An invading army entered a country, killed many of its inhabitants and occupied the territory. A small group of the people who lived in the country eventually rose up against the invaders and, using whatever means they could, fought back and drove them from their land.
This happened in the 2nd century BCE in Jerusalem when the Seleucid Empire attacked Jerusalem and occupied it as part of their country. A small group of Israelites know as the Maccabees retaliated against them and were successful in driving them out. This event is commemorated to this day in the festival of lights that we commonly call Hanukkah.
In 1987, after years of having their land confiscated from them by an invading force, a small group of Palestinians called themselves Hamas and began fighting back against the Israeli army. The same geographic area and the same scenario yet the ancient fighters merit a festival while the modern fighters are branded as terrorists.
The men and women of Hamas are freedom-fighters trying to liberate their land from the hands of an invading force that would take it from them. If someone tried to take your land, wouldn't you fight back?
It is disgraceful that in a nation that values freedom as highly as we claim to, we do not rush to the aid of the Palestinians. Instead, our government financially supports Israel and places Palestine on a Terror Watch List. These people are not terrorists. They want to live in peace just as we do but Israel will not allow it.
It is long past time to end this. Our financial support of Israel must end. Our branding Palestinians as terrorists must end. Our military support needs to be sent to Palestine to push Israel back behind the borders that were established in 1948. Israel is not entitled to any land beyond those lines.
As the leader of democracy in the free world, it is our duty to protect the innocent men and women of Palestine and give them back their land. It is our duty as peace loving Americans to help these people in their time of need.
Anyone who does not know about this conflict and the true reasons for it, should read Arabs & Israel For Beginners by Ron David. Also check out the website http://www.imemc.org for news on the Middle East told without the bias of American news organizations. In other words; for the truth.
Tuesday, February 24, 2015
Another Case of Fraud In The Justice System
This is probably one of the worst cases of fraud that has ever blemished the American Justice System. A jury in New York awarded $218.5 million in damages to the families of victims of suicide bombers in Israel in the early 2000s. On the surface, this looks like a good thing but we need to see what's truly happening here.
The defendants in this case were the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the Palestinian Authority, which is now known as the State of Palestine (since 2013). The jurors found that these two entities are liable for the deaths of Americans and under the Anti-Terrorism Act, they awarded them monetary settlements.
In the first place, did the bombers act under orders of the PLO or the State of Palestine? Nothing in any of the news articles I could find proved that they did. If these were lone bombers who were attacking Israel, then these organizations cannot be held responsible, any more than the United States is responsible for the actions of Timothy McVeigh, who blew up the federal building in Oklahoma City.
Second, the PLO did not exist until 1964 and the Palestinian Authority until 1993. Both were formed out of a need due to Israel stealing land from the Palestinians. How, then, is Israel not being held accountable for their part in this? Had they not stolen Palestinian land, these organizations would not exist, and therefore no trial could have been held. Israel is the proximate cause of this action, yet Israel is not being charged, as they should be. Israel is a nation of state-sponsored terrorism and the United States continues to support them.
Third, how many of the jurors were Palestinian-Americans? In our country, a defendant is entitled to a trial by a jury of their peers. If Palestine is on trial, then Palestinians should be in the jury box. If the Israel Law Center is allowed to represent the plaintiffs, then the jurors need to be Palestinians. Otherwise, a fair trial cannot be guaranteed. In this case, it certainly was not a fair trial.
Fourth, assuming that awards are merited (which is not certain by any means), how did they come up with this amount? If all 33 victims were 35 years old and earning $60,000 per year, and all received a 5% salary increase annually until their retirement at 65, they would have earned a total of $131,548,923 or 60% of what the jurors awarded. Why such a hefty increase over their lost earnings?
This is just one more example of Americans being uninformed and lied to. Palestine has been the victim for decades and our government not only allows it, they sponsor it. The Israelis need to be held accountable. The Israelis are the root cause of the problems in the Middle East and the Israelis need to pay their fair share for damages done.
I say bring Israel to trial for these crimes. Let the actual perpetrator of the unrest in the region be held liable for their actions. I doubt very much that Attorney Yalowitz or the Israel Law Center will be much of a help in that regard. They certainly don't care about justice. They only care about harming Palestine. Again.
The defendants in this case were the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the Palestinian Authority, which is now known as the State of Palestine (since 2013). The jurors found that these two entities are liable for the deaths of Americans and under the Anti-Terrorism Act, they awarded them monetary settlements.
In the first place, did the bombers act under orders of the PLO or the State of Palestine? Nothing in any of the news articles I could find proved that they did. If these were lone bombers who were attacking Israel, then these organizations cannot be held responsible, any more than the United States is responsible for the actions of Timothy McVeigh, who blew up the federal building in Oklahoma City.
Second, the PLO did not exist until 1964 and the Palestinian Authority until 1993. Both were formed out of a need due to Israel stealing land from the Palestinians. How, then, is Israel not being held accountable for their part in this? Had they not stolen Palestinian land, these organizations would not exist, and therefore no trial could have been held. Israel is the proximate cause of this action, yet Israel is not being charged, as they should be. Israel is a nation of state-sponsored terrorism and the United States continues to support them.
Third, how many of the jurors were Palestinian-Americans? In our country, a defendant is entitled to a trial by a jury of their peers. If Palestine is on trial, then Palestinians should be in the jury box. If the Israel Law Center is allowed to represent the plaintiffs, then the jurors need to be Palestinians. Otherwise, a fair trial cannot be guaranteed. In this case, it certainly was not a fair trial.
Fourth, assuming that awards are merited (which is not certain by any means), how did they come up with this amount? If all 33 victims were 35 years old and earning $60,000 per year, and all received a 5% salary increase annually until their retirement at 65, they would have earned a total of $131,548,923 or 60% of what the jurors awarded. Why such a hefty increase over their lost earnings?
This is just one more example of Americans being uninformed and lied to. Palestine has been the victim for decades and our government not only allows it, they sponsor it. The Israelis need to be held accountable. The Israelis are the root cause of the problems in the Middle East and the Israelis need to pay their fair share for damages done.
I say bring Israel to trial for these crimes. Let the actual perpetrator of the unrest in the region be held liable for their actions. I doubt very much that Attorney Yalowitz or the Israel Law Center will be much of a help in that regard. They certainly don't care about justice. They only care about harming Palestine. Again.
Saturday, November 22, 2014
Obama and the Immigration Situation
Not everything I do is political. I've been a little lax on this blog because I was working on writing and publishing a novel on vampires. If you're interested, it's called "Vampire Tales - Book One - Genesis" and you can find it at most online book dealers.
Now on to Obama. Since moving to Tulsa I've been surrounding myself with more and more Republicans. Those who are not truly Republican are still rather conservative. I consider myself to be a breath of fresh air for their stale minds. Just about everyone I meet here gets their news from Fox. It's sad, really.
After Obama wrote his Executive Order on immigration, these people have been asking me what I think of my president now, assuming that I would now change my mind considering how he has taken power that the president is not allowed by the constitution. Or I would be ashamed of how he has taken a "my way or the highway" approach and gone off on his own without regard for the work of the Congress. Or at the very least that I would agree that the will of the people in this last election is that the Republicans are best able to run the government and we should agree with that wisdom.
To all of this I say, get real.
In the first place, Obama is an expert when it comes to the constitution. He knows where the power lies and he knows what he can and cannot do. He knows, for example, that only congress can change the laws that would grant green cards, so he did not go that far. He went as far as the law would allow him to go. That is not a power grab. That is doing his job.
Now let's look at the elected bodies. The senate passed a bill for immigration reform. That is the job of the senate. That bill was sent to the house. The house is then to re-write the bill, if they don't like it the way it is, and vote on it. If it's the same bill, it goes to the president for his signature. If not, it goes back to the senate to be re-worked by that body. When they reach an agreement it goes to the president.
In this case, the senate passed a bill and sent it to the house. The house has been sitting on that bill for more than 500 days. For over a year they have ignored their job duties and done nothing. We did not elect them to not do their jobs. The president told them if they were not going to do their jobs he would do it for them. They did not do their jobs. He did his. That is not a power grab. That is doing the job we elected him to do.
As for a "my way or the highway" approach, they seem to be a tad bit mistaken on who has that attitude. Mitch McConnell stated six years ago that his primary concern was to make sure that Obama was a one-term president. Six years later he now claims he wants to work with the president. John Boehner has consistently shown that he will not work with the president. If anyone needs evidence of that, look at how many times Boehner has brought measures up for a vote to repeal Obamacare. It's over 50 times now. Yet, they could not find time to vote just once on immigration reform. It's not Obama who has the "my way or the highway" approach. That badge sits squarely on the chest of the Republicans.
And lastly, the "people" did not speak in the last election. In fact, the majority of people do not speak in any of our elections. It's very sad that so few people in this country vote but that's the reality. Most do not. For the 2012 presidential election, there was a much larger turnout than for 2014. And the 2012 voters voted for Obama. So, if you want to argue that it's the will of the majority, that would be for Obama, not for a Republican led House of Representatives and Senate.
No, I will continue to support Obama. I stand behind his ideals and beliefs and I share his vision for a better America. Our immigration laws are unfair and need to be rewritten and he has taken a step in that direction. Hopefully his action will cause the Republicans to finally pass reform legislation and get our country moving again.
Now on to Obama. Since moving to Tulsa I've been surrounding myself with more and more Republicans. Those who are not truly Republican are still rather conservative. I consider myself to be a breath of fresh air for their stale minds. Just about everyone I meet here gets their news from Fox. It's sad, really.
After Obama wrote his Executive Order on immigration, these people have been asking me what I think of my president now, assuming that I would now change my mind considering how he has taken power that the president is not allowed by the constitution. Or I would be ashamed of how he has taken a "my way or the highway" approach and gone off on his own without regard for the work of the Congress. Or at the very least that I would agree that the will of the people in this last election is that the Republicans are best able to run the government and we should agree with that wisdom.
To all of this I say, get real.
In the first place, Obama is an expert when it comes to the constitution. He knows where the power lies and he knows what he can and cannot do. He knows, for example, that only congress can change the laws that would grant green cards, so he did not go that far. He went as far as the law would allow him to go. That is not a power grab. That is doing his job.
Now let's look at the elected bodies. The senate passed a bill for immigration reform. That is the job of the senate. That bill was sent to the house. The house is then to re-write the bill, if they don't like it the way it is, and vote on it. If it's the same bill, it goes to the president for his signature. If not, it goes back to the senate to be re-worked by that body. When they reach an agreement it goes to the president.
In this case, the senate passed a bill and sent it to the house. The house has been sitting on that bill for more than 500 days. For over a year they have ignored their job duties and done nothing. We did not elect them to not do their jobs. The president told them if they were not going to do their jobs he would do it for them. They did not do their jobs. He did his. That is not a power grab. That is doing the job we elected him to do.
As for a "my way or the highway" approach, they seem to be a tad bit mistaken on who has that attitude. Mitch McConnell stated six years ago that his primary concern was to make sure that Obama was a one-term president. Six years later he now claims he wants to work with the president. John Boehner has consistently shown that he will not work with the president. If anyone needs evidence of that, look at how many times Boehner has brought measures up for a vote to repeal Obamacare. It's over 50 times now. Yet, they could not find time to vote just once on immigration reform. It's not Obama who has the "my way or the highway" approach. That badge sits squarely on the chest of the Republicans.
And lastly, the "people" did not speak in the last election. In fact, the majority of people do not speak in any of our elections. It's very sad that so few people in this country vote but that's the reality. Most do not. For the 2012 presidential election, there was a much larger turnout than for 2014. And the 2012 voters voted for Obama. So, if you want to argue that it's the will of the majority, that would be for Obama, not for a Republican led House of Representatives and Senate.
No, I will continue to support Obama. I stand behind his ideals and beliefs and I share his vision for a better America. Our immigration laws are unfair and need to be rewritten and he has taken a step in that direction. Hopefully his action will cause the Republicans to finally pass reform legislation and get our country moving again.
Sunday, November 2, 2014
Mary Fallin, Running on her Record
Mary Fallin was elected governor of Oklahoma four years ago on the platform that she would improve the economy and reduce unemployment. Four years later, the economy has improved and unemployment is below the national average. How much of this has been achieved through Fallin's efforts is debatable, however, Fallin is running for re-election based on her record. As the incumbent candidate, she should. Her record is what the voters need to look at to decide if she is the best candidate going forward.
Let's look at Fallin's record:
Fallin was presented with a study early on in her term to improve the prison system in Oklahoma. Our prisons need serious work and this could have been accomplished years ago, however Fallin threw the proposal out. Now, she is looking into it, not because she believes in the idea but rather because she is running for re-election.
Fallin, like nearly all American governors, supported Common Core. Her support was one thing she did well. However, Common Core will only work with proper implementation and when it was revealed that it did not work, rather than take responsibility for her part in the debacle, she immediately distanced herself from the wreckage. Janet Barresi took the fall and lost her re-election bid. Fallin is still in the running.
Our state is among the lowest in education, largely because our teachers are among the lowest paid. You get what you pay for and excellent educators are leaving Oklahoma to teach elsewhere for better wages. Our teachers' salaries aren't even in line with the teachers in our neighboring states. Fallin claimed there isn't any money in the budget to raise their salaries, yet she was able to find money to raise the salaries of the heads of several state departments who were already being paid more than the teachers. Her reasoning was that their salaries should be in line with the national average in spite of the fact that a) Oklahoma's cost of living is below the national average and b) teachers aren't even in line with neighboring states, let alone the national average.
Yes, Mary Fallin should run on her record. And once her record is evaluated, voters should ensure that she does not get another four years to ruin our state. We just can't afford her kind of leadership.
Let's look at Fallin's record:
Fallin was presented with a study early on in her term to improve the prison system in Oklahoma. Our prisons need serious work and this could have been accomplished years ago, however Fallin threw the proposal out. Now, she is looking into it, not because she believes in the idea but rather because she is running for re-election.
Fallin, like nearly all American governors, supported Common Core. Her support was one thing she did well. However, Common Core will only work with proper implementation and when it was revealed that it did not work, rather than take responsibility for her part in the debacle, she immediately distanced herself from the wreckage. Janet Barresi took the fall and lost her re-election bid. Fallin is still in the running.
Our state is among the lowest in education, largely because our teachers are among the lowest paid. You get what you pay for and excellent educators are leaving Oklahoma to teach elsewhere for better wages. Our teachers' salaries aren't even in line with the teachers in our neighboring states. Fallin claimed there isn't any money in the budget to raise their salaries, yet she was able to find money to raise the salaries of the heads of several state departments who were already being paid more than the teachers. Her reasoning was that their salaries should be in line with the national average in spite of the fact that a) Oklahoma's cost of living is below the national average and b) teachers aren't even in line with neighboring states, let alone the national average.
Yes, Mary Fallin should run on her record. And once her record is evaluated, voters should ensure that she does not get another four years to ruin our state. We just can't afford her kind of leadership.
Monday, July 14, 2014
Israel vs. Hamas
In any conflict there are at least two sides but the most important element is the truth. Getting to the truth can only be achieved when one knows the facts. In the present state of unrest between Israel and Hamas, the facts do not seem to be important.
Last month three Israeli teenagers were abducted and executed. Without any evidence to support their claim, Israel accused Hamas. Hamas has denied involvement but that fell on deaf ears. When the bodies of the victims were found, Israeli citizens retaliated by kidnapping a Palestinian teenager and setting him on fire. They burned him to death. The perpetrators of this crime were apprehended but it is extremely doubtful that they will receive proper punishment for their crime, given that their victim was a Palestinian.
The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) though now known only as the Islamic State has apparently claimed responsibility for the initial abduction of the Israeli's. ISIL is a jihadist militant group that grew out of Al-Qaeda. They are not Hamas, they are not connected to Hamas and Hamas does not exert any control over them. Yet, Benjamin Netanyahu continues to blame Hamas, even though he apparently knows that Hamas was not involved.
When Israel killed an innocent Palestinian youth, the Palestinians had a right to defend themselves. They did so with rocket strikes against Israel. Israel has retaliated with airstrikes against Palestine. This must be put in perspective. Palestine has launched over 800 rockets and killed no one. Israel has struck over 1,300 times and killed nearly 200. The vast majority of the casualties are civilians. Israel knows this. Israel does not care.
All Americans should be aware of what is going on in Israel. United States Foreign Aid to Israel makes up more than half of the foreign aid to the entire world. We give more money to Israel than to any other country but we get nothing in return. Israel is not an oil-producing nation, so they do not supply us with oil. In two wars that the United States started (Iran and Afghanistan), Israel has not supplied any military assistance. We get nothing for the money we spend.
The Arms Export Control Act states that the United States may stop aid to countries which use U.S. military assistance for purposes other than “legitimate self-defense.” Palestine has a right to retaliate when Israel burns one of their children alive. Israel cannot correctly call their current actions against Palestine "self-defense." As such, the United States should immediately withdraw all military assistance from Israel until such time as Israel agrees to enter into peaceful negotiations with Palestine. Such negotiations must include an immediate cease-fire, releasing Palestinians held as prisoners without the benefit of due process and returning land illegally seized from Palestine since the agreement of the borders in 1967.
Israel is killing innocent Palestinians and the United States is supporting that effort. When will the people of this great nation stand up for those who are being oppressed by our allies?
Last month three Israeli teenagers were abducted and executed. Without any evidence to support their claim, Israel accused Hamas. Hamas has denied involvement but that fell on deaf ears. When the bodies of the victims were found, Israeli citizens retaliated by kidnapping a Palestinian teenager and setting him on fire. They burned him to death. The perpetrators of this crime were apprehended but it is extremely doubtful that they will receive proper punishment for their crime, given that their victim was a Palestinian.
The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) though now known only as the Islamic State has apparently claimed responsibility for the initial abduction of the Israeli's. ISIL is a jihadist militant group that grew out of Al-Qaeda. They are not Hamas, they are not connected to Hamas and Hamas does not exert any control over them. Yet, Benjamin Netanyahu continues to blame Hamas, even though he apparently knows that Hamas was not involved.
When Israel killed an innocent Palestinian youth, the Palestinians had a right to defend themselves. They did so with rocket strikes against Israel. Israel has retaliated with airstrikes against Palestine. This must be put in perspective. Palestine has launched over 800 rockets and killed no one. Israel has struck over 1,300 times and killed nearly 200. The vast majority of the casualties are civilians. Israel knows this. Israel does not care.
All Americans should be aware of what is going on in Israel. United States Foreign Aid to Israel makes up more than half of the foreign aid to the entire world. We give more money to Israel than to any other country but we get nothing in return. Israel is not an oil-producing nation, so they do not supply us with oil. In two wars that the United States started (Iran and Afghanistan), Israel has not supplied any military assistance. We get nothing for the money we spend.
The Arms Export Control Act states that the United States may stop aid to countries which use U.S. military assistance for purposes other than “legitimate self-defense.” Palestine has a right to retaliate when Israel burns one of their children alive. Israel cannot correctly call their current actions against Palestine "self-defense." As such, the United States should immediately withdraw all military assistance from Israel until such time as Israel agrees to enter into peaceful negotiations with Palestine. Such negotiations must include an immediate cease-fire, releasing Palestinians held as prisoners without the benefit of due process and returning land illegally seized from Palestine since the agreement of the borders in 1967.
Israel is killing innocent Palestinians and the United States is supporting that effort. When will the people of this great nation stand up for those who are being oppressed by our allies?
Friday, July 4, 2014
It's Up to Men to End Abortion
For decades now we have heard that abortion must be legal because it is a woman's right to choose. I agree. We have also heard that abortion is murder. I understand that sentiment but I cannot say that I fully agree. Murder is too strong, as that entails a crime against a person and abortion is an exercise of the woman's right to her body.
The loudest voices in this argument have been the voices of men, particularly among the elected officials and women have often felt that this was unfair. Women claim that if men got pregnant abortion would have been legal centuries ago. Perhaps this is true but we will never know for certain.
One thing I do know, however, is that men can end this once and for all. I am suggesting that we do just that, beginning on January 1, 2015. That gives us nearly six months to prepare. Once we implement the program, we should expect to carry it through to its full term of five years for completion.
Many states have passed legislation to curtail abortions and many of those laws have been overturned by the courts. Even if the states win, they still lose because they must pay to defend the lawsuits brought against them. This is not a step forward.
Several states have recently passed legislation that would close the majority of the abortion clinics within their borders, which does nothing to stop the abortions; it merely moves them across the state line. That does not solve the problem, but enacting this program will cause these clinics to close simply because they won't have the necessary patients to keep them open.
This program is simple because it does not require legislation, it does not cost any money to implement and it does not involve women. It is the men taking the initiative and handling this problem once and for all.
Beginning on January 1, 2015, all across America, men must abstain from sex with women. Now, I know this might be difficult but there are alternatives. For example, you can take matters into your own hands, so to speak. This is not the ideal situation but it has its benefits. Not needing a partner means not caring if you're showered and shaved. Small talk is avoided and no promises need to be made; or broken.
Sex with a woman is allowed so long as it is either oral or anal. The difficulty with this is that, while the man is often more than willing to make this sacrifice the woman is usually not on board with the idea. Suggesting that her sister might be willing to help out just might get her to re-think her position.
Lastly, having sex with another man is fine. Actually, it is encouraged. Since most states are either allowing gay marriage or at least considering it, the taboo on man-to-man sex is no longer what it once was and in reality, a lot of men have been looking for an excuse to try anyway, so why not just give in?
Implementing this program is simple, and once done, pregnancies in this country will drop to zero. When no women get pregnant no women have abortions. As time goes on, the abortion clinics will close, due to the fact that they will be under-used to the point that they cannot afford to stay open. Legislators can get back to working on actual problems that need their attention, not on regulating women's bodies, and this whole argument of whether or not abortion should be legal can finally be put to rest.
The program will conclude on December 31, 2019. Men, the ball is in your court. Can you rise to the occasion? Are you willing to stand firm and show exactly what you're made of? Join me and together we will end abortion in this country.
The loudest voices in this argument have been the voices of men, particularly among the elected officials and women have often felt that this was unfair. Women claim that if men got pregnant abortion would have been legal centuries ago. Perhaps this is true but we will never know for certain.
One thing I do know, however, is that men can end this once and for all. I am suggesting that we do just that, beginning on January 1, 2015. That gives us nearly six months to prepare. Once we implement the program, we should expect to carry it through to its full term of five years for completion.
Many states have passed legislation to curtail abortions and many of those laws have been overturned by the courts. Even if the states win, they still lose because they must pay to defend the lawsuits brought against them. This is not a step forward.
Several states have recently passed legislation that would close the majority of the abortion clinics within their borders, which does nothing to stop the abortions; it merely moves them across the state line. That does not solve the problem, but enacting this program will cause these clinics to close simply because they won't have the necessary patients to keep them open.
This program is simple because it does not require legislation, it does not cost any money to implement and it does not involve women. It is the men taking the initiative and handling this problem once and for all.
Beginning on January 1, 2015, all across America, men must abstain from sex with women. Now, I know this might be difficult but there are alternatives. For example, you can take matters into your own hands, so to speak. This is not the ideal situation but it has its benefits. Not needing a partner means not caring if you're showered and shaved. Small talk is avoided and no promises need to be made; or broken.
Sex with a woman is allowed so long as it is either oral or anal. The difficulty with this is that, while the man is often more than willing to make this sacrifice the woman is usually not on board with the idea. Suggesting that her sister might be willing to help out just might get her to re-think her position.
Lastly, having sex with another man is fine. Actually, it is encouraged. Since most states are either allowing gay marriage or at least considering it, the taboo on man-to-man sex is no longer what it once was and in reality, a lot of men have been looking for an excuse to try anyway, so why not just give in?
Implementing this program is simple, and once done, pregnancies in this country will drop to zero. When no women get pregnant no women have abortions. As time goes on, the abortion clinics will close, due to the fact that they will be under-used to the point that they cannot afford to stay open. Legislators can get back to working on actual problems that need their attention, not on regulating women's bodies, and this whole argument of whether or not abortion should be legal can finally be put to rest.
The program will conclude on December 31, 2019. Men, the ball is in your court. Can you rise to the occasion? Are you willing to stand firm and show exactly what you're made of? Join me and together we will end abortion in this country.
Monday, March 24, 2014
How To Be A Great President
Since the days of Harry Truman, presidential administrations have been ranked by their approval, expressed as a percentage. Looking at the approval rating of all presidents from that time forward as they left office, only two were higher than 60%. As far as greatness goes, these two men can truly be said to have been great presidents.
Ronald Reagan left office with the highest approval rating to that date, at 63%. During the eight years he was in office, the cold war ended, tax cuts for individuals increased, nuclear arms were reduced worldwide, the war in Afghanistan ended (that didn't last very long), the first female Supreme Court Justice was appointed, the Air Traffic Controllers who went on strike were fired (they would have cost the tax payers $700 million had they received their outrageous demands), a successful rescue mission was launched in Grenada and the Strategic Defense Initiative was implemented.
When Reagan left office, the country was prosperous and at peace. The Dow Jones Industrial Average stood at 950.68 on the day Reagan took office. When he left, it was at 2,235.36.
While Reagan's 63% approval rating certainly sounds impressive, and it especially is when compared with the 34% that both Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush had when they left office, or the pitiful 24% that disgraced Richard Nixon's administration. But impressive as 63% is, it was not to remain the highest. That title is currently held by William J. Clinton who left office with a 66% approval rating. Highlights of the Clinton years included an impressive 115 months of economic expansion, 22 months of job creation, the highest home ownership in American history, the lowest unemployment rate to date, the lowest crime rate in 26 years, the smallest welfare rolls in 32 years, the lowest poverty rate in 20 years, the first female Attorney General and the first female Secretary of State and the conversion of the deficit to a surplus.
When Clinton left office, the country was again prosperous and at peace. He took office with the Dow Jones Industrial Average at 3,241.95 and left when it was a staggering 10,578.24.
These two men have one very important fact in common, and it is this commonality that made them great. Reagan was a Republican, but the House was controlled by the Democrats. The Republicans held a slim control of the Senate, which they lost in 1987.
Clinton is a Democrat and his first two years saw him with a Democratically lead House and Senate. That reversed in year three when the Republicans took control of both houses and that control remained until the end of Clinton's presidency.
What each of these men had to do was work with the opposition. No president runs this country on his own. They all have to have the backing of the other elected officials in order to be successful and the truly great know that in order for this country to excel, no one political party can ever have its way to the detriment of the other party. There has to be a negotiation where each party gets some of what it wants but neither party gets it all. When we have this balance, when we work together, we are truly the United States of America and our history shows that when this happens, we can achieve greatness.
Ronald Reagan left office with the highest approval rating to that date, at 63%. During the eight years he was in office, the cold war ended, tax cuts for individuals increased, nuclear arms were reduced worldwide, the war in Afghanistan ended (that didn't last very long), the first female Supreme Court Justice was appointed, the Air Traffic Controllers who went on strike were fired (they would have cost the tax payers $700 million had they received their outrageous demands), a successful rescue mission was launched in Grenada and the Strategic Defense Initiative was implemented.
When Reagan left office, the country was prosperous and at peace. The Dow Jones Industrial Average stood at 950.68 on the day Reagan took office. When he left, it was at 2,235.36.
While Reagan's 63% approval rating certainly sounds impressive, and it especially is when compared with the 34% that both Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush had when they left office, or the pitiful 24% that disgraced Richard Nixon's administration. But impressive as 63% is, it was not to remain the highest. That title is currently held by William J. Clinton who left office with a 66% approval rating. Highlights of the Clinton years included an impressive 115 months of economic expansion, 22 months of job creation, the highest home ownership in American history, the lowest unemployment rate to date, the lowest crime rate in 26 years, the smallest welfare rolls in 32 years, the lowest poverty rate in 20 years, the first female Attorney General and the first female Secretary of State and the conversion of the deficit to a surplus.
When Clinton left office, the country was again prosperous and at peace. He took office with the Dow Jones Industrial Average at 3,241.95 and left when it was a staggering 10,578.24.
These two men have one very important fact in common, and it is this commonality that made them great. Reagan was a Republican, but the House was controlled by the Democrats. The Republicans held a slim control of the Senate, which they lost in 1987.
Clinton is a Democrat and his first two years saw him with a Democratically lead House and Senate. That reversed in year three when the Republicans took control of both houses and that control remained until the end of Clinton's presidency.
What each of these men had to do was work with the opposition. No president runs this country on his own. They all have to have the backing of the other elected officials in order to be successful and the truly great know that in order for this country to excel, no one political party can ever have its way to the detriment of the other party. There has to be a negotiation where each party gets some of what it wants but neither party gets it all. When we have this balance, when we work together, we are truly the United States of America and our history shows that when this happens, we can achieve greatness.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
