Posted by
William D. Dannenmaier on Monday, July 18, 2011 10:52:45 AM
Finally, a word of praise for President Obama! He has suspended or cancelled hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to the Pakistan military. Of course, it took him two years to get around to it. I have wondered for some time why we are sending military aid to a nation that is assisting the Taliban in their war against us.
One of my favorite politicians is Michele Bachmann. One reason for this is her attack on the minimum wage. I’m not certain what it is at present; somewhere about or over seven dollars, but I believe it costs our citizens more than it does good. Star Parker, in one of her essays, points out that it results in a higher unemployment rate among the poorly educated. The high minimum wage results in employers hiring fewer poorly educated beginning workers. Instead of hiring two or three job applicants at a lower salary and giving the best of them the opportunity to advance, companies, saddled with a higher minimum, can employ only one, hoping they have made the right choice. This reduces the opportunity for an unskilled, but intelligent and willing person, to demonstrate their abilities.
The more I read about Mr. Herman Cain, who is running for the Republican nomination for President, the more I like him. He is the CEO of Godfathers’ Pizza and on the Board of at least two other corporations. Wouldn’t it be nice to have a successful business man as President instead of a successful professional politician with little or no experience in working for a living as we currently have?
Discussing it with Sheila following the Fox Sunday Morning roundtable, which has had both Bachmann and Cain (along with other) Republican candidates, I mentioned that I would support either Bachmann or Cain for the Presidency, with my first choice probably going to Cain because of his extensive business experience. She agreed with me on those as her two favorites, but added that she is waiting to see what the Governor of Texas does. We are in agreement there also.
I have read that the United States has a law prohibiting attacks on enemy leaders during cases of armed conflict. I don’t understand this. Why was it all right for snipers to focus on me during combat in Korea (because I carried the radio) when all I really wanted was to be home taking care of myself. Similarly, I could focus fire on Chinese soldiers, who probably had the same wishes to be in their own homes that I had, but our government wouldn’t bomb their leaders. For example, we know that Iran is supplying weapons and volunteers to fight in other countries at the same time that they are suppressing their own people. I’d be in favor of waiting until they have some big political rally and then bombing the devil out of them. I suppose that the reason we don’t do that is the fear on the part of our leaders that they might return the favor. Actually, the idea of the loss of the President and Congress to enemy action doesn’t really disturb me. I’d like to see most of them out of office. I’d be sorry about some, but I still have the attitude that I was raised with that no one is more important than me, and no one is less important. (That attitude, I might add, has occasionally caused me problems with bosses.)
According to President Obama, bombing and strafing Libya, destroying its equipment and killing its people is not an act of war, therefore he does not need Congressional approval. I suppose we should apologize to Japan for declaring war on them and starting World War II. After all, they only bombed and strafed Pearl Harbor. Applying the Libyan logic, Japans bombing and strafing of Pearl Harbor was not an act of war. Using Obama logic, our entry into WW II constituted an unjustified declaration of war. Of course Obama did ask permission of the United Nations. Out of curiosity, was he elected to run the United States or the United Nations?