WW II Battleship sailor tells Obama to shape up or ship out !

Bob Pearcy — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 05:25:10 +0000

WW II Battleship sailor tells Obama to shape up or ship out ! This venerable and much honored WW II vet is well known in Hawaii for his seventy-plus years of service to patriotic organizations and causes all over the country. A humble man without a political bone in his body, he has never spoken out before about a government official, until now. He dictated this letter to a friend, signed it and mailed it to the president. Dear President Obama, My name is Harold Estes, approaching 95 on December 13 of this year. People meeting me for the first time don't believe my age because I remain wrinkle free and pretty much mentally alert. I enlisted in the U.S. Navy in 1934 and served proudly before, during and after WW II retiring as a Master Chief Bos'n Mate. Now I live in a "rest home" located on the western end of Pearl Harbor, allowing me to keep alive the memories of 23 years of service to my country. One of the benefits of my age, perhaps the only one, is to speak my mind, blunt and direct even to the head man. So here goes. I am amazed, angry and determined not to see my country die before I do, but you seem hell bent not to grant me that wish. I can't figure out what country you are the president of. You fly around the world telling our friends and enemies despicable lies like: " We're no longer a Christian nation" " America is arrogant" - (Your wife even announced to the world,"America is mean- spirited. " Please tell her to try preaching that nonsense to 23 generations of our war dead buried all over the globe who died for no other reason than to free a whole lot of strangers from tyranny and hopelessness.) I'd say shame on the both of you, but I don't think you like America, nor do I see an ounce of gratefulness in anything you do, for the obvious gifts this country has given you. To be without shame or gratefulness is a dangerous thing for a man sitting in the White House. After 9/11 you said," America hasn't lived up to her ideals." Which ones did you mean? Was it the notion of personal liberty that 11,000 farmers and shopkeepers died for to win independence from the British? Or maybe the ideal that no man should be a slave to another man, that 500,000 men died for in the Civil War? I hope you didn't mean the ideal 470,000 fathers, brothers, husbands, and a lot of fellas I knew personally died for in WWII, because we felt real strongly about not letting any nation push us around, because we stand for freedom. I don't think you mean the ideal that says equality is better than discrimination. You know the one that a whole lot of white people understood when they helped to get you elected. Take a little advice from a very old geezer, young man. Shape up and start acting like an American. If you don't, I'll do what I can to see you get shipped out of that fancy rental on Pennsylvania Avenue. You were elected to lead not to bow, apologize and kiss the hands of murderers and corrupt leaders who still treat their people like slaves. And just who do you think you are telling the American people not to jump to conclusions and condemn that Muslim major who killed 13 of his fellow soldiers and wounded dozens more. You mean you don't want us to do what you did when that white cop used force to subdue that black college professor in Massachusetts, who was putting up a fight? You don't mind offending the police calling them stupid but you don't want us to offend Muslim fanatics by calling them what they are, terrorists. One more thing. I realize you never served in the military and never had to defend your country with your life, but you're the Commander-in-Chief now, son. Do your job. When your battle-hardened field General asks you for 40,000 more troops to complete the mission, give them to him. But if you're not in this fight to win, then get out. The life of one American soldier is not worth the best political strategy you're thinking of. You could be our greatest president because you face the greatest challenge ever presented to any president. You're not going to restore American greatness by bringing back our bloated economy. That's not our greatest threat. Losing the heart and soul of who we are as Americans is our big fight now. And I sure as hell don't want to think my president is the enemy in this final battle. Sincerely, Harold B. Estes

An Idaho Congressman’s views on the American Clean Energy and Security Act

Bob Pearcy — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 00:15:38 +0000

Or as it is called out here in the real world 'The Carbon Tax'. Congressman Mike Simpson sent this letter to a friend of mine. June 26, 2009 Dear Robert: Thank you for contacting me regarding H.R. 2454, the so-called American Clean Energy and Security Act. I appreciate hearing from you and having the opportunity to respond. I share the concern of many Idahoans for our environment and recognize that we must do what we can to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) where possible. However, I have major concerns with H.R. 2454, which promises large tax increases, higher energy costs, and major job loses, all without any real improvements in climate conditions over the next 100 years. This legislation is not a serious attempt to combat GHG emissions but is instead a political ploy that will be paid for by American families and do nothing to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. As a result, I voted against it when it was considered on the floor of the House of Representatives. The bill passed by a vote of 219-212 on June 26, 2009. Instead of a carefully thought-out proposal to increase our energy independence and reduce GHG emissions in an effective and reasonable way, H.R. 2454 reads like an extremist wish-list of environmental mandates that are not coordinated and, in many ways, actually work against each other. For example, the bill establishes a Renewable Energy Standard (RES) that mandates energy efficiency standards and requires energy companies to produce a certain percentage of energy and electricity from renewable sources, but it limits the definition of “renewable sources” for the RES to exclude hydropower and nuclear energy. The fact that Democrats would not even allow a vote on nuclear energy proves that this bill is not really about combating climate change—it is about establishing an energy economy that punishes activities and industries they don’t like. In addition, there is widespread concern that unless growing economies like China and India participate in a cap and trade system to limit GHG emissions similar to the one created by the bill, U.S. industries will be unable to compete on the world stage and American jobs will be forced overseas. The bill depends on technologies, like carbon capture and sequestration, that are still largely unavailable and untested. It would heavily subsidize purchase of electric or plug-in hybrid vehicles, while electricity prices would skyrocket under the mandates put into place by the bill. This is likely the most consequential issue Congress will consider this year, yet the Democrats allowed only one amendment and three hours of debate on a bill that we saw for the first time only a few days before it was considered on the House floor. They rushed an enormous bill to the floor without any real idea of what impact it will have on our economy, competitiveness, and way of life. This is a classic example of Congress rushing to fix a problem it doesn’t fully understand and implement a solution it hasn’t fully considered. Instead of creating a host of government mandates and forcing consumers to foot the bill for this legislation, I support using technology, incentives, and innovation to move our economy to a sustainable, independent energy source. I believe that to do so we must look at all the options, including renewable energy, nuclear energy, and domestic oil production. This is why I am a cosponsor of H.R. 2828, the American Energy Innovation Act, comprehensive energy legislation that represents a fiscally responsible approach to reducing our dependence on foreign energy, providing a cleaner environment, and putting Americans to work. By encouraging innovation, promoting conservation and efficiency without government mandates, and increasing production of American energy through nuclear energy production, this legislation is a real solution to the challenges facing our nation. These are real problems, and they must be addressed in a common sense, thoughtful way. I look forward to the debate Congress will continue to have on this issue, and I appreciate your comments about this legislation. Once again, thank you for taking the time to contact me about this issue. As your representative in Congress, it is important to me to know your thoughts and opinions about issues affecting our nation today. I also encourage you to visit my website, www.house.gov/simpson, to sign up for my e-newsletter and to read more about my views on a variety of issues. Sincerely, Mike Simpson Member of Congress

Bob's Blog » Letter To A Friend

WW II Battleship sailor tells Obama to shape up or ship out !

An Idaho Congressman’s views on the American Clean Energy and Security Act