Washington Would Weep

As of late, there has been much debate on the old op-ed page (of the Ashe Mountain Times)about the Founding Fathers and what they may or may not have believed from a spiritual point of view.
While I am more inclined to sit in the “not a Christian nation” camp, I will say that many of the things we do as a nation and a government contradict the separation of church and state philosophy that Jefferson, Madison, Adams, Washington and others championed.
In fact, I think they would be quite angry to see that today in America, we have the Ten Commandments on the walls of most courthouses, that we have “In God We Trust” on our currency, that we have Bibles in our courtrooms, that most governmental meetings are opened with prayer only to the Christian God and that we have blind devotion to Israel simply because the Bible and the Torah say they are God’s chosen people.
But, then again, we as a nation have twisted and misinterpreted the Constitution (and other founding documents) so much that not separating church and state is the least of our problems.
We forget that the Founders were humans like the rest of us, prone to the same prejudices and imperfections that we are. We also forget that they faced the monumental task of creating not only a new form of government but making sure that it was done in such a way as to be an example to the rest of the world as to what free white men could accomplish.
Oh my, did I say white men? Yes, and I meant it. The Founders were not always the benevolent guys we all want to make them out to be.
They were intelligent, yes, they were passionate, yes, but they were also educated men from fairly wealthy families who owned land, businesses and slaves.
This is not true of all, but it is true of most.
In other words they were not the working-class heroes some want to make them out to be. They would have had a lot more in common with the Kennedys than with Joe the Plumber.
Our history is full of these types of men and women and we are as imperfect today as we have ever been in the history of our nation — difference now is that the stakes are so much higher.
During Revolutionary times, if we had lost it, we would have just been another subject insurrection put down. Today, when we stumble, the impact reverberates around the world. And we do stumble from time to time.
We stumbled when we fought each other over states rights that were clearly defined in the Constitution and the government used the institution of slavery as an excuse. We destroyed the lives of innocent fellow Americans and fought two physical wars (Korea and Vietnam) and one philosophical one (The Cold War) and used the threat of universal communism as an excuse — even though most of the world’s population still lives under communist governments.
Today, we are fighting a physical war for philosophical reasons because we dumped on Muslim countries so long that they decided to hit back.
But, as was the case in the later 20th century, our leaders lack the guts to really fight the wars the way wars should be fought — quickly and devastatingly.
We in this country have become a society of touchy-feely apologists. We are not now and never have been perfect, but at least we used to put our nation and our fellow countrymen before the rest of the world. Now, we are so afraid of losing some misperceived status in the world that we are constantly apologizing for taking a stand. It saddens me and it would disgust the Founders.
As we limp into another Fourth of July holiday where we are supposed to celebrate the founding of this nation, I suggest that we re-examine exactly who we are supposed to be as Americans.
And I do not care if you are man, woman, gay, straight, black, white, brown, red or blue. Nor do I care if you are Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Jewish, Pagan or atheist.
It is well past time that we start acting like Americans, dedicated to keeping ourselves free and safe from foreign threats, such as terrorists or illegal aliens, or domestic threats such as gutless politicians or careless oil companies.
We owe the Founders better and we for sure owe the future generations better. Because if we don’t start acting like Americans again, there will not be a country to leave them.
I for one do not want to go to my grave knowing that I was part of ending the greatest and most risky experiment in nation building the world has ever known. Do you?

Time for You to Go

There seems to be a lot of questions going on just recently about how we (the United States) are to treat Homegrown Terrorists (HGTs) such as Fort Hood Shooter Nidal Malik Hasan and Incompetent Times Square bomber and naturalized citizen Faisal Shahzad.
There are also several other good ones in our history including: Aldrich Ames, Timothy McVeigh, Benedict Arnold and yes, sorry, the Confederacy. All of these took up arms or attempted an act of war in one form or another against the United States.
Now, U.S. Senators Scott Brown (R-Mass) and Joe Lieberman (I/D-CT) are proposing legislation designed at stripping naturalized Americans of their citizenship if they are affiliated with a foreign terrorist organization.
They are doing this because apparently nobody has told them that the crime they committed, as well as the punishment, is already covered in our Constitution.
I don’t know what is more concerning, that we have HGTs or that elected officials don’t know we have directions on how to handle them.
This one needs no debate.
What are HGTs doing when they do things like Nidal and McVeigh did? They are conducting an attack, or act of war, against the nation and her citizens.
Now, Article III, section three, of the United States Constitution says, “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
“The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.”
Simply put, if you conduct an attack or act of war against the United States, you are guilty of treason and you will have your fate decided by the Congress. NOT some U.S. Court of Appeals or even the Supreme Court, but the Congress. That the sentence is death and that all of his relatives are not permitted t profit from his/her death.
This was so important to the founders that Treason is the ONLY crime mentioned in the document. They did not mention murder or theft or assault, but treason; it was the highest of crimes. It remains so today as well.
So there is no need to debate whether they have rights, it matters not if they are Mirandaized and it doesn’t matter where they grew up or what god they believe in. If someone conducts an act of war—including acts of terror—then under the Constitution they are traitors. The Congress has an obligation to follow their mandate as spelled out in Article III and execute a few of them.
Just to show we mean it, put it on the web and send it to Al Jazeera let everyone who is even considering attacking us again know that they will be executed, no exception.
I mean, aren’t you just a little damn tired of just being lucky. There is no reason why all of the most recent attempted attacks on us failed other than the nitwits trying to launch them were morons. We are not always going to be that lucky: either one is going to stumble into success or they are going to send a smart one. Then it will be 9-11 all over again and some will ask “why?”
because we ignored our directions from the Founders and did not make examples of them.
These people need to die they are our enemies and they chose that path. Sorry time for you to go.

I left out traitors Richard Reed a.k.a. the Shoe Bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab a.k.a. the Underwear Bomber and John Phillip Walker Lindh a.k.a. the American Taliban, simply because I didn’t need to name all of the new ones.
They need to die too.

Hey, You, Get Off-ah My Lawn

“Well, there you go again,” as President Reagan might say. Just because the state of Arizona has taken the hard steps to do what the federal government should have already done, the folks there are being called racists and worse.
And, I expect that once again, since I happen to agree with what the Arizona Legislature has done, there will be a letter or a call or 10 from some of you out there calling me one, too.
I know that I am thickheaded about a lot of things, but I have yet to hear an argument to convince me how it is all right for someone to be here illegally. Not one point has been made and not one shred of evidence has been brought forward that absolves border jumpers for the crime of crossing illegally.
Now, I have nothing against legal immigration. I believe that if someone has something to offer this country, be it in an educational, technical, labor or cultural way, they should be welcomed with open arms. But they should be welcomed within the limits of the law. And those laws exist today.
There are many reasons for allowing only legal immigration, not the least of which is that although we are a nation of abundant resources, the abundance is not infinite. We only have so much room and so much food and natural resources to go around. While it would be nice to live in some fairytale Star Trek world where there is always enough for everyone no matter how many there are, and with apologies to my more liberal friends, that just is not reality.
Yet, there are those who think that we should turn blind eyes to those who are here illegally and allow all who want in, to come.
When the words inscribed on the Statue of Liberty were first written, there was no idea our global populations would grow to the numbers they have. Back then, the “huddled masses yearning to be free” for the most part came in through the ports of New York in a legal manner, most didn’t walk across the northern or southern border.
So, you may ask, “what about the ones already here?” Well gang, with apologies to my more conservative friends, we have to just go ahead and deal with them. If they are here and obeying all other laws except their legal status, and if they can prove they are productive members of our society, let’s give them a chance to stay. If they cannot, or if they are in one of our prisons, ship them home. Then seal the borders and allow legal immigration processes to work.
If the ones allowed to remain here want to move their families here and become citizens, let’s help them do so. If not, let them stay on work visas if they qualify.
Look, I don’t want people kept out who want to be here, but there has to be a limit. Would you let 10 or 12 people just come in to your home and live in your basement uninvited? Would you feed them and clothe them and pay their medical bills if they mowed your lawn and cleaned your house without you asking them to do it, or would you call the police and tell them there were intruders in your house and you want them arrested? They are, after all, doing jobs around your house that you don’t want to do. Why can’t they stay, they just want a nice place to live? Well, it is the same thing when that house is Lincoln’s divided house and instead of 10 or 12 it is 10 or 12 million.
Finally, it is being said that the Arizona law is unconstitutional because to stop someone and ask about their citizenship violates their Fourth Amendment rights.
Well, aside from the fact that they have already said that will not be the process used, and someone here illegally doesn’t qualify for the benefits of our Bill of Rights. It isn’t how things work for the rest of us. I don’t hear the illegal apologists complaining about the police conducting license checks where they stop people engaged in a legal activity just to check their legal status to be driving.
I have to ask for someone to explain to me, if it is legal to check for a valid drivers license, registration and proper insurance coverage, how can it not be legal to check for citizenship? Do illegals have more rights to privacy than natural born citizens?
You know the answer to that one, even if you don’t like it, you know. Go ahead, say it out loud, you’ll feel better.
Like the man said, “the truth shall make you free.”

News, the Sequel

This week the news I listened to was more like a trip down memory lane than a discovery of new stories.
The week started off with the news of the mine tragedy in Raleigh County, West Virginia; something I spent much of my life listening to.
As a kid (born in Raleigh County) and returning to WV after my Dad retired from the Marine Corps, it was a pretty normal thing to hear the newscasters on good old WSAZ-TV telling about another mine accident that killed a group of men.
Back then in WV when you left high school (unless you were lucky enough to be able to go to college) you either went into the mines, went to work at FMC or Union Carbide, went to the seminary or joined the military.
I chose the Marines because I didn’t want to work for the chemical plants or preach something I wasn’t sure I believed in and I damn sure didn’t want to work in a hole in the ground.
Now, I have nothing but respect for the folks who do mine coal. It takes a certain kind of bravery to go down into the dark to dig black gold and I don’t posses that kind of bravery. But I do think that there has to be a change in the way it is done. With all the technology that we have at our disposal it just seems to me that we could continue to mine coal but do it in safer ways. (Just as a note, Mountain top removal mining isn’t an option). I don’t know what that way would be, but there just has to be a way to do this without risking lives this way.

The next news item that brought up old memories was the signing by the Presidents of the U.S. and Russia of a new strategic nuclear arms treaty. It took me back to the simpler days of the Cold War when we knew who our enemy was. Back then we hated the Soviet Union and they hated us. It was a good guy – bad guy world and we knew where to look for trouble and what we would do if they got out of hand. We also could take comfort in the fact that we were safer because with enough stockpiles on either side to obliterate the world 20 times over, we knew neither side would fire no matter how much posturing went on. Now, since the damn Soviets couldn’t hold it together, there are old USSR nukes floating around the world in the hands of god knows who? Thanks comrades, nice job.
This has led to new terms like “suitcase nuke” cute name for a nasty incident waiting to happen. There is no deterrent for a Fanatical Muslim Jihadist who gets his mitts on one of the little bombs and sets it off in New York, Las Vegas or Charlotte. Makes it a little hard to sleep when you think about it, doesn’t it?

Lastly, are the problems we are having with Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai and his open disdain for America and our presence in his country. This guy and his problems with the U.S. reminds me a lot of South Vietnam’s former President Ngo Dinh Diem. He was at the beginning of our involvement in that country – long before we became mired in that unpopular war – a huge pain in another Democrat President’s ass, namely one John Kennedy.
During the Geneva conference in 1954, the U. S. delegation proposed Diem's name as the new ruler of South Vietnam. The French argued against this claiming that Diem was "not only incapable but mad". Not unlike the way some in the international community view Karzai. However, it was eventually decided that Diem presented the best opportunity to keep South Vietnam from falling under the control of communism.
After his election to the Presidency Several attempts were made to overthrow Diem but Kennedy had always instructed the CIA and the US military forces in Vietnam to protect him. In order to obtain a more popular leader of South Vietnam, Kennedy agreed that the role of the CIA should change. Lucien Conein, a CIA operative, provided a group of South Vietnamese generals with $40,000 to carry out the coup with the promise that US forces would make no attempt to protect Diem.
In November 1963, President Diem was overthrown by a military coup. After the generals had promised Diem that he would be allowed to leave the country they changed their mind and killed him. Nguyen Van Thieu, the chief of staff of the Armed Forces of South Vietnam, replaced him.
Well, we all know now how that and other decisions our government made during that war worked out and now it seems we are headed in that same direction.
Difference this time is that Karzai is threatening to join with the Taliban which would be akin to Diem threatening to join the Viet Cong back in ’62-’63.
So, I don’t know if a CIA backed coup would be a good thing or not, but as I asked on my Facebook page earlier in the week; how hard could it be to find a more cooperative puppet leader? Maybe the best course would be to cut our losses (as crass and ugly as that sounds) and leave the old boy to twist in the wind. I’m not so sure the Taliban would leave him in power or breathing for long after he no longer had our protection and support.

I guess, looking at these stories and how they compare to historical news stories, proves that there really is nothing new. And that when we forget about our past we really are doomed to repeat it.
Makes me worry about what we are going to do next especially since there are some states crying “State’s Rights” and rumors of secession float through state houses across the country.

Drinking the TEA

It’s not very often faithful readers that you hear me say I have changed my mind about something. Mainly, it’s because I am extremely hardheaded about the opinions I hold and it takes a near act of God to shake my beliefs enough to say I am wrong.
(My lovely bride would confirm this for you, if I were permitted to release her name publically and you could ask her, but as you know I must protect her identity, or she’ll hurt me.)
Anyway, after reading a couple of books and listening to some recorded speeches over the last few weeks, I just can’t go forward with my position on certain aspects of a movement that has taken the country by storm and will change American politics, and life in general, forever.
I am talking, of course, about the TEA Party movement. In the past I have told you that the party is dangerous and unfocussed, but I have found that this is just not true.
I came to this realization after reading former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin’s Going Rogue and the latest masterpiece by Glenn Beck, Arguing with Idiots: How to Stop Small Minds and Big Government. These two publications, more than anything else opened my eyes to the Socialist agenda that the Obama bin Commie Administration is forcing down the throats of right-thinking Americans.
Now some of you may think that I am selling out and, in the spirit of complete disclosure, I must say that I went back to reexamine my positions on the TEA Party movement and these two great authors and statespersons because, after a three-year wait, I was finally contacted by FOX News concerning my application for employment as a news-script writer for the network.
I am equally honored and a bit saddened to tell you that I will be leaving Ashe County in the fall to begin my new career earning those Rupert Murdoch dollars. As I understand it from my pre-interview, I will be part of the research and writing team that will work directly for Mr. Beck and I am extremely excited to be heading to a news organization that stands for principled, fair and balanced reporting. As I understand it, I will also have the opportunity to aid the network’s various hosts and contributors in pumping Governor Palin’s 2012 bid for the White House, should she choose to run.
I know that many of my Democrat friends will turn their backs on me, and that is fine. I understand that the indoctrination you have undergone from the liberal media is difficult to overcome. I have always seen myself as a Libertarian and even that was hard to put behind me, but as the old saying goes, money talks. I have now seen that Capitalism pays, and I like to get paid.
I will miss all of you and this wonderful community that I have been so pleased to serve over the past few years and will continue to serve until I leave for the bright lights of New York City. I feel that I will be able to serve my fellow countrymen as I help Mr. Beck and Governor Palin grow the TEA Party movement into a viable political party that will finally set America back on the Right path.
Until I leave, faithful readers, I give you my solemn word that I will give you, and the issues that are important to you, my full attention and honest efforts to bring you the news fair and balanced.

Yeah right! APRIL FOOLS!!!

Fitzwater’s Pro-death Platform

At just a few minutes before noon on Tuesday, President Obama signed the hotly contested Health Reform Bill that has consumed the attention of most of the country for months now.
In celebration of this historic event, I want to simply say, welcome to my world of delays and what I like to call afterthought services. Yes, welcome to the same red tape, back of the bus treatment that Vets and those receiving Medicaid and Medicare have been saddled with for years and years. Welcome my brothers and sisters, have a seat and learn patience. Unless you are very wealthy or a member of the House or Senate.
Now, I have nothing against providing healthcare for the citizens of this country. In fact, I honestly believe that the words “promote the general Welfare” in the preamble to the Constitution of the United States means to promote the general welfare. Ensuring the good health of the citizens would be promoting the general welfare wouldn’t it? But the healthcare debate hasn’t been and isn’t now about healthcare, it’s about access and insurance.
That simple distinction has been ignored in the national press, at the protests and on the floor of the House because that is how government works.
Still, all things considered, this exercise in civics we have witnessed, if nothing else, has educated the citizenry about just how back-door-dirty the process of making laws really is. It’s not what we learned from Schoolhouse Rock and it’s not what our elected officials want us to know. You see, we become dangerous to Big Politics when we get educated about how things really work.
As for me, the one thing that really ticked me off the most about this process wasn’t the threatened reconciliation process, that wasn’t needed after all, or the filibustering because both parties use those processes all the time. No, it was the hypocrisy of those Democrats that at first said they were standing on a Pro-life platform and that unless the abortion language was cleaned up they wouldn’t vote yes. But they were quick to switch their votes on the word of the President that he would issue an executive order to prohibit federal funding for abortion that wouldn’t be worth the paper it was printed on. Executive orders cannot trump law. This, they seemed to feel, would satisfy both their party (who wanted their yes vote) and their constituents (who wanted a no vote.) Of course, some of them still voted no after waiting to vote until the magic number of 216 votes were achieved. That’s called having it both ways.
These worms are a perfect example of the outright lie the whole Pro-life v. Pro-choice argument has become, and really always has been.
I wish I had gotten his name during all the sound bytes on Sunday, but one elected official gave the truest definition of Pro-life I have ever heard when he said “life begins at conception and ends at natural death.” I’ll say it again, “conception to natural death.”
Given that definition, I feel quite comfortable saying that all other Pro-life/Pro-choice positions are hypocritical. You see, you can’t call yourself Pro-life if you believe in the death penalty because folks on death row do not choose to die an unnatural death and you can’t call yourself Pro-choice if you believe in abortion because a fetus can’t make a choice to live or die. Both those lives are taken or given by others, not by God or natural selection. I have never understood how exactly Conservatives and Liberals can justify their particular group’s positions on this topic when their positions on those issues are in conflict.
As for me, well I guess I would have to call myself Pro-death. You see I believe that there are times when abortion is the correct answer, such as when a mother’s life is in danger or a child will be born in such terrible condition that it can’t survive. Those folks who know me know that the only smart thing I think Bill Clinton ever said was that “abortions should be legal, safe and rare.”
On the other side of the coin, I believe that there are some people who are so vile and so evil that they need to be taken into a field and shot dead and left to feed the coyotes, rather than remain a drain on resources that could be funneled to childrens’ homes. Those folks are murderers, rapists, child molesters and certain white-collar criminals that completely ruin lives, just so there is no confusion as to whom I’m talking about.
Maybe that is too simplistic a way to look at such complex issues, and I know that there are anomalies in any given situation, but it’s a base to stand on and one I’m comfortable with.

Bad News

Printed by request. Please see the Ashe Mountain Times online archive (www2.mountaintimes.com/archives) to find stories referenced in the following piece.

News outlets are always taking a beating for only reporting bad news and are often accused of using it to sensationalize people’s suffering to make a profit. Mostly, when people talk about this issue, they are talking about major broadcast media or big city newspapers, but now and then we get a call about a story topic that offended someone and we take a hit, too.
One of the things that makes small community journalism so appealing for those of us lucky enough to do it for a living is that we get to, for the most part, report the good news that most often comes our way. It’s nice to be able to have a front-page story about a student who has excelled in their studies or received an award for community service or a local business that is making a difference through philanthropic endeavors, but once in a while we have a story that can only be called bad news.
Another thing that makes small community journalism so enjoyable is that you quite often already know the people you are reporting on, so their successes are meaningful to you as a person and as a reporter and you feel good about sharing their stories with your readers.
Then you have weeks like this week, (March 18, 2010) where the bad news is so bad that you almost hate to write the reports and, as you look at the full body of work in the edition, you can only wonder if the good has outweighed the bad. This week, I sadly think it does not.
Coverage this week of the men accused and/or convicted of sexual assaults and child molestation and accused of kidnapping and torture of women and the loss of a popular and well-respected police officer at a young age has left your Ashe Mountain Times (www.AsheMountainTimes.com) staff feeling a bit wrung out and wishing for something happy to tell.
At the end of the day, it is our responsibility to give you the bad as well as the good and to do it in a manner that is as professional as possible without allowing our personal feelings and revulsions for the acts committed to influence the reporting. Trust me folks, when dealing with crimes against women and children it is extremely hard to be impartial.
When we do have to report on the ugly underside of life, we do it in a manner that admittedly may leave a few questions unanswered for the reader. For instance, unlike publications such as our in town competition The Jefferson Post, we do not print the names of sexual assault victims, because it is quite simply irresponsible journalism to do so. Why should someone have to face additional embarrassment in a small community for being victimized? Does this keep the public from knowing something they need to know? Absolutely not, because what the public needs to know is who the predators are, not the victims.
I received a call this morning in fact asking me why a newspaper would print a victim’s name and the only thing I could tell the very distressed woman on the other end of the line was that either they were not taught any better or they must not have much in the way of empathy for those who are wronged. Think back at how long it took to learn the name of the accuser in the Duke Lacrosse team gang-rape allegations, and she turned out to be lying.
So for anyone who thinks they didn’t get the full story this week (March 18, 2010) when you read Joel Frady’s excellent coverage of two horrendous crimes, I do not apologize. As much as we have a responsibility to report the bad news, we also have as big a responsibility to report that bad news in as compassionate and responsible a manner as possible.
We feel we are more than just your trusted community newspaper. We are your neighbors and hopefully your friends and you deserve our respect as well as our honesty.
Thanks for reading.

Time’s Up

Term limits, term limits, term limits!
What do I have to do to convince some folks that term limits are needed?
Do I really have to say anything more than Strom Thurman, Ted Kennedy or Robert Byrd to prove that professional politicians are a bad idea?
I spent Saturday at the Ashe County courthouse covering the annual county Republican Party convention.
Among the items that members dealt with during the business meeting was a resolution to limit big government and ignore term limits.
Being the way I am, I had to debate a little about this with my Republican friends because I think they have it wrong.
First off, and very quickly, the no-big-government idea holds no sway with me because I don’t personally care how big government is, only how effective it is.
If it takes 10 people to keep the trains running on time that’s fine, but if it takes 100 people to keep the trains running on time, that’s fine too. Government is always getting bigger. Know why? Because the world is getting more and more complicated and it takes more people to do the work.
Term limits are a different animal altogether.
When the founders constructed our government, they had no clue that we would grow as large as we have grown. The country was fairly small then and no one was talking about large government, only independent government run by representatives of the people.
Our leaders are supposed to be our peers. Our leaders are supposed to be in touch with their home districts so that they know what is important to their constituents.
Never-ending political careers that keep people in Washington for 15, 25 or 50 years are not conducive to staying in touch with the home folks.
You know President Washington had the good sense to term limit himself. If he was the quintessential American leader, then why isn’t his self-imposed rule for leadership not good enough for all the career politicians?
These people, many of who grew up wealthy and have spent their whole lives preparing for government service, think that holding office is a career.
Well, it was never intended to be. It was intended to be a sacrifice that you left your home and careers for, to be of service to your fellow countrymen. Today, for many, it is a way of life.
One nice lady asked me Saturday, “You mean you think that Virginia [Foxx] should have to give up her seat?” My response was “yes, after eight years, she needs to go,” as does every politician both Republican and Democrat from aldermen to president, you do eight years and you go. No matter how good or bad you are at the job. That includes state officials too, so Cullie Tarleton and Steve Goss, are halfway there.
Hey, once your eight years are done you can always run for higher office. If you have done a good enough job you’ll win — if not, too bad.
The last argument I received from someone Saturday was that “We impose term limits by using the ballot box. Otherwise you have a lame-duck government.”
Well, it shouldn’t be lame-duck; if the people that are elected are there for the right reasons and not trying to make a big name and enriching themselves, then it won’t be a problem.
While we are at it, since there is a minimum age for office, there needs to be a maximum age as well. My suggestion would be 65; you are eligible for Social Security then and so it’s time to retire.
It remains true, as Mr. Jefferson said, “the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.” It is just as true that government must be refreshed from time to time by washing free the manure that collects over eight years. Since most people vote by name recognition anyway, the laws need to enforce what we as a citizenry can’t seem to figure out.
Note: My mentioning of Congresswoman Foxx, Senator Goss and Representative Tarleton in this column should not in any way be taken as an endorsement by this reporter or The Ashe Mountain Times of their respective opponents in this year’s primary or general elections.- RF

Sick and Tired of Being Sick and Tired

As I sit here at my desk, wishing for a reprieve from my flu-like symptoms but willing to settle for a quick death, I find myself thinking about the never ending national healthcare debate.
First of all, let’s get one thing straight: the debate is about health coverage and health insurance not health care. If it were about health care we would be hearing arguments on quality of care, not who is paying for it or where to get coverage. So the argument doesn’t match the hype.
But that’s all right, because coverage is what people want; they can argue the worth of that coverage later.
I am one of the thousands of people who can’t get coverage from regular health insurers, because of pre-existing conditions related to military service, unless I want to send every penny I make to an insurer. I am supposed to be able to have my healthcare through the Veterans Administration, but as I have learned of late that’s not much of an option despite what the president and his minions spout.
I thought for context that we might just look at what that single-government-run and funded healthcare program looks like.
Now, I have had some services provided for me through the VA; I had shoulder surgery in 2003 and, from time to time, I need to get injections in my back to control the pain from an old injury, but that was done at the Durham VA before I came to the mountains. The care was great, but I found out it was only so because young doctors from Duke University were crossing the street (literally) to work in the VA Hospital.
Now that I am here, I have had to change my hospital and now am registered at Mountain Home VA Med Center in Mountain City, Tenn, but registration is all I’m going to get.
After weeks of calling the county VA rep, who never returned a single phone call, I took a chance a drove to the nearest VA facility. While at the VAMC in October, I went through the motions of registering with them, even though I have been a VA patient since 1996, but that’s government paperwork for you. I left and waited, and waited, and waited some more. Then last week, when I felt that nearly six months of waiting was enough for anyone to wait for an appointment, I called the VAMC to ask “What the hold up was?” I was told that the hold up was because they [the VA] do not have enough doctors to care for the veterans that need it. They were very nice about it and even told me they were sorry, but that I was out of luck and would not be assigned a primary care provider for the foreseeable future.
When I asked about being seen for complications with my service-connected issues, the response was to “come to Mountain City and sit and wait in the urgent care clinic.” I would “eventually get seen.”
That, my friends, is government-supervised healthcare. That, my friends, is how the federal government keeps their promise to care for the ones who have served to protect it. No doctors, no timely care and no consistency from facility to facility.
So my question to you is: “Why are we letting our officials continue to fight and filibuster over an issue that they can’t seem to fix for a small segment of the country (vets) when their goal is to provide this same slack and unacceptable service to the country as a whole?”
I don’t see the sense in the fight because if the government can’t even take care of us how will they care for everyone or force private entities to do so?
I think it is time to quit beating a dead horse and move on. If America wanted government run or managed health care they could have had it under Clinton. It’s time to move on to things that have hope of passing, if anything like that exists in national legislating.
As for me and my fellow vets, we will continue to go to the VAMCs around the country for what we can get, when we can get it, since it’s the only option for most of us.
As for you and your medical care, that my fellow citizens is on you, and it looks like it will stay that way.

It's a Matter of Choice

Author: Ron Fitzwater
Source: The Mountain Times

I have been banging around a constitutional issue with friends, family, co-workers and anyone else who got cornered by me for several days now. The exercise, along with several recent national and local news issues, has caused me to ask the question of myself, and now you loyal reader; 'When are we as a people going to make the powers that be tow the line on our rights as citizens? What is it really going to take before we say enough is enough?'

Just look what people think are rights and what rights the government permits us to enjoy and you might find that of the 10 given to us in the Bill of Rights, we really don't really get many in practice.

For example, people don't think you have the right to bare arms, but really only if you are part of a militia. People think that you have a right to a driver's license, or free healthcare, when you don't. However, even though they think these things are rights and will raise holy cane over their perceived denial of them, they don't seem to care that the government has given itself the right to look into every tiny aspect of your life and not inform you.

The PATRIOT Act and warrantless wire-tapping program that both came about from the Bush 43 administration attacked our Fourth Amendment rights with the tenacity of a Highway Patrolman at a license check.

Speaking of highway stops, ask yourself this while we are on the subject: If they can stop your car today and ask you for your papers without cause or a warrant, how long until they begin stopping you on the street and asking for your papers? It's all right to think I sound conspiratorial; I'm sure there were many citizens of Berlin who thought that people who said it was a bad idea in 1939 were off the rail too.

Another attack on the Fourth comes every time we want to take a flight somewhere. And now, thanks to the Christmas Undie-bomber, they are working toward being able to electronically strip-search us.

So much for "the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects."

Freedom of speech is under attack as well, which if lost would be the death of the real press. Which, by the way, is the press that comes to you without corporate sponsors. Not advertisers, we need them, but sponsors are different.

For instance, even now, if you speak out against the President or his policies, you must be a racist. Trust me on this, I get the e-mails. If you speak out against the speaker of the house or the Governor of North Carolina, you must be a sexist and don't get me started on Latino women on the Supreme Court. I've taken enough lumps over that one already.

Employers are forced to hire by quota at times, and even forego more promising applicants so as not to be tagged as a racist, sexist, ageist or whatever-ist.

Were the Founders able to see what we are doing to their plan, they would throw all of us over board in disgust.
The corporate world is no better; Employees with some public and private jobs are now forced to take sensitivity classes, random drug testing, workplace harassment classes and all because the whole world seems worried they will get sued over some trivial issue.

Some companies have gone as far as to censor personal items in their employees work spaces like calendars and faith-based items. Never know whose feelings might get hurt, so lets all just look the same with no personality or individuality. Making things uniformed is a great way to exert passive control. Works with school uniforms; that is why most educators like them.

It is easy to understand why leadership, be it governmental, academic or corporate, all want to make us easier to control, because a controlled citizenry is an easily led citizenry.

But you let it happen, every one of you that sits quietly, never rocking the boat, never writing an elected official, never attending a commissioner or aldermens' meeting.

You help the ones in power get more powerful; when you keep sending the same people back to Washington and Raleigh and Jefferson over and over again. You complain nothing ever changes but the only time you make changes is when the person in the office has a term-limit. Why else did Bill Clinton and George W. Bush each get two terms?

And what do you get for your trouble? Fewer jobs, higher debt, deeper recession and the privilege of watching the enemies of this country being brought to U.S. soil, given the rights of a citizen, as ours are steadily robbed from us.

I once swore an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of this country. That oath did not come off my back with the uniform I no longer wear. I just traded an assault riffle for a pen.

Now it's time to choose your weapon, use the pen, use the voting booth. If you want change, make that chage.

Because if we do not stop the steady eroding of our personal rights, it will not be too long before they will all be gone. Unfortunately, the real press won't be around to tell you about it, as we shall all have been jailed for treason by then.

Copyright © 2010, The Mountain Times
http://www2.mountaintimes.com

A Rose by Any Other Name

Author: Ron Fitzwater
Source: The Mountain Times

You know, I had my column all written out early this week. I was ahead of the game and then it happened. Something got stuck in my craw and is just making me nuts, so I had to shift gears from my initial topic, which was teenage vandalism in the county. Don't worry; I'll come back to it.

Just in time for Martin Luther King Jr. Weekend Holiday (that's right a day wasn't good enough so now it's a weekend holiday) Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) is the star of the next episode of what I like to call "Race, the American Story," and an opportunity for all the Fitzwater haters to call me racist, again.

All the hubbub seems to stem from a quote by Reid in Mark Halperin's new book "Game Change," that is taking political geeks, like me, by storm.

In it, as you may have heard, Reid speaks about how then candidate Obama was acceptable to white voters because he is "light skinned and doesn't speak with a Negro dialect, unless he wants to." Reid later apologized, I think needlessly, for the remark.

The firestorm over the comment seems to be coming more from the Right than would be expected because most people agree that if a Republican had said something like that they would be crucified, and they are correct in that assessment. I mean if U.S. Rep. Virginia Foxx had said it there would have been calls for her head on a pike. But because it was a Democrat who "used a poor choice of words" all is to be forgiven.

Of course the loudest yelping is coming from RNC chair Michael Steele, who has been working so hard to be more urban in his delivery. I guess the plan is that if the Republicans show they can "conversate" with the ethnic communities, they will be able to bring them under the newly expanded GOP umbrella. Problem is, the party's top poser is about as down with the urban dialect as I am, and he just winds up sounding like "he be frontin'."

And what is wrong with the word Negro anyway? It is a word, and Reid used it in the proper context to make a point I have made several times myself. It seems that it's fine to say, "give to the United Negro College Fund" so that must mean it's only all right to use it if there is a donation attached? Hmmm, makes you think for a minute doesn't it?

Of course there are cases when things are accepted and not questioned, such as Bill Clinton's statement to Ted Kennedy about Obama, when looking for support for Hillary, that "a few year's ago this guy would have been getting us coffee." But I guess that since Clinton was America's first black president he can do that.

It's all such a crock of spit anyway. We have many dialects in the country from Negro to Hillbilly to Northern, Yankee snobbery-think John Kerry. It's part of the whole melting pot thing.

All people are doing is trying to make a problem where one no longer exists. We elected a black president, what more has to be done to prove we have progressed as a society, amend the constitution to give him an extra term? Make him a demigod? Put him up for sainthood? Give him the Nobel Peace Prize during war-time. . . strike that.

As long as guilty feeling white folks and wronged feeling black folks keep ripping the scab off the wound it will never heal. I, for one, think a lifetime of my hearing this crap is too long. Give it a rest folks and when you are picking a battle, pick one that more people than just you will care about.

Copyright © 2010, The Mountain Times
http://www2.mountaintimes.com

How's That Hope and Change Working Out for You?

“So, How’s that Hope and Change Working Out for You,” the bumper sticker read that I saw this morning driving in to start my day’s work.
Today, as you may have heard, was the first year in office mark for President Obama, and the exercise of free speech I saw on the bumper of the Ford Fusion in front of me, gave me pause.
First off, the fact that it was on a hybrid vehicle–normally a sure sign of a liberal at the wheel—made me wonder if the folks who voted for the president felt like they were getting the return on the investment they thought they would? So, I made a couple calls to some very Liberal friends I have here in Ashe and a few other towns I have spent time in, and the answers I received caught me off guard.
One friend, a college professor, told me that overall it wasn’t such a bad first year because of the enormity of the “problems he [Obama] found waiting on his desk and the reality that big problems take time to fix.”
An out of work bridge inspector I know thinks that the President would have done more domestically to put folks back to work, “but all he has done really is help out the fat cats in the CEOs’ offices in Detroit and on Wall Street, while I have to go on food stamps and work at ‘Rent-a-Drunk’ to buy my kids groceries.”
A Note: Rent-a-Drunk (not the company’s real name) refers to a day labor office in this guy’s town where the normal workforce is made up of folks who come in, make enough money to buy what ever substance they are addicted to, and then come back a few days later to make some more. I’ve worked there when in between jobs myself, (it will keep you from starving), but it’s no way to make a living.
Still another friend, a super-computer nerd as I call him, thought that he had done a spectacular job in “beginning to right the ship Bush almost sunk.”
A couple others had stronger opinions in different directions that I won't bore you with.
As for me, I’m no Obama apologist to put it mildly, but overall he’s not done any worse than other Presidents. He is at a 47 percent approval rate, which makes his the second lowest drop for a one-year president, just ahead of Ronald Reagan’s 45 percent and that turned out all right.
I think the big thing is that he came in promising so much; he really couldn’t make it all happen. Does that make him optimistic or a snake-oil salesman? The answer depends on who you ask.
The proof of his administration’s success must be weighed on the local level. This time though I’m not going to tell you what to think, just suggest some questions to ask yourself that may lead you to an answer of your own.
• How does your bank account look?
• Do you or someone in your neighborhood or church or bowling league have a child, parent, cousin, etc. in Iraq or Afghanistan?
• Have you lost your job?
• Is your business in danger of failing?
• Do you have any prospects for better employment?
• Can you afford healthcare?
• How well do you sleep?
After you answer these questions honestly, then ask one more:
What’s really different about today from Jan. 20, 2009, 2005 or 2002.
Let me know what you figure out, I already know the answer.

Not Our Problem

After only two days, I am so damn tired of hearing about Haiti I want to rip my ears off my head with a pair of pliers.
Now, I am very sorry that the earth decided to crack apart under this asshole of the planet, but why is this America’s problem?
I live in one of the most economically hard hit places in the United States, (the western mountains of North Carolina) and sitting here where several major industries have packed up to go to cheaper places to operate outside the country, leaving 14% unemployment, I find it hard to justify sending money and resources to Haiti as I watch my neighbors freeze and starve and commit suicide at one of the highest rates in the nation.
It never fails that when some natural disaster hits someplace in the world, America, in spite of the bad shape we are in, a has to ride in on their crippled white horse and play the savior.
Hell, we can’t even take care of our own when a disaster hits (Katrina anyone?) but we think we can save the poor third-worlders.
If Americans want to donate personally fine, great, wonderful, but we do not need to go to the expense of sending down our overworked military on body retrieval, where they could catch who knows what kind if disease and be put on such disgusting duty. Neither do we need to send the money that needs to be sent to impoverished states and communities to save the lives of Americans.
Sometimes bad, but natural, things happen and thousands of people die. This is how nature thins the herd. If the country hasn’t advanced enough to survive a particular disaster then natural selection kicks in and the weak die off. That’s the way of the world. But nowhere is it written that America has to run to the rescue.
I tell you what, here’s a compromise; Take all the American troops who are in Iraq and Afghanistan and let them finish their tours in Haiti clearing rubble and bodies. They can redirect all the food and medical aid and the money being sent to those countries to Haiti. The people who want our help (Haitians) will get it and the people who don’t want our help (Iraqis/Afghanis) can fuck themselves.