Saturday, September 27, 2008

Let's Tell Our Congressional Reps to Vote AGAINST Any Bailout

This is the body of a letter I wrote to my Representative (Rep. Wittman, VA-1). It contains some of the key reason I oppose a taxpayer-funded bailout.


26 September 2008

Hon. Representative Wittman,

I am writing to strongly encourage you to vote against any and all credit market bailout packages that are brought to the House floor. I understand the idea behind the Resolution Trust Corporation, and my problem with it is that it socializes the risk of all those bad loans, while the banks it helps get to privatize their profit. There is no reason why Wall Street cannot establish and finance their own RTC, and that is what they should do. If that is what is necessary, then that is what opportunistic investors will do. Some who support the government bailout note the potential for profit down the road. If there really is a decent chance for this, then there is no reason why private investors wouldn't form their own RTC. Also, what would the Congress end up doing with such a "windfall profit"? Give it back to us taxpayers? Not likely if Congress is still Democrat-controlled. It would more likely be used to fund more useless socialist programs.

This bailout goes against what conservatism is supposed to be all about. We should be showing the citizens of this country that they don't need a "Nanny Government" to take care of all their problems. As a registered Republican, it pains me to say this, but if I find that you vote for any type of bailout, I will be forced to vote for the Democrat running against you this November. You will have completely lost my trust to carry the conservative mantle.

Thank you for your time and consideration of your constituents' views.

Best regards,
Ben Bursae

Tuesday, September 02, 2008

Here is a letter to the editor I recently submitted to the Free-Lance Star, regarding the initial coverage of Sarah Palin's selection as VP candidate for John McCain. More on this to come, for sure.

Letter to Editor, Free-Lance Star

To the editor,

I am writing to urge all of your readers (and my fellow citizens) to ignore the media bias and sexist banter being thrown about at Sarah Palin’s expense and find out for themselves what this woman brings to the table. Since her announcement as McCain’s running mate, the media coverage has been absolutely abysmal.

First, people who characterize Palin’s selection as McCain merely attempting to rake in disenchanted Clinton supporters are putting their own sexist beliefs on parade (or their own ignorance), as they are effectively dismissing Palin’s (and Clinton’s) candidacy as mere novelty. She was only selected because she’s a woman, they are saying. How about actually looking at the woman’s abilities and achievements?

On this note, I would advise ignoring the mass media outlets, as they seem enamored with focusing on the mundane – silly “scandals” like the alleged firing of Ms. Palin’s ex-brother-in-law. For one, this stuff doesn’t come close to selling strips of land from one’s front yard to campaign contributors (Obama) or plagiarizing speeches from British Members of Parliament (Biden), but that’s just an example of the media’s hypocrisy. One example where it would help to dig deeper than the superficial spin the media gives is regarding Ms. Palin’s “beauty pageant” history. While the connotation suggests dismissing her as a pretty face with no brains, the tone of the story changes greatly when one learns that she only entered the pageants in order to earn money for college, which she needed since both of her parents were “ordinary, working-class” people (a teacher and a school secretary). Coming from a similar humble background (enlisted military brat) where I had to apply myself in order to be able to afford to go to college, her dedication strikes a chord with me, and I imagine it would strike a similar chord with most people.

What the rest of the media (and many Obama-supporters, ironically) are harping on is Ms. Palin’s “lack of experience.” Here are a few observations I have made on this subject. First, Ms. Palin actually has more Executive experience than Obama, yet she’s only the nominee for the #2 spot. But we’re supposed to be comfortable with Obama’s lack of experience, when he’s running for the #1 spot?? This point aside, when one looks at the experience she does have, it’s pretty impressive what she has done in such a short time. She has rooted out corruption in the Alaskan Republican Party, successfully bucking the “good old boys” system while at the same time being able to work with both parties and get things done for the good of Alaskans. Her “inexperience” didn’t stop her then, and I doubt it would stop her now. Thirdly, as someone who prefers minimizing government intrusion in our lives, I would prefer that those at the top have as little experience as possible at creating those intrusions. She has demonstrated with her actions in office a similar dislike for government intrusion.

Her husband (non-college-educated) should appeal to the majority of Americans who do not have college degrees, and why shouldn’t he? College is not the “end-all be-all” of life’s educational experience. Both she and her husband share life lessons that most of us “ordinary Americans” (the ones clinging to guns and religion) have experienced (ask Obama or Biden when was the last time they shopped at their local grocery store), and what she may lack in “public service” experience she makes up for in “real world” experience.

From my read of her history, Ms. Palin seems a genuine throw-back to the true grassroots, conservative base that the majority of Americans share – this is what I urge your readers to consider when thinking about and discussing Ms. Palin’s selection as VP candidate.

Very respectfully,
Ben Bursae
Fredericksburg, VA