opa-opines.net

Imagine this:  you witness a crime.  You actually see someone stealing from your neighbors house when they are not at home.  So you telephone the police and report the robbery.  Your neighbors come home, find that their house was vandalized and robbed.  They report the crime to the police.  The police arrest you.

Think that is absurd?  Think that cannot happen?  Just ask Acorn.  Last year Acorn was accused of “voter fraud” when it was reported that some people had filled out false voter registration forms.  Actually some pranksters had filled in names like Donald Duck on registration forms and turned them in for registration.  Acorn discovered the prank forms and reported them to voting officials.  The press picked up the story and several political commentators accused Acorn of voter fraud.

Aside from the fact that actual voter fraud only occurs when a false voter actually votes, the only damage has been to Acorn’s reputation.  Not one state voting official presented false ballots from erroneous registrations handled by Acorn.  The main stream media, however, just ran the story and never investigated it.

Acorn is a troublesome organization.  This organization serves several functions: advising the poor about available social services; assisting the unemployed with finding jobs; helping underemployed persons obtain training to improve job skills; and, assisting local governments with voter registration.  Acorn is a non profit organization with no real power other than helping people.  The Acorn work force is heavy with volunteers.

Most of the tasks listed for Acorn are actually the job of local government.  Local government is, of course, limited by the tax dollars allotted by their budget, which is paid by the voters.  In that sense, Acorn appears to fill a definite need,

The problem, however, is that Acorn does irritate powerful and wealthy people.  When Acorn registers poor people and encourages them to vote they tend to vote for candidates who support their causes, usually liberals and democrats.

Working with poor people results in Acorn wanting to raise the minimum wage.  That puts them up against businessmen who do not like the minimum wage.  Acorn keeps pushing since the people they serve are close to starvation.

So, what do we do about Acorn?  I suggest that we need Acorn as it saves us tax dollars and performs services that must be done.  Maybe we should get off their back and praise them for their good work.

Today I heard it again.   “President Obama is not a citizen of the USA, so he is not really our President.”  Is that true?  Can we prove it? Let us review how he got to be President.  Observe several events:  Obama served in the Illinois Senate, The United States Senate, campaigned for more than a year, was certified by the Electoral College and sworn into office by the Chief Justice of the United States (a conservative).  How did all those people and agencies miss checking on his citizenship?

Let us take service in the United States Senate.  Before Obama could schedule a visit to a foreign country (for example he traveled to Africa before he became a candidate), he was required to get a passport.  When I applied for passports for my family, I had to give certified birth certificates, with official raised seals, to the United States Department of State.  Everyone I know who has a passport has been required to present evidence of their birth.  That tells me that Obama has some official record of citizenship filed with the US Department of State.  So his country of birth is established, and any prominent conservative official or politician could view the evidence.  Why haven’t they?

During the Presidential campaign, and once since the election, the State of Hawaii has released evidence of a birth certificate for Obama.  An official presentation by a state government is pretty rare.  Why did Hawaii do that if Obama was not born there?

Let us look at a broader question.  Has any previous President of the US presented his birth certificate to the American people?  Has any member of the US Senate or House of Representatives made such a presentation?
If not, how do I know that any of them are US citizens?

Next the question of John McCain.  Several people have complained that since he was born in Panama, he may not be a citizen either.  Researching the question I discovered that for many decades it has been US law that a child born to American parents in a foreign land is automatically a citizen.  In addition, John’s parents resided on a US Naval base in Panama, which is technically US soil just like an American embassy in another country.
Since John McCain was born of US parents on a US Navy base, he is clearly a natural born citizen.

What will it take to prove Obama’s citizenship to the concerned?

Just read an article in Newsweek* that ponders whether elections are the answer in some foreign countries.  The author wrote about Afghanistan and Iraq where “international officials who  oversee the rebuilding countries often try to nudge them towards democracy as soon as possible.”  Some political scientists tend to complain.  They note that the risk of violence “decreases during an election year, in the following year it more than doubles.”   The election “slightly increases” the likelihood of civil war.

I remember in my youth being inspired by teachers who noted the frequency with which Latin American republics lost their elected leaders when their army sponsored a rebellion.  In the past twenty years I have noticed similar incidents in Africa and Southeast Asia.  The people vote in a democratic election and lose the new leader to a coup d’état.

Paul Collier, a professor at Oxford University, says: “what an election produces is a winner and a loser, and the loser is unreconciled.”

The Newsweek article led me to think about the current political situation in the United States.  The people elected a new leader, but the rivals have not accepted the elected leader.  Opposition pundits began speaking out about the new leader before he took office and have continued their resistance.  Is this “opposition” anything like an African coup d’état?

Consider the details of the negative campaign.  They sponsor “tea parties” which remind us of the Boston tea party of the American Revolution.  They oppose every proposal he makes without even knowing the details.  They spread the word that he is dangerous since he will: take away our guns; take the military directly under his personal command; remove our civil rights; make himself permanent dictator; establish panels that will eliminate seniors; abolish Medicare; revise health care so that it is totally government controlled.  And, of course, they deny that the election of the new leader is valid, because he is not a native born American.  Each of these rumors are easily disproved with a little research, but they are delivered emotionally with much fear attached.  Such arguments do not respond well to logical responses.

If you recognize these tactics it is probably because you heard about most of them in history class when you studied the periods prior to revolutions.

I can understand that the losers of the last election may be upset.  But even most of them do not really believe that our current President is as bad as they claim.  Most of them recognize that the President’s proposals are well meaning and that he is constantly attempting compromise and consensus.  The President is far from perfect, but any semi intelligent politician will admit he is not as bad as many we have endured in the past.

So, is the US culture becoming ripe for a coup d’état?  I do hope not, but when I listen to current political opposition, I am concerned that the more fear is inflamed the more likely that an attempt will be made.

Let is pray.

* “Elections aren’t the answer,” Newsweek, August 24, 2009.

Has America changed?  Have American’s become a people who emphasize their personal welfare at the expense of others?  Lately I have begun to wonder.

I remember stories told to me in my youth about how the original settlers in this new world helped each other.  If someone in the community needed a barn, the people of the community gathered and built that barn.  If a farmer was injured, his neighbors harvested his crops for him.  When a woman gave birth to a child, the local women came to assist.

I heard many such stories in history class, and others in civics class (which was a required subject).  Additionally, I remember my parents and grandparents participating in many actions to help their neighbors.
I studied the Marshall plan in American history.  I marveled that our country decided not only to help our World War II allies rebuild, but helped Germany and Japan as well.

Recently I have heard numerous media pendants and politicians railing against a bill to revise health care in the United States.  I have listened carefully to the rationale for and against revising health care.  Those for revision talk about people who do not have health insurance, the high cost of medical care, and the plight of people who lack health insurance.  Those against claim the idea is socialistic, that it might reduce our choices, and that medical costs may increase.  Some of those against also engage in fear mongering by contending, for example, that any government run program may kill grandma.

Listening to one town hall presentation on health care, I heard many complaints from people who themselves had health insurance.  Their comments seemed to indicate that they were afraid that any change in the law could somehow reduce their personal health care.  Others were certain that Medicare would be harmed by any change in the law.  Where do these rumors originate?

None of the opponents to the health care bill have suggested how or if we would help those who lack insurance.  None of the opponents have suggested how to help people who go bankrupt by medical costs.

What happened to our values?  Somehow knowing that those against the health care bill have no alternative plan to help people in need leads me to wonder whether they even care about the plight of the millions of folks in this nation that are  suffering because of a lack of access to insurance.

I don’t understand – what happened to our traditional values?