Defense

When WW 2 ended the US reduced defense spending and the country sent soldiers off to the Korean War with outdated equipment. When the cold war ended defense spending was reduced and called the peace dividend. In the 90’s experts predicted that future wars would be fought with high tech stuff and the need for boots on the ground would be minimal. When the US sent troops off to Afghanistan and Iraq they went unprepared. The country complained that troops did not have the proper equipment and they were being asked to go on multiple tours of duty. Now that Iraq is over and Afghanistan is winding down the US is once again cutting defense. It is my recollection that many of the people who pushed for defense cuts were the same ones who complained that the troops were being short changed and now these same people are once again asking for defense cuts. In all of this back and forth it is the troops that pay the penalty while those who push for such changes escape without a scar.

LNG

While the middle class standard of living is stagnant, it is almost providential that new sources of energy have become available through technology. We are in a position to rapidly increase our oil and natural gas supplies by way of fracking and the government is standing in the way. For years we imported LNG from the Middle East and now we can export but the federal government will not issue the necessary permits. Consideration of licenses to export natural gas from the U.S. will have to wait until at least the third quarter, when a study is completed after a delay of several months, according to the Energy Department. These are shovel ready good paying jobs that would help the middle class. Sending gas to Europe would send a message to Russia that they will have some competition and do more to get Putin’s attention than revoking visa’s. Allowing clean coal plants to continue instead of forcing them to switch to natural gas would free up additional supplies. Right now we are closing down clean coal plants and shipping the coal to China to use in dirty coal plants. Opening federal lands to fracking will increase production dramatically. In a Louisiana swamp several miles upriver from the Gulf of Mexico, about 3,000 construction workers are building a massive industrial facility to liquefy natural gas, preparing for a new era when the U.S. will begin exporting energy around the globe. The $12-billion project is one of the largest single industrial investments in the nation, part of a massive transformation of the energy sector that has led to a boom in drilling, transportation and refining from coast to coast. This is all being done in spite of the government interference. We need to all be on the same side.

Economy

The poor will always be with us so it says in Matthew. That is true because some always have more than others but the poor are much better off today than in the past. The industrial revolution along with advances in medicine and technology, have vastly improved the lives of everyone, including the poor. Throughout history various unsavory people have taken advantage of the income gap and their efforts have led to disaster. The typical scenario begins in a country where there are a few very rich people and many poor. The rich are living in their mansion up on the mountain and the poor in the squalors below. A new, usually charismatic leader appears on the scene and preaches the redistribution of wealth. Once he is in power he will nationalize the industry and begins to confiscate the assets of the wealthy and then spread the wealth around, making sure that a goodly portion of it goes into his personal account. As time passes the people find out that they are no better off than before and rise up against the new leader. The most recent example is Venezuela. What people do not understand is that there have always been too few rich and too many poor. The net result is that they trade the tyranny of the rich for the despotism of the power hungry. Even in the Unites States, the richest country in the history of the world there are not enough rich to make a difference. I have calculated that if we took all of the income from the one percent and gave it to the rest of us we would each get $5,000. That is certainly a nice gift for most but it would not take very long before that was absorbed in our budget and we would be struggling along as we are now. The only proven way to help the poor in the long term is to grow the economy. We currently have a perfect opportunity to do this in the energy industry. Expanding fracking for natural gas on private and public lands, will provide an inexpensive source of energy for all manufacturing. These are high paying jobs that will improve our air and water quality and exports will help our balance of payments. Changing cars, diesel trucks, buses and trains over to natural gas is a good start. Replacing coal and oil in power plants is step two. If the government would work with industry to promote this vast source of energy the economy would boom. The cost of energy is critical to all industry.

Free enterprise

I am just as enamored with the new Pope as most but there seems to be a misunderstanding of what he is preaching. The Pope wants each of us as individuals to reach out and help our neighbors. We can do this best by sharing our talents, experience, and knowledge and of course our financial aid when we are able. What many people fail to understand is that greedy American consumers have done more to help others than churches and charities could ever hope to accomplish. It is the free market capitalist system that provides profits to private companies and tax revenue to governments. Much of this money is used for innovation and research and development. The industrial revolution first in agriculture and then other industries have allowed us to feed billions of people who would otherwise not have survived. It is research in the medical field that produced vaccines that eliminated diseases like polio and provided help to millions of AIDS victims. It is entrepreneurs like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs that provided whole new industries that led to millions of new jobs. When business comes up with new ideas they are financed by profits that are provided by consumers. When government comes up with new ideas they are financed by individual and corporate taxes. The Pope has modeled his life after Jesus and that is something we should all strive for but Jesus was all about people helping people on a voluntary basis. I don’t believe He ever advocated that the government should take money from some to give to others and do it under the force of law. The is even some disdain toward Matthew the tax collector.

Cruz

Senator Cruse is in the news again and this concerns me. Based on his past performance, I believe he is willing to mislead to promote himself. Case in point. He took a belief that many conservatives hold dear and used it to gain attention for himself. Recall that he filibustered in the senate to demand that the government defund Obamacare and if they didn’t he would shut down the government. He said the senate could vote to defund Obamacare and he was correct but this is how all misleading stories go. They start with a truth and then distort. With 46 Republicans in the senate all voting to defund Obamacare many thought that only 4 Democrats could swing the vote. Others thought that perhaps a super majority of 60 votes were needed and they assumed that by some miracle that could be accomplished. But what was rarely brought up was the fact that The President would veto any vote and to override a veto requires 66 votes and no one believed that was possible. The Senator was well aware of the votes needed to override a presidential veto but he kept right on acting like his speech was going to persuade democrats to turn on their president. The result was that the Republicans took a hit for shutting down the government and Cruz accomplished nothing but to get his name in lights. We already have too many politicians who put their own careers ahead of what is best for the country and we don’t need another one.

Ukraine and party politics

Twenty years ago The Ukraine agreed to give up the nukes it inherited from the former USSR and the United States and Russian agreed that the borders of Ukraine would remain intact. Recent events make one wonder why the US made such a guarantee when we are now unable to back it up. President Obama is now faced with the task of living up to President Clintons promise and his hands are tied. Conservatives are now claiming that Putin is a leader and Obama is a follower. This is a repeat of the liberals who claimed that Gorbachev was a leader and Reagan a follower. This is just one more example of how party is more important than country and many people are getting tired of this party at all cost attitude.

Ukraine

During the last presidential campaign President Obama ridiculed Romney when he talked about Russia being our number one geopolitical concern. His opponent, Obama said, is "new to foreign policy" and will drag the country back into old conflicts. "After all, you don't call Russia our No. 1 enemy -- not Al-Qaida, Russia -- unless you're still stuck in a Cold War mind warp," Obama said, alluding to Republican rival Mitt Romney. I wonder if he is reconsidering in light of Putin’s excursion into the Ukraine?

Ukraine

President Obama has been opposed to sanctions against Iran since the beginning. These were all initiated and passed by the congress. One of the most stringent was passed in 2011 by a vote of 100 to 0 in the senate. Recently The President indicated in a speech that Iran coming to the most recent agreement with Secretary of State John Kerry was because of the sanctions. The speech gave the impression that the administration had been the moving force behind these sanctions. This is misleading at best and a lie at worst. The interesting thing is that no one in the new brings this up and most people are not aware. The President often uses this tactic where programs are initiated by congress and depending on how they turn out determines how the administration reacts to them. We are now watching the situation in the Ukraine and it will be interesting to see who takes charge. Will it be the White House or the congress?

Fathers in the home

About 6 months ago Bill O’Reilly spent about a week of programs covering the lack of fathers in the home. He received some flack for this but nothing like I thought he would. In the past whenever this subject was broached the person bringing it up was accused of being a racist. One of the main reasons for this kind of accusation was the vested interest that has evolved over the past 50 years in promoting government intervention in the inner cities. As a part of the Great Society, programs were developed to help people in the inner cities who were mostly minorities. At that time about 25% of the mothers were not married and today that figure is 75%. Statistics show that this has been a disaster for young black males. Crime rates, drop-out rates and drug usage have brought havoc to these neighborhoods. Yesterday President Obama gave the most meaningful speech of his presidency when he announced a program designed to reverse the trend toward single mother families. Perhaps this will awaken those who have avoided this subject and get the country on the road to doing something about it.