Misplaced Praise

It has become more and more difficult to surprise the American people with the praise that President Obama has been receiving from the international community, but it appears that there are still groups out there that are willing to rise to the challenge. This last Friday, President Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

It would not have been a surprise if the award had come a year from now, and many of Obama opponents would have agreed with the decision to award the prize to the current sitting president. The President has done many good thing in bring the world together. For example, the President recently spoke to the UN General Assembly in which he called for a new era in international cooperation. The one thing that really has many Americans concerned is the fact that these efforts have been just that, recent.

To receive a Nobel Peace Prize, you must be nominated. Those nominations are due by February 1^st, only two week after the President took office. Are there really that many people that believe that the President accomplished enough goals to be awarded the Peace Prize in a meager two weeks?

Let us take a step back in time and think about what was happening in January. If you leave out the pomp and circumstance that is associated with the inauguration of a President of the United States there was a substantial list of things that needed to be done on the domestic front that were considered a much higher priority than international relations. The housing market had collapsed and along with it, the entire economy. Jobs were being lost, the Auto-Industry was on the brink of collapse, and the government was scrambling to pass a trillion dollar piece of legislation to try to prevent the country from entering a second Great-Depression, not to mention the thousands of positions that needed to be fill in President Obama's Cabinet. The President did not have the time to focus on international peace. The only thing he did was call the Heads-of-State of our allies.

It is clear that the President is a celebrity on the international stage. The last time that it was news that the President was taking his wife too dinner on their anniversary was back when John F. Kennedy was President. It seems that all the international community cares about is that of his celebrity status and keeping Obama's reputation clean in the international community.

Do not misunderstand, this was not the fault of President Obama or should he be personally ridiculed for the award. Rather, we should be concerned with the fact that those lacking basic requirements are being awarded the most respected award in the world, and suspect of the political motivation of those who give the award. They admit that the award was given in a political move, but does that undermine the underlying intentions of the awards?

That is a question that is not so easy to answer.

And Iran

There are many out there who seem to fear the progress that Iran has made in the last few years when it comes to nuclear technology. Many fear that once Iran has the ability to detonate a nuclear weapon, they will take that bomb and strap it to a missile in an attempt to destroy Israel. While these concerns are not without merit, there is not a very realistic chance that that will happen.

When we look back at the first and arguably only nuclear standoff, we know that the idea of mutually assured destruction can be an effective way of staving of nuclear attack. Some argue that there are those out there that would be willing to die to destroy their enemy, but this logic will not hold when it comes to entire governments. While it is clear that many leaders around the world are willing to sacrifice the needs and wants of their people in order to accomplish their goals, there is no evidence that those same leaders are willing to truly risk nuclear war to accomplish their goals.

What Iran tried to accomplish when it test fired several short and long-range missiles this weekend was nothing different that what North Korea did this last summer. Iran is positioning itself for negotiations with the international community which will begin the first week of October. This all come on the heals of the international community discovering that Iran has had a secret nuclear facility that it has been using to develop nuclear technology for the last several years.

Should the international community be concerned that another state may become nuclear in the the next few years? Absolutely, but not for fear of war. Many nuclear powers have fought wars without using nuclear weapons. Rather, they should be concerned that the technology is secure and that it cannot reach the hands of the small groups of individuals who do wish to start nuclear war.

While the media thrives on images of rockets and missiles being test fired as a show of force, the only real power that these images give a country is the fear that they create. There is no true threat that Iran will destroy the middle east in the next few year, that is unless they forget to lock up their nuclear weapons at night and one or two of them just "happen" to disappear.

UN-Cooperative

Today, President Obama address the United Nations for the first time in a move that is being viewed as the first step in repairing relations in the international community. While speaking on several subjects, several points have been seen as major changes from United States international policy. While it is clear that the President is trying to repair what many felt was major damage caused by the Bush Administration, President Obama made it clear that the US was no longer willing to act independently of the international system. Obama address was mostly focused on a new age of international interaction in which the President called for the world to move past points of conflict in the past and focus on the major problems in the world today.

Was this a concession on the part of the United States caving to international pressure against the war in Iraq? No , the President made it clear that the world had a responsibility to work together to create peace and stability. He states, "The world must stand together to demonstrate that international law is not an empty promise. And that treaties will be enforced, We must insist that the future does not belong to fear."

The President is not trying to remove blame from the US on their lack of international cooperation, but does admonish the world to set aside their mistrust and opposition to previous US policies assuring the UN that the US is now ready to work with the international community and not in spite of it. He states, "The United States stands ready to begin a new chapter of international cooperation -- one that recognizes the rights and responsibilities of all nations"

There are many in the US who fear that a weak stance on the world stage will hurt the US ability to influence world politics. They would be misperceiving what happened at the UN today. It is clear to everyone that President Obama's approach to international politics is much different that Bush's, but this is not necessary a bad thing. There will be times in the world where talks fail and countries solve problems though armed negations, but trying to bring the world together with the very real power the the US holds on the world stage is more beneficial than many would lead the American People to believe. When we make the effort to try to resolve differences in peaceful means, be it problems we have with other countries or ones that other countries have among themselves, we will not only prevent war, we will enhance our position of peace and create a trust among the major international sources of conflict in the world.

Anything we can do to increase trust and reduce fear in the world moves us towards a better world community. While not all of the changes President Obama has made in US Government has been for the good of the people, the call for international cooperation, even if it is simply lip service, is a call that can only help all people, living in the United States or abroad.

Pay For It Yourself

Today, President Obama announced that the US Government would be throwing out the plans to create a missile defense shield in Europe and replacing it with an updated program. The President did not state what the new program would consist of, but he did state that the Joint-Chiefs of Staff were all in agreement over the change in systems.

This is once again an example of the President cutting out programs that President Bush worked so hard to get passed. Is this a bad thing? No it is not, but we need to keep a close eye on the actions of President Obama as he continues to cut programs in order to fund his own agenda. There has been too much waste on both sides of the aisle. There have been far too many Republican and Democratic projects that have been paid for by the Federal Government that are simply pork projects that need to be cut out of the Federal Budget. These projects, while helping the local areas, are more designed to keep politicians in office than they are to help the country as a whole. These projects should be paid for by the state and local governments. Only in those areas where there is not a substantial tax base, such as western Wyoming, should the Federal Government step in to take control.

This would not be a popular idea. The American people love it when others pay for their needs, but it should not be that way. This does not mean that we must raise taxes in order to pay for every new project, rather we should be spending the taxes in the area that they are being collected from. This would not only prevent wasteful spending and increase spending on the truly important projects, but it would also help the American people to have greater pride in the infrastructure of their communities. When you must pay for your own bridges and stop lights and libraries you are more likely to not only use these services, but also to take care of them.

The overall effect of this idea is that not only will we be wasting money on random projects, but the things that we use today will last longer. This only save the people more in taxes. President Obama should cut wasteful programs, but we must make sure that it is not so that he can just pay for his own "bridge to nowhere".

Health Care and The Deathstar

Tonight we were once again addressed by the President of the United States in what can be seen as the end of the month long intermission that we have had from the healthcare reform debate. For months now we have heard about death panels and never ending lines in Japan as people wait to see a doctor. What the President wanted to do was to get his message to the people in a softer light than has been cast by so many in the last few months.

While there is no argument that the President is great at giving a speech, there are a few different points that need to be addressed. First off, there are some things that everyone agrees about. Those things include access for everyone to affordable health care, the right for people to group together to get better prices on insurance, including those who pay for their own insurance, the need for the people to provide for those who cannot provide for themselves and that insurance companies should be able to provide incentives for those who participate in wellness programs. While these all are very good thing that we need to see in the near future, it is more important to work on the things that there is so much disagreement on. The President tried to correct what he referred to as "misconceptions" in the healthcare reform bill, but there are flaws in what the President feels is solid health care reform.

First, the dreaded "Death Panels" that have been the source of so much debate. This come from the idea that there will be a panel that seniors will have to go before where the panel will decided if paying for health care for these individuals is worth the cost, or should they no longer provide coverage. The President firmly denies these allegations in a very Animal Farm type statement. I believe that the President and members of Congress believe with all of their hearts that these panels will not happen, but what they fail to realize is that the possibility of these panels is there. It will not come in the next 5 or even 10 years, but one day down the road, the bureaucracy of the US Government will start to work its wonders as the need for a set system of rules will bring the likelihood of the denial of benefits creeping closer and closer simply because they do not met a set standard of criteria. While this may not be the problem that it has been made out to be, it will be very important down the road when for the individual that is sitting before the board praying that the government will continue to pay for their treatment.

Second, in what is bound to be the most talked about moment from the speech, the President stated that the program would not cover any illegal aliens, to which Rep. Joe Wilson shouted out "You Lie!" This moment(above), which was clearly disrespectful and should be apologized for, only shows a small hint of a much larger argument of illegal immigration. The questions is who will pay for the hundreds and thousands of illegal aliens who cross the border simply because they are sick and know that they will receive health care free of charge because the people of America cannot stand to see a person in need turned away. Will the border hospitals be forced to continue the current practice of paying for the service of those who get help in their hospitals who cannot pay for themselves? This is a question that needs to be address and not simply brushed off, unless of course we can manage to build a fence that is 1000 feet tall and 1000 feet deep and extends the entire length of the border, and since we don't foresee that happening, we need to address the real problems of this health care that will be provided, coverage or not.

Last, the President wants this coverage to be mandatory for every American. He referred to auto insurance as a successful example of how it will work. Let us look at the problems with this. For one, there is an option with auto insurance. If you don't want to pay for the insurance, you can choose not to drive. That is a real option for some. The ability to remove oneself from the system is a right that we hold dear in America. Forcing everyone to have insurance is just not possible in the current system. How do we do this? We need to have the insurance eligibility based on taxes.

What do you mean taxes? Well simply, to get coverage you must file a valid tax return for the prior 3 to 5 years. This will do two things; first, it will make sure that the American taxpayers are the ones that are receiving the benefits from their taxes. The second, it will encourage a substantial increase in the paying of taxes in the United States. If you provide a benefit for paying taxes, as well as a punishment for the lack of doing such, the tax revenue would jump substantially. This would help pay for the program as well as encourage responsible government participation on the part of the people.

To make this work, there would need to be a punishment for the lack of participation. How can we do that? It is clear that we cannot deny emergency care for those who need it, regardless if they pay taxes or not. What we can do however, is to deny other government benefits to those who do not file tax returns for the last several years. What can these be? No student grants, no subsidies for businesses, and no benefit that helps someone in situations that do not risk the health of the individual. By doing this, the government would be able to encourage the payment of taxes, as well as the healthcare coverage for most of America.

It should be noted that even the President of the United States can see that there are healthcare systems that work, for example he noted the Intermountain Health Care Systems in Utah. It "provides above average healthcare, at below average prices" stated President Obama. It is clear that low cost healthcare is possible. The President was referring to the non-profit organization (including the insurance arm under the name of Select Health) that was started by the LDS Church that now provides some of the best medical care in the world, let alone the mid-west. They recently opened what has been come to be called the Deathstar, as it was believed the new state of the art hospital built in Salt Lake City would kill off any other hospital in the area. Yet this single organization now provides better coverage at lower cost, while always keeping the need and rights of the patients as their main concern and not how much money they can make for their share holders. Now if only the government could figure that out.

There are many other things that need to be address, and we will continue with the discussion in the next post.

Summer Vacation

Anyone who makes it a point to keep himself informed about what is happening in the world of US politics is aware that the biggest issue that faces lawmakers today is that of health care reform. We heard about it during the election season as every candidate laid out a plan for the best way to overhaul the system that we know will not survive longer than a few more years. There has been arguments for years about what will happen when the Social Security Fund runs dry and no longer will those of us who have been paying into the system our whole lives be able to receive any of the benefits that have been promised us when we reach the ripe old age of 65. Now, after years of complaints that the government is not doing anything to help, the time has come to start making some decisions, or at least think about making a decision.

President Obama is pushing his healthcare overhaul onto not only congress, but also the American People as he goes from press conference to town hall meeting trying to persuade us with his charm and his never ending slogan, "Change". This program is meeting resistance as people are beginning to understand just how much of a change Obama's plan really is. Democrats in congress have even decided that they are going to wait until after their month long break in August before they call for a vote on the bill. Is this a mistake? Absolutely not.

There are two reasons while Congress should wait to vote on the current healthcare reform bill. First, as has been discussed before, it is important that each side have an opportunity to argue their case. A month long break gives not only the GOP the opportunity to come out against the bill, arguing that it is a socialist program that would only move us farther from the democracy that we cherish, but also give the Democratic Party the opportunity to get their message out to the people. A break will only give the American People the chance to become informed and make a decision based on a better understanding of the issue. They can then relate their feelings back to their representatives in congress, and hopefully, the members of congress will take the desires of their constituents into consideration when they then cast their votes on the issue.

Second, the cost of any major overhaul of Government policy has effects that can last for decades. Take the New Deal that came around as a result of the Great Depression. It had some good effects and some that did not go over quite so well. We now have a highway system that allows not only for travel, but growth, expansion and commerce in ways that were not possible 75 years ago. We also got Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and several other government programs that, while they have done some good for people in need, have always been a broken system, and have placed us in the predicament we now face.

Would it not be prudent then, too take the time to think about what the long term effects will be of any major change. How are we going to pay for these systems? Will the systems hold up under government control? Or will this new, and rather costly, universal coverage only be a temporary patch for a problem that could fill the hole in the ozone.

For Congress, they should enjoy their summer vacation, but they must remember that the choice they make when they come back will have consequences that last long after they leave office. Maybe between the parties and the cabins they can take some time and think about the problem placed before them. Who knows? We might just end up with a better system than we started with.

Absolute Power

We have all heard the saying that "absolute power corrupts absolutely", but how often do we think about its meaning. Whenever there is a person or group that has complete control, they are almost assured of abusing that power. This was the argument that was pushed by democrats for years. The Republican run government was abusing their power and passing legislation that was only setting up the country for a major economic disaster. Time and time again they told the people that the only way for the democratic system to work properly is to have a system of checks and balances. The members of the minority party in Congress told us over and over that nothing was worse than having one party that completely controlled the US Government, as they will unquestioningly take advantage of the situation, and I will, on this rather rare occasion, completely agree with the Democratic Party line, or what it was a year ago.

Then we had the primaries. We all remember the Saturday Night Live skits with Tina Fey and her flawless impersonation of Gov. Palin, or the never ending coverage of the democratic primaries and the praise that Obama received from the media while Clinton was viewed as … well let's just say that it appeared that the media did not like Senator Clinton. We remember the way that McCain, and the rest of the Republican Party for that matter, tried to get as far away from President Bush as humanly possible. Then there was the election and then everything changed. Remember… It was about "Change"?

In one move, the control of the US Government was summarily handed over to the Democrats. From the President to Congress the Republicans had lost all power, with nothing left to hold on too as their own. With nothing left to stop the Democrats from repealing the laws passed in the last few years, the Republicans fell back on their one remaining defense, the filibuster. We often think of old men reading the phone book when we hear the word filibuster, and while the different ways that have been found to carry out this stall tactic have ranged from the phone book to bringing in cots to the room to allow others to sleep, the principle is important. The filibuster gives the minority party time to argue their case with the members of congress when otherwise they lose their opportunity when the votes are simply cast across party lines.

This all change with Al Franken, the television star, who for years spent his time on SNL making fun of government figures. Franken made the decision to run for the US Senate and won. Eight months later, and after a lengthy court battle, he was recently confirmed to his seat. This brought the total number of Democratic held seats to 60, the magic number, the filibuster-proof number. If all member of the party vote together, they can override any filibuster that the Republicans attempt.

What so many Democrats now fail to mention is that they now have absolute power. The is not anything that the Republican party can do now to stop the Democratic train that the Democrats could do two years ago to stop the Republican Express. But where is the outrage? Where are the arguments for equality and checks and balances? The democrats would hope that we would simply forget about those ideas and focus on the "Voter Mandate", the idea that the complete flip in power is the voters' way of mandating that the Democrats use their power to its full extent. As far as I remember, there was no "Voter Mandate" section when I voted last November.

Maybe we should take a different tone. Instead of moving down the path of separation where power flops back and forth between the different parties, where we will just end up in the same place as the UK Parliament, we should move towards working together, even if we don't agree, so that we have the checks and balances that the Founding Fathers placed in our government in such an inspired move. One party will always be a majority and the other will be the minority. Which party is which will change over time, right now the Democrats are in power, but that will not last forever. We must move towards a future that includes one another, regardless of race, sex, religion, age or which political party has control of the government.

Misguided Efforts

As the fiscal year for many states expired on June 30^th and began again on July 1^st, many states use this date as the official enforcement date for any new laws passed in the previous legislative session. This year, the state of Utah had several highly publicized laws go into effect. Some were met with little resistance and even some celebration, as was true with the new liquor laws. Others, on the other hand, have not received such a high approval rating from the local communities. One in particular concerns the much debated topic of immigration.

Senate Bill 81 sets ups guidelines for what employers must do to verify that workers in the state are not here illegally, and makes it a crime to knowingly transport or harbor an illegal alien. Many in the local communities, particularly those communities composed of a large percentage of Latinos, have become very outspoken against the bill. They fear that any law enforcement officer will be able to question them regarding their legal status when they are pulled over for a traffic violation. They are expending their efforts in the hope of having the bill repealed if possible, postponed if not.

For years now, the fight of those who support the bill has been to build bigger, longer, and deeper, to keep illegal community from entering into our country while providing a harsher punishment for those who do break the law. This system has failed to provide the security that so many want. It seems that the government just does not have the resources needed to provide the level of security that the "Minute Men" feel they need to provide. And now, as the government tosses back and forth the idea of allowing the illegal community access to the Social Security fund, of which they have made no contribution, outrage is beginning to pour into Washington as so many who have been paying into the government plan their whole lives, will not be able to access any of the money that the government has forced them to contribute while other who have paid nothing will receive their benefits.

It appears that there is only one true way to fix this problem. Rather than spending time asking how legal it is for a police officer to ask your immigration status is, let us work together to find a way to change the status of so many illegal aliens, to that of legal, tax paying members of the community. Would it not be better for those who are now being paid under the table, tax free, to help pay for the many services that the government provides. They too would then be paying the taxes towards Social Security and FICA. No longer would there even be an argument over the legality of a question as each and every member of the community would be paying for the benefits of living here in this wonderful country.

We should focus our efforts on the laws that can make a true difference in the argument. Fighting over the same things that have moved us nowhere only creates hate and anger towards those who should be our friends. Instead, we should work together to make it possible to each and every one of us to become productive members of society, regardless of where we were born.

The King and The Troops and The Fourth

There have been some very tragic events in the last few weeks. We have all heard of the many celebrity deaths, some of which have come with great surprise, and others that have been expected for months. These deaths have been tragic for not only the families of those who have passed on, and also for the many fans which have been following the lives of their beloved heroes.

The death of most discussion has been that of the late Michael Jackson, the proclaimed "King of Pop", whose death came as a great surprise to most. What is no surprise is the amount of media attention has been placed on the death and subsequent events that have occurred during the investigation of the cause and what will happen to his estate. As the major news networks have struggled get any information from the local authorities, the music networks have run his music videos around the clock, digging deep into the archives to find the most rare and unique pieces of footage spanning the entire life of the music icon.

While this level of media coverage is expected for the person who is possibly the most famous person on earth, it has become clear that there are many other stories that are slipping through the cracks of the total Michael Jackson coverage. The ever escalating situation in North Korea, the exile of the President of Honduras, and the election problems in Iran, are only a few of the things which we seem to care very little about judging from the level of media coverage in the last few days.

There is one story that has been overlooked, which should be the one that is receiving the level of attention that the "King's" death has received. I am speaking of the pullback of Unites States Military Forces from the cities in Iraq. This is a wonderful day in the world, where international leaders now feel that the newly (in the historical sense of the word) liberated country has the ability to keep the peace and govern themselves in a sustained way. This is possibly the greatest victory in modern years. After a major war, and years of insurgent fighting, while the fledgling government has struggled to find itself, the people of Iraq have become capable of leading themselves in a peaceful manner, and it is being completely overlooked by the media.

This lack of media coverage is exemplified by the website for CNN. At 3:13 p.m. mountain time, the total number of stories related to the troop pullback was zero. In contrast, the total number of stories or links to the coverage of Michael Jackson's death was 15. The only mention of the troop pullback was this online survey…

CNN.com - Breaking News, U.S., World, Weather, Entertainment & Video News
http://www.cnn.com/
Screen clipping taken: 6/30/2009, 3:13 PM

Is this not a sad commentary on what we as a people find important? We would rather hear that the Michael Jackson cut his father out of his will, than the next major step in the complete removal of US troops from an active war zone. We care more about the death of a celebrity, than we do about the men and women who are putting their lives in danger every day so that we can have the IPods and 50 inch plasmas and the high speed broadband, which allow us to watch the streaming video of the tribute to Jackson at the Apollo Theater.

We should be ashamed of where we allow our focus to remain, and strive to remember what is that our brothers and sisters are trying to achieve, and by most judgments, are managing to accomplish.

This weekend, as we celebrate the liberty that we so jealously enjoy, let's remember the true source of our happiness. Let us remember that we live in a place that, not only do we have the right to enjoy the music we choose, but we also have the right to choose which God we believe in. We have the right to make choices… in what we where, where we go, who we know, and even who and what we what to allow into our homes. This is a gift that so many lack, and so many others are trying to share with those around the world.

As I use my freedom this weekend to lie in the grass, in a park, staring up at the patriotic displays that so many of us love, I will take a moment, and thank not only my God, but also those who have fought and died to give me that freedom. I will remember that the death of someone fighting for the freedom of others, deserved just as much attention as the death of a pop star, and the actions preformed to help others, are insurmountably more important than the contents of a will.

With that said, I will take a rare opportunity to deviate from my normal pattern. I would like to thank so many for what they have done for me.

My Father, for leaving his wife and children so many years ago to go fight for a people, oppressed by a dictator, and then returning home to teach me about the truly important things in life.

My Mother, who showed me that even though it may be difficult, supporting those who are fighting for the freedoms of other was always the right thing to do.

My Brother, for leaving his family to protect so many other from the radicals who believe that a United States Military presence in Iraq, must be resisted by lethal force. Who has experienced things that I would never wish on another, but continues to fight, knowing that the outcome is worth the sacrifice.

My Sister-in law, who is not only supporting my brother, but who serves herself in the Air Force, for supporting my brother in the ways that I cannot.

J. M., who fought alongside my brother, being wounded in action, for being the brother that my brother needed while away from his family. You acted as a Hero, in a way that will never be forgotten.

All of the men and women in the world, who fight for the rights of others, even at great risk to their own lives.

And finally, To the men and women who have died in the service of others,, whether in the Army, Navy, Air Force, or the Marines, the men and women of police, fire, and medical departments who rush into danger, for the chance of saving another, to all those who have lost their lives, giving another the chance at their own. I thank you.

Have a Happy 4^th of July

Pushing His Luck

This last week the government of North Korea sentenced two American journalists to 12 years of hard labor in a prison camp. The two female journalists were arrested along the Chinese, North Korean border by North Korean border guards. This step has only further strained the relationship between the North Korean Government and the rest of the world as North Korea continues to advance its nuclear weapons program despite outrage expressed by the international community. The arrest of the two journalists has raise the stakes a Kim Jong Ill has work hard to remain the focus of attention in the international community. It is still unclear if the arrest was legal or if the journalist were even in North Korean territory when the arrest took place.
While I have commented several times about the North Korean Government’s need to remain the center of attention, at times comparing Kim Jong Ill to an overgrown child, it is becoming clear that his is an overgrown child with the ability to start an international war. While his past record has shown that he will push the boundaries until he gets what he wants, these recent tantrums have shown us just how far he is willing to go to get his way. Ill is taunting the international community to push back. Once they do, he uses the “international sanctions” as an excuse to threaten war.
Will Kim Jong Ill take this episode to the point of invading South Korea or launching a nuclear warhead at Japan? I don’t know. We must, however, start to consider if he is truly crazy enough to take it that far. It must be unclear if Kim Jong Ill is crazy to Washington if the President and democratically controlled congress have already given their support to military actions in Korea. Committing to a third war when they are doing everything they can to act like they are ending the other two. Do I believe that we will go back to war with North Korea (remember that we never actually ended the Korean War of the 50’s)? I don’t believe so, but Kim Jong Ill has done a great job of convincing us that he may be just crazy enough to do so. Chalk one up for North Korea

That Didn’t Take Long

North Korea's announcement that it had detonated a second nuclear weapon this morning was confirmed by the U.S. Geological Survey who recorded a 4.7 magnitude seismic event at the same site that North Korea tested its first nuclear device in October of 2006. The immediate reaction from the international community was expected and consistent. All major players in the nuclear world came out and condemned the move, going as far as having President Obama say the test was "directly and recklessly challenging the international community." There was only one surprise in the reactions of the international community. China, who has been North Korea's strongest ally, "expresses firm opposition" which is in stark contrast to its previous support. Is this a sign that China now believes that Kim Jong Il has gone too far?

The real concern now is how to respond. The UN Security Council will meet this afternoon to discuss the test and most likely condemn the action with a strongly worded letter. Where the true concern should lie, is what will be the response of the individual counties in the world. Will the US feel the need to stop Kim Jong from developing weapons that can reach the United States? If the US does decide to take action, will China step in and provide them support, or will the alliance break under the strain of the North Korean determination to be a 1^st world country? We must wait and see, but most likely North Korea just upset that no one is paying them any attention.

Not So Fast

When President Obama took office last January, one of the very first promises that he made was to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, before the end of January next year. This last Tuesday, under great pressure from the Republican Party, the democratically controlled Congress pulled funding for the closure of the base. The new "War Supplemental Bill," which provides funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, was stripped of the $80 million to pay for the closing of the prison and was changed to include a ban on providing funding until the President provides Congress with a plan for closing the prison, and more importantly, what to do with the suspected terrorist that are now held there.

This move was a clear contrast with the near rubber stamping policy that the Congress has provided to the President since he has taken office, and may be a sign of the problems the Democratic Party has begun to face. From the recent backtracking of the Speaker of the House, Nancy Palosi, in regards to her being briefed about water boarding, to the slow decline of the President's approval ratings, there are signs that the Democrat controlled government may not have a free ride for the next 4 years. It is more likely that the American People have longer memories than some may have expected.

It is clear that the American People remember the last few years of having the government controlled by one party. Under the Bush Administration, law after law was passed that had no real input from the Democrats. While many viewed this as a productive government, others (usually democrats) felt that the very principle of democracy was in jeopardy. By not allowing both sides to have a say in the process, many felt that we were moving back to the Good ol' Boys system where only the elite had a say.

The American People changed their stance and shifted the power in Congress to the Democrats at election time. While this stopped the passage of many pieces of legislation, it also had the effect of slowing the government as a whole. Not only was the Republican agenda stopped, but any new legislation produced by the Democrats was vetoed by President Bush. This brought the process to almost a complete stop with the fight over the budget for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan when the democrats fought with everything they had to force a timetable for the withdrawal of troops from the Middle East, while President Bush vowed to veto any budget that had a withdrawal requirement. The Democrats were eventually forced to give in and provide a withdrawal-free budget. Once the economy began to crash however, President Bush was left out in the wind as Republican Presidential hopefuls scrambled to distance themselves from the black hole that was President Bush. This ultimately played in Obama's favor as the country looked for someone to bring change.

The mistake that the Democrats have made is clear, they assume that because they now control both Congress and the Presidency, they can run the government the same way it was for the last eight years. Now, only a few months into the new administration, they are starting to see what will happen if they continue down this path. If they continue to do what they want simply because they can, the results will most definitely be as disastrous as it was for the Republican Party.

The American People remember what it was like to feel that the government did not care about them. As they begin to see past the excitement of "Yes We Can" and begin to see the "Because We Can" attitude of Congress, it will become much more difficult for Congress to do as they please. As Congress begins to tell the President "No", however, they are only strengthening their hold on the government for the next few years.

Politics of The Mouse

On a recent trip to southern California, I spent a few days at a not so specific amusement park with an adorable not so specific rodent as their spokesman. While the majority of the trip was all that it was expected to be, a unique interaction with the employees there taught me a few things about politics. It came of the second day that we were in the park, or should I say it came the second day before we were "supposed" to be in the park.

As is common in many parks, guests are allowed into the park up to a half hour early to shop and buy things so when the time comes around to open the park, a rope is dropped that allows everyone into the park at the same time and avoids congestion at the ticket gate. After being admitted through the ticket gate and into the shopping area, I will call it All-American Ave, we entered the shop at the end of the Ave and was promptly ushered through a door by an employee. This door led us out into the park behind the rope holding back the rest of the guest eager to enter the park. Amazed at our luck, we quickly walked to the ride we wanted to enjoy and were amazed that we were the only guest that were in the park, even stopping to take pictures of the completely empty park.

After passing several employees who said nothing to us, we arrived at a ride themed around a cute little fish that every child between the age of 2 and 20 knows by name. Seeing that the ride was not open yet, being that we are in the park about 10 minutes before it opened, we stopped and talk to the employee standing at the entrance of the ride. After talking to this very nice employee for a few minutes a second employee, who appeared much older and much more in charge, ran over to us and very curtly asked us how we got into the park. After telling her that we were not quite sure, and responding to some other not so kind questions, we were told that the park was not open and that we were not supposed to be in the park yet. We were then instructed to go sit down and wait for the park to open, which we did without question.

No more than two minutes later, we look across the park and see a uniformed security officer running towards us in an obvious hurry. Out of breath, the officer begins to ask us the very same questions that the last employee had asked us. After once again telling us in a rather unkind way that we were not supposed to be there, we were told that we needed to follow the officer back to the main gate to wait for the park to open. We did as we were asked and before we made it back to the front of the park, the park opened and we were allowed to go enjoy our day.

This interaction taught me a major lesson when it comes to politics. You must communicate, and if you don't, it will only cause problems. I was clear that the lack of communication between the employees in the park lead to us not only getting into the park unintentionally, but also a rather unkind interaction with several employees. This same principle should apply to government and politics. If the leaders of government communicate with the people, it will be easier for the people to understand what it is we need to do to make the world a happier place. If this simple communication takes place, a great number of problems can be avoided to begin with.

At times when problems with the people cannot be avoided, simply communicating with other departments within the government can help to create a clear front and avoid the simple battles that only lead to more problems. Let's work on cutting through the red tape that keeps us from talking with one another. If the right hand knows what the left hand is doing, they can work together and help in a world that is in desperate need of the very things the government was designed to do, rather than competing over the things that could do some real good.

To Spend or Not To Spend?

Photo:President Obama address the press at the White House.

As more and more people compare our current national economic state to that of the Great Depression, the response of the Democrat controlled congress is clear to see… throw money at it. A Trillion dollars later, there is no true sign that the economy is turning around. So what does the President do? He takes a hard stand against over-spendin….ehr… inefficiency.

Today President Obama recommended to congress that 121 federal programs be cut from next year's budget. These cuts are not necessarily a bad thing. Spending millions on a long range navigation system that was made obsolete years ago by GPS technology is absurd, as is paying for two separate programs that provide the same services to the same people. What should concern us is the reason that President Obama wants to make the cuts, so that he can pay for his own programs. In a statement made by the President he states, "To put this in perspective, this is more than enough savings to pay for a $2,500 tuition tax credit for millions of students as well as a larger Pell Grant -- with enough money left over to pay for everything we do to protect the National Parks," both of these projects have been goals the President has been pushing for since the campaign.

I firmly believe that we need to control our spending. We must balance our budget and cut the programs that are a waste of money. The only way that we as a country can have a sound economy is to follow the same basic principles that ever fiscally secure person follows, make more than we spend and pay off our debt as soon as we can. We must not however, cut spending in one place so that we can simply spend it somewhere else. That would be like paying off some of our credit card, just so we can buy a new 57" flat screen TV. We still don't have the money to begin with, and when it comes time to pay, we are going to realize that maybe we could have gotten by with the 19" we had to begin with.

We need to focus on making do with what we have. Most new programs can wait. Sure, it's great to reduce our spending by $17 billion, but if we turn around and spend another $20 billion, was it really that great to begin with. Let's make cuts, but with the mindset that we are trying to live within our means and not that we simply are trying to free up some space on the MasterCard.

The Senate is not Parliament

There is a major difference between the US government and the Parliament in the United Kingdom. Both are two party systems with a conservative party and a liberal party. Both have different sides of the room to sit on, and the parties within each have very different ideas about how the government is supposed to run the country. Arguably the biggest difference between the US Senate and the UK Parliament is the power of the minority party. In the UK when one of the parties comes into power, all power is stripped from the opposing power. They are removed from any positions of power in the cabinet and are left to complain about how they would have done things differently if they were in power. The US is different, or at least it is supposed to be. In the US Senate, any decisions must be voted upon by the entire party and can only pass with a vote of at least 60, a clear majority over the 51 needed for a simple majority. While this measure may mean fewer things pass, it also provides for a certain amount of discussion that would not exist otherwise. Needing more votes means that there must be a level of compromise from both parties.

Well today that may have changed. In something as normal as passing the US Budget Outline, the Democrats in the Senate have managed to change some of the basic workings of our government. When the Democrats added a last minute change, they made it possible to pass the US Budget later in the year with a simple majority vote in the Senate. While some may think that is does not sound like a big deal, the truth is that there are some major repercussions that will follow. Part of the government process should always involve discussion. While I think that the use of filibusters on both sides of the isle are taken too far, it is far better to talk too long than not to talk at all. The ability for the Democrats to pass the Budget without having any input from the opposing party looks much more like the UK Parliament then the Founding Fathers had in mind.

We all want what is we feel is best for us. Some of us think that the answer lies in complete government control looking towards Canada and France as examples. Others believe that the less the government steps in, the more the economy will grow. The answer is clearly not to rely on one extreme or the other. Only through the compromise of both have we reached a system that, while it has its many problems, works for us here in the United States.
Why then are we allowing the system to be changed just because the President can say the word “antiquated”? We need to stop and take a step back, remembering that the only way we have survived this long as a country was on our ability to come together. We did it back in WWII, and again after the September 11th attacks. Why do we refuse to do such when it comes to the decisions that we really need to make together. If we allow for one party to take power with no control or restraint, we will undoubtedly follow in the path of so many others, complete socialism. This may be the goal of some, believing that the American people are so far gone that they cannot take care of themselves, but I have more faith than that. I believe that it is possible for the American People to take care of themselves. They simply need to be told that they can, and not told that the only way to overcome the problems that surround then is to let the government rule.

The System works because we have two parties, and they are always in competition, not just when elections role around. The answer to the problems lies in working together and taking the time to stop and consider what is going on in the world. It is simply wrong to make it possible to skip one of the most important steps and move on to simply getting whatever you want, regardless of what it may cost.

Even the Best Can Fall

April 8, 2009: Deputy U.S. Marshals and U.S. Postal Inspectors seize an automobile
from the home of Shawn R. Merriman in Aurora, Colo

Last Tuesday, the SEC filed a lawsuit against a former LDS bishop in an attempt to recover funds that had been embezzled in a ponzi scheme over the last 13 years. Shawn Merriman is accused of milking almost $20 million from investors as his scheme grew.

The real importance of this story is not that that there is another person that has been caught stealing money from others, rather who that person was, a religious leader. I have often come across those who feel there comes a time in life when a person becomes so righteous that they are no longer tempted to do things which may be unethical or even illegal. At a certain point, a righteous member of their religion is free from the trials that face the rest of us. That could not be any farther from the truth.

Each member of society is responsible for their actions. That does not change with age or position. The only thing that does change with age is our ability to make a bad decision. As we are given more responsibility in life, we are also given the change to succeed or fail. If we fail to act with a basic level of morality, then we are failing in our responsibility as members of our community. These decisions can be very small at first. They may come out of desperation. Merriman was at one time trying to do some legitimate investing, however, after losing $400,000 of his investors money, he turned to a dishonest practice to cover up the losses.

They may come from greed, but they well come given enough time.

What may be upsetting to many is that Merriman was a respected member of his community. He was not simply a "banker on Wall Street", but was a religious leader and respected by many of his neighbors.

We must remember that each one of us has the potential to be the next victim of a bad decision. The choices we make effect others in ways we may not be able to see, and the consequences of those decisions may last for years. While it may be easier to think that there is an easy way out, or that if I go to church, then it won't happen to me, we need to understand that it can and does happen to the best of us, bishop or CEO or member of the congregation.

If we truly want to live in a peaceful society, we must recognize that the problem exists, and that we will be forced to face it from time to time. When we are prepared for the challenge, regardless of who we are and what positions we may hold in our community, they we will be well on our way to living in our own personal Zion.

Playing With the Big Boys

In an expected move last Friday, North Korea test launched a missile that would show that the country was capable of launching a nuclear weapon that could possibly reach as far as the United States. While the move has been seen as hostile by most countries, as well as much of the United Nations, any moves to punish North Korea are sure to have little, if any, effect. Why won't North Korea stop developing nuclear weapons? The answer is simple; they want to play with the big boys.

At the very mention of nuclear weapons, everyone pays attention. It does not matter how small you are, or how much military force you can scrounge up, if others think you have the biggest stick, they are going to listen to you. The "haves" as they are called, or the countries that currently have nuclear weapons, are always looked at in a different way than the "have not's". To understand this point, we need only hear a few names: The US, Russia, China, India, The UK, and Israel. I am sure that each of us knows these names and will have some idea of where in the world they are. You may even know a little about our nation's policy towards these countries. Now consider these names: Chad, Argentina, Moldova, Belarus, Somalia, and Turkmenistan. My guess is that you have no idea where any more than one or two of those countries are, and probably have no idea as to US policy towards them.

Now let's consider two final names: North Korea and Iran. Before the war in Iraq, most of us could not tell the difference between Iraq and Iran. All that has changed in the last few years as the potential of these countries developing a nuclear program became clear.

Yes there is reason for us to be concerned with more nuclear weapons in more hands around the world. No one thinks it will be a good idea to go back to a Cold War stance of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD), and nuclear proliferation should be done with extreme care. There is no reason to assume, however, that North Korea' s purpose in developing nuclear technology is so that it will be used. We can see from their past actions that they simply what to be included in the conversation at the "adult table".

When North Korea detonated their first nuclear device in 2006, the world quickly moved North Korea to the center of attention. Media coverage focused of the county and its eccentric leader for months. Every news organization vied for the chance to go inside North Korea and be the first "on scene", and for the first time after the Korean War, we all knew what was going on across the Korean Peninsula.

Overnight, North Korea moved from being a small country on the other side of the world that had a crazy leader, to a small nuclear country on the other side of the world with the same crazy leader, but now we cared about them. With efforts for peace and nuclear disarmament we allowed North Korea to remain a major actor in world politics. We sent the New York Philharmonic to play a historic concert that was "bridging the gap" between our nation and theirs. And then the North Korean government started to destroy its nuclear program, or at least the part of the program that we could see and could be broadcast on CNN. Reporters showed us how much progress was being made and how well the world was getting along.

But all that faded away over time, and we all once again stop paying attention to Kim Jong Il. We knew that the North Koreans had nuclear weapons, but they could not send them anywhere. We stopped including North Korea in the discussions and moved on to the "economic crisis" that was bringing the world to its knees. So what is North Korea to do, how about launching a "satellite" that we all know is just a way to show that they have the ability to launch a nuclear weapon into space.

And look, it worked! We all care about North Korea again. We all want to see what is going on half way around the world, and the media is happy to supply us with pictures of projected missile flight paths and of a tiny dot in the middle of a field that we are told is a missile that is ready for launch. We once again respect, or should I say fear, what someone has the power to do on the other side of the world.

Will North Korea use nuclear weapons on South Korea, Japan, or even the United States? That is doubtful. They simply want to feel like one of the big kids and the best way they know to make it happen, Carry the biggest stick around. Don't worry about North Korea. Wait for Iran to develop a nuclear weapons program. Then we might have something to worry about.

Enjoy It While It Lasts

In an unexpected move, today the Iowa Supreme Court struck down a state law that banned same-sex marriage. In the unanimous decision, the court effectively ruled that same-sex marriages were legal in the state, making Iowa the third state to allow same sex marriages. The new rules will come into effect in as soon as 3 weeks.
While this may seem like a win for the gay community, I beg to differ. Iowa is a very conservative state, and while the law as ruled down, it was passed in the first place. The people of Iowa are mostly corn farmers who hold their beliefs and value systems in high regard. They may not be the most educated state in the country, but I would argue that it is one of the smartest states in the country. Iowa know how to use the system. There is a reason that they are the first state to hold their primary presidential elections, and refuse to move to Super Tuesday. They know that the government wants to keep the voters happy so the Iowa people will keep them in office come election time. This comes out in numerous subsidies that the corn industry receives.
Moving back to the issue at hand, The people of Iowa know how to get things done. They first passed the law to ban same-sex marriage. That has now been struck down. Do the people of Iowa give up and allow something that they came together as a people to ban, absolutely not. They will come together again and change their constitution.
Is this possible? If it is, will it happen? Yes! How can we know that? It has happened already. Iowa's neighbor to the west, Nebraska, went through this a few years ago. I would know, I lived there. Initiative 416 was the movement to change the Nebraska Constitution to effectively ban gay marriage. Was 416 contested? Yes. Were there hateful actions preformed on both sides of the issues? Of course. Was I called out at school in the middle of class and yelled at by a girl throwing out labels like bigot? You bet, but 416 still passed. Not only did it pass, it passed by a large margin. As much hate that came my way, including people destroying my property and dumping their cigarette trays in my driveway, the people made a decision and did not let the screaming of a few influence the laws that bind everyone.
Will this be the case in Iowa? Most likely it will be. The religious component of Iowa is very strong. Not only will the small churches push for the change, but the larger churches are willing to add their support. The ruling from the Supreme Court is not planed to be contested, but I would be very surprised if the constitution was not changed to override the Courts. It may seem a victory for now, but the people will undoubtedly come together and show the they still disagree with gay marriage, don't want to allow it, and will do what it takes to make their "quiet voices" heard.

We live in Zion Times

The world is changing, I believe that we all know that. Things that were abhorred only twenty years ago are now embraced and praised. Is this change bad? Not always. There have been some changes that have been for the better. My wife was able to get a degree in a field of study that only a few years ago was almost entirely composed of men. These changes should be looked at as a success in society, but other changes may be much more destructive. For example, the effect of not having a parent in the home to raise young children, mother or father, has had measurable negative effects on society.
In these wavering times we find failures in society as well as reasons for rejoicing. But simply watching the news while you get ready in the morning or reading major news websites does not fulfill the responsibility of each person to participate in their community; local or national. Nor does begrudgingly going to the voting booths on a Tuesday in November. Each citizen has the responsibility and the right to be truly informed, not merely the ability to simply repeat what they hear on Fox News or read in the New York Times. They need to have a true grasp on the world around them and give their own opinion, even if it happens to be the same as what they read on the web.
The world we live in is what we make of it. We live in Zion Times. We have the chance to make our communities into a shelter from the world. We may not have the power to change what is happening in Washington, but we do have the opportunity to change the communities that we live in into our very own Zion. To do that, we must understand what is happening around us. Understand the controversy around us. It's fine if we disagree. I may not feel the same way you do, but working together we can all have a part in making a better world, however small that world may be.
Lets create a world where in uncertain times, expression is not reserved for only those with the loudest voice. The quite voice has the power to change. Together, let us call for truth.