*Disclaimer:
Powers is a registered voter and does have a representative, yet feels that his interests (which are represented in above named blog and do not necessarily reflect Morrison's or the PowersAndMorrison.com staff's) are not acted upon by current administrations. His posts are of a personal nature and may be humorous or light-hearted.
Solving the Supplemental
May 10, 2007
Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is considered the best policy to allow more people to volunteer for the armed services while still making opponents of homosexuality comfortable in their illusion that everyone around them is a “real, beer drinking, heterosexual manly man” or “man-loving strong brave woman.” Generals, commentators and politicians who speak against dropping the one sided policy call homosexuality “immoral” and cannot open their own minds and hearts to the idea that it is the character and commitment of a soldier that matters, not their personal religious, sexual, or political beliefs. Of the ten simple commandments that are widely accepted by many to have been passed down directly from a God, there is nothing about coveting my neighbors husband or keeping the Sabbath day hetero. There are several about stealing, killing, coveting “things” and honoring parents. The things soldiers are asked and commanded to do appear far more immoral and ungodly than something held as a personal belief referenced vaguely in lesser chapters of religious scriptures. Leaders who extend tours of duty, complain about low recruitment levels, and lament about being stretched too thin or being ill prepared for service should be more accepting of the brave men and women who want to volunteer their time and lives toward the continued protection of our country.President Bush stated that he would veto federal protection for discrimination against homosexuality on the grounds that most states already have laws against it. Could it be, rather, that making it a federal crime would require overturning discrimination in the military and political platforms? Does it lead the overly anxious Republican Party to jump to the conclusions that it somehow effects gay marriage the same way stem cell research is being related to stealing fetus’ from the wombs of unwilling mothers? If a discrimination claim could be made for the passage of gay and lesbian marriage, it would have been passed on sexism, not sexualism.We are constantly shown propaganda messages from the Middle East and told to hate how the “insurgents” are trying to turn the public against America by saying they are attacking Islam, yet we witness accusations dividing the country about “liberals” trying to attack Christianity every single day. Don’t ask your followers to hate, don’t tell them how to think. That is a philosophy that all Americans would do well with, beit politically, religiously, or racially.Solving the Supplemental
May 4, 2007
The Congress is attempting to be representatives of the people in putting an end to this highly unwarranted and disliked war. The Executive Branch is calling for a compromise that does not “tie the hands” of the commanders in Iraq. There is no compromise between ending a war and continuing an open-ended occupation when both sides stand firm on their core beliefs. If anyone in the Capitol is listening, I have found a solution. Pass a 150 billion dollar supplemental solely for the troops. Give them 50% more than they ask for and have only one stipulation that will not tie the hands of the soldiers on the ground, the commanders in a bunker, or the “commander-in-chief” surrounded by security. Add to the bill that there will be no more money, emergency or budgeted, for the ongoing occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan until they are presented with a plan. More than just a tactic, more than a “stay the course” or “adapt to win” sound byte, but an actual, discussed, well-planned plan. They will have the rest of the year with money to spare for better equipment or unexpected snags. They may show some sense and save some of the money, seeing that the years budget was not enough to last 6 months this year. They may do what they would like provided they finish the war before the money is out or present, behind closed doors, an actual strategy to bring stability to the region. They must not allocate more funds to be spent without receiving approval for these funds. There is no sense to running any portion of the government with the thought that the funds will follow and surely be there. Figure out how to pay for something before it is implemented.The President can be blamed by opponents for starting a surge without the funding and Congress can be blamed by the others for not funding ongoing operations. A compromise would be funding, but not a blank check; a chance to succeed but not a continuation of the same changing goals that we have seen this war morph through with no clear strategy other than “trying harder.” Give this war an ending or an ability to win, but right now, we in America have neither, and the two sides cannot meet in the middle.Powers Note: I'm a patriot, I don't just complain to my readers, I've written to Senators Harry Reid, Claire McCaskil, and Speaker Pelosi. I can't introduce a bill to Congress, but I can at least introduce an idea to the leaders of Congress. We'll see if they want to make more statements, more meaningless resolutions and non-binding 'benchmarks," or more progress for our nation.
The Backwards War, Rubbed raW
May 2, 2007
It is hard to describe our current “war on terrorism.” All past wars have been discriminatory with battles against a nation, race, or feuding section separated by neighborhood or region. Most wars have been fought between groups in uniforms, the blue vs. the grey or various flags on the helmets and shoulders of those fighting. Today, however, we have heavily armed uniformed soldiers trying to stop plain-clothes Iraqi or insurgent citizens from destroying themselves and those around them.To this writer, it makes me imagine trying to kill all of the dogs that are going to bite me. Most will not, and a majority of dogs look the same from a distance. Some may bark at me, but that does not mean he will sink his fangs into my arm. Some could not be tamer, but when threatened by a human, could be incited to bite. There is no way to know which canine may attack until it occurs. Yes, you can look at the past biting history of the dog and all of the narrow escapes that have been had with the mutt, but as long as there are still four-legged creatures with teeth, there is always a chance that I will be bit.I, and many others I assume, would have more support for this war if it made sense. If you want to impose democracy on a nation, treat them with the same respect that you would your own. Iraq may not have a strong government or an enforced constitution, but the United States does, and our soldiers should treat the Iraqi people under it. Do not enter a house without a warrant or a reasonable cause. A bomb goes off in the neighborhood; do not assume that everyone that lives nearby is guilty. How can we be greeted as liberators when we instill curfews, search every car that moves and, in rare cases, make innocent deaths look like terrorist acts to cover our own backs?I do not trust our own police force here. I know that it is not the majority, but there ARE cops who will plant drugs in a 96-year-olds apartment after shooting her dead when she was startled by their unannounced break-in. There is the cop who beat a bartender when she said he had had too much to drink, and later threatened to close the bar, plant drugs on the employees, and recorded the license plates of the waitress he assaulted and her manager if she spoke. There are the St. Louis cops who took World Series tickets from scalpers, stole them from evidence to give to their friends, returned them to evidence and still claim that what they did was not wrong. I look at every cop and feel less safe, not knowing what could happen to me if this is not a fair and just officer. I worry that I might look too much like the man his wife ran off with and he will throw me in jail out of spite. I fear cops and hope that one does not accuse me of being a terrorist because he has heard me talk about how something has to be done to get this country back on the right track. The Supreme Court again passed on hearing a trial to ensure justice at Gitmo, even as the administration pushes for less interaction with lawyers and less evidence provided. I want to feel safe, most cops want to keep me safe, but it only takes one to ruin my life.Why continue a war in a nation that is more terrified of our soldiers than relieved that they are present? Why spend trillions more on a battle against an ideology of hate, which only spawns more with every innocent or shady death and search? How can we bring democracy to a nation when we are imposing our will against the people’s wishes? I would love to stand behind America and feel so proud of the nation I live in, but with flawed, failed, and backwards policies, how can I?Spending Debt
April 19th, 2007
As President Bush and Congress continue to butt heads over an emergency spending bill for the troops fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, a larger issue of government spending is pushed into the shadows. Both sides talk about their support of the troops and the importance of keeping them well funded. The Bush administration proposed and immediately enacted a troop surge and three-month deployment increase for all soldiers without debate or, apparently, the necessary budget to do so. The fault lies entirely with the Executive branch for this oversight. Bush cannot blame Congress for not expediting a no-strings-attached $100 billion spending bill to suit his wishes and, in his words, “support the troops.”The government should not make promises and policies that it cannot keep. This includes increasing programs that will obviously overstrain and outspend current budgets and funding. As any citizen or business has learned, we all must save money and balance our spending before making large purchases. The national debt is in the trillions, which means that every cent spent by the government is borrowed. Every paycheck, every new appointee, ever letter that is mailed, every program that is funded, and every additional soldier that fights another day adds to our deficit. This is the fault of both branches of the government, for the legislation continues to earmark more spending for pet projects and the executive branch keeps defending tax cuts and signing the earmarks into law. The soldiers are not the only ones to suffer for the lack of further emergency spending bills, but it will affect each of us. Everyone who depends on Social Security, Medicare or other Federal programs is collecting money that does not belong to us. Every roadway that is maintained, in whole or in part, by the government does not have the funds to be cared for. Each museum, hospital, shelter, federal employee… We are all out of money as the government continues to spend.The fault for the budget lies with everyone that has voted for or signed a spending bill since we were in a surplus only six short years ago. It can be partially blamed to people who file their taxes fraudulently, but the money should not be spent until it is collected. This war should not go on because of fear for being seen as a failure, but for the lack of planning, insight, progress, and, most of all, money. Is this worth trillions more in debt? Is this worth the loss of more lives and the weakening of our own national security? Let the terrorists come from Iraq to America if that will be the result of leaving this failed occupation against ideology. Let our well-trained and well-rested armed forces meet them at the terminal, coast, or border as they attempt to invade. In doing this, we will save money, actually protect the people of the United States against real danger, and make a policy change that most Americans want. It is the fault of the President if he vetoes an emergency spending bill and the troops run out of funds. It is not the fault of the Legislative branch for debating, voting, and passing a bill. It is not the fault of American citizens for voting out a Republican majority. It is not the fault of the soldiers for collecting their pay or not completing their confusing and poorly guided mission in an ideological war. It is the fault of a President who oversteps his bounds in ordering more troops to be sent for a longer period without the necessary funding. Get support, get money, THEN, and only then, get your troops.I’m going to go move into a new house, get a few new cars to fill the driveway, order a few catering companies for the housewarming, and refuse to pay a cent for it until the bank drops their interest rate and does not require me to make a payment schedule. They can talk to me if they like, but my terms will not change. Even if my wife and my cat are the only ones beside me.And to think, all this debt yet presidential candidate candidates are raising millions to pay for television ads…The Trouble with this Administration
April 17th, 2007
People on Capital Hill and Main Street, U.S.A. alike are calling for Alberto Gonzales to step down amid the most recent controversy over fired U.S. Justices. Gonzales admits that “mistakes were made” and sees how bad each excuse, deleted memo and memory lapse look to the American people but stands by his statement that the firings were not his call or politically motivated. I am at the point where I would rather hear Gonzales testify under oath, allow our constitutional system of justice to make it's ruling, and, if what he's reported is true, allow the man to stay in his closely watched and untrusted office. How many times can we find one of the Bush cronies to be corrupt, step down amid scandal before they are prosecuted and be replaced by (surprise!) another new friend of the GOP who hires a new staff and starts the whole cycle over again?When the bosses don't abide by their oath to protect the constitution, I would rather we have employees who watch their back and double save their outgoing and incoming e-mails than a new face who can say "Whoops, my bad, I'm new." Especially since it is taking a year or two from the discovery of a scandal to an inquiry, under oath, in front of the public and justice.Stop the leaders who cause the problems instead of following their misdirection to prosecute their underlings. Harriet Meyers, Scooter Libby, Rumsfeld, Brownie, Fox, Bolton... Either a majority of the cabinet and staff is coincidentally corrupt or we need to look at the people appointing these untrustworthy leaders overseeing every portion of our governments' executive branch. I do not want two more years of fall guys.People still reside in FEMA trailers, the Gulf coast is still largely in disrepair, our civil liberties are still slipping through our fingers, the war in Iraq is still not any closer to having a goal, plan, or direction other than “winning.” Activist judges of the other sort are trying to bring Jesus into everyone’s life, equate stem cell research to abortion, silence scientists who believe in evolution and global warming, and rollback progress with the GOP’s wishes. Under the Bush Administration, social security reform has been touted as a broken system that will not last and healthcare as a system that is unattainable and unaffordable for much of the public. The only solution presented has been tax cuts for those that can already afford to save enough for their futures and medical needs, or the inclusion of more private firms (and private fees) to take our tax money that is already, by their admission, not enough to preserve the current needs. Failing school systems and excelling teaching environments have been forced to change to a mediocre standard of teaching only basic educational skills. Great teachers that uniquely connected to their individual students are reduced to robotic clones that must teach from the same lesson plans as a teacher paid less or less qualified. Out-of-the-box thinking has been compromised in not only great teachers, but in promising students that are treated as well as the poorest performing student. What will this generation be capable of when they all know only standard Math, English and the governments’ version of proper writing? Good education comes from personal attention; personal attention comes from adaptable and exceptional teachers; exceptional teachers come from school districts that pay competitive wages. This administration would rather pay companies to mass produce instruction books and learning lists that prepare, not for life or careers, but for a standardized test.We need our country to continue to be innovators. We need the United States to thrive with independent thinkers encompassing all religions, philosophies and political parties. We need leaders who work together with all types of these thinkers to create well-rounded and well-compromised programs for the good of our present and future. Allowing corrupt leaders who are more concerned with special interests than the constitution to bring in like-minded friends and associates has not benefited America or the World. Another two years of letting them hurt our nation will only take another 20 years to rebuild. Spending our entire surplus a hundred times over will take so much longer to earn back. The ruined reputations of the Executive staff means little when they have increased their stock portfolios and bank accounts to a point where they no longer need to worry about using government services to retire, obtain medical care, or work another day in their life. Look at Cheney, he filed his income tax and paid 250% of his annual income as vice president.The trouble with this administration may be each individual scandal, but it all seems to point to a political group and faulty ideology that is carried out to extremes by the current leadership.Words Not Directed At Me
April 15th, 2006
It’s been a busy time since last I wrote, a time I’ve spent talking to random diverse citizens as I’ve crossed the country multiple times. Now I’ve settled upon the Midwest to make my next home and perhaps make an impact in a region that, by design or not, is decades behind the coasts in ideology.Was that offensive? Should I be banned or stop writing for the site? Can you look at the population diversity in the area and assume that my statement was made from racial intolerance?Imus’ comments were taken as such.I’m as tired of hearing about this man and his comment than anyone else, but the continued debate that surpasses even Michael Richards’ tirade requires me to speak.Is it more racist for a man to call a whole team consisting of eight women of African heritage ho’s or to assume that it’s solely the black women that he is referring to? Is the term “Shock-Jock” used just because it rhymed and lured more listeners than PJ-DJ for a morning radio host? Do the women of the Rutgers team listen to Imus’ show or was it the fault of others that they heard the offensive “slur” and the persistence of opponents that forced them to speak out upon their outrage?The only issue in deciding if Imus should have been fired is his intent. Did he mean to say it to the girls? Did he say it to hurt a team, race, or gender? Did he write the comment down and, despite the protests by fellow workers, say it on air anyway? I doubt it, but only he could know that.One of the players, Heather Zurich, said: “What hurts most about this situation is that Mr. Imus knows not one of us personally.”Yes, I’d rather be called names by people who knew me, rather than a man who tries to fill live radio time with statements that may or may not rub people the wrong way. Not knowing a person that you’re talking about would make it easier to brush something off my back. I’m sure there are many more radio shows that praised the poise, athleticism and accomplishments of the finalist team. Perhaps some of those commentators knew them and some of them had never met a single one of them, no one is calling any of them wrong, or talking about them at all.Movie, theatre, and music reviewers who are free to praise a performer, critique a performance, or to make brash statements about how someone “must be an idiot” or any other name falls in the same line, only you need to let those slide off your back. No, not everything is right to say and often times an apology would be nice, but these people don’t hold their breath. Sticks and Stones. As long as we continue to take words as the worst possible meaning and take those words to heart, we will be a disappointed society wallowing in our own self-pity. Please, call me a prostitute, honky, or a cracker, I won’t mind. I’ll just “turn the other cheek” and think of you as ignorant or bad with jokes.The lessons that I have learned from this are few but important:1) Live radio will be compared to pre-recorded newscasts on pre-recorded newscasts that claim “We have to watch what we say, and would never say anything like that.”
2) Apologizing to Al Sharpton is like pouring water on a grease fire. If you’re going to call my neighborhood a “shanty-town,” visiting the neighborhood to tell everyone what you’ve said is a worse idea. Apologize in the same medium so the people who heard it get the apology. “Kramer” should have apologized to the people he called a name if they were offended, Imus should have apologized to the women if they were offended, and the rest of society who takes offense to someone being called a name should expect those people to take the lead. Don’t start a protest on my behalf unless I’m at the front of it. It’s not your business.
3) If you mock, insult or call names to a person or group (ala Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, Howard Stern, Al Sharpton, or any other “shock-jock”) and do not apologize or admit wrongdoing, you will keep your job.
Player Kia Vaughn expressed the whole matter more simply than anyone else, saying, “I’m not a ho. I’m a woman. I’m someone’s child.” By her logic, no female is a ho, and no offense should be taken to a word that includes no one. Stop being Parosadartz, and stop taking offense over my use of a word, real or fictitious that you believe is meant harshly or rudely or offensively. It’s a word.The First Amendment Destroyed:
05/26/06 -2:52 PM Pacific Time
Congress has been vocal recently against the unconstitutional raid of a Rep. William Jefferson's office last weekend. The argument is valid, although no one on capital hill or the media has pointed to the most obvious section of the constitution (Article 3, section 2) that provides all cases of such manner to originate in the Supreme Court, making a lesser court's warrant ineffective. Most shocking to me is while the Republican speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, and others, are calling for the immediate suspension of all involved in the investigation, the greater infringement on citizens' constitutional rights with the warrantless tapping and database of phone records is continuing with little interference from Capital Hill. Worse yet, Congress is not only taking their time in getting to the bottom of this wrong-doing, but Gen. Michael Hayden who orchestrated the program was confirmed with a promotion to head of the CIA. What part of "representative government" do they not understand?The entire first amendment has been trampled and invalidated again and again by this Administration. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."Since Congress is the only establishment able to make laws, these rights can never be taken away. Religious organizations are free to practice as they please (in their services) and are prohibited from receiving government aid. Reporters never have to reveal their sources or edit information that some believe should not permitted for publication. They never have to share the lies the government tells them to spread and cannot be prosecuted for printing fact (or stated opinion). People cannot be punished for assembling in any public area, so long as it is peaceful (see post below "Limiting the Right to Protest"). Leaders of the House or Senate may not refuse petitions from the citizens of the country. A majority or minority leader represents not only the residents of their district, but the residents of every district (regardless of what Ms. Pelosi might say).What is left of the first amendment? Between the Patriot Act, newly recycled 1917 laws against the press, bans on protests, refusals of petitions, warrantless wiretaps, press phone taps, and every secret program that has not yet come out to the public, we have lost the first amendment and we have lost the fourth amendment. When is someone going to do something about it? People keep telling me that things can change after Election Day this November, but when a strong minority of current Congress members represent or listen to the citizens, where is the hope that any new opponent will?Pleading the Fourth:
01/23/06 -10:31 PM Pacific Time
Referencing Amendment 4 on my post below brought other issues to mind. It's gives the people of the United States of America to be "secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects." Does the government have the right to make us subject ourselves to searches? The amendment has not been amended to refute the original writing. I understand the searches and scrutiny placed upon those who use airplanes and airports, as I believe (and may be wrong) that they are used by private citizens who pay for the privilege. Using mass transportation which is funded by taxes and fees from citizens should allow you to be free, unless a specific warrant is obtained, as explained in the constitution. All web sites visited in the privacy of your home, all search engines used, and all forms completed all also defended by the fourth, as the Supreme Court has commonly taken the term "papers" and "press" to be synonymous with the Internet. How long until the public stands unified, recognize the rights provided to them, and plead the fourth?Does the Ninth Amendment Mean Anything?:
06/02/06 -01:00 AM Pacific Time
Last Monday, the Supreme Court ruled against protection for public employee "whistle-blowers." In a 5 to 4 vote, the court ruled that the Los Angeles County district attorney's office did not violate prosecutor Richard Ceballos's freedom of speech by "allegedly" demoting him after he wrote to supervisors charging that a sheriff's deputy had lied to get a search warrant.Many are opposed to the decision, citing that it applies to all public employees and could deter them from speaking out against wrong-doing. But, the court ruled, recognizing such claims could turn policy disputes into federal constitutional lawsuits. Lawsuits that could disrupt the public administration, clog the courts, and make it hard for government to speak with a single voice.Disrupting bosses with evidence of corruption? Using the courts to try cases? Causing difficulty with the U.S. Government in defending themselves in demoting it's employees when pointing out a potential crime? It's a good thing the Supreme Court stopped this madness. The constitution only provides that "the judicial powers shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made under their authority..."Wait...It seems the courts are supposed to be used in the case of punishing employees for reporting illegal activity within the business.The Bush administration supported the district attorney's office, citing the US government's interest as ``the nation's largest public employer." They don't want to have people leaking information about their wrongdoings, unless they've asked them to, of course.``We reject the notion that the First Amendment shields from discipline the expressions employees make pursuant to their professional duties," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote. ``Our precedents do not support the existence of a constitutional cause of action behind every statement a public employee makes in the course of doing his or her job."What about the ninth amendment? "The enumeration in the constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." No one ever talks about this clear constitutional right acknowledging that we DO have rights that are not listed in the text. We cannot be told "that doesn't fall under free speech, you deserve to be punished for clogging the courts." They have ripped every other amendment in the Bill of Rights to shreds, and might as well squash the ninth by never recognizing it as providing anything. We have rights that are not clearly put into laws because they should not be questioned. The lives we lead in our own houses are protected under the ninth. The way we treat our personal bodies are protected from the governments rule. The right to live as a spouse to your love or loves cannot be restricted (while receiving government incentives or services may be, as they are law). Don't forget that there is a ninth amendment. The Government has ignored it long before they disregarded the rest of the document. It's time we took it back. 
Help Promote P&M Click Here To Visit Our Store
