The below comments of mine were printed in the Letter to editor section of the Start Tribune on Sunday Feb. 1, 2009.
RUSH LIMBAUGH
He has a right to express his opinion
Like him or not, Rush Limbaugh's comment that he hopes President Obama fails is a prime example of free speech in America. Limbaugh objects to the direction in which Obama wants to take America. Freedoms afforded every American under the Constitution exist to allow all of us to voice our opinions on whatever topic we wish to without reprisal from the government.
http://www.startribune.com/opinion/letters/38724237.html?elr=KArksUUUU
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Monday, March 30, 2009
A better approach
During the past November election cycle, Californians voted and passed Prop 8 that changed the California Constitution by eliminating the right of same-sex couples to marry and defined marriage as “between a man and a woman”. Currently Minnesota legislators have introduced several bills on the topic of same-sex marriage. Three bills – HF 1824, HF 1870, and HF1871 – have been introduced in the Minnesota Legislature that proposes Minnesota Constitutional amendment of defining a marriage as a union of a man and a woman (http://www.leg.state.mn.us/lrl/issues/gay.asp).
With all the issues facing Americans, why do we spend so much time on the topic of same-sex marriage? Understandably some aspects of our lives, i.e. healthcare, require a “marriage” license in order for ones partner to participate or make decisions on the topic at hand. OutFront Minnesota, and others around the United States, are pushing for a conversation on same-sex marriage with the goal to legalize it as some point in the future.
Why? Why must same-sex be deemed legal? Marriage is not something that Government ought to define, control, enforce, legislate, or license. The sanctity of marriage is established and maintained by ones belief system. Believers that view same-sex marriage as a threat to the nuclear family or against the will of “God” need to be treated the same as those that believe same-sex marriage is completely natural. Holding such a belief does not make one a bigot or homophobic. Rather it is simply their belief system; right or wrong.
It time for Americans to stand up and shorten Governments reach into our lives. Regardless of how one feels on the topic of same-sex marriage, the simple fact is that Government was not formed by the founding fathers to establish the right of marriage. The concept of marriage is rooted in a belief system. Groups like OutFront will further their cause better if they advance the elimination of Government intrusion rather than fighting the moral majority on the issue of same-sex marriage.
Since the word license often translates into right, by changing the jargon from license to certificate we solve one problem facing the concept of marriage. Instead of the state issuing a couple a marriage licenses the state issues certificate that recognizing the union of two people. By recognizing the union the Government is simply stating that.
The new “Civil Union” certificate will afford all Americans the same rights that are held hostage by the marriage license. Going the route of certification and away from licensing, Americans can escape the repeal or proposal of legislation like Prop 8 while shortening the arm of Big Government.
With all the issues facing Americans, why do we spend so much time on the topic of same-sex marriage? Understandably some aspects of our lives, i.e. healthcare, require a “marriage” license in order for ones partner to participate or make decisions on the topic at hand. OutFront Minnesota, and others around the United States, are pushing for a conversation on same-sex marriage with the goal to legalize it as some point in the future.
Why? Why must same-sex be deemed legal? Marriage is not something that Government ought to define, control, enforce, legislate, or license. The sanctity of marriage is established and maintained by ones belief system. Believers that view same-sex marriage as a threat to the nuclear family or against the will of “God” need to be treated the same as those that believe same-sex marriage is completely natural. Holding such a belief does not make one a bigot or homophobic. Rather it is simply their belief system; right or wrong.
It time for Americans to stand up and shorten Governments reach into our lives. Regardless of how one feels on the topic of same-sex marriage, the simple fact is that Government was not formed by the founding fathers to establish the right of marriage. The concept of marriage is rooted in a belief system. Groups like OutFront will further their cause better if they advance the elimination of Government intrusion rather than fighting the moral majority on the issue of same-sex marriage.
Since the word license often translates into right, by changing the jargon from license to certificate we solve one problem facing the concept of marriage. Instead of the state issuing a couple a marriage licenses the state issues certificate that recognizing the union of two people. By recognizing the union the Government is simply stating that.
The new “Civil Union” certificate will afford all Americans the same rights that are held hostage by the marriage license. Going the route of certification and away from licensing, Americans can escape the repeal or proposal of legislation like Prop 8 while shortening the arm of Big Government.
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Congress Double Standard
In his Friday column on MSNBC website titled “The Magic Circle”, NBC Political Director Chuck Todd points out a troubling reason why Congress may not be so eager to do the job elected to do. The decision of taking PAC money from TARP fund recipients may be the first bi-partisan action taken by Congress. Chuck Todd did point out that Barney Frank nor Nancy Pelosi accepted funds, as of February, rather their national committee did. If Congress is willing to pass legislation that violates the US Constitution, why then is it okay for them to accept PAC money from companies that accepted TARP funds?
Check out Chuck Todd’s column; see below, to determine if your Representative or Senator has hit the list. Frankly, I am a bit shocked that Chuck Todd is posting Democratic names since Friday morning on Morning Joe, a show that airs on MSNBC, was only naming Republicans until the Joe Scarborough, host, and noted that Democrats were involved as well.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/03/27/1868569.aspx
Check out Chuck Todd’s column; see below, to determine if your Representative or Senator has hit the list. Frankly, I am a bit shocked that Chuck Todd is posting Democratic names since Friday morning on Morning Joe, a show that airs on MSNBC, was only naming Republicans until the Joe Scarborough, host, and noted that Democrats were involved as well.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/03/27/1868569.aspx
Friday, March 27, 2009
AIG Outrage: Appropriate or Misguided?
American International Group (AIG) has been front and center over their contractual obligation to pay executive bonuses. President Obama questioned the merits of AIG paying executives a bonus due to questionable lending practices of AIG and the TARP funds accepted. President Obama was not alone in calling in question the payment of AIG executive bonuses. CEO Edward Liddy was brought before a Congressional hearing this past week to explain the bonuses paid to AIG executives and asked for the executive names. To CEO Liddy’s credit he refused to give names out of fear of the safety of the executives and their families. Since CEO Liddy’s appearance several executives have agreed to pay back their bonuses. Executive vice president at AIG’s financial products division saw Jake DeSantis resign and profess that he will donate $742,000 of after tax bonus money will be donated to charity in an Op-Ed column in the New York Times.
DeSantis and others executives at AIG were not obligated to pay back the bonus they contractually agreed to. The fact that many executives at AIG are “willingly giving” back the bonus money at the point of public outrage begs the question where was Congress oversight. Sen. Dodd had originally added a provision to the “Stimulus” Bill that would have prevented, proactively, the issuance of bonuses for companies taking bailout assistance. Sen. Dodd removed the language and why/who asked for the provision to be removed is still an unanswered question.
Why is the outrage not directed at Congress who passed a “Stimulus” Bill without holding a single committee hearing or taking the time to read the bill?
The House of Representative passed, 328 to 93, a measure that would levy a 90% tax on the bonuses for any company receiving more than $5B from TARP. Many contractual questions, ethical, moral, and common sense questions are raised by AIG actions. A bigger question looms.
Does the United States Government posses the ability to pass legislation of this nature?
According to Article 1, Section 9 of the United States Constitution prohibits Congress from enacting bill of attainder and ex post facto laws. A bill of attainder is any legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trail per www.techlawjournal.com. Encarta.msn.com defines Ex Post Facto law as a law enacted or decreed after an act has been committed that may be illegal as a result of the new law but was not illegal at the time it was committed.
The measure passed by the House of Representatives, mentioned above, is a bill of attainder. Where is the outcry against the 328 House members that failed to live up their oath to uphold the US Constitution?
DeSantis and others executives at AIG were not obligated to pay back the bonus they contractually agreed to. The fact that many executives at AIG are “willingly giving” back the bonus money at the point of public outrage begs the question where was Congress oversight. Sen. Dodd had originally added a provision to the “Stimulus” Bill that would have prevented, proactively, the issuance of bonuses for companies taking bailout assistance. Sen. Dodd removed the language and why/who asked for the provision to be removed is still an unanswered question.
Why is the outrage not directed at Congress who passed a “Stimulus” Bill without holding a single committee hearing or taking the time to read the bill?
The House of Representative passed, 328 to 93, a measure that would levy a 90% tax on the bonuses for any company receiving more than $5B from TARP. Many contractual questions, ethical, moral, and common sense questions are raised by AIG actions. A bigger question looms.
Does the United States Government posses the ability to pass legislation of this nature?
According to Article 1, Section 9 of the United States Constitution prohibits Congress from enacting bill of attainder and ex post facto laws. A bill of attainder is any legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trail per www.techlawjournal.com. Encarta.msn.com defines Ex Post Facto law as a law enacted or decreed after an act has been committed that may be illegal as a result of the new law but was not illegal at the time it was committed.
The measure passed by the House of Representatives, mentioned above, is a bill of attainder. Where is the outcry against the 328 House members that failed to live up their oath to uphold the US Constitution?
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Introduction
A conversation prompts my entrance into the blog world. For a time now, I have kept rants, concepts, and points of discussion to a select few within my network. Many within the network have encouraged and demanded stoppage of my correspondance for various reasons. To lend a broader forum and reach out to the intellectuals, The Hamburg Post has been born.
I reside, with my family, in the small hamlet called Hamburg on the outskirts of Carver County in the great state of Minnesota. The family unit is non-traditional, yet it may be, consisting of my wife and four children (mine, hers, and ours). After graduating from Minnetonka High School I traveled to the Grand Forks, ND where I attended the University of North Dakota. After graduating for UND, with assistance from the 1997 Great Flood, traveled back to the Twin Cities to pursue employment.
After a stint in the Casino Gaming Industry I moved onto the world of Industrial Diversified's. During that time, in the Industrial Diversified realm, I earned my MBA and Green Belt in Six Sigma.
Now the question comes, what topic of public sway to address first. Stay tuned to find out and participate.
I reside, with my family, in the small hamlet called Hamburg on the outskirts of Carver County in the great state of Minnesota. The family unit is non-traditional, yet it may be, consisting of my wife and four children (mine, hers, and ours). After graduating from Minnetonka High School I traveled to the Grand Forks, ND where I attended the University of North Dakota. After graduating for UND, with assistance from the 1997 Great Flood, traveled back to the Twin Cities to pursue employment.
After a stint in the Casino Gaming Industry I moved onto the world of Industrial Diversified's. During that time, in the Industrial Diversified realm, I earned my MBA and Green Belt in Six Sigma.
Now the question comes, what topic of public sway to address first. Stay tuned to find out and participate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)