Tough Love

While watching coverage of Hurricane Irene, it has stuck me how blunt officials have been in their warnings to people who might decide to stay put rather than evacuate. The warning from these officials: if you stay and get into trouble, don't bother calling us for help . . we will not risk the lives of first responders. One official went so far as to recommend that people who stay write their name, social security number, and next of kin contact on a 3x5 card and keep it in their pocket in case they don't survive the storm. Serious warnings for a serious event. The government here is basically saying that people are responsible for their own decisions and actions. If people get into trouble, too bad. You will have to live (or die) with those decisions and actions. Pretty harsh, but it is this kind of tough love that motivates people to respond.

So what would happen if the government took this same approach when it came to day to day decisions and actions by the general public? Imagine what would happen if the government said to people: you bought this house or that car . . if you cannot now pay for it, don't come to us looking for us to save you . . if you are in financial trouble, too bad. Or: if you wasted your days while we provided you with a free education, don't come to us looking for handouts because your minimum wage job doesn't cover your bills. I know, it sounds harsh; but it seems to me that our government is making it way too easy for people to live off of the government. No doubt, there are political leaders who desire to see more of that. Even as food stamps are being used at their highest level in history (surely a sign of failed government), this administration is currently seeking out more people who they can qualify for food stamps (surely the sign of a failed administration).

What would happen if, just prior to a hurricane, officials told citizens it didn't matter whether they evacuated or stayed, emergency officials would be out rescuing people throughout the hurricane? "You have nothing to worry about, we will be there as a safety net to save you, no matter what". More people would stay, putting a much bigger burden on first responders to find and save them. That is exactly where we are right now in our economy, especially when it comes to social services and the big social contract items. Over the years our government, and more specifically the politicians who promised everything for just a few more votes, have basically told the public to take advantage of the multiple safety nets government keeps adding to its arsenal. They have relaxed the rules for who qualifies for these programs. They have extended the length of time people can qualify for these programs. And they have opened the door for abuse on so many levels. So how do people respond? They relax, make stupid decisions, get themselves in trouble . . then come running to the government for a bailout.

Does the government need to offer a safety net to certain people? Absolutely. Some people have needs that are so extreme and so beyond them that the government can be helpful (although it could be argued that a private non profit could serve that person better). But that is not what I am referring to here. I am speaking here about the purposeful shift to draw even more people into that fold, if for no other reason than to make people more dependent on government. When people become more dependent on government, they will more likely vote for the people who want to expand the list of goodies that government will hand out to the people. And that cycle perpetuates itself, growing government to a point where it is nearly impossible to trim it back.

Oh to hear officials tell people: you make bad decisions in your life . . too bad . . we will not rescue you. You will bear the costs for that, we will not burden the American people.

Great Video

This video is mesmerizing. As I understand it, there were 1500 photos used in this 2 minute film, with 500 people holding them. Very creative, and I'm guessing a lot of time to produce.

9/11 Motorcycle Ride in Leesburg, Virginia

Roughly 1800 motorcycles made their way through downtown Leesburg August 19, all part of the 911 Foundation annual ride from Pennsylvania to Washington to New York.

Jason & Joyanna Wedding at Morven Park

I know when people plan a wedding five plus months out, especially for mid-August, weather is one of the biggest concerns. I know it was for Joyanna. She wanted an outdoor wedding more than anything. Fortunately, Friday August 12 turned out to be a beautiful day for her outdoor wedding, and Morven Park was a great choice. Here are a quick images. Click on image to enlarge. For more images from this wedding, click here.

Random Thoughts on Debt Ceiling

1. Norah O'Donnell, formerly of NBC and now the White House correspondent with CBS, seems to be pretty distraught about there being no new taxes imposed as part of the debt ceiling deal. As you watch this clip, notice two things: a) her disgust with no new tax revenue, and b) her statement that "they (WH) gave them (Republicans) everything they wanted, and we (Democrats, presumably) got nothing". Kind of a stark admission by Norah. No need to wonder exactly who "we" are. And this by a CBS White House correspondent. So much for a non-biased journalist. Do they even exist anymore?



2. In response to a question about the Tea Party, Mitch McConnell wanted to make sure that he expressed appreciation for the Tea Party and their influence, but what he said I found troubling. McConnell basically said that if it was not for the Tea Party, Congress most likely would not have addressed budget cuts in the debt ceiling deal. A compliment with an unintended meaning. In other words, if left to the established Republicans already in office (like McConnell), the debt ceiling would have passed just like every other ceiling increase in the past, with no attempts to address spending. Most of these old time Republicans have been just as addicted to spending as their Democratic counterparts, oblivious to the costs. We should be thankful for these 75+ new Republican "terrorists" who seem to be inflicting terror in all of the old guard on both sides of the aisle.

3. Matt Damon says he wants to pay more taxes. That is great. So go ahead Matt, what is keeping you from paying more? It sounds like you are waiting for the government to compel you to do something that you believe you should already be doing. Why wait? My guess is that Damon takes advantage of every tax deduction/credit/shelter available to minimize his tax burden. Why? So he can pay the least amount possible. So why not choose to decline those credits/deductions/shelters? Why not fully expose your earnings so you can pay the most taxes possible? Or why not just write a check to the government for an additional amount? Or answer this: if you had $100,000 left over to give away, would you choose to give it to the federal government, or to let's say the Red Cross, or your local food bank, or to an orphanage in Mexico? I'm guessing not the government. Why not?

4. The general American public needs to prepare itself for some pretty nasty battles and name calling over the next few years. The debt ceiling debate got testy, and the liberal left have lost all sense of peace and love and hope and change as they call any opponents "terrorists" and "racists" and "monsters". All of this provoked by what amounts to being fairly minor decreases in spending. We really have not gotten to the serious reductions yet, the ones that will have a more direct impact on our debt. These are the cuts that will affect all of the liberal institutions that have been built over the past 50 years, and just like disturbing a beehive, liberals will get angry. Like I said, get ready for some pretty nasty battles.

5. One additional thought related to the last one: most every sane person acknowledges that as a country we cannot sustain the spending that our government has taken on over the past 50 years. Their programs may have had good intentions at the beginning, but we simply cannot continue all of them; and those that we need to continue need to be seriously reformed. The Democrats don't seem to want to have anything of it. Instead they insist that we will be killing off old people and children and the poor. But they have nothing to offer about how to pay for these things, other than making those who already overwhelmingly pay the most to pay even more. Never mind that doing so falls way short of what is needed. And never mind what their beloved programs are doing to the people of this country, creating a dependent class of citizens who allow the government to provide their daily needs. This president likes to talk about sacrifice, something he has probably never done in his life. These liberals will have to sacrifice many of their beloved programs, turning them over to private and/or non-profit entities, or just eliminating them. But will they? Will they see their folly and acknowledge that there are some things that government is simply not built to do, or will they stand in the way? This is the battle line.

Scott & Jeanne's July 23 Wedding

Here are a handful of images from Scott and Jeanne's Bluemont/Purcellville wedding.