- mbogo's Blog - TheJHub.com

- mbogo's Blog - TheJHub.com http://www.thejhub.com/home/Blog/mbogo en-us Letter to Barack Hussein Obama http://www.thejhub.com/home/Blog/mbogo/709 http://www.thejhub.com/home/Blog/mbogo/709 Lately I have been trying to take advantage of the hunting season, and have been out enjoying the mountains and looking for a buck to put in the freezer. This year my thoughts keep going back to the up coming election and how much the choice we make is going to effect our future. It seems that many people are thinking in terms of which candidate is the lesser of two evils, while others proclaim their choice as some kind of savior come to deliver us from the mess we are in. If you have read any of my previous blogs on the subject, you probably know I am voting for McCain because I believe he is the most experienced and qualified for the job of Commander in Chief and President of The United States. This past week I ran across a Post called, "To Barack Hussein Obama", by a Michael Master of Mclean, Virginia. It’s taken me a couple of days to verify the facts in the post, and has interfered with my hunting time. The writer has done a good job of sticking to verifiable facts and I would recommend that anyone who hasn’t read this, and is concerned about making the best choice for our future view the post at, <a href="http://atlanta.craigslist.org/pol/887442347.html">http://atlanta.craigslist.org/pol/887442347.html</a> Evidently the entire web site did not come through on my post, but if you click on it it will take you to the post by Michael Master. RE-DISTRIBUTE THE WEALTH? http://www.thejhub.com/home/Blog/mbogo/705 http://www.thejhub.com/home/Blog/mbogo/705 RE-DISTRIBUTE THE WEALTH? Some people have been getting pretty excited about Barack Obama’s plan to not tax anyone with a yearly income of under $250,000.00. The reason Obama has been espousing this idea, is because he knows that those making less than $250,000.00 comprise the majority of American registered voters and he is hoping that he can get most of them to vote for him. He also knows that it won’t work. At least if he has any sense of history he knows it won’t work. He is hoping that we won’t figure that out until after he is elected, since we will be so excited to think that we won’t have to pay federal income tax any more. Richard Larsen in his column, where he compared Obama’s plan to Herbert Hoover’s policies did a great job of explaining the problem that most of us recognize as a re-distribute the wealth plan. During my life time there have been several attempts by interestingly enough, Democrats, to re-distribute the wealth either by the promise of no taxes for the poor and middle class, or reduced taxes of the poor and middle class with the major burden of taxes falling on the wealthy. Most of the time re-distribution of the wealth proposals were defeated because the so called Greatest Generation, that had to live through the Great Depression recognized re-distribute the wealth programs as one of the factors that contributed to the Great Depression and they rejected those programs at the polls. Now, the Greatest Generation has passed away or soon will, since they are now in their late eighties or nineties. Obama and the Democratic Party are hoping that since the majority of registered voters never experienced the Great Depression, but are struggling to make ends meet, re-distribution of the wealth will propel them into the white house. If it does, we will either see Obama concede that he can’t fulfill the promise of no taxes for the poor and middle classes, or if he and a Democrat majority actually pass the legislation, we will be in for the toughest of times. The re-distribution of the wealth plan relies on the false assumption that the wealthy will pay all or the majority of the Nation’s federal income tax since the percentage of the wealthy’s income that is taxed will increase. The wealthy will be just fine because they make so much that what is left will easily keep them living in the style they have always lived. The poor and middle classes however, will experience more money than they have ever had before because now, they get to keep what they used to pay in taxes. What I learned in high school and College government classes plus a couple of political science classes I took as electives, and what my father and the rest of the Greatest Generation learned the hard way, is frightening. Since the wealthy are now burdened with the lions share of the federal income tax, industry will slow down since industry is primarily owned by our wealthiest citizens. As a result of the slow down and down sizing, workers will be laid off to cut expenses. Since industry isn’t producing as much, investing as much or making as much money as before, taxes from the wealthy will not meet the government’s predicted levels. The government will not be generating enough to pay expenses and the National Debt will soar upward. In an effort to meet expenses the government will be forced to re-introduce income taxes for the poor and middle classes. Now the only problem is that the original re-distribute the wealth program has left the poor and middle classes out of work and they can’t pay taxes. However they can now start voting Obama and the rest of the scoundrels that put them into this mess, out of office. That is exactly what happened to Herbert Hoover after he and his congress passed the legislation. Whether you are impressed with John McCain or not, (I’m mildly impressed) he has gone on record as saying he will not repeat the mistakes of the Hoover Administration that contributed to the Great Depression, he is supported by a majority of retired military generals and service men and women and has a proven record of promoting bi-partisanship. His worst problem seems to be the same as Barry Goldwater’s was years ago. He has a no nonsense approach to solving problems and talks very bluntly at times. That scares some people. We can’t spin the bottle again and see if we can do better than Obama or McCain for the next four years so we have to choose one or the other. I would never try to insinuate that if people are smart, they will vote the way I vote. Could I at least suggest that we all think hard and make what we feel is the best decision for the country. We are all going to be on this ride together for the next four years. WHAT KIND OF CHANGE DO YOU WANT http://www.thejhub.com/home/Blog/mbogo/694 http://www.thejhub.com/home/Blog/mbogo/694 WHAT KIND OF CHANGE DO YOU WANT? Although I have nothing personal against Barrack Obama as a person, I’m getting a little tired of his supporters trying to allege that every criticism of his philosophy or policies is racially motivated. Richard Larsen did a great job in his column of explaining that Obama’s thinking isn’t new, but follows the same thinking and policies of President Herbert Hoover. Those policies were disastrous for the country and deepened the depression. If you haven’t already done so, read Larson’s column. The more I study Barack Obama the more I am convinced that he is naive and unprepared to lead this country. Remember when he boldly stated that as President, he would immediately bring the troops home from Irag? One of his advisers evidently was able to educate him in an aspect of international law that he had missed and the next thing we knew he was telling us that on further reflection, he would support a time table withdrawal of troops instead of an out right withdrawal. Feeling that he had masterfully avoided ridicule on his withdrawal of troops from Iraq, he then proceeded to tell us what he would do in Afghanistan. John McCain rightfully told Obama and the nation that as President he wouldn’t telegraph his punches and tell the enemy what he was going to do. To do so is lunacy. It is exactly this kind of naivety on Barack Obama’s part that worries me. I have a son who is a military policeman in the National Guard and could be called to serve in Iraq or Afghanistan. I don’t want the President of the United States doing anything to compromise his safety and place him in more danger than he and his unit are already being exposed to. Although I think Obama is an intelligent individual, he seems to be unwilling to learn important lessons that are in conflict with his personal agenda. When criticized for his statements concerning the war in Iraq since he had never been there, he immediately made arrangements to go to Iraq. However, all he could talk about when he returned was that the people of Iraq want America to leave. The truth, if you talk to military people who have served there is, that the majority of Iraqi people are trying to rebuild their country and are grateful for the presence of U.S. soldiers who are assisting them in keeping the peace while they rebuild their country’s Government, schools, and economy. Once the people of Iraq are able to stabilize their country, both they and the United States want to see an orderly withdrawal of foreign troops from Iraq. However, the President of the United States isn’t just the Commander in Chief. He has to make some hard decisions here at home also. After President Bush had been in office seven and a half years, consumer confidence was at a two and a half year high, Regular gas was $2.19 a gallon, unemployment was 4.5%, the Dow Jones hit a record high of 1400+, and Americans were buying cars, taking cruises, traveling overseas. WHAT HAPPENED? In 2006 we voted in a democratic congress. For two years this democratic congress has done absolutely nothing except to oppose the policies that were starting to improve the lives of every American. Now, consumer confidence has plummeted, Regular gas went over $4.00 a gallon and is currently $3.32 where I buy gas, unemployment has risen 10%, to 5.5%, home equity has dropped 12 trillion dollars, and 1 % of American homes are in foreclosure. In 2006 Americans wanted change and voted in a democratic congress that is ruining our economy by doing nothing. Now, Barack Obama claims he will give us change as President with this same democratic congress. Ask yourself, how much more of this change do you think we can stand? NO HUNTING, NO TRESPASSING http://www.thejhub.com/home/Blog/mbogo/673 http://www.thejhub.com/home/Blog/mbogo/673 NO HUNTING, NO TRESPASSING I have spent as much time as possible this past Summer and Fall in the mountains where I plan to hunt. Basically, I’ve been getting the camp area ready for hunting season this year and scouting the area out to see if the deer and elk are still using the same trails and are frequenting the same areas. Mostly I like being in the mountains and will use any excuse to go spend as much time there as possible. This year I have noticed more farmers and ranchers posting their property and telling hunters that the area is off limits and that trespassers will be prosecuted. Happily I won’t be affected for two reasons. First, the area I hunt is quite a ways above, more remote and not as accessible as the farm and ranch areas. I also own the land the camp site is on as well as a lot of the land around it. The second reason is the one that interests me most. Several of the land owners have told me that the signs are not  meant for me, but have been posted because of some of the hunters that they have had to deal with for the past two or three years. I guess they finally had enough of these guys. It is unfortunate that some people can’t have enough respect for others property that even farmers and ranchers that for years gladly allowed hunters to hunt their land are now posting that land. I’m not sure I know all the problems they have encountered, but let me suggest some I have seen myself. 1) Hunting from four wheelers, trucks and 4X4 vehicles and driving the same across farm land instead of sticking to trails and roads. 2) Not asking permission of the land owner and hearing his/her particular concerns before entering the land. 3) Littering 4) Not closing gates or leaving gates the way they found them. 5) Camping in areas where the land owner doesn’t want people to camp or build fires. 6) Drinking and partying in camp which upsets wildlife and causes accidents. 7) hunting while hung over from the night before. 8) Bringing pets(does not include horses) that upset wildlife and any farm animals that might be in the area. 9) Shooting in directions that could endanger farm animals or buildings. 10) Being rude to others, particularly the land owner or his/her employees. I have even been told by a couple of people that they were on BLM land when they were in fact on private property. It would seem that if people want to hunt, they would make sure they know where they are. However, not everyone does know where they are. Hopefully, this year will be a good year for hunting, particularly in terms of winning back permission to hunt some of the land that has been posted. Not everyone that wants to hunt owns the land they are hunting. Maxine Baird http://www.thejhub.com/home/Blog/mbogo/668 http://www.thejhub.com/home/Blog/mbogo/668 I read with sadness this morning that Maxine Baird, a regular contributor to the jHub, passed away at the young age of 64. I will miss her optimism and sense of humor. My best wishes go to her husband Joseph, and their family.  DEER CAMP II http://www.thejhub.com/home/Blog/mbogo/664 http://www.thejhub.com/home/Blog/mbogo/664 DEER CAMP II Last Fall I wrote about getting ready for deer camp during the hunting season. At that time my eldest grandson informed me that he was going to hunt with us. Well, he is back again this year. He is quite a bit taller and a little bit quieter this year. He still prefers to load his day pack with candy, Oreo mint cookies, Ritz crackers, cheese wiz, and soda pop instead of a small survival kit, extra cartridges, parachute cord, field glasses, field dressing kit, extra fleece pullover, water bottle etc. I think his dad is going to have him use a .243 instead of my old 30-30 this year. Last year the 30-30 wasn’t ideal for the ranges that we usually saw deer. The .243 shoots flatter and reaches out a little better without any perceivable increase in recoil as far as I can determine. He has a cell phone this year, but I think he is going to be devastated when he learns that it doesn’t work where we are going, and we will not drive him within range of the nearest tower whenever he wants to call or text his friends. My son and I have been scouting the area we want to hunt in all summer, and have identified several places that look real good if the deer will come to the same places during the season. This year all the men in the family who are old enough to hunt, plus a couple friends are planing on spending some time with us in deer camp. We think we have enough places for everyone to set up with a reasonable chance of seeing deer, and the camp site is a nice place to relax when people want to take a break. We always invite our wives to go with us, but they don’t want to go. My wife won’t go anywhere unless there is water running out of a faucet and there is an indoor, flushing toilet.  Yellow Stone Park is as primitive as she is willing to get. I actually met her on a BYU thirty day survival course, called, Youth Leadership 480, while I was in graduate school. Jim Rhoades http://www.thejhub.com/home/Blog/mbogo/638 http://www.thejhub.com/home/Blog/mbogo/638 Nationally respected nutritionist, Jim Rhoades will be at the Ameritel Inn tonight at 7:00 pm to discuss the Isagenix Health and Nutrition program. This is not a diet plan, but a health and nutrition program, although some people have experienced safe weight loss on the program. Admission is free,so whether you are interested in the best nutrition available or looking for a good home based business, you are welcome as our guests. These meetings usually last an hour to an hour and a half depending on questions from those attending. UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR http://www.thejhub.com/home/Blog/mbogo/620 http://www.thejhub.com/home/Blog/mbogo/620                                                    UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR A couple of days ago I received an article on my e-mail called, "You ain’t going to like losing". The author was discussing what kind of person we need in the White House as we move into the future. Most of the sentiment in the article was well thought out and I found my self in agreement with most points that the author made. The person who forwarded the article to me knew that my political views were very similar to the author’s and thought I would enjoy the article. I did enjoy the article until I read the last paragraph. In the last paragraph the author quoted Barack Obama, as saying in his book, "The Audacity of Hope", "I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction". In reality, that isn’t what Mr. Obama wrote. If you have a copy of, "The Audacity of Hope", turn to page 261. Mr. Obama was talking about the treatment of Japanese Americans during WW II, and his concern that we as Americans would not let the same kind of inflamed sentiment lead us to violate the Constitutional rights of Arab American citizens or any other minority. The word, "Muslim", was not used in the original quote, but was placed there by the Author of, "You ain’t going to like losing", to direct inflamed sentiment toward Barack Obama. This is the second time I have seemingly come to the defense of Barack Obama, even though I can’t support him for his bid for the Oval Office. However, even though I don’t support Obama, I don’t believe in distorting his or anyone’s comments. In the end, the Author of, "You ain’t going to like losing", has discredited himself, given Obama more ammunition to use in his bid for office and done John McCain no good at all. If anyone would like to read, "You ain’t going to like losing", in order to compare it to what was actually said on page 261 of Obama's book, send me your email and I will forward it to you. BARACK OBAMA http://www.thejhub.com/home/Blog/mbogo/600 http://www.thejhub.com/home/Blog/mbogo/600                                                          BARACK OBAMA   I don’t dislike Barack Obama. I don’t care what color his skin is, who his pastor is, what religion he has chosen to participate in, how often he changes churches he attends or for what reason. Since Barack Obama is running for President of the United States, I am interested in what experience he has that qualifies him for the job. I’m also concerned that our next president be a staunch defender of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Since Obama is a first term junior senator from Illinois, it is reasonable to question his qualifications for the job of President of the United States. Does anyone remember his promise that if elected, he would immediately bring the American troops home from Afghanistan and Iraq? Now he is hinting that he might not do that, but will consult with his advisors and determine what is in America’s best interests. I suspect that what really happened is that Obama was absent or sleeping in government class when the teacher explained the various commitments that the United States and other nations have entered into and one of his current advisors simply informed him that he had to abide by international laws and he couldn’t just pull the troops out to keep a campaign promise. He then tried to explain his new comment on the subject as a clarification, hoping to avoid the impression that he was inexperienced in international relations. Im sure that NATO was relieved to hear his clarification and to know someone was going to keep him from violating our international commitments. Anyway, that was the impression I got and I began to wonder what other kinds of trouble his inexperience would ultimately lead to? Like many people, I’m also concerned with Obama’s reluctance to wear an American Flag, put his hand over his heart and sing the National Anthem. I have tried not to jump to any conclusions on this subject, but I must admit that it seems to me that the President of the United States should be proud to wear the flag, put his or her hand over the heart and sing the National Anthem. I haven’t heard an explanation that satisfies me, so it does concern me. Obama’s willingness to defend the Constitution and the Bill of Rights concerns me also. Earlier this year He commented that he felt the Washington D.C. Gun Ban was Constitutional. When the Supreme Court determined that the Second Amendment guaranteed an individual right to own and keep a handgun in one’s home, even in Washington D.C., Barack still did not completely accept the court’s ruling. He basically tried to straddle both sides of the issue while not actually criticizing the courts decision or alienating the Brady Bunch. If Barack Obama doesn’t know the importance with which the word, "People", was regarded by the framers of our Constitution, he shouldn’t be President of the United States. People is only used once in the preamble, twice in the body of the original Constitution, five times in the Bill of Rights and once in Amendment XVII. It should be noted that each of these occurrences deals with individual rather than collective rights. Obama’s lack of understanding of the Constitution and Bill of Rights could eventually lead to the appointment of Supreme Court Justices who also lack an understanding of those important documents. We already have four Supreme Court Justices who weren’t listening to their U.S. history and government teachers during class when the reasons for the Declaration of Independence, The Constitution, The Bill of Rights and the American Revolution were discussed. However, as opposed to Barack Obama as President of the United States as I am, there is something else to which I am equally opposed. This morning the New Yorker magazine came out with a cover depicting Barack Obama wearing Muslim clothes, his wife as a gun toting terrorist, in the white house burning an American flag in the fire place, bumping their fists underneath a portrait of Osama Bin Laden. This kind of cruel mockery of Barack Obama and his wife was tasteless and undeserved. I hope you will join with those of us who are sending objections to the New Yorker magazine publisher and editor. We ought to be able to support or oppose candidates based on our vision for the future of our country without resorting to name calling, mud slinging or cruel satire.       THE BATTLE ISN'T OVER http://www.thejhub.com/home/Blog/mbogo/587 http://www.thejhub.com/home/Blog/mbogo/587 THE BATTLE ISN'T OVER   The Supreme Court's 5 to 4 decision, overturning the Washington D.C. ban on citizens keeping a handgun in the home for self defense, was hailed as a long awaited victory by firearm owners across the nation. Although this is an important and historic decision concerning one aspect of the citizen's Second Amendment rights, there are still other issues to be resolved. This case started when Anthony Heller, a security guard, who lives in a high crime area of Washington D.C. wanted to keep a handgun in his home for self defense. His request was denied and he filed suit against Washington D.C. The case eventually was heard by the Supreme Court of the United States which ruled that Mr. Heller had an unalienable right to keep a handgun in his home for self defense and that the Washington D.C. ban on handguns in the home violated the Second Amendment to the Constitution. The court's ruling also has some serious implications for other cities with similar Orwellian handgun bans, such as New York, Chicago, and San Francisco. The National Rifle Association has indicated that they are considering filing law suits in those cities also. Cathy Lanier, Chief of Police in Washington D.C. was quick to point out that most of the city's handgun ban remains intact. Those wishing to have a handgun in their home for self defense will still have to register the handgun, it must be a revolver, it cannot hold more than 12 rounds and may not be carried outside of the home. Semi-automatic handguns like the police in Washington D.C. carry and many American gun owners prefer, are considered machine guns regardless of the number of rounds they hold and are illegal for citizens to possess in the District of Columbia. This battle has just heated up a little. Don't expect Washington D.C., New York, Chicago or San Francisco to cave in and recognize the citizen's Second Amendment Rights until the Supreme court revisits the issue and clears up all the questions remaining. You would think that with all the writings of the founding Fathers on this issue, there would be no questions or issues left to resolve including carrying a firearm away from home. Thomas Jefferson wrote, "Let your gun therefore, be the constant companion of your walks". Our founding Fathers intent when they included the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights, seems pretty clear to me.