accused Mr. Obama before of being "A Convenient President." It is how he needs to appear before the people right now. He needs some positive press and will do what is necessary to get it. However, when the need passes, he’ll return to business as usual and will do things that meet Mr. Obama’s agenda, not the people of the United States.
This may seem to be pretty down on the president, but I can’t help it. Time and time again he has said things that appeal to Americans in general, but then turned around and does something different. I guess I should clarify. He may not “do” things himself, he actually allowed the formerly democratic dominated Congress or now the Senate to do all the dirty work… without a word from him.
Now I know I’m just a basicguy, but I have a warning. If Mr. Obama is pawning for a compromise, there’s something in it for him. It’s convenient to compromise right now because he’s lost the democratic controlled Congress and his political ideology is losing ground in America. So, he needs something, and I suggest that we not give it to him.
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
One Debt or Another
Can you believe the dangerous predicament we’re in? Just today, while searching the Internet, I found out that the US has once again reached its debt limit at over 14 trillion dollars. And the most worrisome part is that there is no agreed upon plan to do anything about it… especially from the Whitehouse. Why don’t they see the danger that basic folk see and get busy fixing the problem?
Another news story was another sign of dangerous times ahead. 2010 marked the first time that more was spent from Social Security than was taken in. I had hoped that my many years of contributing to this fund would still be available when I retired, but I seriously doubt it now. I suppose a lot could happen over the next 9 years, but having watched the Obama economy, it isn’t likely.
So, how did we get here? Well, we have a government with no fiscal restraint. I see it as one of the problems that come with a generation of career politicians. They spend as if the American economy will eventually overcome all shortfalls. It may be true when the economy is robust. Which brings us to another obvious problem; the economy is not robust these days and doesn’t show any promise that it will become such either. The political climate that a vote for change has brought has ensured that.
I have heard talk of two other problems that contribute to these dangerous conditions. One is the Baby Boomers. With a very large and growing aged population (many drawing upon Social Security and other government sponsored programs) the pressure on government entitlements threatens to overwhelm our resources.
Why? Well, one reason is our shrinking work force. The American workforce isn’t shrinking just because of high unemployment rates; there is more to it than that. It’s true, we find ourselves in challenging circumstances. Fewer people working equals fewer taxes which equals fewer dollars to cover our increasing debt and other government programs like Social Security.
But there is another reason for this workforce shortfall. Plain and simply we have fewer people entering the workforce. Families are smaller than they used to be. With each successive generation, family size is shrinking. We should have known that this day would come; when a very large bubble of boomers who have done their part for the American economy are now ready for their day in the sun.
But there is still one more reason that needs to be mentioned, and faced by this nation. Years of Roe v Wade has assisted in the genocide of millions of babies. What a waste. Not only do we miss the talents and skills that may have been born with the live birth of some of these sacrificed embryos, but we miss the shear number of individuals that could have been part of today’s workforce. I’m left to wonder how things might have been different had some Americans been different in how they viewed life. So, before you complain about the serious imbalance between the American workforce and the retiring Baby Boomers, first consider whether you are part of the problem or not.
Now, I personally believe that abortion is a plague. It is far more serious a problem than a simple imbalance in this country. Each child in embryo is a God-given gift. Each deserves a chance at life, to fulfill dreams, and to contribute in a positive way to this great nation. It is a national shame that we have allowed it to plague us for so long. Well, now we all have to pay for it… literally. Talk about a debt limit… this one dwarfs our $14 trillion.
Another news story was another sign of dangerous times ahead. 2010 marked the first time that more was spent from Social Security than was taken in. I had hoped that my many years of contributing to this fund would still be available when I retired, but I seriously doubt it now. I suppose a lot could happen over the next 9 years, but having watched the Obama economy, it isn’t likely.
So, how did we get here? Well, we have a government with no fiscal restraint. I see it as one of the problems that come with a generation of career politicians. They spend as if the American economy will eventually overcome all shortfalls. It may be true when the economy is robust. Which brings us to another obvious problem; the economy is not robust these days and doesn’t show any promise that it will become such either. The political climate that a vote for change has brought has ensured that.
I have heard talk of two other problems that contribute to these dangerous conditions. One is the Baby Boomers. With a very large and growing aged population (many drawing upon Social Security and other government sponsored programs) the pressure on government entitlements threatens to overwhelm our resources.
Why? Well, one reason is our shrinking work force. The American workforce isn’t shrinking just because of high unemployment rates; there is more to it than that. It’s true, we find ourselves in challenging circumstances. Fewer people working equals fewer taxes which equals fewer dollars to cover our increasing debt and other government programs like Social Security.
But there is another reason for this workforce shortfall. Plain and simply we have fewer people entering the workforce. Families are smaller than they used to be. With each successive generation, family size is shrinking. We should have known that this day would come; when a very large bubble of boomers who have done their part for the American economy are now ready for their day in the sun.
But there is still one more reason that needs to be mentioned, and faced by this nation. Years of Roe v Wade has assisted in the genocide of millions of babies. What a waste. Not only do we miss the talents and skills that may have been born with the live birth of some of these sacrificed embryos, but we miss the shear number of individuals that could have been part of today’s workforce. I’m left to wonder how things might have been different had some Americans been different in how they viewed life. So, before you complain about the serious imbalance between the American workforce and the retiring Baby Boomers, first consider whether you are part of the problem or not.
Now, I personally believe that abortion is a plague. It is far more serious a problem than a simple imbalance in this country. Each child in embryo is a God-given gift. Each deserves a chance at life, to fulfill dreams, and to contribute in a positive way to this great nation. It is a national shame that we have allowed it to plague us for so long. Well, now we all have to pay for it… literally. Talk about a debt limit… this one dwarfs our $14 trillion.
Sunday, May 8, 2011
How Wide the Divide?
As I have watched the discussion in Utah regarding illegal immigration, I’m struck with the difficult situation that it has become… especially for members of the LDS Church. Being a member myself, I have been caught in the firestorm of deliberation over the LDS Church’s seeming confusing compassionate stand on illegal immigration.
One of the strongest arguments against the Church’s compassionate stand is found in it’s own core doctrine. The 12th Article of Faith declares that the Latter-day Saints believe in “obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.” There are some things surrounding illegal immigration that make a compassionate stand extremely difficult. Just the word “illegal” says a lot.
On the other side of the divide, there is another aspect of this situation that puts the Church in a difficult circumstance. What if the Lord is inspiring some of His children in Mexico and other places to risk coming to the US… even illegally? Many of them have found their way into the Church; especially families. The Prophet Joseph Smith once expressed something he had learned from his experience with God:
“Whatever God requires is right, no matter what it is, although we may not see the reason thereof till long after the events transpire” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 256).
I know it doesn’t fully explain the 12th Article of Faith, but it does create some sense of being measured in our response to the situation. So, with that said, as a basicguy I believe the following:
1. We need to first secure the border. It really is a security risk and we live in a very dangerous world.
2. We then need to formulate a fair and manageable immigration policy and process… one that makes sense, requires a commitment to English, encourages acceptance of the American tradition, and one we can afford.
3. Finally, we need to develop a measured but compassionate strategy for dealing with those already here. Some are more deserving than others; some are criminal and need to be deported immediately. However, there are those who truly seek a better opportunity. Is it possible that the US position of turning a blind eye towards our own immigration law has actually encouraged illegal immigration? If so, does that not beg for some compassion for those who are here illegally? In a way, we’re all guilty of illegalities. We risk speeding up to 5 mph over the speed limit because law enforcement allows it. Should we hold our neighbors to a higher standard than the one we ourselves are willing to abide by?
I think we can deal with this issue in a way that both sides will find fair and balanced. I’m just glad that someone smarter than I will be left to figure it out.
One of the strongest arguments against the Church’s compassionate stand is found in it’s own core doctrine. The 12th Article of Faith declares that the Latter-day Saints believe in “obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.” There are some things surrounding illegal immigration that make a compassionate stand extremely difficult. Just the word “illegal” says a lot.
On the other side of the divide, there is another aspect of this situation that puts the Church in a difficult circumstance. What if the Lord is inspiring some of His children in Mexico and other places to risk coming to the US… even illegally? Many of them have found their way into the Church; especially families. The Prophet Joseph Smith once expressed something he had learned from his experience with God:
“Whatever God requires is right, no matter what it is, although we may not see the reason thereof till long after the events transpire” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 256).
I know it doesn’t fully explain the 12th Article of Faith, but it does create some sense of being measured in our response to the situation. So, with that said, as a basicguy I believe the following:
1. We need to first secure the border. It really is a security risk and we live in a very dangerous world.
2. We then need to formulate a fair and manageable immigration policy and process… one that makes sense, requires a commitment to English, encourages acceptance of the American tradition, and one we can afford.
3. Finally, we need to develop a measured but compassionate strategy for dealing with those already here. Some are more deserving than others; some are criminal and need to be deported immediately. However, there are those who truly seek a better opportunity. Is it possible that the US position of turning a blind eye towards our own immigration law has actually encouraged illegal immigration? If so, does that not beg for some compassion for those who are here illegally? In a way, we’re all guilty of illegalities. We risk speeding up to 5 mph over the speed limit because law enforcement allows it. Should we hold our neighbors to a higher standard than the one we ourselves are willing to abide by?
I think we can deal with this issue in a way that both sides will find fair and balanced. I’m just glad that someone smarter than I will be left to figure it out.
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
The US can learn from the UK on this one
Well, it’s Christmas and, like you, I’m often looking for good ideas for gift giving… especially for kids. Gift giving gets pretty difficult as the years build up on you. When my wife asks, “What do you want for Christmas?” I really struggle as to what to say. I have no idea. I don’t need any particular thing and when you get to be my age what you really want is way too much money. So, what can you say? It’s just as challenging when trying to figure out what to give.
Well, I recently received a link to a story from a friend. The headline thrilled me because of the subject. I identified it right away as a great Christmas gift—a different kind of gift, but a gift just the same—especially for kids. The headline read: “Plan to block all online Porn.” It immediately caught my attention. One of the frustrations of the internet is the easy availability of porn. It has been a dangerous blight and has captured plenty of full grown men in its trap. So, when I saw the link I followed it.
Imagine my disappointment when I found the article (see http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/world/all-internet-porn-will-be-blocked-to-protect-children-under-uk-government-plan/story-e6frfkui-1225973481287), and realized it was in the UK, not the US. Well, of course not. What was I thinking? Why would the country or purveyor of 80% of all internet porn think to make the internet safer for our children? You see, we can’t compromise the astounding amount of money to be made.
I know the argument; it’s the parent’s responsibility to teach their kids about the dangers of porn and also to provide safety nets on their own home computers. Pornographers don’t bear any responsibility for the welfare of US kids, just their own welfare. Besides they have a 1st amendment right to muddy the morality of our youth and eventually our country.
Well, the last time I looked at the Constitution, there was more there than just the 1st amendment. I wonder what pornographers can do to help “form a more perfect Union,” or “insure domestic Tranquility”? Or what do they think it means to “promote the general Welfare” … “to ourselves and our Posterity”? Wouldn’t it be nice if the world of porn policed itself and willingly contributed to the safety of our children? Now that’s a real gift they could give. It may not be a gift that brings them more wealth, but it might help America maintain a moral people in whose hands the Constitution would be held inviolate. In that way we all benefit.
Since the Revolutionary War, there hasn’t been much America has jealously wanted from the UK. Well, maybe this is one thing to jealously desire. We also need to find a way to block internet porn to protect our kids. Let’s make the internet less dangerous for them. Though I don’t appreciate the porn world as some do, I don’t suggest blocking it from everyone. With all of the technology out there, I’m certain there is a way to conveniently make the internet safer for families without compromising access for those who want it. I have a feeling it could easily be resolved if the pornographers were willing to unselfishly give a gift. Come on, it’s Christmas, give a gift to America’s kids.
Well, I recently received a link to a story from a friend. The headline thrilled me because of the subject. I identified it right away as a great Christmas gift—a different kind of gift, but a gift just the same—especially for kids. The headline read: “Plan to block all online Porn.” It immediately caught my attention. One of the frustrations of the internet is the easy availability of porn. It has been a dangerous blight and has captured plenty of full grown men in its trap. So, when I saw the link I followed it.
Imagine my disappointment when I found the article (see http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/world/all-internet-porn-will-be-blocked-to-protect-children-under-uk-government-plan/story-e6frfkui-1225973481287), and realized it was in the UK, not the US. Well, of course not. What was I thinking? Why would the country or purveyor of 80% of all internet porn think to make the internet safer for our children? You see, we can’t compromise the astounding amount of money to be made.
I know the argument; it’s the parent’s responsibility to teach their kids about the dangers of porn and also to provide safety nets on their own home computers. Pornographers don’t bear any responsibility for the welfare of US kids, just their own welfare. Besides they have a 1st amendment right to muddy the morality of our youth and eventually our country.
Well, the last time I looked at the Constitution, there was more there than just the 1st amendment. I wonder what pornographers can do to help “form a more perfect Union,” or “insure domestic Tranquility”? Or what do they think it means to “promote the general Welfare” … “to ourselves and our Posterity”? Wouldn’t it be nice if the world of porn policed itself and willingly contributed to the safety of our children? Now that’s a real gift they could give. It may not be a gift that brings them more wealth, but it might help America maintain a moral people in whose hands the Constitution would be held inviolate. In that way we all benefit.
Since the Revolutionary War, there hasn’t been much America has jealously wanted from the UK. Well, maybe this is one thing to jealously desire. We also need to find a way to block internet porn to protect our kids. Let’s make the internet less dangerous for them. Though I don’t appreciate the porn world as some do, I don’t suggest blocking it from everyone. With all of the technology out there, I’m certain there is a way to conveniently make the internet safer for families without compromising access for those who want it. I have a feeling it could easily be resolved if the pornographers were willing to unselfishly give a gift. Come on, it’s Christmas, give a gift to America’s kids.
Saturday, November 20, 2010
It's all about Spin
I remember as a kid getting spun round and round by friends and then they’d step away and laugh as I dizzily stumbled this way and that and finally falling to the ground. Of course, I’d do it right back to someone else… all in the name of fun.
Well, I’m old enough now that I don’t have to worry about being spun around by friends anymore. However, a new spinning game is very prevalent. Instead of physically spinning your body around in circles, the new game attempts to spin our minds around in circles. And some are very affective. Spin is best achieved in the title, especially in a browsing culture. Too many will just read the lead title and skip the article and never come to appreciate the details. That’s how those who “spin” their agenda win.
As I have thought about it, I’ve seen some spin with such topics as education, entertainment, politics, religion, and culture. For example, just this week an article from the Associated Press quickly spread through the web. It was titled: “4 Out of 10 Americans Say Marriage is Obsolete!” Now that sounds pretty serious.
A friend of mine sent me a link to the story. I could tell it had concerned her. Being a basic “married” guy, that ominous sounding headline also concerned me… at first. But you see, once you become aware of the “spin cycle” which is so widespread in our society, you get a little suspicious of peoples motives. Everyone has an agenda and they try makes things appear in a way that promotes their worldview. The “spin” in this articles title suddenly looked like an agenda talking.
Note this title from an article in the Deseret News on November 18th: “Study reports Americans are optimistic about the family unit” (see http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700083108/Study-reports-Americans-are-optimistic-about-the-family-unit.html. What’s interesting about this article is that it is based on the same Pew Study as the Associated Press article, but clearly this writer had a different agenda.
So tell me, in your opinion, which one of these two approaches represents spin and which one represents reporting a news story? Is it spin to report that “6 Out of 10 Americans are Optimistic about Marriage” or that “4 Out of 10 Americans Say Marriage is Obsolete”? Some may argue that both are spin… one written by a writer who opposes traditional marriage and the other by a happily married person.
Well, as far as I’m concerned, I know which one is spin to me. Since when do we emphasize the smallest number in a report and give it the weight of the biggest number? Well, when it helps promote your agenda… that’s when. Now, I’m just a basicguy, but that just seems wrong. So, here’s some spin for you. I’m glad to be part of the biggest number… the side where 6 out of 10 who are optimistic about marriage. You see, it’s all about spin.
Well, I’m old enough now that I don’t have to worry about being spun around by friends anymore. However, a new spinning game is very prevalent. Instead of physically spinning your body around in circles, the new game attempts to spin our minds around in circles. And some are very affective. Spin is best achieved in the title, especially in a browsing culture. Too many will just read the lead title and skip the article and never come to appreciate the details. That’s how those who “spin” their agenda win.
As I have thought about it, I’ve seen some spin with such topics as education, entertainment, politics, religion, and culture. For example, just this week an article from the Associated Press quickly spread through the web. It was titled: “4 Out of 10 Americans Say Marriage is Obsolete!” Now that sounds pretty serious.
A friend of mine sent me a link to the story. I could tell it had concerned her. Being a basic “married” guy, that ominous sounding headline also concerned me… at first. But you see, once you become aware of the “spin cycle” which is so widespread in our society, you get a little suspicious of peoples motives. Everyone has an agenda and they try makes things appear in a way that promotes their worldview. The “spin” in this articles title suddenly looked like an agenda talking.
Note this title from an article in the Deseret News on November 18th: “Study reports Americans are optimistic about the family unit” (see http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700083108/Study-reports-Americans-are-optimistic-about-the-family-unit.html. What’s interesting about this article is that it is based on the same Pew Study as the Associated Press article, but clearly this writer had a different agenda.
So tell me, in your opinion, which one of these two approaches represents spin and which one represents reporting a news story? Is it spin to report that “6 Out of 10 Americans are Optimistic about Marriage” or that “4 Out of 10 Americans Say Marriage is Obsolete”? Some may argue that both are spin… one written by a writer who opposes traditional marriage and the other by a happily married person.
Well, as far as I’m concerned, I know which one is spin to me. Since when do we emphasize the smallest number in a report and give it the weight of the biggest number? Well, when it helps promote your agenda… that’s when. Now, I’m just a basicguy, but that just seems wrong. So, here’s some spin for you. I’m glad to be part of the biggest number… the side where 6 out of 10 who are optimistic about marriage. You see, it’s all about spin.
Friday, October 1, 2010
Murkowski's Last Grab
Many years ago a friend and I were walking through a hallway of some dorm rooms and by chance saw an interesting poster on a wall. It pictured a squirrel hanging on for dear life to a tree branch and the caption read: “Hang in there, baby!” I’ve been reminded of this poster lately as I’ve watched entrenched politicians trying to find ways to cling to their “jobs” after being upset by Tea Party favorites.
One of the most recent was Lisa Murkowski, senator from Alaska who lost her primary bid to Joe Miller who was backed by Palin and Tea Party faithful. Murkowski, who was first appointed to office in 2002 by her Governor father, is just finishing her first full term to which she was elected by the people of Alaska. The unexpected loss obviously did not sit well with Murkowski because she has mounted a write-in campaign in hopes of regaining her seat. Talk about hanging on!
Why is it that some politicians can’t seem to accept the will of the people? Some try to find a way around the system by changing parties (i.e., Charlie Crist in Florida has jumped from the Republican Party to run as an Independent). Murkowski opted to give voters another chance to make up for their mistake or to come to their senses through a write-in vote. Why?
Well, in Murkowski’s case, she said she was doing it for the people of Alaska. So, what is she saying? Did the people of Alaska not make their choice in the primary? Did she not have an opportunity to make her case to “the people of Alaska”? What was so wrong about the process that will change with a write-in campaign? Are the people going to change their minds? Go figure.
I see another reason which Murkowski would never say openly. I think Murkowski is yet another example of the career politician. She sees it as a job. She was hired by the state of Alaska, given a great benefits package, and a very nice annual salary. The office where she works happens to be in Washington D.C. Being fired from this job doesn’t sit well with career politicians. Especially in her case; she hadn’t yet reached full-retirement that brings a lifetime income and benefits package. She needed to serve just one more term for that favored status to kick in. No wonder she’s clinging, clawing, and hanging for her life.
There was a day when politicians were statesmen (or women) who “served” the people rather than worked a job. When you are a servant, you go home when freed by your constituents. If for whatever reason your service is no longer required, “we the people” can send you packing. That’s all there is to it. To see an array of career politicians clamoring or clawing for their “jobs” is embarrassing. If you want a career, get a real job. If you want to serve “we the people,” then serve.
One of the most recent was Lisa Murkowski, senator from Alaska who lost her primary bid to Joe Miller who was backed by Palin and Tea Party faithful. Murkowski, who was first appointed to office in 2002 by her Governor father, is just finishing her first full term to which she was elected by the people of Alaska. The unexpected loss obviously did not sit well with Murkowski because she has mounted a write-in campaign in hopes of regaining her seat. Talk about hanging on!
Why is it that some politicians can’t seem to accept the will of the people? Some try to find a way around the system by changing parties (i.e., Charlie Crist in Florida has jumped from the Republican Party to run as an Independent). Murkowski opted to give voters another chance to make up for their mistake or to come to their senses through a write-in vote. Why?
Well, in Murkowski’s case, she said she was doing it for the people of Alaska. So, what is she saying? Did the people of Alaska not make their choice in the primary? Did she not have an opportunity to make her case to “the people of Alaska”? What was so wrong about the process that will change with a write-in campaign? Are the people going to change their minds? Go figure.
I see another reason which Murkowski would never say openly. I think Murkowski is yet another example of the career politician. She sees it as a job. She was hired by the state of Alaska, given a great benefits package, and a very nice annual salary. The office where she works happens to be in Washington D.C. Being fired from this job doesn’t sit well with career politicians. Especially in her case; she hadn’t yet reached full-retirement that brings a lifetime income and benefits package. She needed to serve just one more term for that favored status to kick in. No wonder she’s clinging, clawing, and hanging for her life.
There was a day when politicians were statesmen (or women) who “served” the people rather than worked a job. When you are a servant, you go home when freed by your constituents. If for whatever reason your service is no longer required, “we the people” can send you packing. That’s all there is to it. To see an array of career politicians clamoring or clawing for their “jobs” is embarrassing. If you want a career, get a real job. If you want to serve “we the people,” then serve.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)