A Letter to the President from a Listener!

The following was a very interesting analysis in the form of a letter sent by a local listener to President Obama:

Dear Mr. President:



1. Your role as President is to inspire us, and give us hope for the future. Lift us up, instead of scaring us to death. There is no need to remind us that things are bad and likely to get worse – we already know. Please refrain from using words like “crisis” and “catastrophe” and instead reassure us by emphasizing the coming economic and financial recovery and the future prosperity that awaits us. Like a weatherman who forecasts a blizzard, even if it never comes, we’ll inevitably adjust our behavior accordingly by stockpiling food and milk until the shelves are clean. Similarly, if you continually remind us of how bad things are and how bad things are going to get, we’ll respond in similar fashion. Businesses will prepare for the coming economic “blizzard” by cutting costs and laying off employees. Consumers, concerned about their jobs, will likely reduce their spending. These actions will ultimately cause the very collapse in the economy we are trying to prevent. It’s all about confidence. If we believe things will get worse, they will. Conversely, if we believe things will get better our behavior and spending patterns will adjust accordingly and the economic sun will shine again. Stop playing politics – we already know things were bad before you took the oath of office and don’t hold you responsible. Become the leader we thought you could be, not the politician we feared you were.



2. If you really want to stimulate the economy, why on earth would you raise taxes during these depressed economic times – particularly on capital gains? Although typically the financial markets adjust in response to economic conditions, I would argue that this time it will be the reverse opposite – future economic fundamentals will depend upon financial market performance. Consumers will not spend, and thus the economy will not improve, while their wealth and after-tax income is eroding. Improvement in the financial markets will restore much of the wealth that has been lost and inevitably the necessary spending to jumpstart the economy. Given the steep losses in the financial markets, no one has capital gains anyway. Reducing or eliminating capital gains taxes – even if only for a few years – would cost the government little while providing a psychological boost to encourage prudent risk taking and the capital formation we so desperately need to get our economy back on track. A temporary elimination of the capital gains tax would likely cause the stock market to appreciate a minimum of 10 – 20% in short order. I assure you that consumer confidence and spending would quickly follow. And do you actually think raising income taxes in the midst of the current economic calamity will help reduce the deficit? Here’s a clue – tax me more, I’ll spend less. The less I spend, the worse the economy. The worse the economy, the more jobs are lost. The more jobs are lost, the less income you have to tax. Instead, tax me less, I’ll spend more and everything is reversed. Get it?



3. Why punish the financially responsible and reward the financially irresponsible? Why reward those who used excessive debt to purchase homes or other luxury items they couldn’t afford at the expense of those who lived responsibly within their means? I recognize we have a housing crisis and that mortgage delinquencies are contributing to our current economic malaise, but instead of forgiving the outstanding principal of delinquent mortgages at taxpayer expense wouldn’t it at least be more equitable to have a lien against future appreciation – perhaps at time of sale or even against one’s estate upon death? Please explain to us how simply forgiving the outstanding principal, with no possibility of recapture of subsequent appreciation by the taxpayer, is fair? All you are doing is incentivizing others to stop making their mortgage payments so that they too can be rewarded for their bad behavior by receiving a government handout on my and other taxpayer’s hard earned dime. It would seem to me that your policies in this arena will merely make the problem worse, not better. Nothing complex Mr. President – just common sense.



4. Please explain how reducing the charitable income tax deduction on high income taxpayers will help non-profit organizations throughout this country and increase the tax revenue to the federal government. Do you realize that this would potentially eliminate the very lifeblood of these organizations and the essential services they provide? Without the source of private donations most non-profit organizations would cease to exist, creating a void that only the government (and thus the taxpayer) could fill. More government involvement would likely equate to even greater taxpayer expense than any resultant increase in tax revenue. It’s not rocket science.



5. If you actually think we can become energy independent solely through alternative energy sources and little reliance on oil you are sadly mistaken. Your budget proposal to eliminate tax incentives on oil exploration will merely reduce our domestic oil supply, increase our reliance on foreign oil, compromise our national security, and further jeopardize our economy through higher oil and energy prices. Further, your proposal to limit certain emissions from the very businesses and manufacturers we depend upon for employment and job creation will only increase their manufacturing costs, reduce their global competiveness, and cause the loss of even more jobs than those we’ve lost already. Although the ideal of having clean energy and environmentally friendly manufacturing processes is indeed admirable, I don’t think our idea of a cleaner environment consists of the absence of manufacturing altogether. Want to turn a deep recession into a depression? Just go ahead and add even more cost and inefficiency to an already beleaguered U.S. manufacturing industry during these severe economic times.



It’s only been a few weeks since your inauguration Mr. President. You obviously have a lot to learn. It’s no coincidence that our financial markets are plummeting and our very way of life threatened since that time. It is readily apparent that neither the markets nor we have any confidence in your words, decisions, and proposed policies since assuming the highest office in our sacred land. Nor do we believe your policies and proposals represent the “change” we thought we were getting when we elected you. It’s now on YOUR watch, and there is no longer time for on the job training or assigning blame to others. Although the American people are patient, our patience is wearing thin. Please wake up – and soon. Be the great President that many felt you could become. Our hopes, our future, and indeed our very faith in the American Dream are dependent upon it.



Sincerely,

Kevin

The Wrong Coach Got Fired!

That's right! You heard me.

By now, I'm sure you've all heard of the great tragedy in Dallas, Texas where the coach was fired for allowing his team to win over another school 100-0. In addition to firing the coach, Micah Grimes, the administration of Covenant School , a private Christian school called the January 13th win over Dallas Academy, "shameful and an embarrassment that this happened. This clearly does not reflect a Christlike and honorable approach to competition."

In response, the Coach, who was asked to apologize, posted a statement on the Covenant website that said that he did not agree with the school, nor did he feel embarrassed or ashamed. His quote of significance said, "my values and my beliefs would not allow me to apologize for a wide-margin victory when my girls played with integrity and honor."

What about Dallas Academy? they have 8 girls on their varsity team and 20 girls in their high school. It is winless over the past 4 years. The academy is known for its small class sizes, and specializes in teaching students who struggle with "learning problems."

So, now that we have as much of this story as we know or probably need to, let's make some observations.
1. This coach is probably a jerk for pressing and shooting three-pointers when his team already had lead at halftime 59-0. However, have we thought about the other girls who played for the winning team? Are they supposed to just come in and know not to use their skills they have apparently learned a heck of a lot better than the other team? My answer is, No!

2. What the Hell is Dallas Academy doing playing basketball if they can't even compete? That's unfair and uninteresting for teams that are trying to compete fairly. Their losing forces a team to quit playing the game honestly, and do other things that may hurt them when they have to play against a team that can compete.

3. The Coach is apparently teaching his kids to play basketball very well. He was hired, I assume to teach, and at least in this case, basketball. One could argue whether he has great compassion, or whether or not he's too aggressive in winning, but no one can argue the fact that he's either a great teacher, recruiter, or both. Yet, he gets fired for doing his job, as I'm sure he was not hired with the hope that he would beat Dallas' Academy's losing streak by losing as much as possible.

4. What is the purpose of the game when you play it? You want to score and you want the other team not to score. Guess what, mission accomplished! The ultimate in this case is a shutout. So Covenant Academy is so ashamed, that they forfeit the game, which now becomes a 2-0 win for Dallas Academy. What? We give 2 more points credit to an unprepared team than they could score themselves, we bail out a coach who is doing a lousy job teaching, and we in a very politically correct manufacture a gray area that says that it's not about winning and losing, but strictly how you do it. Talk about sending a mixed bag of messages to kids, what are they learning here?

5. Our country thrives on competition, and yes, we want to win with class, but winning and losing in our society is part of who we are. For every winner, there is a loser. If you don't have a chance to compete, should you step into that situation until you have at least some of the fundamental tools. I won't be able to compete against a great golfer until I have practiced and honed the skills to step onto that stage. The coach is classless, but should never have been fired. Admonished, yes; not fired. The people that should be fired are the two administrations of these two schools who taught all the wrong lessons to the students involved.

One group learned that winning is wrong, and the other learned that someone will bail you out even if you lose. They were also taught that basketball in this case was made too important instead of worrying about more life and death issues that deserve far greater attention.

No, I say fire the two administrations, and depending on the situation, the OTHER COACH who has done a terrible job. If I walked into a classroom to teach students and consistently over 4 years had such bad lessons that it was the equivalent of a losing streak every day, I would expect to be fired, and any administrator worth his salt would do it. In this case, the only one with any salt were the kids that competed.

Taxation to Shape Behavior.

Two things have been swirling around in my head this week, and this morning the two of them connected.

First of all, was the idea of “Spread the wealth, “ you know that phrase that then Senator Obama uttered to “joe the Plumber” in Ohio. It was the idea that the wealthy need to be taxed to share with those who are poor or not as wealthy.

The second was the idea of sin taxes and government tax rebates. This is taxing or providing rebates for the purpose of shaping behavior. For example we tax cigarettes to make it more unattractive to smoke, or we offer a rebate to those who buy a greener car, while letting the SUV owner fend for himself.

So last night, I’m re-visiting a story about the state of New York getting ready to impose a new tax on every can of soda so that people will have to pay more to get fat on sugared drinks. Then it hit me! Bam! If the government is going to be in the business of shaping behavior with taxes and rebates, and spread the wealth since they obviously think that is the way to go, why not use the same concept , but in an additional way.

May I propose the “Spread the Responsibility” Concept. This is the idea that we really use taxing and rebates to spread the responsibility in this country. It could spur people to change their situations and behavior.

For example, we tax the poor more, because then they will want to change their situation and get a better job.

We tax the unemployed and homeless, so they will want to acquire a home and job.

We tax those with guns at an exhorbitant rate so they will put their guns away, and not buy them.

We tax rappers with swear words in songs so they will insert more responsible language.

We tax members of Congress when they don’t have budgets done on time.

We tax illegal immigrants more so they will leave or want to become legal.

We tax illegal employers who employ those illegal immigrants .

We tax those who don’t graduate at a higher rate.

We tax gangs.

We tax single family homes, so we’ll have two parents staying.

We tax those in jail, work release programs, and juvenile detention centers at a higher rate.

We tax parents higher who allow their kids on the street after 8:00 pm.

We tax drug dealers to make them stop dealing and selling drugs.

We tax people who have too many kids who can’t afford them.

We tax people who are on welfare too long.

We tax loiterers.

We tax porn at a higher rate so kids and adults won’t get addicted to it.

We tax members of Congress for staying longer than 2 terms.

Conversely, we’ll provide tax breaks for graduating, staying out of jail, getting a good job above $40,000, supporting their families, and a host of other things I haven’t thought about yet.

Since it looks like taxes and shaping behavior are the only two things most of our representatives want to do, let’s use the money to help all of us. Right now, the responsible reap nothing from the sin taxes and behavior-shaping, so let’s get something back for the money government wants to take from us and help people make the choices most of us have already made.

Hey, if you can beat, join and revise!

More Random Thoughts!

I promised some random thoughts, interesting or not, so here are a few more observations:

We didn't sell out on my old show when we went 6-9. It was economics. The radio industry sucks right now, but unlike so many others, the bailout money doesn't seem to be coming to help us. We have to cut back, take losses, streamline, do with less, and generally re-invent some things. In my case, that means adapting to a new time and expanding what the original show was by becoming more concise with valuable information, and more variety. Two of my colleagues lost their jobs because of this effort while I kept mine, so I take this morning drive opportunity seriously knowing that in my business, any day could be my last. For those of you who actually listen, WSBA has allowed me to have a free reign in that process. Anyway, I am rather enjoying trying to provide a different kind of vehicle for news and views.

Should Maybe Senator Roland Burris of Illinois be allowed to be seated in the Senate this week? If you go by the law, the answer is , Yes. If you use perception, the feedback is a resounding NO for Governor Blagoyavich's choice. Frankly, isn't this just Illinois-type politics with just a little bit more gall and brashness than usual?

State Senator Bobby Rush, an black man from Illinois, indicated last week that Barack Obama's former senate seat needs to be filled by a Black man. In this time of post-racial America, isn't that a bit of hippocracy at least, and at most racism. Wow, whatever happened to "a person shoulod be judged by content of character; not color of skin"? Mr. Rush went on to note that there would be a senate without any black members if the replacement for Obama, Mr. Burris, is not sent to D.C. What a problem? Can you imagine if we were to have a vacancy here in PA, and Governor Rendell was compelled to choose a white man because a white man had occupied that seat. Anyone say "racism?" Oh, I forgot, racism ony runs one way, though. All else is just getting even, right?

Other thoughts:

Is failing still ok in this country?

Maybe the government should have bailed out the "Big Four" in Detroit. That's GM, Ford, Chrysler, and the Detroit Lions (0-16 in the NFL; I knew they could do it.) in case you are wondering.

Does anyone know what the "G" commercial on tv with Muhammad Ali, Derek Jeter, and the mimes is all about? I haven't gotten it yet.

I saw the "Almost" commercial with the lonely elderly lady sitting by herself, and the voice in the background telling us that "someone almost brought her food; almost visited; almost took her to the doctor, and so on." It occurred to me that most people are very charitable and help others on their own. Do we really need the Ad-Council laying the daily guilt trip on us? Knock it off!

Lest you think I am cold-hearted, I really enjoyed driving kettle workers out and back to their sites during the holiday season. (One of the reasons I was remiss in my blogging responsibilities. I'm sure there is a commercial out there showing a blogger waiting in a rocking chair with a pc in front of him , and a voice somberly intoning, "Today, he almost received a blog from Sutton....") Anyway, I met so many joyful people who in many cases didn't have much in tangible wealth, but were incredibly rich in happiness. The stories we shared, and friendships we built were ones I will continue to try and cultivate, learny by, and remember.

Meeting the Glen Rock Carolers on their 161st Anniversary at sunrise Christmas morning is one of the simplest, most awesome Christmases my wife and I have ever had. The silence and beauty of meeting with others around a tree at 6 in the morning is an experience each of you should try some Christmas.

Burl Ives singing anything about Christmas still sucks.

My New Year's Eve present is news that I have bone on bone in my right knee, and torn cartilage as well. I've got to get a knee replacement, because my quality of life since the auto accident in April has disintegrated gradually. I'm losing weight, so I can get the replacement, and feel better in late January or early February. Happy New Year, huh? Anyone ever have one of those things? I guess I'm about to find out.

My wife and I broke down and got a 32" Flat Screen tv and a Wii. Picture looks better and Wii is addictive.

Jay's salads (I said I'm losing weight.) over at Jay's WOW Cafe and Wingery are the best around, especially with grilled chicken.

Emceeing the opening night of Christmas Magic at Rocky Ridge Park this year was one of the neatest things I've ever had the chance to do. Asking 250 little children and adults to countdown and help perform magic by pointing at trees, then seeing 400,000 lights come on in six different locations was cool.

I wish you all a Happy New Year, and hope to be more than just "an almost blogger."

Back from hibernation--Reflections on the holiday--Random thoughts!

Sorry I have been in hibernation, but I just needed to spend time with my wife, check out some medical things and enjoy the holidays. The following is simply a set of random ramblings with no particular ending, and a built-in invitation to respond or not.

First of all, I am still planning on blogging, though admittedly I am not very good at it. I know I lack the wit and insight of many of you, but I will make an effort to comment on the passing parade and ultimate circus.

On the "bailout mentality" now being debated in the country, I wonder what it does in continuing the idea that individual independence, free enterprise, and capitalism lie somewhere at the core of our country's success. What entities and institutions in our country are so important and intertwined with our system that they should be bailed out by we the taxpayers, and our irresponsible and generally dishonest representatives called the Congress, and government in general.

Let's see, so far we have bailed out financial institutions, now part of the car industry, and what next? Who else is so important they cannot fail? Retailers are starting to make some noise, but I was more intrigued by one of the great ironies I read the other day that I would share with you here.

Seems there is a problem with newspapers in this country; they're losing a ton of money, and they owe great debts. Bristol , Connecticut , incidentally the home of ESPN, is one of those cities trying to keep two newspapers going. It also seems Connecticut lawmaker Frank Nicastro sees saving the local newspaper as his duty. But others think he and his colleagues are setting a worrisome precedent for government involvement in the U.S. press.

Nicastro represents Connecticut's 79th assembly district, which includes Bristol, a city of about 61,000 people outside Hartford, the state capital. Its paper, The Bristol Press, may fold within days, along with The Herald in nearby New Britain.

That is because publisher Journal Register, in danger of being crushed under hundreds of millions of dollars of debt, says it cannot afford to keep them open anymore. Can the New York Times and The Chicago Tribune be far behind?

Nicastro and fellow legislators want the papers to survive, and petitioned the state government to do something about it. "The media is a vitally important part of America," he said, particularly local papers that cover news ignored by big papers and television and radio stations.

Here's the rub; freedom and the press to be separate from government and to be the watchdog on the government for the people. The ultimate irony, huh? The very group that needs to be vigilant in searching for truth on our behalf now needs money from the very group they oversee to keep doing their job. So how vigilant will they remain, and how investigative will they be in their reporting when it turns out to be the literary equivalent of biting the hand that feeds it? It is an amazing irony to me, and I am sure to many.

I guess the scariest part, if it would happen is that again it takes from the individual and bestows yet more power on a group of representatives who confiscate the individuals money to do it. Who wants to get off that merry-go-round first?

So, maybe sometime soon, we'll have the American version of Pravda, or maybe we will let failing businesses fail, and use good old American ingenuity to find a way to re-invent the newspaper industry.

Seems there is a

Source: Robert MacMillan, "Tax breaks (not bailouts) for newspapers"

Link to his blog at Reuters.

Congratulations to the President-Elect!

Congratulations to President-Elect Obama who will become the 44th President of the United States. He has run one of the most well-organized (maybe the most well-organized) campaigns in history. As Americans in difficult times, it is incumbent for all of us as citizens and leaders to forget agendas and get to policymaking. Our country and its people deserve no less. Democrats are the party in power and now have the opportunity to lead, and no longer obstruct. republicans have lost their position of power, and must now find ways to help lead, and not simply replace the Democrats as obstructionists. President-Elect Obama is my president and your's, but he is a representative of our views on how best this country must proceed. We need to hold him to account when he is wrong, and praise him when he is right. We need to see that he is now a leader who will be a puppet of no special interest or party. In doing so, I hope that we can make it policy-driven; not disgraceful and personal as has been done too often with President Bush. That is my wish this morning.

Redistribution of wealth--Progressive or Regressive

The following is a reprint of a response I had in an earlier post. It is not an attenpt to be a revisionist historian to Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations" which I have read. Rather, it is to discuss the benefits and merits of a concept. Debate it rather than just offer up names. Here it is:

The idea that government should choose who the winners will be and who the losers will be is anathema to the whole principle of free choice, isn't it? Progressive taxes? Repudiation of the Bush-Cheyney policies? Come on.

The ultimate job of government is to get out of the way so that individual initiative can have a chance to realize goals if pursued by the individual. It is, or was, based on a society that believed in independence and work. The only "fairness" that we worried about was to try as much as possible to have a level playing field for all in this country.

I do believe that there must be stricter regulation and oversight for situations that we have seen in this financial crises. When power and wealth are abused, especially in a way that takes all of us with them, there must be safeguards in our system of freedoms. People make bad choices, and illegal choices. They must be held accountable.

Having said that, what is progressive about any tax? Government produces no money, but takes it from those that do, then make them pay progressively more than those who don't???? What is progressive about that? How does that provide greater incentive for people to create wealth in this country? How does a 35% corporate tax keep business in this country when every other industrialized country offers less of a strain on earnings? Senator Obama is right in the sense that wealth is built "from the ground up." When you start at ground level, don't you want to achieve higher status financially. What a goal to look forward to when you know that your efforts will lead to a "progressive tax." How is that progressive for success?

Lessen the tax confiscation, tighten the spending, and find an equitable way to provide tax cuts for 100% of citizens in this country; not just 95%. If you nwant to create a nanny state of dependency where we whine for fairness defined as what I can get, I believe we go opposite the very tenets on which we were founded.

Bailout or Rescue???

Now that the bill has become a law, has your anger faded? Maybe it was never there if you think it is ok for the same entity that lackedd oversight, and took part in this mess is the same one we choose each time to bail us out. Is this not the insanity that Einstein spoke of at an earlier time? Why do we distrust our institutions and individual ingenuity so much?

Maybe this vote was right for the moment, but what about the long-term; what about the future of our free enterprise system? Have we safeguarded our individual liberty, or have we altered the state of our economic system? Our problem is that we all think we need something new, but we are not willing to suffer through hard change to do it. We weren't willing to say "No" to our president and our Congress and face the prospect that change could come about with the result of market correction, not government direction. We are afraid of returning to our principles, which is why we seek the cocoon and comfort zone of letting government ride to a faux rescue using our real money.

We need change, but not the kind offered by Obama that wreaks of socialism, or McCain's which has only the policy du jour that will make him popular for the moment.
The change will only come from us in an ideological revolution. I know that this is totally idealistic which is why it doesn't work because we have lost our idealism, except in shallow speeches only geared to being elected. We are lost in our innocence of daily life, manipulated by those who have the power; that's government.

Forgive my negativity, but it is what I see, and the outcome is not one that is postive, at least from these eyes. Your thoughts....

Who do you trust when it comes to guns?

With the shooting events at Columbine School and Virginia Tech on their minds, the small school district of Harrold in North Texas has passed a new rule, and it’s causing debate around Texas and the country. Starting this term, teachers in the district can carry concealed firearms as long as they are licensed and trained in use of guns. In order for teachers and staff to carry a pistol, they must have a Texas license to carry a concealed handgun; must be authorized to carry by the district; must receive training in crisis management and hostile situations and have to use ammunition that is designed to minimize the risk of ricochet in school halls.

Governor Rick Perry of Texas has backed the policy, and suggested that he would fully support other districts doing the same thing with similar safeguards. So the argument starts. Are schools better off gun-free with no one having the ability to fight back, or responsible teachers being armed and trained to defend against those who would attack without regard for life.

Sounds easy to me. The school has authority called In Loco Parentis which gives them authority over the child in place of the parents during the time they are in school. If I am a parent, I will trust the responsible teacher packing before leaving the school open to savage attacks by the irresponsible who know they are attacking the vulnerable and defenseless.

Society is tired of being victimized, and this is yet another example that they’re not taking it anymore. I’m Gary Sutton.

John Conyers and ICE enforcement

I am absolutely puzzled! I recently read that immigration reform advocates, including Democrats like Chairman John Conyers of the House Judiciary Committee are calling for an end to Immigration and Customs raids at businesses that knowingly hire large numbers of illegal aliens. See why I’m puzzled? It doesn’t make any sense, does it?

What if law enforcement was watching a business which ended up illegally making drugs that were hurting people in our country? Would we claim that law enforcement should not raid that kind of place?

So now that I’ve posed some questions, try some of these facts that are actually happening. There was a report out of the Center for Immigration Studies last week showing that raids along with other enforcement methods are doing exactly what they are supposed to be doing; reducing the number of foreigners illegally working and residing in the United States.

The illegal population has decreased by over one million persons in the past year. In fact, with the deportations, and self-deportations going on, the report states clearly that if this decline is sustained, it will reduce the illegal population by half in the next five years.

So why, then do people like Congressman John Conyers call these raids part of a “brutal, payback, gotcha” agenda being pursued by the United States government? No, Congressman. It would only be that if this were being done to law-abiding citizens who were living law-abiding lives. To equate them with those who are not is a lie. There is no brutality here, or payback, but there is gotcha.

In the end, lawful citizens are not puzzled so much as they are getting just outraged by your kind of pick and choose attitude on what to enforce in this land. The only “gotcha” that is involved is the fact that people are starting to see what hypocritical charlatans people like you actually are. I’m Gary Sutton.

Not running to Harrisburg -- staying on Main Street

I didn't mean to be cryptic or evasive lately and no, Trenton, I have only played a little golf, but I wanted to give a quick update on why I have not posted anything for some time.

When Bev Mackereth decided to step down from the 196th legislative seat effective December 10th, I decided in a very small window of time to make an effort to run for the seat. My only desire was to try and serve as a voice for people in a system that I think is very broken; nothing more.

During the past two weeks, I visited homes of those who would elect the candidate and learned a great deal. One of the things I learned is that there are a lot of people who listen to this show. I also learned that a lot of people count on the show as a an opportunity to voice their thoughts. That's gratifying and shows the importance of people having a voice.

Also during the last couple weeks, I was presented with a difficult choice. With any candidate after the nomination process (at the moment there is one), I would have to get a waiver signed by them to be allowed to remain on the air.

This is because of the public trust and nature of my job. If write-in candidates or candidates signed such a form, I could remain on the air. Even so, I still would not be permitted to discuss any issues on the state level that I might face as an elected official. Not only is that quite limiting, it changes the nature of the show by removing the the freedom to take on all subjects.

If an opponent or opponents decided not to sign the waiver, I would be off the air until at least November -- and probably as late as January. In other words, while everyone else could work at their jobs and run for office, I could not. I would have to find other ways to make money and pay for those pesky little things like health insurance and gas. This choice helped put everything in perspective for me.

These considerations are pretty serious on their own, but I also realized how much I love the privilege of contributing to our community on the air. I believe our conversation on air is stimulating and useful.

So with that in mind, I'm returning to my opportunity and privilege -- never a job -- rejuvenated and bristling with new ideas. I always thought that the biggest part of a person's vocation is to truly enjoy and prize it every day. I can honestly say that after having gone through the process of the past two weeks, I know where I belong, and it is right here. Thank you for your patience and for being a part of this community I love. GS

What was that Supreme Court Ruling really all about on handguns?

So what was the Supreme Court decision on allowing handguns really about last week and who did it most affect? First of all it was another chapter written in the book called “Can Americans be trusted with responsible choices or not?”

Five of the judges stated clearly, yes to that question on Thursday as they viewed the right to own a handgun responsibly with respect.

As usual, four of the justices did not and decided that responsible American citizens should be treated the same as irresponsible ones who are committing crimes in this country.

Many have said that it is the number of guns causing problems in the country. I would side with those who would say that it is the intentions behind those guns that provide the problem.

This brings me to the answer to that second question; can Americans be trusted with responsible choices or not.

The answer is Absolutely.

They’ve been doing it since the founding of this country using, by the way, ideas and guns. If the ruling had gone against individual rights of gun ownership last week, who would have been most affected? Responsible American citizens would continue do the same things they’ve always done; respect law and make choices with it as part of their civic duty to the country , whether guns would have been taken away or not. We could trust their choices to be the same; responsible.

For criminals, we could also trust their’s to be the same no matter what the ruling; irresponsible and unlawful. The only difference now is that their prey may be armed, which could be a deterrent for them.

So,when they decide to invade a man’s home and castle, they would do well to remember Jesse Ventura’s famous plaque over his door: Forget the dog , beware of owner. “ The responsible owners of this country have rights, too. One ruling for them was cast last week! I’m Gary Sutton.

To think I'm anti-woman (or don't understand them)!

Remember the other day when a person nicknamed Hillary Forever said I’m anti-woman?

It really bothered me, as you can probably tell by now. I’ve studied women, and to the degree you can understand them, I have tried to do so.

For example, I have learned that when a woman says yes, it means no, and when she says no, it equals yes.

If she says maybe, it always means no.

When she blurts out I’m sorry, the translation is you’ll be sorry.

When she states we need, it means I want, while "We need to talk" is code for I need to complain.

Sure, go ahead means I don’t want you t, and I’m not upset is interpreted to mean of course I’m upset you moron.

This kitchen is so inconvenient in woman talk really is stating, I want a new house.

Do you love me is the precursor for I’m going to ask you for something expensive,

and Are you listening to me—well, too late, you’re dead.

Was that the baby crying tells you to get out of bed and walk him until he’s asleep.

Is my butt fat is a call out to Tell her she’s beautiful.

How much do you love me is the warning that she did something you’re not going to like, and I’ll be ready in a minute means sit down and find a good game on tv.

Finally, the answer to What’s wrong is “the same old things” which means “nothing” which is” really everything” which finally can be interpreted that her pms is acting up.

And to think I am anti-woman or don’t understand you. Huh.

GS

So, what now for Senator Clinton?

In the wake of her most recent lack of progress cutting into the Obama lead this past Tuesday, Senator Hillary Clinton now begins the final swan song tour that includes primaries in West Virginia and Kentucky which she will win.

She cannot win the nomination now, nor will she see the super delegates flock her way. For all intents and purposes, she will do what her husband did, which is decide what her legacy and her future will be from now until June 3rd when the final primary will be held.

My bet is that she will become a uniter, not a divider; she will talk more about the issues, especially healthcare, she wants to leverage into the party platform come August. Little negative will be said about Senator Obama, so as not to detract from the presumptive nominee. She will play cat and mouse with the Vice Presidential talk that is certain to run rampant as a super ticket is considered. Senator Clinton will come across as more human than ever before, so as to gain the mantle of Grand Dame of the Party, and return to the Senate in a position to gain even more power there. Finally, she will choose her moment to exit from the race as she should, but look for her to do it after a win either in West Virginia or Kentucky.

She will then go to work for the Democratic Party which will have defeated the Clinton Party for the nomination, and will help to get its nominee ushered into the White House come November 5th. For a family which has only known winning, and has forged its own niche for 16 years in presidential politics, it is a humbling moment that Democrats hope will be tenderly handled with care and grace. I’m Gary Sutton.

Lots of possibilities in today's primaries?

To use some tennis lingo, we are at match point again in the Democratic Primary process, at least according to the all-knowing prognosticators out there.

The popular thought is that Senator Clinton must snatch the primary from next-door-neighbor-favorite-son Barack Obama to continue in the race, and at the same time, close to about 5-6 points in North Carolina where she was down 20 at one time. The predictors seem to be babbling that the pressure is on her because she needs to record big wins to catch up in the numbers, therefore, her back is against the wall.

If that's so, it seems to me that she has the company of one Senator Barack Obama who can’t say he’s gotten his momentum back with that big weekend victory in the Guam Caucuses where about 4,000 people voted. Uh-Uh. No, Barack Obama has won every border state to Illinois so far and much of Indiana is located in the Chicago Media Market. If he can’t win there, even though there are Hillary enclaves located in the northern part of state, further doubt about will explode around the country as to whether he is their guy.

The elected numbers don’t matter anymore for Hillary because she won’t overtake Obama. What does matter is the tally of reasons called primary victories no matter how small that give super-delegates reason to pause on their choice or change before or at the Convention in August. In addition, it also makes dealing with the Florida and Michigan rules mess more palpable if she comes steamrolling into the convention close enough where it becomes a real question.

Either way you look at it, both need Indiana today to either keep the door open to victory for Clinton or slam it in her face if you are Obama. We’ll see at the end of this day who comes knocking. I’m Gary Sutton.

Obama's honeymoon is on the rocks

Barack Obama’s honeymoon with the media may well be over.

His rhetoric has turned into a double-edged sword which took him to great heights because of its regular man soaring possibilities, but has now become the kind of cryptic, almost Clintonian kinds of answers to troubling questions that leave us as a nation feeling unfulfilled.

For a man with an oratorical gift like the Senator, and one who constantly talks about clearness, and transparency, he missed a great opportunity portraying those qualities by not telling us what “earlier controversial comments” he had heard his pastor Jeremiah Wright utter. The fact that he understates the controversy of Wright’s remarks as simply a “distraction” instead of a defining moment that could help people trust him or not is an error in judgment for a man with a considerable intellect.

People walk away from that answer with a feeling that this is the same old political hack who holds an arrogance that we have seen emanating from Washington for years -- the same Washington that Barack Obama is trying to distance himself from, and the type of political hack he constantly criticizes.

Add to that the tortured oral bumbling in trying to explain how an association with William Ayres, a bombing member of the Weather Underground is nothing more than a “manufactured issue” and you have a candidate whose high-flying words have been grounded, at least for the moment.

It seems to me that what will raise his message back up is clear and plain talk about all issues, whether he thinks they are important or not. I’m Gary Sutton.

Pro and con racism -- some thoughts

So much has been written about and alluded to carefully about race and racism in this presidential campaign that I think it’s time for us as human beings to remove “carefully” and insert “starkly” into this conversation.

Racism is disliking , discriminating, and hating someone simply because of their color of skin. It’s wrong, it’s ugly, it’s narrow-minded, it’s despicable, and it’s ignorant. It’s also real though many of us would deny it. The problem of racism is that it has multiple ownership with many of those proprietors of hate not realizing the stake they have made.

Think about it; if you think Barack Obama is the best candidate , but you won’t vote for him because he is a black man, then you are a racist. Yes? So let’s offer another side to this and see how it fits. Suppose you think that Barack Obama is not the most well-qualified candidate in your mind and heart, but you vote for him because he is black whether you are or not. You are also a racist. Yes? Why? Because race is the only basis for your decision.

Racism is a convenient substitute for thinking because it is easier to resort to the primal stupidity, ignorance, narrow-mindedness and hate inherent in such a feeling. Our better angels tell us that the only thing that really matters in this election, or any event where race is involved is the content of character and leadership of a man or woman. If Barack Obama becomes the Democratic presidential candidate, and ultimately president, it should be only because of his qualifications.

Unfortunately, we’re not there yet; race is too important to too many, but when we break the barrier without discussing race as a barrier, then we as the human race will have matured beyond pro and con racism, and we all will win. I’m Gary Sutton.

The basis for all evil--Olav be damned!

Armageddon is coming and here's how I know it:

People not walking on the right as they pass you. This evil menace is a growing problem in this country -- and, potentially, the world community.

Walking on the right when you pass another creates order from chaos. Form from the Void. Sure, here at WSBA we are sometimes accused of being on the right. But think about it. You’re walking down a hallway on the right because that was how you were taught by your family and re-enforced by society. It worked in the hallways of the school, on the sidewalks, at the mall, walking down the aisles at church. It's a simple standard that makes life easier for all of us.

Everyone was happy and working together. No longer. Let's say I’m walking down the hallway on the right and you come walking down the left side. How do we resolve this problem these days?

First of all, we have to stop at some point and decide on the rules -- yours or mine. This obviously will determine conservative and liberal. We'll use the conservative label for people of believe in the established custom and liberal for those who want to change it. Clearly, passing people in hallways is the birthplace of these terms.

Now we now move into the win-lose mentality, because one of us is going to have to lose our sense that we were walking down the hallway correctly and succumb to the other. If one of us is white and one is black, we may well have a racism or reverse-racism situation where one of us has to be submissive to the other’s views.

Oh, it gets worse. We decide that the other person who is passing on the left was not raised correctly. Resentment and despair builds! Why doesn't that person pass on the right, as our forefathers intended?

Now what? If we're lucky, we just do the little shuffling dance in these situations. If we're unlucky, well, who knows how bad it can get? A stare down, a battle of words, or even a fight. And God help us if one or both persons are gang members, like those Red Hat Society ladies.

Suppose some bureaucracy gets upset over the fact that we can’t decide on the rule, so they make a new set of rules which leads to a decision that we’ll have to have an identity card that says we can’t walk in the same place at the same time, or different days will require walking on different sides of the hallway, or that we will have one way hallways which will be required as a regulation for every public and private building and will be funded at taxpayer expense to make sure it is compatible for all.

Halls in buildings where we are having problems will require a special walking fee (tax) which will be collected at the hallway toll booth and whose profits will go to educating children on the dangers of walking in hostile hallways without a friend.

A third lane will be created called an HOW lane which stands for High Occupancy Walkers which may alleviate the fact that we will ever have to pass each other.

Another problem that has now also been identified in this right-left confrontation has been those who sneak by us on the right and sneak by us on the left. This inconveniences us, and tears down the value of our walk by making sneaking the same as what we are doing -- which is just playing by the rules in society.

It’s bad enough that we have to deal with Mr. or Ms. Lefty over here who has stopped us — oh no, now we have someone else trying to push their way past us. Sounds like it’s time for the hallway border guard who if they catch these people not obeying any rules at all, sends them back to their starting point at the other end of the hall. Problem is, they’ll be sneaking by us again before we even know it.

By the way, according to government hall-walking statistics, there are approximately 12-20 million illegal hall-walkers in this country today. They have closed down at least 12 massive buildings because of their overwhelming stream past law-abiding walkers.

Obviously, when two of us are at a standstill in the hallway, and we’re both intent on winning at the expense of the other, yet we are not violent, we now have gridlock. That means neither of us will get to our place of work, and we’ll just do nothing but stand and face each other down while the real work awaits.

But wait, a Blue-Ribbon Commission is appointed to study the problem of hall-walkers, and all of the reasons we got to this point. Along with Congress, they will arrive at a date by which walkers must withdraw from the confrontation, stand off, and civil war they are experiencing when they meet on the right and left sides of the hall.

Perhaps, former Senator Lee Hamilton, and former President Jimmy Carter will be chosen to head this Blue-Ribbon Panel, which will then have right-side walkers screaming favoritism and politics because these guys most certainly will favor the left-side walkers.

You’ll also hear cries from people who say that in Europe, they also walk on the left, so why don’t we look at that instead of just unilaterally deciding that the right side of the hall is the only place we can walk. None of our global friends are walking on the right, so how can we be so pompous as to think that the right side walkers have cornered the market on how to walk the hallways?

This is much ado about nothing, you say. Okay. How far away can driving on the left-side of the road on a highway be? Think about the chaos , death and destruction that it will cause just because you wanted to drive where you felt like it.

This brings us full-circle to the beginning, where I have decided to stay in my office, and my home, and sneak out only after everyone has left or gone to bed. Yeah, you’ve got it — isolationism. I don’t know if it will work, but at least I can duck the problem of having to have my view of the world changed by left-side walkers.

Can Armageddon be far?

A soldier's response to being called part of a cult

This was the letter I read on the show from Major Joe DeCree in response to Jacqueitch's blog post on Wednesday of this past week. I hope it means something to you. It did to me. GS

I was not able to listen to the guest spot that he responded to but I heard your reading of his blog and I then read his post to make sure that I got it right. I read his blog comments and I am sitting at my desk shaking.

I at first got angry, of course. Such talk is outlandish and even dangerous. How dare that man who clearly aspires to little make light of a brave Navy SEAL who yesterday was awarded a posthumous medal of honor when he blew himself up to save his buddies.

Cultists do not die for their fellows. They certainly are not concerned with saving their fellows. How dare Jacque Itch diminish that man. I find such a man who would say those things as a man without honor. It's one thing to think of something in a moment of anger it is quite another to take the time to craft a lengthy message which is delivered anonymously and in cowardly fashion on a blog read by hundreds. Jacque Itch is such a man it would seem.

Jacque Itch, if you are out there you are a man without honor and I hope never to make your acquaintance. You cannot apologize enough for your statements. I can give nothing else you say credence perhaps in perpetuity.

The second feeling I experienced after reading that was overwhelming despair. I made the military my life. I read the Constitution regularly because I swore an oath to uphold it. I re-read my oath of office frequently for the same reason. I missed my families birthdays. I missed my anniversary every year because I married in June and the Army is always in the field in June. I missed a few Christmases. I missed retirement parties, I do not know my brother's children because I was always gone. I missed my oldest daughter's last 3 years of high school because I was overseas for almost that entire period. The deployments nearly cost me my marriage. And , oh yeah, I got shot at -- a lot.

Why did I and thousands like me go through all of that? I did it for the Republic. I did it for my brother's children, I did it for my own children. I even did it for Jacque Itch. I did it so that we get to be what we want.

I did not care about Usama bin Laden. I knew I would never see him in the flesh so any personal attachment to that man is pointless. I did it for my men who under 8 years of the Clinton's went from a proud fighting force to buying the diesel fuel for military vehicles with their own money so we could make training exercises. Doesn't sound much like a cultist to me.

But today Jacque Itch set me straight. I spent 22 years being an automaton. I spent 22 years not trying to teach young men and women how to be better than what they were, but simply brainwashing more automatons. I did not defend the Republic. I instead apparently wasted my life and lived a lie. Words fail me, I cannot describe what I am feeling right now I only hope never to feel it again. Screw you, Jacque Itch.

-- Maj. Joe DeCree, US Army (Ret.)

Rant: Protecting children on the web

(This is an edited version of my rant last Monday. Yes, the sassy cutie to the left has little to do with this post, other than the fact that I used "children" in the title. But she's my god-daughter and I get to post pictures of her if I want to.)

I heard a caller on the show who saw an advertisement on a website that he thought was inappropriate for young people.

Now, I rarely see ads when I’m surfing the web -- I block them with AdBlock Plus, free software that comes with Firefox, my Internet browser.

The suggestion made to the caller was to go back to the site, write down the names of all the other advertisers and ask them to force the site to remove the one ad he didn’t like. Later in the show I got the feeling that a lot of people think the federal government should be taking care of this problem.

Let me ask you this:

Suppose I decide not to lock the doors to my house. I decide not to set my alarm system. I decide to allow strangers into my home. I do this for a while and pretty soon, there are cigarette butts on my carpet, the toilet’s clogged, and, worst of all, someone hung a Dallas Cowboys banner in my living room.

If I complained about this to you, what would you say?

Would you say: Jay, contact your neighbors and tell them what’s going on. Ask them to stop troublemakers from coming into your neighborhood. And let’s get the federal government on this. Let’s get a platoon of Marines stationed in front of your house to stop this. Would you say that?

Or would you say: Jay, why don’t you lock yours doors, set the alarm and don’t let strangers into your home. And if you don’t want to be responsible for what comes into your home, then it’s your problem.

Later in the show, I heard complaints about adult content on the rest of the web.

Again – I have to ask – why not just prevent that stuff from coming into your home? Software that filters the internet is widely available.

I did a little research one night. And by "research," I mean I spent 5 minutes typing keywords into google and viewing the results. Here’s what I learned.

If your internet service provider is Comcast, guess what? They give parental control software away for free. How about AT&T? Free. Verizon? Five bucks a month.

It took me about 5 minutes find a bunch of free – or close to free – options to control the content that comes into the home. (You can find some links and info here.)

But you know what? I’m convinced – I don’t want to spend any time or any effort to control what I let into my home. I don’t want to be responsible for what I let into my home. Let’s get the federal government involved instead.

Let’s see, some people suggested creating a new domain on the internet for adult content. We have .com, .gov, .edu; so let’s make, I don’t know, .xxx.

Let’s move pornography over to .xxx. Some of those men’s magazines have pretty racy pictures, so let’s send Maxim Magazine and FHM over there, too. Sports Illustrated has to go – that annual swimsuit issue can be revealing. Websites that explain breast health and cancer awareness might show naughty bits, so they’re out.

The Onion is a pretty funny parody of online news, but they use bad words, so they’re out. Speaking of bad words, I saw some blogs that occasionally drop the f-bomb. They’re gone too.

Now, someone needs to be in charge of reviewing web sites, managing the new .xxx domain, and handling disputes. Let’s form a new federal bureaucracy to deal with this called the Bureau of Naughty Websites. It’ll have to be pretty big – there’s a lot of new web content published every second.

Of course, none of this will work. Why? Even if we move everything offensive to someone over to the new .xxx domain, we still have to block those sites from coming into our homes.

And we already decided that we don’t want to spend any time or effort into blocking stuff coming into our homes that we don’t want.