Entitled to what?

The Entitlement programs of the United States are an interesting thing to think about. Why is it worth thinking about? Because as many "elites" are coming to realize, true reform needs to happen. And with the election buzz just getting started, it is time to pay attention to what the "frontrunners" are saying. But as I pay attention to the "echo chambers".. ie.. talk radio, no real debate on this issue is occurring. Instead it is about raising that crazy debate limit, how many more trillion dollars can we push it!

But lets start with this idea, why do we rely so much on the government? Why do we rely on something that can be in the very same have tons of rules and regulations. But yet we go back to it... we need it after all. Why? For retirement, to take care of us when we are old... and now, now for healthcare. And when it comes time to question this idea, it is being unsensitive, uncaring, but even better yet... dare I say UNAmerican

Do not get me wrong, we do need government. But in a very limited way. But as government has grown, so as the need for it. And so trying to take it back is the real question we need to ask today!

How are we going to make it without the help, the help from the government?
I would like to think, I would like to believe, but most likely I would like to do is do it on my own. That is true freedom. And isn't freedom what the American dream is all about.

Not anymore, now it is having the government take care of you.
But if you have not checked, it is going to be almost impossible for the government to be able to do so, not without going broke, and then, we are going to have to take care of ourselves anyways, just a thought from someone who wants to truly be free!

So what are you entitled to? But better yet, what happens when you do not recieve it?

IF you are young ..health insurance and retirement.. just to name two, are things I do not want to rely on the government for. But in the broke system that we have now, we have too rely on it, because it keeps goverment individuals in power and us truly not free.

What is going on here?

From my previous posting you can see that my view of the Army has greatly changed. This article stood out to me tonight. Anybody who wonders what is going on in Afghanistan better read this article. Blod the article, normal text my writing.
Time to COIN Another Strategy -- Now Apr 15 Written by: Diana West Friday, April 15, 2011 1:01 AM This week's syndicated column: Reading about another catastrophically maimed casualty of the counterinsurgency strategy (COIN) in Afghanistan, I was struck by a biographical note. This young American, now a triple amputee after stepping on an IED while on foot patrol, an integral feature of COIN's hearts-and-minds efforts, was only 11 years old when the war in Afghanistan began.
Did we ever plan that it would be this long? What have we accomplished?
Come October, this war will have lasted a decade. Last month, the Iraq War passed the eight-year mark. During the Vietnam War, the question was whether there was any "light at the end of the tunnel." In these wars, we have to wonder whether there is any tunnel. If so, no one seems to be in any hurry to get out. Why? Why is it that we have come to accept war without end -- not to mention, I would (and do) argue, war without benefit? And why does it actually seem as though our leaders want it this way? There are reasons and they are shocking.
I wish they were good, are they in our best interest? Truly decide without just supporting the party line. Can you do it, really?
Watching Defense Secretary Gates in Iraq recently where he practically begged to leave U.S. forces in place after the scheduled pullout in December 2011, Jed Babbin, I think, nailed it. Writing in the American Spectator, Babbin guessed that President Obama just doesn't want Iraq to fall apart, at least not on the eve of the 2012 election. Ditto Afghanistan. And falling apart -- I would call it reverting to type -- is the inevitable result of U.S. withdrawal. "Who lost Iraq and Afghanistan?" is not a question Obama wants to get into during the election. Thus, Obama will slog on with COIN, maintaining his weirdly logical wartime alliance with the neoconservative, democracy-project Right. On Obama's part, this is a political calculation, pure and simple. On the Right, something else is going on.
Falling apart, is that it, one of the reasons! Political calculation, are you serious? Of course no one wants it to fall apart on them, but what does the alternative choice look like... or what does "winning" look like? Keep reading, The fact is, so long as we are still in Iraq, still in Afghanistan, the policy born of neoconservatism's lights, embraced by nation-building Bushies, promulgated and entrenched by Gen. David Petraeus, still has a theoretical chance of working. A constant refrain from these camps is that prematurely withdrawing from either country would jeopardize what Petraeus has dubbed for more than four years "fragile and reversible" security gains. To them, staying forever is leaving too soon. It isn't so much that in withdrawal lies defeat; it's that in withdrawal lies confirmation of the defeat of their prized COIN strategy. In the strategy's defeat lies the abyss.
Here is where we need to stop for a second, or however long it takes to realize that defeat can equal a victory for us. So we leave both places, yes, "fragile and reversible" but we let the people there take control, its their land, thier country. The reason, I have come to the conclusion that 9-11 happened because of our presence over their many upon many years before that date. I will seek to further explain this in later posts, but the links of individuals I have provided will hopefully be some guidance to you, but Michael Sheuer Non-Intervention is the best place to start. So lets leave, then see what happens. But totally leave, and pursue the enemy on an "individual" level. This is an alternative. Is it not? To continue...
And so they must keep reality at bay. And they do that by keeping Iraq and Afghanistan a work in progress. As such, it is up to our troops to try harder to win "hearts and minds," walk more IED-strewn patrols, distribute more cash to make "them" like us, adopt more Shariah practices in dealing with Islam (as literally suggested by ISAF). In this way, the COINdinistas are hamster-footing it to keep the ride from stopping at any cost. That's their prerogative, but only until someone finds the courage to fire them. That won't happen until people connect the human toll of these wars -- ROE-related combat deaths, IED casualties, frequent unfriendly fire murders -- with dead-end COIN strategy. It's no secret. In a recent report on new military medical statistics that reveal a horrific spike in multiple amputations and genital injuries due to IEDs in Afghanistan, the Los Angeles Times noted: "Troops are increasingly vulnerable to injuries from such makeshift bombs as they mount foot patrols in an effort to win support from Afghan villagers, a key strategy in the counterinsurgency campaign."
Does this really sound like the best option, or does the alternative I offered seem even worse, if that is so, then how?
Either our representatives are as deeply vested in "success" as the military brass is, or they're too timid to demand answers. Just look what happened when Rep. Walter Jones, R-NC, expressed his frustration about war unending to Gen. Petraeus last month. "You know, 15, 16, 17 years, for God sakes, how much more can we take, how much more can we give treasure and blood?" asked Jones. Petraeus won the day by announcing, to great but irrelevant effect, that his own son had completed his first Afghanistan tour in November. "I don't think you win this war," Petraeus is quoted as saying in Bob Woodward's last book Obama's Wars. "I think you keep fighting. ... This is the kind of fight we're in for the rest of our lives and probably our kids' lives." This "kind of fight" -- COIN -- needs to stop, if only for the 11-year-olds.
It looks like either way, my solution or this one, "we're in for the rest of our lives and probably our kids lives" so why, why not try something different, I believe, and every American should at least consider, that the cost has already been to great! Defending a country is one thing, a forever presence in another country/countries is something totally different, is that so hard to understand! Find out how many countries the U.S. Army is in, and ask, do we really need to be there?

This Is Why

It has been awhile since I wrote in this blog, I made some changes, decided that I wanted to write about current events, ie. the “headlines” of the day. (or whatever comes to mind at the time) Lately I have had a great interest in what is going on in the world and how it relates to all of us and, of course, the political implications. I have begun to develop a strong opinion on things and have found this blog as a valuable place to voice it. So, here is some personal background, to help aid in understanding me. My attitude and views on things have distinctly changed. If you read my previous blog, from upon many months back, you will see that I did begin to have a growing concern about politics and world events. But that concern was not as deeply rooted as it is now. It was more of a generalized interest. It took what I call a “life experience” in order to firmly root where I am at right now. That “life experience” is this: It all surrounded my experience in joining the Army. That is where I reexamined my reason(s) towards what I was really, truly doing. Going in I was very excited, I found a “real” purpose. I thought that I was being very “patriotic”, willing to even die for my country. I was searching for a reason greater than myself, and this was it, right? But I also now realize that I was not being open-minded. People concerned about me voiced it (some clearer than others) about my decision. They openly wondered if it was the “right” thing for me. At that point in my life, right up to the time I left, I became defensive to those people. Thankfully, those who are close to me supported me, as those who did not know me as well were at the very best skeptical. Well, the time came, I left for basic. That is when it became real for me. Why it did not before, who really knows, (I know it should have, I had plenty of time to think about it) but my time there, which granted was not very long, it was long enough for me to decide, to know, that this was not my place. I will honestly admit it felt like things where out of my control. Mentally I could not do it, physically my body did want to, but my anxiety overwhelmed me! No matter what I tried to do my racing anxious thoughts, overtook me physically, I physically could not calm down, that was a scary thing for me. I finally concluded and admitted that I needed help! I could not “will” myself out of it... and Basic Training is neither the time nor the place to receive that kind of help. So I left, that simple right, I had to go through a long process of such, but yes I left. I can write more about it, that whole experience, but not today, maybe not ever. It is time for something new! And that is where I want to start! I have to see that it is the start of something new. Not only a time for me to reflect, but not to dwell, in that past event, or for that matter any past events. So let’s begin with what I learned. Now I am coming back, to be willing to be open-minded. But, how do I do that? It starts and ends with not being closed off anymore to only one way of thinking of and about thing(s). I need to understand that mistakes happen and will continue to happen. But open to new ways of thinking will help correct and change the decisions I make in life! That is what the focus of my writings will be about. Taking the news, the “headlines” out there and offering my opinion, my newly found open minded “view” on things. My hope is that I will spark other people’s interest too, and who knows where that might go! Tell me what you’re interested in and what your story is! So, here is what I want to ask…

Out of Money!

As you can see I am a (big) fan of Rand Paul, so I am following what he has been doing now that he is elected...the Tea Party favorite! One of the big issues is the debt, and that fact that we all know that it is way to high! Trillions upon trillions of dollars. So lets see what he has to say about it, The article is in bold, my comments are not. April 19, 2011 Rand Paul speaks at luncheon in Lexington AnonymousThe Times-Tribune The Times-Tribune Tue Apr 19, 2011, 08:18 AM EDT CORBIN — By Ronnie Ellis / CNHI News Service
Tea Party favorite Sen. Rand Paul told a friendly audience of 400 business people the country’s overriding problem is its debt and seemed later to hint his father is more likely to run for president than he is. Good call for now! Paul told those gathered for a Public Policy Luncheon of Commerce Lexington at the Lexington Convention Center the “main problem in our country is our debt crisis.” Later, he told reporters he is unlikely to vote to raise the debt limit “unless some kind of significant budgetary reform were part of it.” Please, Please, Please, stay true to this! Faith needs to be restored, trusting in those that are elected. I wonder what kind of significant budgetary reform he means. Paul wouldn’t say if he’s considered mounting a filibuster against the vote. “We haven’t decided what our strategy will be on that,” Paul said, adding he’ll vote against raising the debt ceiling of $14.3 trillion without some sort of real agreement to significantly cut spending. Paul told reporters his father, Texas Republican Rep. Ron Paul, might soon form a presidential exploratory committee. Paul has twice previously sought the presidency and Rand Paul has said he won’t run if his father does.There it is 14.3 trillion dollars! Why isn't everyone so concerned about this, I mean everyone!!! “I see (Ron Paul) going to Iowa and New Hampshire and South Carolina quite a bit,” Rand Paul said, referring to the first three critical states in the nomination process. “I think they’ve actually talked some about an exploratory committee so I think he may be headed in that direction.” Paul has said he would at least consider a run if his father didn’t, but he’s always emphasized he would not run if Ron Paul does. He said he will likely vote against raising the national debt limit. The administration and many economists warn that failure to raise the debt ceiling could plunge the economy back into deep recession and Republicans have demanded some sort of spending reduction be coupled with the vote. But Paul said that will have to be more substantial than the $38 billion in cuts negotiated this month, saying the cuts in reality represent about $350 million in spending reductions. (Congressional leaders, including House Republicans who negotiated the cuts with the Obama administration, say the cuts will actually reduce spending by $38 billion over 10 years). When the spending is in the trillions, how can the cuts just be in the billions!? "could plunge" so what is going to happen if we continue to keep raising it, its a ceiling for a reason! A debt limit is just that a limit! You and me can not keep spending, raising or "credit limit" just because... insert whatever reason is out there. This year, we’ll spend more money than we did last year,” Paul told the audience. He said cuts will have to include defense and entitlements such as Medicare and the rules for Social Security must be altered to prepare for the coming retirement of baby boomers. This has to happen, when will people see this! Entitlements and defense, lets start the conversation, no one is crazy enough to say get rid of them now. Just cut back, live on, say a budget, and do not change it, balance it! He backs legislation which would raise retirement to 70 over about 24 years for those presently under 56 and reduce some payments for more affluent retirees. He told the receptive business crowd that Washington has “become a government of busy bodies” and claimed regulations cost the country more than $1 trillion. “It is the beauty of the marketplace that works,” Paul said, “but the government often gets between you and the marketplace.” He was critical of the Environmental Protection Agency and complained about the Occupational Safety and Health Administration — OSHA — regulations. Paul criticized the U.S. involvement in military operations in Libya, saying the congress should debate a declaration of war before authorizing the president to use military force.
It was an expanded version of the speech he gave a week ago at the state Lincoln Day Dinner in Louisville, calling for reduced government spending without increased taxes and quoting Ronald Reagan who said government isn’t the solution to the country’s problems, government is the problem.
RONNIE ELLIS writes for CNHI News Service and is based in Frankfort. Reach him at rellis@cnhi.com. Follow CNHI News Service stories on Twitter at www.twitter.com/cnhifrankfort. If government is the problem, let’s do something about it! But it just not government, but the size of it!