Shatner On Gun Control

An Open Letter To Nancy Pelosi

NOTE: This open letter is a works in progress. Like the U.S. Congress, we the people reserve the right to 'tweak' legislation to for OUR needs. In this case, to control the Congress and force the Congress back under the control of the American people.

---

Dear Ms. Pelosi, (And I use the term ‘dear’ very loosely) Since you have shown the American people, whom you work for, so little concern in the reckless spending of their money through an 800 billion bailout (It began at 700 billion; An additional 100 billion of pork was added) to boost confidence in our nation’s financial markets, may I offer some advice that may allow you to save face with your employer, the American tax payer? We the people want to see some common sense legislation coming out of Capitol Hill. The following is just a few ideas you may introduce into law on our behalf.

The American people depend on their 401K and IRA plans to fund their retirement. The market meltdown, caused by the employees of the American people, the elected representatives, has cost billions of dollars through legislative mismanagement and lack of oversight of the mortgage and banking industry. The American economy through policies designed to enrich the top few upon the backs of the working class is in a shambles. This is not the doing of the American people. This is the work of the Congress who has little oversight on them. The Congressional oversight committee, the American media, has abandoned this responsibility for partisan reasons.

We the people demand to see the following items included in a bill that will truly benefit the American people, not the politician elites and their cronies.We demand a tax deduction to be claimed by individuals who have 401K and IRA plans. This deduction will be equal to the amount lost since January 1st, 2008 for each 401K and IRA plan owned by each American. Politicians and their immediate families will be exempt from this deduction, since you got us into this mess. Said tax deductions will continue until the 401K and IRA plans regain in value to equal their pre 2008 value, which at that time, the deductions will cease.

We demand a tax deduction for those who have not claimed bankruptcy or who are not in foreclosure on their home. This deduction shall be equal to the dollar amount depreciated from their home over the last three years, using the following formula; Home value depreciation will be calculated from January 1st, 2006 to January 1st 2009. The homeowner will be allowed to claim as a loss, the loss in equity in their home for the said three year period.

I would like to bring to your attention Ms. Pelosi, because you appear to be so far out of touch with mainstream America, that there is a perception among the American people that the Congress of the United States is rampant with issues of conflict of interest. We are unable to understand why a multi-millionaire such as yourself, Ms. Pelosi, would desire to run and hold political office for $169,300 per year (2008 figure), unless there is something to be gained financially by holding office. We the people demand the following;

All politicians and their spouses must implement a blind trust for their holdings and assets. A blind trust is defined as; A trust in which the fiduciaries, namely the executors or those who have been given power of attorney, have full discretion over the assets, and the trust beneficiaries have no knowledge of the holdings of the trust and no right to intervene in their handling. Blind trusts are generally used when a settlor (sometimes called a trustor or donor) wishes to keep the beneficiary unaware of the specific assets in the trust, such as to avoid conflict of interest (See Barney Frank) between the beneficiary and the investments. Politicians or others in sensitive positions often place their personal assets (including investment income) into blind trusts, to avoid public scrutiny and accusations of conflicts of interest when they direct government funds to the private sector. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_trust

Furthermore Ms. Pelosi; it will be mandated that the blind trust remain in effect for a period six years after a politician leaves office. Upon conviction of congressional member of a felony crime or for impeachment involving conflict of interest, said trust will be turned over to the U.S. Treasury. After a fair trial, unlike an IRS preceding, where an American taxpayer is considered guilty until he proves himself innocent, the trust may be returned or confiscated according to the outcome of said trail.

So that we the people of the United States have our faith in our representatives restored, so that we may once again believe that our representatives will work for the people and not their own benefit and profit, the Congressional pension plan must be terminated with all accrued funds in said pension plan to transferred immediately to an appropriate 401K or IRA plan, to be contained in the Congressman's blind trust. The congressional 401K or IRA plan must be equal to and not better than what is available to the ordinary American tax payer. In addition, the Congress will have social security tax withheld from their pay, to be disbursed upon retirement to said representative, to be administered under the same guidelines the American people are subject to. You may wish to fix the social security system, Ms. Pelosi, since this will contribute to yours and your colleague’s retirement.

All Congressional members must purchase their own medical health plans and all Congressional members must work within the framework of said plan. As it is mandated in California; an employer may not have better, but only equal medical insurance coverage to what he offers to his employee. And, so it shall be mandated for Congress. Congressional members may not have better medical coverage than any of their constituents. This keeps things fair for all.

Finally, we the people demand term limits to no more than two terms, just as the president is held to. This will break up the “good old boys club” on Capitol Hill and facilitate the return of Congress back to the American people.

Passage of a bill encompassing these demands is to be mandated on all of Congress with no loopholes. This will be a start in restoring the people’s trust in our representatives again.

We the people reserve the right to alter this legislation with a popular vote and anytime, whenever there is a general election. While ‘mob’ rule is not good for this country as a whole, in the case of controlling Congress, this one exception should be allowed.

Love & Kisses!

Your boss, the pissed off American tax payer

As The Pendulum Swings To The Far Left, A Reminder of How It Once Was; Ronald Reagan's Farewell Address to the Nation

Oval Office
January 11, 1989

This was President Reagan's formal goodbye to the nation after the completion of two terms in office.
3,302 words

This is the 34th time I'll speak to you from the Oval Office and the last. We've been together eight years now, and soon it'll be time for me to go. But before I do, I wanted to share some thoughts, some of which I've been saving for a long time.

It's been the honor of my life to be your president. So many of you have written the past few weeks to say thanks, but I could say as much to you. Nancy and I are grateful for the opportunity you gave us to serve.

One of the things about the presidency is that you're always somewhat apart. You spend a lot of time going by too fast in a car someone else is driving, and seeing the people through tinted glass--the parents holding up a child, and the wave you saw too late and couldn't return. And so many times I wanted to stop and reach out from behind the glass, and connect. Well, maybe I can do a little of that tonight.

People ask how I feel about leaving. And the fact is, "parting is such sweet sorrow." The sweet part is California, and the ranch and freedom. The sorrow--the goodbyes, of course, and leaving this beautiful place.

You know, down the hall and up the stairs from this office is the part of the White House where the president and his family live. There are a few favorite windows I have up there that I like to stand and look out of early in the morning. The view is over the grounds here to the Washington Monument, and then the Mall and the Jefferson Memorial. But on mornings when the humidity is low, you can see past the Jefferson to the river, the Potomac, and the Virginia shore. Someone said that's the view Lincoln had when he saw the smoke rising from the Battle of Bull Run. I see more prosaic things: the grass on the banks, the morning traffic as people make their way to work, now and then a sailboat on the river.

I've been thinking a bit at that window. I've been reflecting on what the past eight years have meant and mean. And the image that comes to mind like a refrain is a nautical one--a small story about a big ship, and a refugee and a sailor. It was back in the early '80s, at the height of the boat people. And the sailor was hard at work on the carrier Midway, which was patrolling the South China Sea. The sailor, like most American servicemen, was young, smart, and fiercely observant. The crew spied on the horizon a leaky little boat. And crammed inside were refugees from Indochina hoping to get to America. The Midway sent a small launch to bring them to the ship and safety. As the refugees made their way through the choppy seas, one spied the sailor on deck and stood up and called out to him. He yelled, "Hello, American sailor. Hello, freedom man."

A small moment with a big meaning, a moment the sailor, who wrote it in a letter, couldn't get out of his mind. And when I saw it, neither could I. Because that's what it was to be an American in the 1980s. We stood, again, for freedom. I know we always have, but in the past few years the world again, and in a way, we ourselves rediscovered it.

It's been quite a journey this decade, and we held together through some stormy seas. And at the end, together, we are reaching our destination.

The fact is, from Grenada to the Washington and Moscow summits, from the recession of '81 to '82, to the expansion that began in late '82 and continues to this day, we've made a difference. The way I see it, there were two great triumphs, two things that I'm proudest of. One is the economic recovery, in which the people of America created--and filled--19 million new jobs. The other is the recovery of our morale. America is respected again in the world and looked to for leadership.

Something that happened to me a few years ago reflects some of this. It was back in 1981, and I was attending my first big economic summit, which was held that year in Canada. The meeting place rotates among the member countries. The opening meeting was a formal dinner for the heads of government of the seven industrialized nations. Now, I sat there like the new kid in school and listened, and it was all Francois this and Helmut that. They dropped titles and spoke to one another on a first-name basis. Well, at one point I sort of leaned in and said, "My name's Ron." Well, in that same year, we began the actions we felt would ignite an economic comeback--cut taxes and regulation, started to cut spending. And soon the recovery began.

Two years later another economic summit, with pretty much the same cast. At the big opening meeting we all got together, and all of a sudden, just for a moment, I saw that everyone was just sitting there looking at me. And one of them broke the silence. "Tell us about the American miracle," he said.

Well, back in 1980, when I was running for president, it was all so different. Some pundits said our programs would result in catastrophe. Our views on foreign affairs would cause war. Our plans for the economy would cause inflation to soar and bring about economic collapse. I even remember one highly respected economist saying, back in 1982, that "the engines of economic growth have shut down here, and they're likely to stay that way for years to come." Well, he and the other opinion leaders were wrong. The fact is, what they called "radical" was really "right." What they called "dangerous" was just "desperately needed."

And in all of that time I won a nickname, "The Great Communicator." But I never thought it was my style or the words I used that made a difference: It was the content. I wasn't a great communicator, but I communicated great things, and they didn't spring full bloom from my brow, they came from the heart of a great nation--from our experience, our wisdom, and our belief in principles that have guided us for two centuries. They called it the Reagan revolution. Well, I'll accept that, but for me it always seemed more like the great rediscovery, a rediscovery of our values and our common sense.

Common sense told us that when you put a big tax on something, the people will produce less of it. So, we cut the people's tax rates, and the people produced more than ever before. The economy bloomed like a plant that had been cut back and could now grow quicker and stronger. Our economic program brought about the longest peacetime expansion in our history: real family income up, the poverty rate down, entrepreneurship booming, and an explosion in research and new technology. We're exporting more than ever because American industry became more competitive and at the same time, we summoned the national will to knock down protectionist walls abroad instead of erecting them at home. Common sense also told us that to preserve the peace, we'd have to become strong again after years of weakness and confusion. So, we rebuilt our defenses, and this New Year we toasted the new peacefulness around the globe. Not only have the superpowers actually begun to reduce their stockpiles of nuclear weapons--and hope for even more progress is bright--but the regional conflicts that rack the globe are also beginning to cease. The Persian Gulf is no longer a war zone. The Soviets are leaving Afghanistan. The Vietnamese are preparing to pull out of Cambodia, and an American-mediated accord will soon send 50,000 Cuban troops home from Angola.

The lesson of all this was, of course, that because we're a great nation, our challenges seem complex. It will always be this way. But as long as we remember our first principles and believe in ourselves, the future will always be ours. And something else we learned: Once you begin a great movement, there's no telling where it will end. We meant to change a nation, and instead, we changed a world.

Countries across the globe are turning to free markets and free speech and turning away from ideologies of the past. For them, the great rediscovery of the 1980s has been that, lo and behold, the moral way of government is the practical way of government: Democracy, the profoundly good, is also the profoundly productive.

When you've got to the point when you can celebrate the anniversaries of your 39th birthday, you can sit back sometimes, review your life, and see it flowing before you. For me there was a fork in the river, and it was right in the middle of my life. I never meant to go into politics. It wasn't my intention when I was young. But I was raised to believe you had to pay your way for the blessings bestowed on you. I was happy with my career in the entertainment world, but I ultimately went into politics because I wanted to protect something precious.

Ours was the first revolution in the history of mankind that truly reversed the course of government, and with three little words: "We the people." "We the people" tell the government what to do, it doesn't tell us. "We the people" are the driver, the government is the car. And we decide where it should go, and by what route, and how fast. Almost all the world's constitutions are documents in which governments tell the people what their privileges are. Our Constitution is a document in which "We the people" tell the government what it is allowed to do. "We the people" are free. This belief has been the underlying basis for everything I've tried to do these past eight years.

But back in the 1960s, when I began, it seemed to me that we'd begun reversing the order of things--that through more and more rules and regulations and confiscatory taxes, the government was taking more of our money, more of our options, and more of our freedom. I went into politics in part to put up my hand and say, "Stop." I was a citizen politician, and it seemed the right thing for a citizen to do.

I think we have stopped a lot of what needed stopping. And I hope we have once again reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited. There's a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: As government expands, liberty contracts.

Nothing is less free than pure communism, and yet we have, the past few years, forged a satisfying new closeness with the Soviet Union. I've been asked if this isn't a gamble, and my answer is no because we're basing our actions not on words but deeds. The detente of the 1970s was based not on actions but promises. They'd promise to treat their own people and the people of the world better. But the gulag was still the gulag, and the state was still expansionist, and they still waged proxy wars in Africa, Asia, and Latin America.

Well, this time, so far, it's different. President Gorbachev has brought about some internal democratic reforms and begun the withdrawal from Afghanistan. He has also freed prisoners whose names I've given him every time we've met.

But life has a way of reminding you of big things through small incidents. Once, during the heady days of the Moscow summit, Nancy and I decided to break off from the entourage one afternoon to visit the shops on Arbat Street--that's a little street just off Moscow's main shopping area. Even though our visit was a surprise, every Russian there immediately recognized us and called out our names and reached for our hands. We were just about swept away by the warmth. You could almost feel the possibilities in all that joy. But within seconds, a KGB detail pushed their way toward us and began pushing and shoving the people in the crowd. It was an interesting moment. It reminded me that while the man on the street in the Soviet Union yearns for peace, the government is Communist. And those who run it are Communists, and that means we and they view such issues as freedom and human rights very differently.

We must keep up our guard, but we must also continue to work together to lessen and eliminate tension and mistrust. My view is that President Gorbachev is different from previous Soviet leaders. I think he knows some of the things wrong with his society and is trying to fix them. We wish him well. And we'll continue to work to make sure that the Soviet Union that eventually emerges from this process is a less threatening one. What it all boils down to is this. I want the new closeness to continue. And it will, as long as we make it clear that we will continue to act in a certain way as long as they continue to act in a helpful manner. If and when they don't, at first pull your punches. If they persist, pull the plug. It's still trust but verify. It's still play, but cut the cards. It's still watch closely. And don't be afraid to see what you see.

I've been asked if I have any regrets. Well, I do. The deficit is one. I've been talking a great deal about that lately, but tonight isn't for arguments. And I'm going to hold my tongue. But an observation: I've had my share of victories in the Congress, but what few people noticed is that I never won anything you didn't win for me. They never saw my troops, they never saw Reagan's regiments, the American people. You won every battle with every call you made and letter you wrote demanding action. Well, action is still needed. If we're to finish the job, Reagan's regiments will have to become the Bush brigades. Soon he'll be the chief, and he'll need you every bit as much as I did. Finally, there is a great tradition of warnings in presidential farewells, and I've got one that's been on my mind for some time. But oddly enough it starts with one of the things I'm proudest of in the past eight years: the resurgence of national pride that I called the new patriotism. This national feeling is good, but it won't count for much, and it won't last unless it's grounded in thoughtfulness and knowledge.

An informed patriotism is what we want. And are we doing a good enough job teaching our children what America is and what she represents in the long history of the world? Those of us who are over 35 or so years of age grew up in a different America. We were taught, very directly, what it means to be an American. And we absorbed, almost in the air, a love of country and an appreciation of its institutions. If you didn't get these things from your family, you got them from the neighborhood, from the father down the street who fought in Korea or the family who lost someone at Anzio. Or you could get a sense of patriotism from school. And if all else failed, you could get a sense of patriotism from popular culture. The movies celebrated democratic values and implicitly reinforced the idea that America was special. TV was like that, too, through the mid-'60s

But now, we're about to enter the '90s, and some things have changed. Younger parents aren't sure that an unambivalent appreciation of America is the right thing to teach modern children. And as for those who create the popular culture, well-grounded patriotism is no longer the style. Our spirit is back, but we haven't reinstitutionalized it. We've got to do a better job of getting across that America is freedom--freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of enterprise. And freedom is special and rare. It's fragile; it needs protection.

So, we've got to teach history based not on what's in fashion but what's important: Why the Pilgrims came here, who Jimmy Doolittle was, and what those 30 seconds over Tokyo meant. You know, four years ago on the 40th anniversary of D-Day, I read a letter from a young woman writing of her late father, who'd fought on Omaha Beach. Her name was Lisa Zanatta Henn, and she said, "We will always remember, we will never forget what the boys of Normandy did." Well, let's help her keep her word. If we forget what we did, we won't know who we are. I'm warning of an eradication of the American memory that could result, ultimately, in an erosion of the American spirit. Let's start with some basics: more attention to American history and a greater emphasis on civic ritual. And let me offer lesson No. 1 about America: All great change in America begins at the dinner table. So, tomorrow night in the kitchen I hope the talking begins. And children, if your parents haven't been teaching you what it means to be an American, let 'em know and nail 'em on it. That would be a very American thing to do.

And that's about all I have to say tonight. Except for one thng. The past few days when I've been at that window upstairs, I've thought a bit of the "shining city upon a hill." The phrase comes from John Winthrop, who wrote it to describe the America he imagined. What he imagined was important because he was an early Pilgrim, an early freedom man. He journeyed here on what today we'd call a little wooden boat; and like the other Pilgrims, he was looking for a home that would be free.

I've spoken of the shining city all my political life, but I don't know if I ever quite communicated what I saw when I said it. But in my mind it was a tall proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, wind-swept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace, a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity, and if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it and see it still.

And how stands the city on this winter night? More prosperous, more secure, and happier than it was eight years ago. But more than that; after 200 years, two centuries, she still stands strong and true on the granite ridge, and her glow has held steady no matter what storm. And she's still a beacon, still a magnet for all who must have freedom, for all the pilgrims from all the lost places who are hurtling through the darkness, toward home.

We've done our part. And as I walk off into the city streets, a final word to the men and women of the Reagan revolution, the men and women across America who for eight years did the work that brought America back. My friends: We did it. We weren't just marking time. We made a difference. We made the city stronger. We made the city freer, and we left her in good hands. All in all, not bad, not bad at all.

And so, good-bye, God bless you, and God bless the United States of America.

Of Voting By Conscience Or In Casting a Protest Vote For a Third Party Candidate

I start off by saying that I am not a big McCain supporter. I do like Mrs. Palin!

Remember when those who felt that George H.W. Bush ran a lackluster campaign and many felt that he was not worth voting for? Those who refused to vote for the Republican Party ticket cast their vote for the third party candidate; He was the Independent Party presidential nominee, Ross Perot. Ross Perot had more of a grass roots support base than do Barr, Baldwin, Keys or Paul enjoy now. What happened in 1992? Perot supporters helped place Bill Clinton into the White House by voting Perot, and we are poised to see history repeat.

I wept the night Clinton was elected. Bill Clinton was suffering from numerous scandal allegations and he still was elected! How could that have been possible? We knew Clinton was corrupt before he was elected, just as we know there’s something fishy about Obama, who has not yet been elected. Ross Perot was responsible for splitting the vote.

Remember on July 16 when Perot unexpectedly dropped out of the presidential race? What did that get us? The Perotbots still voted Perot! Because of that scenario, we, as a nation, endured through eight years of Clinton scandal and corruption. Today we are seeing the results of Clinton administration policies because of legislation that was signed into law by him on November 12, 1999. Let me be fair. Republicans are to blame for some of that legislation signed by Clinton. But, Clinton signed it. Those events in 1999 led to the Wall Street debacle we see today.

It is those who voted for Clinton by voting for Perot that we are still paying the price. All so Perot supporters could make their point. A nice point they made too. I digress.

Today we stand at a precipice in American history. We stand to elect a man who makes Bill Clinton, look like, well, Bill Clinton lite. Obama is a socialist whose allegiance to America is suspect. We really don’t know who Obama in allegiance to. But, it is not the American worker and taxpayer. We know Obama promises to raise taxes on the rich and corporations. By definition, my wife and I are close to meeting the definition of what 'rich' is. We run a small incorporated business and we live in California where the cost of living is high and so are the salaries. It’s all relative.

Anyone knows that those who live in parts of California, New York and other overpriced areas in America may meet Obama's definition of 'rich', but being defined as rich and actually being rich are two different things, especially when one accounts for where in the country a person lives. C'mon folks, a family who makes 100k a year in Kentucky is quite well off. A person who makes 100k in San Francisco or New York is barely making it. Over simplified? Maybe... Some of you smarter folks know of what I speak.

My wife and I struggle just like the family who lives in rural America. Let me ask you; how many political candidates break campaign promises? It happens all the time. If elected, what's to prevent Obama from adjusting his definition of 'rich' down a few notches? What if Obama decides to push for a tax increase on those who have an income of 150k, or maybe 100k? McCain says he won't raise taxes and that he may cut them. That’s change I can hope in, as the alternative of Obama will mean economic death for millions of Americans.

If Obama gets into office, mine and the taxes of millions will be increased. My company will be taxed and regulated into bankruptcy, and I risk losing all I have worked for. Some of you Obama supporters and those of you who relish in participating in class envy, a socialistic concept, are simply orgasmic at the prospect of punishing the 'rich' as defined by Obama's taxation proposals. You haven't the foggiest idea that it is people like me who employ 80% of the people in this country. If my American contemporaries and I go out of business because of Obama's tax proposals, a lot of people lower down the economic ladder are also going to suffer because of higher taxes on individuals and companies. They will be out of a job. This is trickle-down economics in reverse. It is kind of like the laws of physics that says that excrement flows downhill. Take from those who Obama will define as being ‘rich’, and the little guy employed by Obama’s ‘rich’ and their small corporations will get dumped on by that downhill flowing economic excrement.

Back to my original point; On November 4th, who you vote for may be a matter of principle to some of you. Remember this... When the dust settles on November 5th, and if we find that Obama wins because of a repeat of the 1992 election, there will be many Americans who will suffer severe economic harm as soon as Obama’s proposed tax policies are rammed through congress. All this, because of a vote on principle or a vote of conscience.

One last reminder; in the 1992 election, Perot received 18.9% of the popular vote - approximately 19,741,065 votes. This made Perot the most successful third-party presidential candidate in terms of the popular vote. Barr, Baldwin, Paul and Keyes don't hold a candle to the support Perot had. Translate the 1992 scenario to today, and those of you voting your conscience, be it a protest vote, or a vote against both Obama and McCain, you may be responsible for placing Obama in office. Not only will you help Obama realize his dream of socializing this nation, you will assist Obama in breaking the American dream, by stealing it from hard working, honest, business people like me.

Those of you considering voting third party, or planning a write in vote. Don't do it. Your good intentions may be responsible for destroying other American lives. I beg you to reconsider.