Vandalism During Elections

Vandalism During Elections: What are they trying to accomplish?

Vandalism during elections is a problem that never seems to draw enough press.  What are the folks who knock apart and otherwise destroy campaign signs trying to accomplish?  What kind of message are they trying to send?

Let me ask you:  If you saw a truck with an NDP sign stopping at every Green Party sign, the driver getting out, and trashing the sign, would you be inclined to vote for the NDP?  Not likely!  It applies no matter who is doing it. Canada is world renowned for its politeness, but that seems to disappear during elections.

English: Gibsons Harbour, Sunshine Coast, British Columbia Deutsch: Uferweg am Hafen in Gibsons, British Columbia (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Election campaign signs, whether we love them or hate them, whether for our candidate or theirs, are legally erected for the duration of the campaign.  It is a criminal act of vandalism to destroy them.

What many people may not realize is that people who put up these signs are volunteers who care about the community they live in.  Never mind what their politics are;  they do a lot of work during a campaign.  All those large signs that are so manly to destroy are put together by hand, built from lumber that has to be measured, cut, fastened together and driven into the ground by community minded volunteers who love their country.

The other day I noticed as I went down "the Bypass," here on the Sunshine Coast, BC, and then back up again, that someone had destroyed every single one of the Conservative campaign signs on both sides of the highway.  One was repairable with the tools at hand, a pair of rocks, so I did.  The rest required a lot more than what I had with me, so I did not.

Today, as I drove along the highway between Gibsons and Sechelt, I saw where someone had vandalized a Liberal campaign sign, cutting out the face of the candidate.  I suppose these criminals must think that if they destroy all except the signs promoting their candidate of choice, people will vote with them.  

Wow.  Such mind boggling intelligence!  They must think the rest of us are very stupid...

It's Time... to Drain the Swamp

by Dave Cottrell

It's time for Congress and the Senate to start working together.  If they continue to stand toe to toe and nose to nose like the the Zax of Dr. Suess fame (with apologies...):

"The day after election day,One day, making tracks

In the prairie of Political Prats,

Came a North-Going Republican Congressman

And a South-Going Democrat Senator

And it happened that both of them came to a place

Where they bumped. There they stood.

Toe to toe. Face to face.

Well…

Of course the rest of the world didn’t stand still. The world grew.

In a couple of years, the Tea Party came through

And they built right over those two stubborn Hacks

And left them there, standing un-budgeted in their tracks."

Yes, folks, the world is NOT going to stand still simply because the fools in the House and the Senate can't get along.  If the Senate won't budge and keeps saying it's Congress' fault and Congress won't budge and says it's the Senate's fault, they will both fall over that fiscal cliff whose edge they are standing on, and the world will go on.

If BOTH parties don't set aside their differences and work together, it won't matter who is in the White House any more.  All those beautiful, promised social programs, including the new health care program, will be stopped in their track, and many existing ones will be cut, AUTOMATICALLY.

Furthermore, they won't come back for a very long time... economists figure it will take about eight years to recover... but at least, the economy will be strong when it does recover, and these lunatics that are bickering with each other, right now, will be gone.

What a crazy, messed up world! 

So, What Now?

So, Congress has passed the bill to raise the debt ceiling and avert a default disaster.  But many on both sides of the floor are still grumbling about it.

Tea Party members of the GOP are grumbling, because there were no real, meaningful cuts and taxes were not reduced.

A LOT of Democrats are grumbling, because there are no spending increases to social programs and taxes were not increased.

Leaders of both parties continue to posture, both in Congress and in the Senate.

But the big question remains:  What now?

The fact is that the USA is multiple trillions of dollars in debt, and is about to raise those numbers once again to avoid a default.  But what is the cost of this?

There is a very slight possibility that the US credit rating will not be downgraded, mainly due to the "old boy's club" that the USA seems to have a very big say in.  But the reality is that the US is in a state of RUNAWAY debt creation, and this little spat between the GOP and the Dems that we've just witnessed is nothing compared to the storm that is coming.

When people realize that their great grandchildren have been sold out by this present mob of criminals in Washington, there's going to be some BIG changes.  Mr. Obama wanted change, but not the kind of change he's going to see if the general population ever wake up to what's really going on!

Under this agreement that is being signed into law as I write this, nothing has really been fixed.  The day of reckoning has merely been delayed.  A bigger storm is being allowed to brew.  Contrary to what Mr. Biden likes to say, you cannot avoid bankruptcy by spending more money you don't have!

A default would have been bad for the USA and the whole world.  But what is coming could be (and probably will be) a lot worse.  A total collapse now may have been the best thing that could have happened, before things get worse.  Only time will tell.

What's the Difference?

Well, what do you know? 

 Recently released "secret" documents reveal that the previous Democrat government, under the guileless leadership of the slippery-but-popular President Bill Clinton, had ample warning about the potential threat from one Mr. Osama Bin Ladin. It seems that the terrorist threat from that particular individual's chosen country club, otherwise known as "El Qaeda," was already well known in the "intelligence" community during the Clinton administration. 

Many sounded the alarm, but most were ignored. During Mr. Clinton's "cigar trial," the administration did begin to make noises suggesting it was taking the situation seriously (Wag the Dog?), but when the president finally decided to launch several cruise missiles to Bin Ladin's known location, he first called Osama's friends in Pakistan to warn them (ostensibly to prevent a nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan due to the unexplained presence of missiles flying over their airspace.) 

Of course, when the missiles arrived at their destination, Osama and company were long (at least two hours) gone. 

Since that time, many opportunities to curtail El Qaeda's operations, mainly by taking out their leadership, have been passed over due to a certain hesitancy on the part of the politicians in and over the intelligence community to believe reports from anyone but a red-blooded member of the US intelligence community. 

Virtually all opportunities to destroy the terrorist leadership have been missed due to the inability of the intelligence community to confirm these reports from people on the ground in the areas where the terrorists are residing. 

 Pardon me, but isn't it a little difficult to confirm these reports? Western intel will never even get close to these men! If the West is going to win, the West has to start trusting friends "over there." 

This brings me to the whole point of today's rant: What is the difference between the present US administration and the previous US administration? The Democrats rather loudly decry the present Republican administration for not catching Osama Bin Laden and his friends, but the Democrats are crossing their fingers and hoping everyone has forgotten that THEY had the best opportunity to take out Bin Laden and prevent the 9-11 tragedy than anyone so far, and they blew it! 

 The truth is, the Bush administration has been left with the unenviable task of picking up the pieces dropped by its predecessor.