Um…is this a surprise? I realize left-leaning politicians have a job to do, and I also understand that part of that job is to be against anything a Republican president wants to do or what Republicans in general might want to do. Unfortunately, in pursuing these short-sighted goals, real people die. Some of those people are Americans, and some of those are Iraqis.

So, any left-leaner worth his salt might say “hey, if we weren’t there in the first place, people wouldn’t be dying”. That statement is partly true — Americans in Iraq wouldn’t be dying. But Iraqis would most certainly be dying just as they died by the thousands under Saddam Hussein. And Americans might also be dying in other parts of the world — or even in the US — as terror attacks continued.

You don’t have to agree with the action in Iraq. You are absolutely entitled to disagree. But! Common decency (and maybe a little patriotic support?) suggest that you might not want more people to die. We don’t need politicians and media outlets taking the other side. And as the Harvard (no conservative bastion) study points out, the media reports we see every day basically do just that.

Post from: motivatedperformance.com

McGovern argues that eliminating options and choices for individuals does not lead to a healthier society.  In today’s political climate, we have candidates from both parties telling us they’ll save us from “unfair” mortgages, they’ll pay for our health care, and they’ll save us from ourselves when we need cash (all examples in McGovern’s column).

This is crazy.  We’re a country built on a sense of personal responsibility our “leaders” are trying to squash.  At their roots, Americans are rugged individualists that also possess a strong sense of community.  We know when someone needs help, and we’re more than happy to provide it.

When I think “McGovern”, I think of the guy that lost one of the most lopsided presidential elections in history  (520-17 in the Electoral College).  But in doing a little homework for this blurb, I learned that McGovern was a mature liberal even then.  In his telegram to Nixon conceding defeat, McGovern wrote, “I hope that in the next four years you will lead us to a time of peace abroad and justice at home. You have my full support in such efforts”.

Can you see Hillary being as gracious to Obama?  Only if the cameras were running…

Post from: motivatedperformance.com

Given our current political, economic, and national security environments, one would think that Congress would have better things to do with their time.  Congressional democrats and republicans should be ashamed of themselves.

This investigation is more about political posturing than it is about the veracity of Clemens’ testimony or the dangers of steroid use.  Steroids are illegal without a prescription.  If Congress were serious about enforcing the law, it could easily do so without hearings, grandstanding and testimony.

There was no need for a Mitchell Report, and there’s even less need for the political food fight that’s being waged to attack or defend on party lines.  Congress — and Chairman Waxman especially — have overstepped boundaries defined by both the law and by common sense.

Guilty or not (of perjury or steroid use), Roger Clemens does not deserve to be used as a pawn in a political brawl.  More importantly, we should hold members of Congress accountable for recklessly destroying a man’s reputation.

Steroid use is not a matter of National Security.  Steroid use does not affect the health and vitality of our economy.  Steroid use has nothing to do with a whole host of problems we’re faced with in the country.  And yet, our elected officials are ruining lives while wasting our time and money.

When will we make them stop?

Post from: motivatedperformance.com

Does that sound callous and coarse? Politically incorrect? If it does, you’re reading the wrong guy’s stuff.

I am no fan of affirmative action or anything that distinguishes us based on race or gender. I’m not a fan of “first black” or “first female” anything.

Some may claim that we’re recognizing accomplishment. I say “bull”. What we’re doing is pretending that somehow a black person (or a female) doesn’t have the ability to achieve what a white male (for example) can.

By separating and acknowledging achievement by race and/or gender, we’re perpetuating the idea that race or gender are obstacles on the road to success. We’re breathing life into the notion that a “black person can’t” or “a woman never will”.

Was there a time when race was a factor in a person’s ability to succeed ? Absolutely. Are there still racial barriers in our society? You bet. The same applies to gender as well. We still have a lot of work to do in our society.

But we’re not helping matters any by recognizing every “black” or “female” accomplishment. In fact, we’re making the problem worse. By pretending that “the first black ref” is extraordinary, we’re actually sending a message to black kids that “this guy is the exception. Do not try this at home.”

Some will claim that we’re holding up these individual black or female success stories as an example of what someone can do. “It’s an inspiration!”

Great. Then inspire by recognizing the man or the woman. Recognize the individual. But stop adding adjectives.

You can read the story here. The ref’s name is Mike Carey. Is he exceptional? You bet he is. He’s damn good at his job. And that has nothing to do with being black.

Post from: motivatedperformance.com