On January 7, 2009, there was a meeting between Robert Reich, Pres. Obama's economic adviser, and the Way's and Means Committee. There are a few things there, but the thing I want to address came from Representative Charles Rangel in a discussion of providing economic relief money in order to save and promote local and State economies.

"Governors are going to be forced to find some formula to find out how we can get the money where the hemorrhages are."

I have two problems with this short statement. First, "governors are going to be forced..." Really? I don't mind the government saying, "Hey, we are sending you money for high risk areas. Put something together so we can make sure it all gets where it is needed." The problem I have is the transfer of responsibility. Instead of the "unity" we keep hearing about, the goal is to pass the buck to the governors. This sets a precedent. If the money doesn't make it, it's the governors fault. There is no unity, there is a sign off, a transfer of responsibility. "Here is that box of money, it's all in your hands now." I don't like constant federal over-watch, but come on. How hard is it for them to work together to put something together?

That is actually a small thing, one that I may change my mind on later, but there is another element that bothers me most and it is an issue of "common sense." He was talking about pushing money to the "hemorrhages." Medterms.com defines a hemorrhage as "Bleeding or the abnormal flow of blood." It comes from two separate Greek words, one meaning blood and the other "to break free." So Rep. Rangel is saying that there is a constant economy "leak" in these areas.

There was a man living in a small European village who was selected to refill the towns water reservoir after it leaked onto the ground. The man ran from the stream to the reservoir, filling it one bucket at a time. Whenever it reached the small crack, though, the water would drain. When he realized that he was making no progress, he gathered more men, each with larger buckets than his first. Back and forth they ran, filling it bucket after bucket. Finally, the water lever kept rising, even as it was leaking. They filled the reservoir to the top and finally, were able to rest. While they were idle, the water drained through that crack. The next morning, the men saw the reservoir empty again so they began filling it, running from the stream to the reservoir. They did this everyday, and the reservoir emptied every night.

Congress' solution of sending money where these economic hemorrhages are is akin to trying to fill a broken bucket: you may get it to the top, but it will still drain out. But they are not seeing this. All they are seeing is the reservoir is filling, ignoring the fact that there is a reason it is empty every morning. What the villager should have done was let the reservoir empty, repair the crack (or replace the reservoir, but that is a different argument) and then fill it. Likewise, Congress needs to not throw money at these problems but instead, find where the "crack" in the economy is and work to repair it. Once the repair is done, we can send money to give it a kickstart.

I am looking back at the Constitution now to determine the duties of president and this is what I found:

*Command standing military
*Negotiate treaties with consent of Senate
*Nominate ambassadors, consuls, and Supreme Court justices, confirmed by Senate
*Select individuals to temporarily fill Senate seats
*Introduce legislation expedient to his duties and Convene special sessions of Congress, either or both houses

That's it.

There is nothing about securing economy, providing jobs or providing medical care. The power to monitor and maintain economy (when it is within their power) belongs to Congress. They do this through taxation, borrowing money, and coining money.

I think President Bush knew this, so only did what he could to do his job. There are things that I may not like, and the ability to tap my phones without warrant is one, I still find that he was, overall, a very good president. I sit here today, having watched part of the inauguration speech and the subsequent luncheon and parade, reminiscing about the last eight years and wondering what will happen over the next four or eight. Things that cross my mind are the tax cuts he introduced into the House of Representatives. Cuts for corporations who used the new profits to provide raises and jobs. Cuts for higher income individuals who used the surplus to invest in those companies. Cuts for upper-middle income who used the money to buy luxury goods. I think about the legislation he introduced and supported that protects the lives of unborn babies. Legislation like Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, and the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act. More in his field, President Bush also ensured America's protection from missile attack by backing out of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and developing a missile defense system. He also ensured our judicial sovereignty by unsigning the International Criminal Court treaty.

He made mistakes, of course. He backed amnesty for illegal aliens and buckled when the public complained about the idea of sending National Guard to the borders. While it's intent is good, I fear that the PATRIOT Act can be used wrongly, and the bill could have been infused with more protection from misuse. He gave in to too many partisan demands, catering to Democratic officials without them returning the gesture. Then there is the well known "Mission Accomplished" sign on the aircraft carrier. The early strategy in Iraq was a failure, but he made up for it with the surge. That is really all I can find.

President Bush made a few mistakes but had far more successes as president. I hope that people will understand this and historians will record only the truth, not popular ideas. I hope truth and objectivity will outweigh popularity and political winds.

I thank you, President Bush, for doing what you could to ensure our countries safety and sovereignty and will miss your leadership and silent insight.

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2008/10/13/ldt.tucker.voter.fraud.cnn

Since 2000, I have been hearing about voter fraud, though usually it's people like ACORN employees (and the Rosie O'Donnell's of the world) that talk about Bush "stealing" the election.  Of course, ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) claims to be the beacon in the dark on this, promising to make elections more fair by opening up registration opportunities where they did not exist before.  Of course, what's not talked about is that ACORN is a federally funded registration group.  They are given tax money to ensure voters are registered properly and fairly.  Is this what they call "Reform"?  Three cheers for voters rights!