Firearms Friday: Talk To And With The People

The politics we percolating this week as the President delivered the State of the Union on Tuesday and the first Republican Presidential Debate of the year was held last night. There were a lot of words bandied about and a heck of a lot of rhetoric disguised as unity earlier in the week. However, there were some moments and some lines that caught my attention last night when common sense prevailed as the topic of the second amendment was brought to the forefront of the debate (note that the full transcript can be found at The Washington Post).  

Bush: “…I have an A plus rating in the NRA and we also have a reduction in gun violence because in Florida, if you commit a crime with a gun, you're going away. You're going away for a long, long while…And that's what we should focus on is the violence in our communities. Target the efforts for people that are committing crimes with guns, and if you do that, and get it right, you're going to be much better off...”

Trump: “If we had guns in California on the other side where the bullets went in the different direction, you wouldn't have 14 or 15 people dead right now. If even in Paris, if they had guns on the other side, going in the opposite direction, you wouldn't have 130 people plus dead. So the answer is no and what Jeb said is absolutely correct. We have a huge mental health problem in this country… The guns don't pull the trigger. It's the people that pull the trigger and we have to find out what is going on.

Rubio: “Look, the Second Amendment is not an option. It is not a suggestion. It is a constitutional right of every American to be able to protect themselves and their families… criminals don't buy their guns from a gun show. They don't buy their guns from a collector. And they don't buy their guns from a gun store. They get -- they steal them. They get them on the black market. And let me tell you, ISIS and terrorists do not get their guns from a gun show.”

Christie: “I don't think the founders put the Second Amendment as number two by accident. I don't think they dropped all the amendments into a hat and picked them out of a hat. I think they made the Second Amendment the second amendment because they thought it was just that important.

Cruz (When asked “So what is the answer, Senator Cruz, to stop mass shootings and violent crime, up in 30 cities across the country?”): “The answer is simple. Your prosecute criminals. You target the bad guys… Listen, in any Republican primary, everyone is going to say they support the Second Amendment. Unless you are clinically insane that's what you say in a primary... I've got a proven record fighting to defend the Second Amendment. There's a reason Gun Owners of America has endorsed me in this race. There's a reason the NRA gave me their Carter Knight Freedom Fund award and there's a reason, when Barack Obama and Chuck Schumer came after our right to keep and bear arms that I led the opposition, along with millions of Americans -- we defeated that gun control legislation.”

The other candidates on stage did not contribute to this part of the debate. And while I was satisfied with many of the answers I think I was most impressed with those coming from Senators Cruz and Rubio. When taking into account their track records on the subject, Cruz would be the one that I cast my vote for in the primary. When taking all other issues into account, the divide becomes more pronounced and I, once again, vote for Cruz. With that said, that statement pertains to those on the main broadcast.

Of course I still believe that Rand Paul is the best candidate still in the race (and not just because of his ardent support of the Second Amendment) but there is clearly a lack of support for his campaign which was evident in his absence from the stage. However, his presence was still felt last night as the crowd chanted “We want Rand!” during the broadcast and, throughout the evening, Paul was answering questions coming directly from the voters via Twitter with the hashtag “#RandRally”. So, while the punches were being thrown (and dodged) on stage, a unique dialogue was taking place between a Presidential candidate and the people. What a novel concept.

Double D’Oh!

On my way to the office on Tuesday morning the radio was full of both local and national discussions as we would see a new Governor take office in Pennsylvania around lunch time and the President was set to address the nation in his State of the Union speech in the evening. It should be no surprise to anyone who reads this blog that I wasn’t looking forward to either of these speeches. Two meals ruined by the double d’oh!

The morning flew by as I as jumping from project to project trying to make sure things were lined up for what was going to be a scattered afternoon. As I walked out of my office to head to a meeting Tom Wolf (in sheep’s clothing) was being sworn in as the 47^th Governor of the Commonwealth. While his speech was innocuous there are too many questions still unanswered stemming from his previously stated views from the campaign. While by no means all encompassing, this was pointed out later in the evening by 6 ABC (a local Philadelphia news station) when they reported the following:

“Wolf outlined his goals in positive, general terms - creating good-paying jobs, equalizing educational opportunity in public schools and providing "a government that works." He did not mention a projected $2 billion-plus revenue gap for the fiscal year that starts July 1 or his proposals that include levying a new tax on the natural gas industry, overhauling the state income tax and increasing public school funding.”

Basically we are all just waiting for the state and local taxes to go up along with the federal taxes that are certain to be on the rise as well. Having a greater chunk taken out of our pay is a near certainty heading into the final two years of the Obama administration. Some will say that it will only be imposed on the top 1% but those are not the ones that are going to feel it. Trickle down taxation is something that is not discussed as much as it should be but simply put the ripple from top to bottom is certain and, in the end, we are all going to have lighter wallets.

By the way, Business Insider has a great state by state chart of how much you would have to make to be considered part of the 1%. The Atlantic has another chart that breaks it down by age. While still high compared to what many of us take home each year, it is takes far less than a million dollar annually to be considered part of the 1%. In fact, when you think about it, nearly every politician that you vote for would fall into this top echelon.

However, what really struck me about the evening speech by the President is the combative tone which he used throughout the night including the record threat to veto four separate initiatives expected to be passed by Congress. This is particularly striking when paired with his other pleas for understanding and cooperation. With an economy that is still lagging and national security in question, might we consider the fact that there are other ways to go about doing business. Of course that wouldn’t work. Instead we are going to keep paying more and more money to support failed and flawed policies because the best way to fix a problem is to throw money at it and the best way to get people to accept something is to give it to them for free (you just get taxed for shipping, handling, and processing). The state of disillusion is strong indeed!

The State Of The Union Is…

It is many things but nothing that I would call strong. Actually, scratch that. The state of the union is strongly divided.

While the address by President Obama this year was annoying and, at some points, downright stomach churning it was still better than it was last year when the television barely escaped in one piece. In that regard, things have gotten better since this same time last year. That may be the only positive development that I can really see that this administration has made in the past twelve months.

Like many of the President’s pubic addresses when the prompter is working properly, his performance was excellent. That part is undeniable and many people enjoy hearing the President speak just like many people like the forced overdramatic performances in B movies. But, just like the fiction found on film, the promises and pledges made are theatrics and nothing more.

The state of the union is divided. Too many people are out of work and any have given up trying. While the jobless rate seems to be going down it leaves me questioning how many people stopped looking? How many people are no longer counted?

Many minutes were dedicated to the calling for equal pay, for helping the African American community find work, for a higher minimum wage, for amnesty, and for many other things. Is this really where we should be focusing our efforts? Is this where we should be funneling our dollars? I don’t see this as a means to equality, this is a road to complacency. We need to be a nation of equal rights, equal freedoms, and an opportunity to pursue our own happiness.

No one ever said that life is fair. This nation was not founded as a coop. Embrace opportunity and work hard to make your life better. Does that mean you will live like the Jones’? No. Some will have more than others but many have more than they need. Are you really going to be better off paying higher and higher taxes, having money taken out of your pocket, in order to fulfill the promises of a government that insists on supporting the weight of the nation under the false premise that we need to give unequal amounts of money to some in order to ensure equality?

However, the most dangerous phrase of the evening which was used on a few occasions was “with or without congress” when referring to the actions that ‘need’ to be taken. It is this statement that should ring loudly in the ears of all who are listening. This is a frightening action and a threat of unilateral action that has the potential to be more damaging to the state of our union than any external force which threatens our safety and our freedom. This is a phrase that no President, regardless of party, should be using especially one with approval ratings as low as they are at this point. And, given the status that the United States still has in this world, it is a statement that endangers the safety and security of our allies especially Israel.

The state of the union, our union, is many things but, at this point, it is not strong, it is not stable, it is not safe, and it is not prosperous. We are in a state of division with a chasm that is growing faster than the national debt. It is with this reality in mind that we need to focus on and fight for change in the political system. It is through our efforts and our voices that we can fulfill the opportunity for change that has been given to us by the Founding Fathers. We all have an equal vote and an equal opportunity. It all comes down to who wants to work harder to change the state of the union and restore the strength that was once present.