Thursday, January 21, 2016


The republican debate in South Carolina was well staged by the interviewers, the questions asked were substantive and we finally got down to the issues.

Overall I believe Donald Trump got put in his place for the first time since the debates began, and Ted Cruz showed me that he is a much more substantive debater for the first time. I was particularly impressed with Cruz, he’s extremely composed and able to maintain a certain equilibrium that speaks well for the future. That being said they are all improving with practice. There is a noticeably weak general knowledge on foreign affairs, by all parties. A President to be must be of more worldly caliber, if he or she is to rise to the post of ‘Commander in Chief.’

Ted Cruz, Presidential Candidate

The positives and negatives of living on a vast continent separated by two oceans from the rest of the world, is it creates a distinct culture and focus. A lot of the immigrants that came to this country brought with them hard earned experiences, and it is this human capital that has made America the great nation that it is today. The downside is that to some extent we are cut off from the rest of the world and its more cosmopolitan views of what will be needed for the coming years.

I like the idea of a flat tax, and a down sizing of the outrageous number of data that employs so many people in an unnecessary exercise. Simple is always best!

I will now point out what I believe to be subjects, in their order of importance that need to be seriously addressed in the coming months:


The whole discussion on immigration has become a political football, which over the years no party other than an occasional attempt has really dealt with this controversial situation.

What Donald Trump is offering is going in the right direction. Build a wall. We live in the electronic age so with sensors and drones this doesn’t have to be the once costly task that has been given as a reason for passed excuses.
Now here comes the difficult part who goes and who stays? Obviously shipping out every illegal immigrant back to Mexico or where ever is preposterous? The costs, logistics and organization would be an overwhelming task. My thoughts are this:
a.    Do a background check on each person here illegally. Anyone who has been here for three years or more, has no criminal record should be allowed amnesty to apply for L1 status, which would eventually lead to an application for a green card. In this way the country benefits from any taxes that should be paid under the law. The rest must be shipped back to their country of origin. The law on birthright to becoming a US citizen must be changed immediately. No person, other than a US citizen, can give birth to a child in the USA and be given automatic rights to that status. Those that already have that status will be in a better position to make application for other members of the family. It’s a difficult choice and families will get split, but the price they all took in the first place, has its consequences.
b.    The giant mistake here is that passed administrations have dodged this issue to where it has become an overwhelming problem. It will cost the US, but it’s the only way to solve this immigration crisis once and for all.

Donald Trump, Presidential Candidate


This indeed is another sore spot with the American public and indeed around the world. Let’s take a look at passed history here, Viet Nam, Yugoslavia, Iraq 1991 and 2003, Afghanistan, and the present. I only
know of two times that the deployment of American troops with other nations have resulted in success. These wars have cost trillions of dollars, and the one thing the US must learn is when you take up the sword you stay, occupy, and only give back the country to its inhabitants, once law and order has been established.
Its one thing to attack a country and succeed, but where is the plan for the day after? Once a nation walks down that lonely path, in frank English, ‘Your ass is on the line’. You don’t just up and leave, creating a power vacuum and leaving a mess that generations after have to deal with for years. It’s all well and good charging off to war, exciting stuff! But has this really been thought through? The great Empires of the world always colonized a nation after its fall, respecting culture but acting as a referee in order to maintain stability and peace.
I am not for blasting ahead with another war over ISIS, strategically, with other nations, yes. This is a war that now belongs to the Arab nations in that region, we can only help, advise and assist. ‘The sins of the father have been well shed upon the youth!’ So let’s learn from our mistakes?

3.    GUN LAWS

I have well made my feelings known on this subject. Please read my passed blogs. We live in different times, the ‘Bill of Rights’, was created from English law. If you go back through the English History books, you will see that reform has always been a part of an evolving nation. This is not changing the constitution; it’s just dealing with the reality of the times we live in!


This indeed is a sensitive subject. ‘The first is only as good as the last!’
In my personal opinion, I know the police force do all they can to respect the law, but where does, panic, good conscience and humanitarian principles, play their part. From what I’ve witnessed after a driver of a car, a person illegally selling on a side street, does not obey the command of the officer on duty, an almost robotic behavior seems to take place from the police. So this comes back to training. If we treat people without respect, then get ready to see the outcome. If these basic principles are not learned, then we are in for a future police state that will rule by force.
Is this what America is all about? The statistics in this country speak for themselves throughout the world.

So what’s the solution, you may well ask? The power lies in the police who are doing their job to enforce the law. That’s all well and good, but how that power is imposed is the key to either having what we have now, or better relations and respect between the police force and the civilian population. So what’s the answer? Experience, the imposing of the law is probably the most difficult process of all. Inexperience will bring fear, and when a civilian feels that fear, stupid things happen. For me to explain this in detail here would take up too much space. In short, the better trained an officer is in the art of dealing with complicated situations, will bring opportunities to break down the ‘fear aspect’, and lead to less ugly outcomes. There are a million questions here to answer, but you don’t shoot an unarmed man on the run! A real budget must be set forth to train younger inexperienced officers in this art of avoiding confrontation. In simple words defense and safety is the mind set here, not attack and destroy. When an entirely new method of implementing the law is taken, and attitude is a huge part of this, people will then respond differently. I can’t say it enough, understanding the psychology of the person you are confronted with is the beginning.


I stand for a flat tax. The Tax code has become over complicated. Employs to many accountants to interpret, and too many IRS employees. The result, too much time is wasted, and the overall costs of collecting taxes becomes an expensive business. Simplification, and reduction of corporate income tax, will attract investments from abroad and the return of existing American companies. This will create jobs that will in turn bring payroll tax and the need for goods and services. These are the key elements, outside exports, for the financial success of any nation. As I have expressed in previous blogs a country must invest in technology and innovation. As a more developed country, the USA must focus on high technology and concentrate on innovative industries, in order to stay ahead of world competition.


I know we live in a time when the public is fed up with gridlock in Congress, and we all desperately want change, but not change for changes sake! I know the nation is awe struck with Donald Trump, but seriously, the ideas are good, but this not the man to lead America. Ruling by theatrics and fear mongering won’t work in practice. So what qualities does it take to run this great nation?

a.    A good listener, but a person that is action orientated. A leader who chooses the best leaders in every field, not political cronies that tell you what you want to hear, ‘Remember weapons of mass destruction?’
b.    We are in a new age of unparalleled technology and innovation. This requires a new approach. A President that does not possess the minimum skills, better have a very good backup. Above all a team must be chosen that is not afraid to stand up for their beliefs.
c.    I believe America cannot keep believing in the, ‘we must do it all, fight the wars, police the planet. It’s time to build coalitions and focus on more important concerns facing us in this nation, for education and retraining, and infrastructure.
d.    Its imperative that the leader and the ‘White House, must reach across the isle!’ This over micro managed White House has separated itself from congress and that MUST BE CHANGED.


We must return to the heart of what this nation was created for. A lot of Brits settled here after the ‘War of Independence’, who did not want to return to a monarchy. George Washington’s Grand parents are a product of that, their family home stills stands in England, next to the estate where Princess Diana is buried. Much has changed in England since that time. That being said this is an elected government, that constitutionally stands for the people and by the people. We are in serious danger of losing that authority. Super Pacts, supported by wealthy families and corporate empires must be stopped. The Lobbyists and the special interest groups must be harnessed. Some way a cap must be considered on the amount of funds given to a potential candidate. I’m all for the support that comes from the public at large through the Internet. This is democracy at work. Each elected candidate must remember his or her roots, and not forget the people from each state who elected them. The power of big money and party politics can sweep away the values and good principles that were once the reason a person got elected. In short we must get back to basics.

Hillary Clinton (L) and Bernie Sanders (R)- Presidential Candidates


I have enjoyed watching the debates and was greatly stimulated by the last two debates from the Republican and Democratic parties. We’re finally getting down to ‘brass tacks’. More to debate, but they are getting there. For my money Ted Cruz, appears to be an extremely astute, well-educated person, with the right experience behind him. He could go all the way. He’s not afraid to go with his beliefs, with a little more diplomacy he appears to be a man that is worldly enough to lead here and abroad. My only concern is that the Republican Party is too fractured. If they are to succeed and gain the electorate, they must stand for a more united party policy in order to have future success.

The Democrats really only have, Hillary Clinton. As much as I love Bernie’s, passion, ideas and thoughts, as an added tonic, his left wing views are too costly. I believe Hillary has the best chance with Bill. Bill Clinton’s public appeal and ability to express himself, gives the country the best option for the most experienced couple to lead our nation. It is important that a leader has good international experience and skills. The new age we are entering will be about building coalitions with other nations. Strong separate views about foreign policy can only bring about more expense and dependence on the US.   


Monday, January 11, 2016


In order to have some understanding of our second amendment rights, I scrolled back over its inception, to at least give us a starting point.

It’s clear that the birth of this “right to bear arms”, comes from the Bill of Rights of 1689 under English common law. The main reason these laws were implemented in England was over the constant confrontation between Roman Catholic and Protestant followers. When James ll died in 1689, a Roman Catholic, the new King William lll of Orange who was a Protestant, had laws passed on guns, some of which have been adopted in the second amendment.

1.     The ten amendments adopted on December fifteenth 1791, included the second amendment. It was described as an, “auxiliary right”, with the paramount reason to defend an individual’s ‘SELF DEFENSE’, amongst other conditions.
2.     In 1876, “The Supreme Court”, ruled that “the right to bear arms” is not granted by the constitution, neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. It then ruled that the federal government along with States could limit any weapon types not having “reasonable relationship” to the preservation of a well-regulated militia.
3.     James Madison, Father of the constitution, along with George Mason, also became, Fathers of this second amendment. They stated that “the right to bear arms” would not be restricted by British Law.

Since this time the amount of debate that has existed based on the correct wording of this amendment, is enough to fill the Smithsonian Institute.

So where to now? You may well ask. Obviously this so called inalienable right of self defense is not going to be regulated without an uproar.

Photo Credit: 

So let us go back to the time of the enactment, by Madison and Mason. This was done at a time when this country and its landscape were entirely different. A small island like England, is a not like a vast continent. America has become the largest organized landmass on the face of the Earth. In 1791, this country was not as advanced as the thirteen original colonies. So in the middle of nowhere without a firearm, would have been difficult in view of, Indians, cattle rustlers and horse thieves to say the least. It was necessary for farmers and the like to be able to defend themselves.

Today? It’s a completely different situation.  We can lay hands on an automatic rifle at a time when it’s not as needed as the revolver was then. What I don’t understand is we now have the militia in the form of the National Guard and the police force, so yes I believe in the right of ‘self defense’, but is all this choice of weapons really necessary?

There needs to be a restriction on certain weapons that are better used by the military, unless it’s for ‘hunting purposes’, in which case automatic weapons would be unnecessary.

Photo Credit: CNN

So what’s the conclusion? Congress must limit the type of gun required for self defense, greater training must be given, licenses are issued base upon the skill level and intelligent purpose for the gun’s use. In other words our elected officials must realize that times have changed, what was necessary in 1791 is not the same as today. The amendment criteria needs to be updated, to respect the times we live in, with regard to the right type of gun needed for self protection.

Obviously background checks for a persons’ mental health and/or restricted for persons with a criminal record. Fines made upon suppliers of weapons that have not accomplished a proper audit, on the consumer. Parents, relatives, are subject to fines, confiscation in the event their firearms are too easily acquired by unsafe protection in proper gun racks, by family and anyone without a designated license.

The above is easily enforced, as it is in most civilized nations. Will it happen? I doubt it. I guess the fact that our country has a 10.64 deaths per 100k people is senseless. The UK is .23 per 100K. If we can keep out the terrorists, we can surely tighten down on so many of these loop holes, yes?

So why? You may well ask. The manufacturing of fire arms is big business, not only here but through arms dealers, who have ways of putting them into the hands of rogue nations and undesirable people such as terrorists and the like. Some exports are legitimate, but not all. In addition this means jobs. So big money is being made and the firearm manufacturers can spend inaudible amounts on campaign financing. These so-called super pacts are well known, in particular one, which fanatically lobbies against change.

So are we all going to stand back and be a fly on the wall? Or stand-up for what is truly right. I’m not advocating for the abolition of the second amendment, I’m asking for a review of its wording in today’s world, for common sense values to take place. How many more people must die before stricter, better, more sensible rules, regulations and accountability are put in place?  

Tuesday, January 5, 2016


Before I begin on the New Year I must reflect on the past twelve months. What a year of change? The rise of ISIS, a new form of terrorism. The ridiculous number of candidates for the Republican Party, and the Hillary Clinton email fiasco. Nothing like American politics to keep up a great ‘soap opera’! The price of oil crashing to thirty dollars a barrel from all time highs, enough to send many nations into a tailspin financially. All these factors will now set the stage for 2016.

So who’s going to win the nomination? Not Donald Trump that’s a certainty. Yes he has a good platform and some refreshing ideas, but talk and implementation are two very different scenarios. I’m all for stricter background checks for immigrants, but where do we draw the line? Has anyone read and understood ‘sharia law’, how this religious viewpoint can be acceptable to a predominantly Christian nation belies all logic. We worship the same God, but the very principals of our nation and constitution are in direct conflict with the Muslim way of life. How can we all have these so called inalienable rights when a husband has the right to rape his wife or wives? Of all the world religions how can these laws be permitted in a western society? To my way of seeing matters, I am a Brit and proud of my birthright, but I live in America and I have sworn allegiance to the flag and this country and I am duty bound to uphold those rights as a citizen. Anyone who doesn’t put forward and abide by our laws, should return to the their land of origin, where such values are acceptable. In short this is the USA, and although there is a right to worship freely, I draw a line when it undermines the very value system we uphold!

Well, enough of that. So who’s going to be our next president? It’s obvious, Hillary Clinton. Is it my choice? No, but she has the best credentials for world politics, as a former First Lady, Senator and Secretary of State and a husband that balances her well with experienced delivery and ‘detente’ at home and abroad. The Republican Party is too fractured and unfocused, hence the number of candidates. Religious evangelicals, fanatical far right opinions, on gun laws, election campaign contributions, and a myriad of views that conflict, rather than a united plan toward a common purpose. If they don’t do more to appeal to the minorities, they are certainly going to lose the election.

The rise in technology will undoubtedly conflict with job growth, through automation. Our future is definitely in R & D and maintaining leadership in the world of technology, so education of our up and coming generation and reeducation is essential for the nation as a whole in order to keep pace with jobs and healthy futures for the middle class. Incentives must also keep pace with innovation. Potential knew entrepreneurs who, and what they do, are the lifeblood of our country in job creation.

Finally, and most importantly we must take a completely new look at the enforcement of law at every level. The amount of discord between minorities and law enforcement is overwhelming, and proof that innovation must exist to find meaningful ways for those among our society that are least considered. ‘The first is only as good as the last,’ and the ‘wealth of a nation is its people’!

In the words of JFK, ‘Ask not what your country can do for you, but more importantly what can you do for your country?’

My best wishes to all of you, for a  ‘Happy and Prosperous New year’!