Presidential Consideration

Politics are a matter of perception. Some voters see one candidate as a right wing fanatic; others might see the same person as a left wing liberal. Of course it all depends upon what that candidate says to what crowd of people on a given day during the election cycle. Causes are also like that. During the 1970s school busing was seen as pure evil by some, a necessary evil by others, and a logical correction to a past injustice by others, but one thing is certain, there were those that used the court ordered procedure to advance their own political agendas and ambitions.
Today, we have two men from the two major political parties vying for President of the United States. Neither candidate has the undivided support of the populace. Neither has its adulation or commands total respect for his views or actions, or personal aspects. Former governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney appears to many to represent an elitist top-down view of government. His latest remarks that seem to reinforce that perception were made during a fund raising event in Boca Raton, Florida in May, and were released by Mother Jones Magazine. What Mr. Romney and many within his party fail to understand is that the vast majority of citizens want good paying jobs that are meaningful to their lives. Not every college grad can go their parents and beg for money to start up a business. Another reality is that there are just so many private sector jobs that can stand alone.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the population of the United States is nearly 315 million. There are not enough private sector jobs to handle the entire working age population. Because of this inability by the private sector to provide enough sustainable, meaningful employment offering adequate salaries and benefits, it falls upon the various government entities within the nation to pick up the slack. By neccessity and not by design the government has become entwined in a symbiotic relationship with private sector employers and the People in general. It is the federal government that provides a need for military equipment procurred from private sector contractors that then hire workers to achieve production goals and contracts. It is the combination of federal and state governments that provider the bulk of infrastructure jobs necessary for the safe transport of citizens and goods. This is all achieved by tax revenues. It is the collection of taxes that fund government required programs of this sort and many private sector jobs.
Yes, there are those that have scrimped and saved to start up their own business, but sadly, such small business ventures generally fail within a three year time span. It then becomes critical for government to provide a proper working atmosphere for such businesses to grow and thrive. If government policies meant to protect the People from the harmful effects of a polluted atmosphere or drinking water are degraded to the point of becoming meaningless then government has failed a national security requirement. Therefore, it becomes encumbent upon business and government to partner to provide the protection the People need and the jobs they require. A proper environment for growth and future jobs also requires a revamping of the current tax code. That means no loopholes, no favoritism, tariff protection if needed, and no raiding of Social Security trust funds or Medicare trust funds to balance budgets.
Thankfully, President Obama has withdrawn American combat forces from Iraq, and is in the process of doing the same in Afghanistan. He completed the work the Bush Administration failed to do. But now we must ask: Why did we go into those nations? With the risk of sounding like a conspiracy theorist, I believe we did so to maintain our current energy dependent economic model. There is oil in Iraq, it has a port on the Persian Gulf, it lies adjacent to Kuwait and Iran. Afghanistan is the land through which a natural gas pipeline must cross to bring the Central Asian republics' supply to the Pakistani port of Karachi. This is the world's last known, readily available supply of natural gas that does not require the dangerous and unpredictable fracking technique to extract. Afghanistan also has an easily extractable supply of rare earth minerals that China now has a monopoly on. These minerals are essential to the electronics industry. The problem with this part of the world is that the Taliban are proxy fighters for the Pakistani ISI. Pakistan wants to maintain some degree of control over Afghanistan and to use it as an ally against India. They have proven themselves duplicitous, and have shown they are the transport mafia of overland routes to and from their landlocked neighbor.
With all this in mind, the American People must ask themselves: Who is better equipped to disentangle us from those foreign entanglements our Founding Fathers warned us against, and who is better to lead us to a more prosperous future in which our economy is on a sound, self-sufficient footing unaffected by foreign energy sources? I suggest President Barack Obama is the best leader for the next four years. He has proven himself capable, amiable, knowledgeable, engaged, and steady at the helm. Unlike Mitt Romney, President Obama's view of government is grounded in the belief that it is the grass roots constituency and the sanctity of the common citizen that matters most. I endorse the reelection of President Barack Obama.

What Is The American Dream?

As a boy I found that I wanted to be a musician, a guitarist or perhaps a keyboardist, but in fact I wanted to be just like John Lennon. I liked his stage presence and voice. As I grew older, I enjoyed the abilities of Lennon and his bandmates, and I dreamed of forming a band. I also enjoyed making up stories and telling them to people; especially to my younger brothers at bedtime. That was the first time I had any inkling of what I would like to be or do with myself when I grew up. But I wasn't really thinking in those terms. It was a boyhood desire to emulate and become something. The choices I made in life prevented the realization of those desires. In high school, I pictured myself becoming an architect or a draftsman (this was before the invention of the PC and Autocad). But what I really enjoyed doing most was writing. One of my teachers, Mr. Good, encouraged me to write more, but I didn't have time to fully invest in myself and more importantly, I lacked the understanding and the  drive to achieve that goal. I had to work part-time after school to help my family. And then there was the attraction of the opposite sex. After high school, I thought I might go to college and become a geologist. My family was poor and there was no way my parents could help me financially. I knew nothing of grants or scholarships. The military draft of that era also came into play. Upon receiving my notice, I went to the Navy recruiter and signed up. The Navy sent me to its electronics and navigation schools. Upon my discharge, I really began for the first time to think of my future. I gave myself three possible career paths to choose from or to fall back upon. I chose to become a musician first, a writer second, and should I fail in the pursuit of those careers, I would become an electronics technician. Although I love music, I did not pursue it properly. Somehow writing became more of a hobby as the practicalities of life forced me to find a means of immediate employment. Life forced my third choice to the fore. I worked for a couple of years in the electronics industry, but was bored to tears. I also smoked a lot of marijuana and, no pun intended, it clouded my ability to rationalize. Partying with my friends was easy, and being single was fun. I met a lovely girl who was intelligent and fun. We got married and settled down. We had our first child, and supporting my young family was paramount. I did not want them to suffer in poverty as I had. I learned to become a land surveyor. The work was interesting and never boring. I did field engineering work on some multi-million dollar projects, but I was never happy. It was just a means to an end. I was able to buy my family a home, fix it up, and maintain a decent lifestyle. I got hurt on the job, and that ended my career in heavy construction. All the time I was working though, I wrote. In 1988 I began working on a story called Private Revolution that was published in 2006. I now consider that story drivel. Eager to be a published writer, but totally ignorant of what was required, I dusted off a story I wrote in 1977 titled Beetle and Lady Bug. It was a love story, but written for children. It was published in 2005 after a Bug's Life had become famous, and children at a book festival compared both stories to one another. Kids are pretty astute. It made me wish I had taken the initiative long before and published that story earlier. I have since written and published or am publishing other works-mainly fiction. I live in a single family home in a great location. But it isn't the house that is the American dream. Yeah, that's a part of the dream, but it is not the entire dream. I danced around life not knowing or understanding what the choice of a career would mean to me. I always wanted to be an artist of some kind and believe I have achieved that goal. It hasn't paid me nearly as well as any of the other jobs I've held; including that of convenience store clerk and hotel desk clerk, but I enjoy it. I just may end up living in a cardboard box, but I have achieved my American dream of becoming a writer. The audience is still out as to how good a writer I am. All my stories are available at amazon.com.http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=j.f.+dargon

The Dollar's Future

It wasn't very long ago that the Mexican government revalued its peso. Before that, the dollar exchange was something like 1: 3600; a boon for Americans. The last time I visited our southern neighbors, the exchange was around one dollar to ten and a half pesos. When I was a child, the dollar went much further in its purchasing power than it does now. A single dollar bill could buy a half gallon of milk, a loaf of bread, and a pack of cigarettes. Today, you'd be lucky to buy a cup of coffee for one dollar. What does this mean? It means the dollar's worth is far, far less, and has almost no purchasing power. A half gallon of milk, a loaf of bread, and a pack of cigarettes can cost upwards of ten dollars or more. When I first started driving, a gallon of gasoline was just 32 cents. Today, it stands at $3.65-some people consider that good today, but is it really? Where did the dollar's power go? Has it abandoned the People of this country? Billions have gone to buying goodwill and peace in the mideast; that is to Egypt and Israel to maintain a peaceful relationship. Billions have gone to the shakedown the Pakistanis have effectively maintained against us in exchange for using their overland roads into Afghanistan to fight their proxies, the Taliban-the Mafia would be so proud. Some of our foreign aid has been used for good purpose. It has fed millions of people, educated other nations' students, and has bribed friends to stand by us when they didn't want to help us invade a sovereign nation for no good reason. A good deal of our hard earned cash has gone to purchase superior weaponry that wasn't up to par, needed tweeking, or was junk before and after it was made for those that must use it. It used to be that the military didn't buy a product unless it proved its worth without cost to the government, but not anymore. The dollar's loss of value can be traced to poorly thought out and executed foreign policy; not to domestic spending. Had the dollar been spent on new American infrastructure built by American workers utilizing American products, the money would have stayed circulating among American citizens enhancing their standard of living. Instead, Americans are expected to drop their standard of living to meet the demands of American companies that have taken American jobs elsewhere to enhance their profits and the bonuses of their chief operating officers. Instead of the world's workers aspiring to our standard, we are expected to lower ours to theirs. The degrading worth of the American dollar will only get worse as long as our Congress continues to bicker and stall for the sake of petty politics. It won't be long before the Federal Reserve recommends its revaluation or worse, demands the floating of the dollar to meet the Chinese  yuan; currently trading inexplicably at 1 U.S. dollar to just 6.36 yuan Renminbi. Other exchange rates point to the dollar's troubling future. How is it that the British pound is worth so much more? Wasn't the British Empire broke after WWII? Where did all their money come from? I believe most of it was from our treasury, but really, how is it that the pound exchanges at a higher rate today at 1 dollar to 1.54 pounds? We lose about a half dollar in purchasing power when we visit England. I can understand the Euro's rise as it is a combination of many nations' wealth, but England is not a wealthy country, and if I understand right, isn't it in debt too? So what is the real worth of the American dollar? Seven dollars and fifty cents less than it was just fifty years ago. In other words, it costs roughly $8.50 to buy the same amount of goods today as $1.00 did fifty years ago. How much more will it degrade? I shudder to think.

Strange Bedfellows: Religion and Politics

Many question why the United States military still maintains a presence in Afghanistan; after all Osama bin Laden and many of his most influential henchmen have been eliminated. One of the reasons why the United States attacked the religious students known as the Taliban was to prevent the latter's indiscriminate beating and killing of women for any and all alleged instances of misbehavior. The Afghan Taliban utilized the UN built soccer stadium in Kabul to execute any woman accused of being unfaithful, disobeying her mother-in-law, or showing her ankles in public, or for any other trivialality a male could have dreamt up. Yet, here we are in the United States of America allowing men who believe in another form of God, or what I prefer to call the Creative Force, to enforce their brand of Christianity upon women, and any other person not of their particular religious bent. Those that deny a good and pious man such as Romney a chance to attain the land's highest office because he is a practicing Mormon do so out of fear and not on the basis of inability or disqualification as set forth in the Constitution. These men want to deny women control over their own destinies by denying them medical coverages and practices they believe runs counter to their religious thought. Yet, not every person believes in the same version of the same deity at any particular moment in time. The main tenets of Christ, as I learned them,  are to love thy neighbor as thy self, and judge not that thou be not judged. Yet, the hypocrisy of the political right denies equality to women and the tenets of Christ. This mixture of American politics; especially within the Republican Party, and the forced nature of conservative Christianity makes it difficult, if not impossible, to square with our mission in the Central Asian nation of Afghanistan. There, the hypocrites are Islamic, here, they are Christian.  No human being can or ever will know the mind of the Creative Force. There is no "chosen people," there is no "party of God," and there is no returning "savior." We are the driving force of our fate upon this small speck of dust we have chosen to call Earth, and it is up to each one of us to see to it that those that drive religion are not allowed to do so because it is politically expedient or to drive politics based upon religious fervor.

It's Always Been The Economy, Stupid

The greatest problem in American politics is its perennial inability to properly manage the economy. The main reason for this failure is that the current capitalist model is based upon constant, robust growth. To grow the economy and spur a demand for goods and services, a population must constantly grow. This population-demand-growth economy has resulted in a roller coaster effect upon the economic well being since the nation's inception. Based upon the 18th century British model of mercantilism, American capitalism discarded some of the cumbersome aspects of its British counterpart and was bolstered by the continent's vast natural resources that were exploited by waves of immigrants. At first, America was an agrarian based economy importing most of its manufactures. As New England grew and realized the potential of its river systems through damming, a manufacturing based economy grew in the Northeast. Wealthy owners teamed with local politicians to maintain a low wage work force and protective tariffs. This eventually led to a disparity between the northern industrial economy and the slave based southern economy; especially after the invention of the steam engine. The steam engine opened routes that expanded the nation westward and spurred demand for American made goods. Tariffs and the slave based economy of the southern states eventually led to the Civil War. After the war, northern manufacturers moved many of their factories south where labor costs were cheap and where Reconstruction helped to expand demand for goods. Once coal replaced wood as the main energy source, American railroad and maritime ventures fully exploited the import/export trade and filled the interior of the nation with immigrants displacing the Native American population and forcing the continental boundaries to become placed where they are today. Oil, and its ability to provide improved steam engines led to the internal combustion engine that led to the trucking industry and the Interstate Highway system. This brought the United States to its manufacturing height with blue collar jobs replacing farm jobs as the mainstay of the population. It also brought the country into conflict with aging European colonial powers and eventually dragged America into two world wars that brought about the end of the divine right of kingship, facism, and led to the Cold War. The Cold War led to the Space Race and robotic exploration of the Solar System, but all at a cost. All three were in effect wars for control of the world's carbon based energy supplies. The Soviet Union's contribution to the defeat of the Nazis and its implosion in the 1990s inadvertently brought about America's metamorphosis as the world's sole military super power which in turn brought about an arrogance never before witnessed in American politics. We have disengaged from Iraq, a country that could fall into disarry before the year is out, and fought the Taliban to a stalemate in Central Asia where the last of the world's vast natural gas fields lay that do not require the destructive method called fracking to extract, but do require a long pipeline through Afghanistan to the Indian Ocean port of Karachi, Pakistan for export to America and other nations. The world's population has surpassed seven billion, but it is now evident that the world's natural resources are not limitless, nor are they one nation's for the taking. This small speck of dust we call home is the only habitable planet that safely shelters humankind in our Solar System. We have developed nuclear energy, but have yet to figure how to safely recycle or discard its waste. Oil and coal are finite commodities. Manufacturing and farm jobs will never employ the numbers of workers they once did as they have become computerized and mechanized. Our religious leaders demand large families and preach the ridiculous notion that family planning is counter to God's teachings as if they have a direct phone line to the mind of God. It is time to get serious about overpopulation and to change the economic model that drives the need for demand for goods and services through excessive population with one that is built upon a foundation of sustainability and sane population levels. Most visitors to the United States marvel at how much we have in terms of land and goods. If we multiply like ants on the forest floor and wipe out our resources we will have to turn to a war economy to reset the population to accomodate economic demand. That model is barbaric and benefits few and must be changed.

Republican Choices

Well, the inevitable is transpiring. The Republican Party's choice for the nominee of the 2012 run against President Obama is narrowing. Each man that has presented himself for selection (notice there is no woman) has his attributes and vices. Mitt Romney, was once a governor who helped the people of Massachusetts obtain a form of universal health care (whether you agree with it or not, it was a pragmatic decision as the majority  is forced to pay for the care of the poor in some form or another), he worked in the free market economy, and is morally upstanding-regardless of his religion. Romney, however is not quick witted as evidenced by the debates, he does seem to waver at times, and to some, being a moderate is just not good enough. Ron Paul has some very good ideas on reforming the government. He is honest, and that would be considered any person's-especially a politician's finest attribute. Yet, Dr. Paul's desire to gut the government would be a disaster should he be given the ability to do it. He would put many people out of work permanently. There would be no means or ability to hold polluters and scammers accountable. Most of all, the laws that are meant for the public good of the entire nation would devolve to the states as Dr. Paul would strictly adhere to the 10th Amendment. This would tie the courts up in knots. Newt Gingrich is a good speaker, he is knowledgeable to a fault, he seems to offer a return to Reaganism-an illusive dream that many who live in the past yearn for. His biggest failings are his egocentricity, his bombastic style, and his failure to remember the outcomes of his tenure as Speaker of the House where he and his cohorts needlessly shut down the government, passed NAFTA, and raised taxes to pay down the deficit. Finally, there is Rick Santorum. Santorum is an honest and decent enough man with some good ideas, but his orthodox Catholicism gets in the way-even for many of his fellow Catholics. So, who is the final choice to be? Some combination of the four would be good, but nobody on the Republican side exhibits such traits. That is why the nomination has turned into a tug of war. Eventually, all but one will slip, lose his grip, and fall into the mud. Some may fall with a curse or a feigned smile, but whoever is the last man standing, he'd better get a grip on the rope of reality, get his facts straight, and practice the art of debating without falling into worn out cliches and sound bite rhetoric.

In 1852, the British troopship, H.M.S. Birkenhead, was traveling to South Africa when she hit a ledge and foundered. Aboard the vessel were more than seven hundred men, women, and children. With approximately twenty minutes to take action before the inevitable, the correct and chivalrous decision was made to place all women and children aboard the few lifeboats the ship possessed. The entire company of seamen and the troops they were transporting stayed behind and faced circling man-eating sharks. Hundreds drowned or were eaten alive as their women and children listened to their screams and watched the horror, but not a single woman or child perished that day. Since then, mariners facing a similar situation have adhered to what is known as the Birkenhead drill. With the sinking of the Titanic, the Lusitania, and other mighty vessels sailing the seven seas, there were also such scenes of chivalry as men gave up their places in rafts or lifeboats so that women and children could live. But on the 16th day of January, 2012, a cruise ship larger than the Titanic ran aground off the coast of Italy. It now appears that the reason for the grounding was the result of an idiotic order by a negligent captain to alter the vessel's course so that his friends could be impressed with the ship he commanded. As the facts are coming out, the time required to safely lower the ship's lifeboats passed without the proper command being given to lower them and abandon ship. As a result, there are those that trusted their lives in the hands of a person they believed to be a competent commander who will not be making port or seeing their loved ones any longer. As we know, the Costa Concordia is lying on her starboard side close to an underwater shelf that should she slip over will assure that she will not be seen again. There was nothing chivalrous about the Costa Concordia's captain or crew. A great many of her passengers swam to the safety of the nearby island of Giglio saving themselves and assisting each other. Rightfully, the master of the vessel, Francesco Schettino and his first officer, Ciro Ambrosio, have been arrested for negligence. One can only hope that those still missing have found safe enough locations aboard ship and survived, or their bodies can be retrieved for proper burial.

Iran, Oil, and the Straits of Hormuz

It is difficult to determine Iran's reasons for blustering and threatening to shut down the strategic Straits of Hormuz. To do so will slow the transport of oil from the Gulf States of Iraq, Oman, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Qatar. Yes, it is a possibility that by sinking enough vessels making or attempting to make the passage could effectively shut down the narrow straits connecting the Persian Gulf with the Arabian Sea. Yet, to do so would be suicidal for a regime that holds onto power by cowering its population, threatening its neighbors, and utilizes proxies to cause turmoil in the region. Iran's navy would without doubt suffer a catastrophic and humiliating total loss. Its air force would, for the most part not get into the air, and those planes that do will easily be dealt with. But the real fear that comes from these religious bigots isn't in the conventional war sense. It lies in the possibility of the ayatollah's henchmen possessing a nuclear device purchased from A. Q. Khan's factory in Pakistan or from North Korea. Properly mounted on a cruise missile or short range ICBM, such a weapon could prove a disaster for the American fleet stationed nearby as well as for the entire region. Should such a horrible scenario play out, the result would bring about a catastrophe so complete for the Iranian people that it would take generations for them to recover. But there is a glimmer of hope, and that hope lies with the Iranians themselves. If they should rise up against the tyranny of the theocrats, future insanity could be avoided and the real possibility of true peace could be attained for all the inhabitants of the Gulf States and maybe even with Israel too.

Decriminalizing Drug Usage Will Eliminate The Need For The DEA

I propose the elimination of the federal Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) and the decriminalization of drug usage. So much money has been spent by the federal government in the so-called war on drugs that it has become a drain on the economy, allowed the rise of drug lords in Central and South American nations, rending the fabric of Mexican society, and is an obvious failure of policy. According to the Justice Department website, the DEA in 2010 had a budget of 2.2 billion dollars, made 30, 922 arrests, employed 10,000 agents and bureaucrats in the United States and in its 83 offices in 63 countries, and denied 17.7 billion dollars to illegal drug operations. Its operations have generated some resentment of the people and officials of some of those nations. It is true that given its mandate, the DEA has done an admirable job, but it is a political child driven by an outmoded way of viewing drug abuse. Most drug abuse is based upon prescription drug usage by teens and others in search of an emotional outlet. As a civilized nation in the 21st century, we have an obligation to each other as citizens in this democratic republic we call the United States of America. We pay taxes for the common good, we maintain a standing army, navy, and air force for security, and we attempt to educate our children to the best of our and their abilities. It makes more sense to decriminalize drug usage and to provide safe haven treatment facilities to those that want help. Decriminalization will take away the mystique of doing something against society. It will also drain our prisons of persons held for their weakness for drug usage. We no longer hold vagrants or drunks in our jails, we should stop holding drug users unless they commit a crime. Drug abuse is just as much an illness as alcoholism is, and as such requires treatment. Those that continue to push illegal drugs should face the stiffest of penalties such as life imprisonment should they be justly convicted. By eliminating the DEA we can drop a bureaucracy, transfer those that want to remain in the federal government's employ to positions their abilities will better serve, and save the money spent on this so-called war. Taking away the mystique of illegal drug usage will make it easier to educate the young against the dangers of this illness, remove the profitability of illegal distribution, and in the end bring about a more just and caring society.

A Proposal To Add A 28th Amendment To The Constitution

Unfettered capitalism is just as dangerous to the People as unfettered communism, religious extremism, or facism. It is in the interests of the People to take matters into their own hands whenever Congress fails to compromise or has become a tool of narrow private interests. Such is the case in today's economic situation. Therefore I shall propose the following petition to the People to rectify an incoherent and partisan Congress that has abandoned common sense and logic.

Petition of the People of the United States of America 

PROPOSED:

AN AMENDMENT

TO THE

UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION

This petition, to the People and Congress of the United States of America, heretofore to be regarded as the proposed 28^th Amendment to the Constitution is hereby proposed for ratification by a vote of approval by a two thirds majority of the states.

Proposed: Amendment 28

Section 1.        Congress shall alter the federal tax code to reflect the following unalterable standards and conditions.

a.      An individual flat rate income tax of five percent (5%) per employed person regardless of household for all wage earners earning less than three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000.00) per calendar year. Those living below the poverty level are exempt.

b.      A primary home deduction per household of two and a half percent (2.5%) shall be allowed per calendar year on a primary mortgage held by a local savings and loan or credit union regardless of style or structure of home for all wage earners earning less than the ceiling of three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000.00).

c.       The so-called marriage penalty shall be eliminated.

d.      There shall be no deduction for charity.

e.       An individual flat rate income tax of fifteen percent per person earning in excess of said three hundred thousand dollars per calendar year with no deductions allowed.

f.       A corporate tax rate of 20% with no deductions and no loopholes allowed.

Section 2.  Any company, corporation, or business within the confines of the United States of America that chooses to close its business in the United States and export American jobs to a foreign land shall be penalized with a tariff equal to the full value of wages and benefits lost to the American employees displaced by said move for a total of five years’ time per employee.

Section 3. Except in the most extreme dire emergency or in case of a declared war shall Congress not impose upon the People a value added tax (VAT).

Section 4. No law shall be enacted that allows members and staffs of Congress an exemption; nor shall said members and staffs of Congress be exempt from any law already enacted. The Executive branch, the Judiciary branch, and Congress shall not be exempt from any law.

Section 5. To prevent the undue influence of corporations, individuals, lobbyists, and foreign entities, all federal elections shall be financed by the People of the United States of America. Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Iowa's Caucuses Is Grassroots Democracy In Action

I believe the people of Iowa continue to give to the rest of the country a reason for being optimistic about the future of our democratic republic. The reason is simple: Iowa's reliance upon the caucus. Why? The caucus not only separates those who aspire to the presidency from those with a realistic expectation of gaining that important position, but it shows to the rest of America and the world that voting for a candidate in a primary is not the best or only way of declaring for a candidate. The caucus system provides to the voters of Iowa an opportunity to speak their minds, to gather together, to voice their expectations and disappointments, but more importantly, the caucus brings these voters together in groups large and small. It is democracy by committee, if you will. This unique demonstration of democracy shows the rest of us the basic process in action. Some may fault this process and refer to the expediency of a primary vote, but a primary vote fails to bring the People together to discuss the future of the nation. Thank you Iowa for demonstrating for the rest of us what grassroots democracy is all about. This is what those demonstrating Occupy Wall Street movement were striving for, but failed to utilize and fully appreciate. Iowa's demographics may not fully represent all Americans, but its process does let us consider our candidates in a pragmatic and democratic way.

Education: Choice or Political Shannanigans?

I've recently noticed the spectre of school choice raising itself up once again. Is this another attempt by some to manuever and shape the public debate to gain tax advantages and thereby fund private educations for their children at the public's expense? It certainly seems so. Why else would the politically savvy do this? It cannot be that they have become concerned and are now motivated enough to change public education for all children; especially since such academic entities result in lotteries and disappointment for so many. Why should the public tax dollar go to pay for such subsidies? After all, it is the public education system that made the United States the greatest nation-state the world has produced. Instead of demolishing this public system of democratic education, why not invest in it? It produces returns to the public that no other industry ever could or ever will. Unlike throw-away investments that require war and violence, public education produces future doctors, research scientists, and dreamers that bring about a better civilizing force. Yes, there are those that argue war is great for the economy and forces innovation, but the cost is always inhuman and always produces resentment. Have we not yet come to the point where our Congressional leaders and others understand that our best and first defense against tyranny is public education? I say it is time we invest fully in public education as it is our first line of defense against ignorance, intolerance, and tyranny. Public education is a national security issue that requires our full attention, and is the first of many public infrastructure projects that should be upgraded and the focal point of the future, not something to be discarded and left for the poverty stricken to pick at.