| Perfil de The Running PolRunning PolBlogListas |  Herramientas  Ayuda |
|
Running PolThe wandering thoughts of a person motivated by running and politics. 26 septiembre Newer and More Improved Things continue to change in the world, and things continue to change for me. As noted quite some time back, I have moved beyond, though not completely abandoned this site. In the evolution of the man known as "Pol," we started with Running Pol, right here. A faithful and exciting blog, it became merely a stepping stone in the journey. Soon, Iron Pol was born, and the journey from marathoner to triathlete began. Many followed me, most did not.
But the Iron Pol blog contained one small discrepancy. Though I had started a "career" in triathlon, the term 'Iron' was somewhat inaccurate. Referring to the Ironman triathlon, it is a title that really should be earned. And that requires the completion of a 140.6 mile race consisting of a 2.4-mile swim, a 112-mile bike, and a 26.2 mile run. Most familiar is the Ironman World Championships held in Kona, Hawaii each November. That also is something that must be earned.
After the 2006 season, during which I complete three shorter triathlons, I attempted to sign up for Ironman Wisconsin and was unable to complete the registration process before the race was sold out. Devestated at being unable to register for a race I never actually intended on running, I began to constantly monitor triathlon sites for other options.
Soon enough, a new race was announced. In 2007, the inaugural Ironman Louisville would be held. This time, I would not be denied. On the day registration opened, I was at a friend's house with three computers and a high speed Internet connection. Shortly after sign-ups opened, I had my registration confirmation. That began a 10-month journey from novice triathlete to the start line of my first Ironman.
My Iron Pol site details the events of the day as I earned the title I had so innocently assumed nearly 18 months earlier.
And then, the "blogspot" portion of the address became bothersome. As did the constraints of the system. So, it was time to move on.
That began with registering the domain www.ironpol.com and establishing a new presence on the Internet. And, as with the change from Running Pol to Iron Pol, the journey remains documented on the original sites. So, if you wander through here, know that I am still alive and kicking. In fact, I'm growing, evolving, and improving. Stop by and let me know how you found me. And perhaps you'll find something to peak your interest and encourage you to continue on this journey. 08 septiembre Are Apologies in OrderRecent news reports have former State Department official Richard Armitage admitting to being Robert Novak's source identifying Valerie Plame as a CIA operative. After three year's of investigations, with most critics directing blame towards President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and VP aid "Scooter" Libby, the truth is coming to light. It makes one wonder what impact this revelation will have.
Will all those who have directed their efforts at impugning the name of the President and Vice President apologize for their comments? Will they abandon their unsupported conspiracy theories about the White House attempting to destroy those with differing opinions (unlike liberals who support diverse viewpoints, just ask Senator Lieberman)? Will they ask that the charges against Scooter Libby be dropped, or will they continue to pursue him as a consolation prize? Will those driven by their hatred of President Bush be able to accept the admission from Armitage?
Another set of questions must be directed at Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald. When was it discovered that Armitage was the source, instead of Libby and/or Cheney, as many believed? If there are unclassified documents identifying Plame as a CIA operative, including where she worked, has any crime been committed? If we have an admission from the source of the information, with no intention of pursuing legal action against that individual, is it time for apologies to those falsely pursued and dissolution of this office of independent counsel?
In the desire to malign an administration they despise, a great many false claims and accusations have been made. The Plame's themselves filed suit against the administration because of their mistaken belief they were targeted by the President and Vice President. Apparently, their claims have less validity than they would like to claim.
Of course, any realist understands that this will all be labeled as part of the conspiracy. Armitage is being a "fall guy." Conspiracy theorists will determine that he is being paid large sums of money with lots of promises of protection for doing this. His action to protect the White House will be repaid. As usual, there will be no evidence to support this theory, but it won't take long before a few whackos present this as some sort of proven fact. And we'll start the whole process over, again.
Until then, at least, I'll be waiting to see how many apologies are printed in the same full page ads that were used to accuse the White House of illegal actions. 28 agosto Rock the VoteAs we approach election day in the United States, the political machines around the country are ramping up their campaigns. The Democratic and Republican Parties have both deemed this election as one of the most important of this generation. Of course, every election cycle is "the most important," as there are always key issues to be addressed.
This year is no different. There are a great many issues of significant importance. And true to form, various groups define their cause as the defining issue of the year, and believe votes should be cast based upon that single issue. They'll usually tell you how you should vote, as well. They are correct about one thing. You should vote. But your vote should be based on your own research and evaluation of the issues. Because their is a lot of spin going on out there, and getting to the whole truth is difficult, if not impossible. Your best bet is to read a lot of news, form your own opinions based on that news and your personal philosophy, and vote accordingly.
Here is a list of some of the topics that should have some impact on your vote:
Fiscal accountability - both parties claim to be for fiscal responsibility. Both have shown that the drumbeat of fiscal responsibility is generally beat by the opposition party. Republicans spent decades fighting the rampant growth of government they saw while Democrats controlled Congress. Now that Republicans have been in control for a decade, we see a bit of role reversal. Democrats are now calling out for fiscal control as Republicans generate much of the same pork they vehemently opposed in the past.
Taxation - both parties also claim to support tax cuts. The key difference is the beneficiary of those benefits. On one side are calls to transfer money from the wealthy to the poor. Many in this country pay no taxes, and therefore see no refund. Some receive "refunds," even though no taxes were paid (also known as transfer payments). The other side of the argument is to give tax breaks across the board. Those who pay some taxes receive a small break. Those who pay more taxes receive bigger breaks. Some refer to that as an equitable reduction in taxes. Others call it a tax break for the wealthy. Either way, tax policy should be a part of your decision making process.
Immigration - the issue of immigration has become a recurring theme in American politics. When the last general amnesty was granted 20 years ago, our elected officials claimed illegal immigration would no longer be a problem. Apparently, they were correct. It was no problem for people to enter the country illegally. And we now face the consequences of our immigration policy over the last 20 years. Basically, neither party is willing to address this issue. Both claim to have the solution. One thing is certain, immigration is a major topic in this election cycle. There are several takes on the subject, which can help you formulate a voting plan. First is the general amnesty plan, which nobody openly admits to supporting. Many, however, do favor granting amnesty to all who are currently here illegally. Another idea being floated around is the layered amnesty concept. Those here for many years pay a fine and receive citizenship. Those here for several years have to leave and are then allowed to immediately re-enter the country and seek citizenship. Those here less than 5 years have to leave and try to re-enter through normal avenues. (As an editorial, I would point out that "normal" for these people is to sneak across the border and be here illegally). Another option is to actually secure our borders and then enforce those laws already in place. Stop the flood of illegal immigration, and then deport anyone found to be here illegally. How you feel on the immigration issue will, to some degree, dictate your choices in the election.
The war in Iraq - separate from the war on Islamic terrorists, the war in Iraq is a hot-button topic. While debate rages about the actual events leading up to the war, a far better question for this election cycle is the actual prosecution of the war. The intelligence used to enter the war has been debated for the past several years. It is, at this point, largely moot. We are engaged with the enemy, and the conflict was entered with the support of Congress (debate surrounding the garnering of that support notwithstanding). Now, our leadership must determine the best course of action for securing long-term stability in the region, identify the circumstances under which American forces can begin to draw down, and ensure that our sacrifices in this conflict were not made in vain. Discussion of the history of the war is as counterproductive as continuing to debate whether President Bush or former Vice President Al Gore won the 2000 elections. Our energies are best directed at identifying who can better lead the United States in assisting the new Iraqi government to final victory over the aggressors in Iraq.
The war on Islamic terrorists - while some will take offense at the addition of the adjective "Islamic," it is important to remember where the "war on terror" is directed. While there are homegrown terrorists such as Timothy McVeigh, we are not truly at war with them. There are terrorists operating in the war on drugs. We aren't really at war with them. And there are enemies in many other struggles who use terror as a tool. We aren't engaged in a war on them. We are in a war against those who have hijacked the Islamic religion and declared war on the United States. This war began decades ago. Iranian extremists were fighting the war when they took Americans hostage during the administration of President Jimmy Carter. The conflict continued under President Reagan when they bombed the Marine barracks in Beirut, Leganon. President Bush (first) had to deal with Saddam Hussein's campaign to expand Iraq. President Clinton was plagued by Islamic terrorists as seen in numerous attacks in the 1990's. The Khobar Towers bombing, the USS Cole, embassies around the world, the first WTC bombing, etc. ad nauseum. And President Bush had only been in office a short time when the final "declaration of war" was made with the WTC attacks of September 11, 2001. We continue to fight this enemy, and will continue to fight for some time. The Cold War continued for more than 50 years, and some contend it hasn't even ended. To believe the war on Islamic terrorists will end in five or six years is foolish and shortsighted. That said, we must vote for those we believe will promote the best policies for addressing the issue.
Integrity and vision - something often overlooked, this should be a key factor in your decision making process. Elected officials should do more than speak out of one side of their mouth. They should live the principals they claim to support. All too often, our representatives make claims they believe to be most politically expedient. In other words, they say what they believe you want to hear. Their votes will have nothing to do with what they say, as they have already been elected. Come the next election cycle, they will again "re-mold" themselves into the package for which you are likely to vote. Rather than listening to what they say, find out how the vote and what laws the write. It is all public record. You may find that the person for whom you voted doesn't actually vote the way you believe they do. It might sway your opinion.
Most importantly, vote. Our government was founded as a representative government, which means it represents those who vote. If you stay home on election day, it isn't actually your government. It only belongs to those who vote. But before you vote, learn. An uneducated voter who pulls levers based on what they have been told to do isn't a voter, they're a puppet. Like Pinocchio, we need to cut the strings of those who would control us, and vote for those who will best represent you.
In this post, I have attempted to suppress any bias I hold (and I do have them). While I am more than willing to share why I believe people should vote a certain way, this is aimed at getting people to think for themselves. If you have any specific questions about the various issues, please let me know. 24 agosto Iron Pol is the Place to BeIf you haven't noticed, time continues to be a strain. While the original plan was to maintain both weblogs, Iron Pol has continued to be the primary location for my blogging time. For those who remain interested in following my blogging, please stop by there. I have left the anonymous comment option open, so you can leave comments. If you leave your blog name, I'll swing by and see what's happening.
I will, however, keep this site open, and try to get at it as time allows. The triathlon season is winding down, and I have only one last marathon scheduled for late September. After that, training will take up a bit less of my time.
Thanks for continuing to stop by, and make sure you follow the link to my other site. 13 julio Finally!Well, for those of you who thought I might have died, it is nothing that serious. The long absence from posting came from two factors. First, an inability to log in to Spaces, whether at home or at work. Second is a schedule that is absolutely maxed out with work, triathlon training, and kids.
There has been so much going on, both in the training world and the political world, that needs to be covered. Time, however, remains somewhat constrained. At least being able to get here while in the office will help. A great deal of my blogging occurs before starting the work day, or after finishing.
In addition, a second blog has been started. The link is at left, and Iron Pol is where most of my training entries have been going. For those more interested in political discourse, that site will bore you. It has lots about training, and little about political issues.
So, if Spaces and work computers continue to play nicely, I'll be able to get more done, here. If not, stop by Iron Pol and see what's happening. 08 junio Another Hydra Head GoneNews of the death of terrorist leader abu Musab al Zarqawi got me to thinking about the mythical hydra. Is this the death that breaks the back of the terrorist groups operating in Iraq, or will another seven heads appear to replace him? The elimination of Zarqawi is a good thing. Only time will tell the impact of his death.
It was only a short time after the news of his death that debate commenced on whether that news is good or bad. Those determined to see every action taken by the current administration in a negative light were quick to point out that Zarqawi's "martyrdom" was certain to result in a surge in terrorist recruiting. The other side, while cautious in their optimism, seemed eager to report the beginning of the end of al Qaeda in Iraq. Neither stance is likely to be all that accurate. While Zarqawi was the apparent leader of terrorist groups in Iraq, removing him from the scene is likely to make room for other influential madmen to step into the role. It was only a short time after Osama bin Laden was forced to flee the relative safety of Afghanistan for a life on the run that Zarqawi stepped in to fill his turban. It seems safe to assume others will be ready to pick up the pieces and fan the fires of hatred bin Laden and Zarqawi kept lit.
The argument that Zarqawi's death will fuel the terrorist recruiting is likewise disengenious. Those people supporting al Qaeda's efforts need little help in feeding their hatred. The hatred exists, and has existed for some time. Killing Zarqawi might be used as justification by those outside the terrorist groups to justify the murderous rampage of those groups. It isn't needed to fuel the hatred.
So, we sit and wait. We wait to see if another "terrorist mastermind" has enough of a deathwish (or desires his 72 virgins) to step into the role of public enemy number one. Or will the death of Zarqawi be the catalyst that causes people to start keeping their heads down? Will his death be enough to make terrorists around the world consider the idea of trying another path, a path with peace as a possible destination?
The death of Zarqawi, just like the death of all others in the region, is regrettable. It is, however, different. Coalition soldiers, Iraqi police, contractors, reporters, and civilians were murdered by terrorist forces attempting to bully the people into submission. Zarqawi was a military target eliminated in an effort to promote peace. Hopefully, the deaths will soon end and Iraq can begin to build an effective and lasting peace. 30 mayo Pots and KettlesIt seems like only a few months ago that Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid was referring to the absolute corruption of the Republican party due to ties to disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Oh, that's because it was only a few months ago. Like Reid, Democrats were overjoyed at the idea of pushing the so-called "culture of corruption" theory before the American people.
Back then, I believe I pointed out that both parties are equally corrupt, and one referring to the other as lacking in morals was idiotic.
And now, it appears that Senator Reid will have his own corruption issues to address. It seems he was accepting ringside seats at boxing events while the provider of those tickets was seeking his assistance in legislative matters. Other senators took different tacts, either paying for the tickets, or recusing themselves from any action on the legislation.
Not Senator Reid. He took the tickets. He accepted them at no-charge. And he pushed legislation aimed at helping those who provided them. And who do we find at the center of all this? Jack Abramoff.
I wonder if Harry Reid will now do what he has been so quick to demand of others. If he takes the advice he has been so free with, we should expect his resignation in short order. Then again, he's a Democrat. He couldn't possibly be corrupt? Could he? |
|
|||
|
|
