Friday, February 22, 2013

Leader vs. Bully

On December 30, 1794, President George Washington submitted a report to Congress requesting immediate consideration for the re-occurring problems on the frontier.  He respectfully asked the Congress to make a decision without encroaching upon the Legislative body:  “I feel a confidence that Congress will devise such constitutional and efficient measures as shall be equal to the great objects of preserving our treaties with the Indian tribes, and of affording an adequate protection to our frontiers.”  A clear and distinct separation of powers existed in 1794 where both the President and Congress knew their respective roles and worked according to the powers bestowed upon each branch.  Even Washington, the most beloved and respected leader in American history, knew that abuse of power was a terrible thing, sure to lead to chaos and destruction.

In contrast, no such fine lines exist between the three branches of the government today.  Indeed, the Executive has no qualms about dictating terms to the Congress.  Consider Barack Obama’s stance on climate control:  "If Congress won't act soon to protect future generations, I will.  I will direct my cabinet to come up with executive actions we can take -- now and in the future."  Clearly, Obama has no problems with blurring the lines formed between the three branches of the government since the formation of the nation.  His “I will direct” attitude has reared its ugly head on many other occasions be it the fiscal cliff last January or the latest “threat” of his own creation: the impending sequestration. 

Yet, the disruption of checks and balances on the government is only partially Obama’s fault.  Obama’s abuse of power is a direct result of the Congress’s (and Judiciary’s) continuous pandering and surrendering of their respective powers to his outrageous demands.  For example, the “fiscal cliff” deal heightened by the ongoing “battle” between Obama and the GOP-more specifically House Speaker, John Boehner was an abject failure.  In the end, Boehner and many others, including one time vice presidential hopeful Paul Ryan, agreed to Obama’s outrageous terms to make a deal for Americans.  Similarly, on the issue of amnesty for the illegal immigrants, Senator John McCain recently joked about how “bananas” would work better than putting up a fence south of the border.  Despite their claims to work for Americans, these politicians are only interested in working for themselves.  How else can they explain their collapse as jellyfishes in the face of adversity?  With such “opposing” leaders in Congress, can anyone blame Americans for mistrusting all politicians?  Precisely what is the magical hold that Obama has over the “opposition” that causes these “leaders” to easily hand over their constitutional power? 

Bullying tactics.  Yes, that is right.  Obama has mastered the role of the ultimate bully.  To be sure, he insists on a bi-partisan format to work on issues Americans face today but in reality, he is only interested in furthering his own political agenda at the expense of destroying the nation.  If you have any confusion about Obama’s position, please re-read the above statements.  Yet, a bully is only a bully until the “victim” allows him to be a bully.  The same principle applies in this case with the opposition leaders.  Of course, whether they are truly “victims” or just pretend to be so for the sake of confusing Americans is another matter.       

Therefore, with Obama in control and virtually no opposition from Congress, what can Americans expect in the future?  Already the so-called middle-class, the one Obama so favors, suffers from lack of jobs; high gas prices and high food cost; poor healthcare options with the advent of Obamacare; competition from illegal immigrants who demand the same benefits available to citizens; and an attack on our liberties that were provided by the United States Constitution.  Despite their rhetoric and propaganda, most politicians can barely relate to the “middle class.”  Indeed, how many “middle class” families are taking two separate million dollars, all expense paid vacations in a span of 30 days?  How many “middle class” Americans are able to charge $200,000 to give a speech?  How many of the New England fishermen are happy at the thought of losing their jobs at the age of 69 and starting fresh again?  How many people in Detroit are proud that their city ranks as the most unsafe place to live in America?  How many young men and women are thrilled at the prospect of the growing joblessness in the country?  Yes, the politicians are quick to make promises but equally quick to forget them.  Indeed, politicians work shamelessly against the liberties of the same Americans they vow to support.          

Unfortunately, for the politicians, Americans are resilient and smart people.  We will gladly place our trust in those who support our fundamental rights but we will also rise against those who disrupt the same principles.  We have a rich history that shows us the difference between a great leader and an insufferable fool.  As such, it becomes the duty of every American to observe our leaders carefully and hold them accountable for their actions.  For if we continue down the path set by our current leadership, the only legacy we will leave behind for our children is the one that forgets Washington-a true leader and remembers Obama -the incorrigible bully.      

Why Should I Listen?

Why should I listen to a man who abhors this nation?

A man who eats from rich plates and takes million dollar vacations.


Why should I listen to a man who fails to hear the cries of the forlorn?

Instead, he uses race, class, and propaganda to rage a fiery storm.


Why should I listen to a man who steals from the people to warm his own pocket?

His followers calling him our messiah and our prophet.


Why should I listen to a man who eagerly doles out aid to our foes?

An enemy that burns our flag with absolutely no remorse.


Why should I listen to a man who blames others for our plight?

When he contrives with the same for his benefit but for the people he will not fight.


Why should I listen to a man who dismantles our Constitution?

Under his terrible rule, we are bound to lose our nation.

Wednesday, February 20, 2013

Joe Biden vs. The Second Amendment

Most Americans consider the vice presidency a useless office.  Even John Adams thought that it was “the most insignificant office that ever the invention of man contrived or imagination conceived.”  Yet, no other officeholder has made more of a mockery out of the position in recent history than the current Vice President, Joe Biden.  Biden is notorious for making off handed comments and his latest gaffe reflects the lack of consideration he has towards the United States Constitution. 
On Tuesday, Biden spoke with Parents Magazine in an online town hall forum on Facebook stating that, "the Constitution does allow the government to conclude that there are certain types of weapons that no one can own.”  One can excuse a youngster for making such a gravely erroneous remark but for it to come from the Vice President of the United States himself is most embarrassing.  Contrary to Biden’s version, the Second Amendment of the Constitution specifically states:  “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”  Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that the government has the authority to “conclude” what type of weapons the people can own. 

Unfortunately, for those unfamiliar with the Constitution, Biden’s comment is extremely misleading and promotes the Progressive anti-gun agenda against the Second Amendment.  His comment can only mean one of two things:  he willfully attacked the Constitution to promote the Obama Administration’s radical cause or he is unfamiliar with the Constitution.  Whatever the case may be, as the Vice President of the United States, Biden’s comment is both disgraceful and alarming.  Yet, instead of accountability, we can expect him, along with his cronies in the mainstream media, to laugh off the incident as another harmless Biden moment.  As hilarious as his actions may seem, the last laugh is on Americans who honor the Constitution and obey the law.  If our leaders are unaware of the supreme law of the land, or willfully ignore it, others will soon find the United States as buffoonish as Biden and we will surely become the laughing stock of the world. 

Monday, February 18, 2013

The Battle for Immigration Reform

Earlier this week, Jose Antonio Vargas, an illegal immigrant, gave an emotional speech during the Testimony on Comprehensive Immigration Reform.  He reprimanded the congressional panel for “inaccurately” calling him an “illegal” and thereby “dehumanizing” him and insulting his family in the process.  Vargas proudly stated that he was one of the 11 million “undocumented” immigrants but that does not make him an “illegal” immigrant.  He claimed to be as much an American at heart as anyone else.  Vargas put forth two pointed questions to the congressional leaders:  “What do you want to do with me?” and “How do you define American?”  As a student of American history myself, and an immigrant to the United States, I feel compelled to respond to his speech and especially his questions.    

As a first generation immigrant who came to the United States legally, I find Vargas’s story touching but full of holes.  For example, during his speech, Vargas repeatedly made it a point to highlight his sexual orientation.  What precisely does his being gay have to do with his legal status?  Is he suggesting that the American government is targeting him because he is gay?  Just because he is gay, should that absolve him from being illegal too?  Should we assume that all illegal immigrants to the United States are gay as well and thereby require special attention?  I am unclear as to what purpose his sexual orientation served in discussing illegal immigration unless of course it was simply to emotionally sidetrack leaders from the main issue at hand. 

Vargas mentioned that he arrived in the United States as a child and was unaware of his illegal status until later-that is to say, it took him 12 years to admit that he was in the country illegally.  Yet, he wants Americans to recognize that he, as other illegal immigrants, “dream[s] of a path to citizenship” to “actively participate in” the rights of American citizenship.  Sorry to disappoint Vargas but illegal immigrants are not the only ones who “dream” of becoming American citizens. 

Many of us, who arrived here legally, confronted challenges of our own and had to make personal sacrifices to get here as well and we did not break laws to do so.  My family waited patiently for almost a decade before we gained admission to the United States.  During that period, we cut corners to save money and gave away precious personal belongings to meet the number of things we could bring with us.  The stress of managing our finances and saving money to make the long trip alone took a serious toll on my family.  I recall, as a child, standing in long queues at the Indian Embassy for endless hours under the blazing heat and humidity of an Indian summer with my father.  We waited patiently, on more than one occasion, to fill out stacks of papers required to gain permission to enter the United States.  The pain of leaving family and friends behind was as real for us as it is for illegal immigrants. 

When we arrived in the United States, we worked hard as a family to survive.  Unlike Vargas, my siblings and I did not have benevolent friends and family to offer us private scholarships to attend college to pursue our ambitions.  Instead, we worked at fast food restaurants and retail stores to help the family and save for higher education.  The politics, culture, and traditions of our new country were unknown to us and we remained anxious about our future as a family and as individuals.  Through it all, we worked together, never relying on the Government to do the job.  My father worked hard despite his failing health, standing up for several hours on legs that were unable to support him any longer.  My parents were unaware of the welfare state; they only knew how to work to provide for their children’s needs. 

Over the years, millions of immigrants have arrived in the United States legally.  Many of them made similar sacrifices to get here.  Do we ignore their sacrifices and give illegal immigrants an easier path to citizenship?  Would this not be hateful towards those who continue to struggle but follow legal procedures to obtain the same American Dream?  For someone who claims to love America, how patriotic is Vargas when he feels that there should be no difference between illegal immigrants enjoying the same benefits as those who become American citizens legally?  By demanding the same privileges of citizenship for illegal immigrants, Vargas insults me, the sacrifices of my family and all those who arrived here legally.  As he did with the congressional panel, I ask Vargas his own question:  What do you want to do with me?  What do you want to do with the millions of immigrants who arrive in America legally by making personal sacrifices of their own?   

Vargas also asked, “How do you define American?”  I ask Vargas, “How do you define crime?”  What precedent is Vargas willing to set for the country he claims to love by asking, nay, demanding that crime no longer be defined as crime?  Despite his emotional appeal, the point is that he is an illegal immigrant in the United States.  Illegal by definition means “unlawful.”  Offering complete amnesty to illegal immigrants does not help the United States.  Instead, it only sets a precedent for future violators to follow suit without fear of repercussions.  Clearly, Vargas is a talented young man but to think that all illegal immigrants aspire to achieve the same objective is foolhardy. 

Illegal immigration is an important issue and politicians must tackle it.  Yet, politicians should refrain from uplifting one group and minimizing the difficulties and sacrifices of another.  Immigration reform needs a careful analysis and must remain a fair practice for all.  As President George Washington once said, “foreigners” could become citizens by “a uniform rule of naturalization.”  Thereby, all immigrants to the United States should follow a “uniform rule” to gaining citizenship.  Surely as a “student of American history” Vargas can appreciate the sentiments of our Founding Father and first President.  The government of the United States would benefit from remembering to stand up for solid American principles instead of bundling under pressures of the latest upheaval even if it comes under the guise of heartfelt but misplaced declarations.


Friday, February 15, 2013

Dear Liberals, Benghazi Matters

“…there simply was not enough time given the speed of the attacks for armed U.S. military assets to have made a difference.”  ARB Report.

Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid wants Americans to know that “Chuck Hagel had nothing to do with the attack in Benghazi.”  Reid is unhappy with the current GOP filibuster in progress against Hagel’s confirmation as the new Defense Secretary.  He, as many other Progressives, feels that the GOP is blocking Hagel’s confirmation for party politics.  All of this should be hardly shocking to Americans since Progressives have maintained that the Obama Administration had nothing to do with the Benghazi attack of September 11, 2012.  The mainstream media has helped further this idea by refusing to question Obama directly about the Benghazi attack, focusing their time instead on attacking Conservatives.   

For all his promises of bipartisanship, Obama’s selection of Hagel is nothing more than another political gimmick.  The selection of Hagel, a supposed Republican senator, has fooled many people to believe that Obama wants to collaborate with the Republican Party amicably but the GOP refuses to cooperate.  Progressives feel that Hagel would provide a unique voice as Defense Secretary, increasing the chance of bipartisanship in managing the national security.  Yet, if one considers Hagel’s troubling sentiments in the past towards Israel and Iran alone, the odds should be stacked against his nomination.  Additionally, Hagel’s performance during his hearing is equally troublesome and requires serious consideration.  Why then are some Republicans still considering supporting Hagel’s nomination remains mindboggling. 

Obama’s reasons for selecting Hagel are obvious but the GOP is also responsible for their part in the process.  As the opposition, the GOP needs to keep the pressure on finding a suitable candidate for the job of defending America.  Our nation’s security is of the utmost importance and selecting an individual known for irregular views about America’s friends and foes must take precedence over any political gains.  Indeed, the same objective should be of primary concern to the virtually non-existent Democratic Party.  Unfortunately, instead of focusing on protecting our great nation, these awkward leaders continue to fumble through their choices of candidates for top positions, thereby, placing America’s future in jeopardy. 

Our leaders would do well to remember that Americans are now alert to their political games and we refuse to become their human pawns.  Hagel’s nomination goes well beyond the D.C. parameter and many Americans are finding it most troubling.  Despite what Hillary Clinton may think, the tragedy of the Benghazi attack that killed American heroes Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, and Tyrone S. Woods should never have happened and it does make a difference to Americans.  The Obama Administration may try to get away without acknowledging their gross negligence and dangerous handling of the Benghazi attack on the night of September 11, 2012 but if our leaders continue to ignore reality, it will not be long before history repeats itself.       

Thursday, February 14, 2013

Beckel the Ignorant-Why the Left is Afraid of Dr. Benjamin Carson

Dr. Benjamin Carson’s speech at the National Prayer Breakfast earlier this week astounded many Americans.  Some people found strength in Carson’s straightforward discussion about God, family, and politics; yet, other people found the speech offensive.  Perhaps no other person categorized Carson’s speech as inappropriate for the occasion more than Bob Beckel. 

According to Beckel, Carson’s main purpose in speaking at the National Prayer Breakfast was to gain “15 minutes of fame.”  Beckel’s accusation is laughable at best and shows a level of ignorance and incompetence that has become typical of Progressives as of late.  If only Beckel had behaved in a manner befitting a true journalist and done his research, he would have found out that Carson is a well-known and highly respected professor of neurosurgery, oncology, plastic surgery, and pediatrics at the reputable Johns Hopkins School of Medicine.  Additionally, he has served as the director of pediatric neurosurgery at the Johns Hopkins Children’s Center for more years than Beckel can count.  Carson holds over 50 honorary doctorate degrees and is a member of the Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Medical Society and the Horatio Alger Society of Distinguished Americans amongst other prestigious organizations. 

In his speech, Carson used charm, wit, charisma, humor, and intellect to address important issues that concern many Americans today.  Unlike Obama’s speeches laden with empty rhetoric, Carson discussed the significance of our liberties, the burden of taxation, and the importance of education for all Americans.  Yet, instead of recognizing the significance of the speech to America’s future, detractors, such as Beckel, have tried to undermine the position of this great American.  For Beckel, it would seem Carson’s gravest sin was his conservative political stance on the issues.  Apparently, Beckel has no qualms about applauding speeches given by a man out of touch with America’s heritage and with a shady background.  Clearly, being a conservative American who loves God, country, and the Constitution would offend any Progressive especially one as ignorant as Beckel.   

Tuesday, February 12, 2013

President Abraham Lincoln: A Worthy Leader

Progressives have made it their business to herald Obama as the new Abraham Lincoln.  They boast that as with President Lincoln, Obama too leads a decidedly split nation.  Indeed, they are correct that Americans remain divided over important issues but whether that equates Obama to President Lincoln is stretching history a bit too far.

Of all the problems President Lincoln struggled with during his presidency, slavery was the most important issue of the day.  Slavery divided the nation between the Abolitionists and the radical Southerners.  One group demanded the complete end to the horrible institution that marred American history and the other group wanted slavery to remain intact.  Squeezed in the middle of both warring groups, President Lincoln maintained an unwavering position to crush slavery.  Lest anyone confuse this to mean that his main purpose in the fight that led to the Civil War was to emancipate slaves, one must remember that President Lincoln’s primary concern was always the Union between the States.  Here marks one of the greatest differences between President Lincoln and Obama.  Despite his unpopularity, President Lincoln always worked to keep the nation together.  In contrast, Obama works diligently to further split the nation, forever promoting his own radical agendas over the cries of half of the nation’s population.

Yet, it is not President Lincoln’s political genius but his humanity towards his fellow Americans that makes him an exceptional leader.  For example, during the Civil War, President Lincoln often stayed up late at night reading dispatches from the War Department to keep up with the latest news.  In contrast, Obama slept through the night of September 11, 2012 as enemies slaughtered American heroes in Benghazi.  Moreover, contrary to the claims of the Obama Administration, Americans still wait for answers to what happened in Benghazi on that fateful night. 

Politicians, celebrities, and the Media have all made outrageous comparisons between Obama and President Lincoln in hope(s) of raising Obama’s reputation as a great national leader.  It is obvious that the propaganda has led some Americans to believe these tall tales over time.  Yet, no amount of glossing over can cover up the stark contrast between President Lincoln and Obama’s personalities respectively.  Obama might be able to present himself as a flamboyant politician because of the overwhelming support from his followers but he is hardly a worthy candidate for comparison to President Lincoln, a plain man with a great soul. 




Monday, February 11, 2013

George Washington: The Humble Statesman

In 1789, Americans unanimously elected George Washington as their first President.  Since then, many presidents have come and gone; yet, Washington holds the honor of being the only president in the history of the United States to garner such loyalty and affection from the American public.  Washington was an admirable man because of his excellent leadership qualities but another outstanding quality of this great leader, often overlooked, was humility.  Even at the pinnacle of his power, Washington maintained a humble stance towards his role as the President of the United States of America.  As President, he never wavered from assuming the role of a public servant over that of a mighty ruler - a position that most modern presidents have often ignored.   

Washington did not seek the presidency himself but accepted the honor as a service to his country.  In his First Inaugural Address, Washington noted that, “I was summoned by my Country, whose voice I can never hear but with veneration and love.”  As such, the first President reflected a Statesman more than reflecting a Politician.  Perhaps the most significant difference between a “statesman” and a politician is that the former wished to serve his country; the latter is more interested in serving himself at the expense of the country.  Indeed, even when the opportunity presented itself, Washington was quick to decline from accepting “any share in the personal emoluments” or monetary gains for himself.  For Washington, the opportunity to preside over the nation presented the chance to serve Americans instead of depriving them of their liberties.  

To be sure, Washington had many flaws but for the new Americans, his humbleness overshadowed any discrepancies he possessed.   Indeed, his humility was as much, perhaps even more so, a part of his greatness.  For example, he admitted that he had received “inferior endowments from nature” and was quite “unpracti[s]ed in the duties of civil administration.”  Incredibly, even after winning the Revolutionary War against the greatest world power at the time, Britain, Washington remained “peculiarly conscious” of his many “deficiencies.” 

Again, in his Second Inaugural Address, Washington maintained the same humility that was the hallmark of this great man.  Instead of a flowery speech, he was succinct and stated that if he ever “violated willingly or knowingly the injunctions” of the Constitution during his term that “(besides incurring constitutional punishment)” he should “be subject[ed] to the upbraidings of all who are now witnesses of the present solemn ceremony.”  Washington remained steadfastly faithful to the vision of the American Revolution throughout his presidency.

Of all American presidents, Washington most assuredly had the perfect opportunity to abuse his presidential authority.  Yet, instead of getting intoxicated with power and destroying the nation, he maintained his humbleness throughout his term.  Even when a deep political cleavage became apparent in his administration, Washington maintained a neutral position on most matters.  His vision was always to keep Americans united in the principles of liberty.  He managed to perform the arduous task of remaining above political factions by sheer determination and humility.  Perhaps it was easy for Washington to do so because instead of being a duplicitous character, he was naturally humble in his personal and public life.  For Washington, leading the country always remained an opportunity to promote the idea of liberty and not a chance to generate wealth for his own pocket.  Today, Washington remains mostly forgotten, or worse, criticized by those who feel the founding principles need to be reformed.  Instead of trying to change the fundamental concepts of the nation, principles that once heralded the United States as a superpower, it might be more helpful for Americans to consider the vision provided by those who fought and died for our liberties. For those seeking to lead the United States today, a lesson in humility from George Washington would make a great start in uniting the nation in hope of moving forward. 

Wednesday, February 6, 2013

“‘Tis Well”: An Original Poem

On a cold December day,

The sky was dull and gray.

The river Potomac lay frozen,

The sounds of birds, painfully broken.

People arrived in droves for the procession,

Many aghast at the shocking revelation.

A great white steed trod slowly through the crowds of Virginia,

The empty saddle signifying the great loss for America.

The one Wheatley praised for his valor and virtue more,

Now lay forever behind heaven’s door.

Despite his request for a private burial,

Americans flocked to see the greatest memorial.

Thunderstruck most were for they could not have conceived,

A man as great would so soon be grieved.

The troops, the band, the mourners marched on,

Heavy hearts, each, in disbelief that he was gone.

The clergy prayed and the Masons performed the final rites,

Some watched while others took to flight.

The shroud concealed the greatest American,

Who lived by principles now long forgotten.

In the simple red brick tomb in Mount Vernon he now lays,

Unaware of the mayhem of his country’s present days.

A man once celebrated and unanimously elected,

Is now forgotten and mostly disrespected.

For ‘tis true he was born in February,

But they will not even honor his memory.

Columbus Day they gladly celebrate,

But a special day for this extraordinary Leader, they hate.

Of all the politicians we see,

He was the greatest Statesmen there shall ever be.

Should you ever hold a dollar in your hand,

Do remember that George Washington was a great man.