Jasper Journal

I live in  Colorado and enjoy the outdoors, especially skiing in the winter. I have been here now for almost ten years,  and lived here twice before.  Although I would love to, I have never skied at Aspen.  It, and Beaver Creek, are the two most expensive ski resorts in the state.  ( I have never skied at Beaver Creek either). I get my discount lift tickets at the  Denver ski show in December and  go to the smaller ski areas primarily,  and perhaps once a year to a bigger  one such as  Breckenridge or Keystone. That is what I can afford. This is  pretty typical of many of the residents here.

So I was  surprised by the news that Mrs Obama and kids were in Aspen this weekend for skiing. I guess perception by the public that this might be excessive doesn’t matter. Are they tone deaf about this?  But wait, where was this reported? I saw it on Drudge from a British newspaper. Did you read it anywhere or hear about it on any media outlet?  They sure do a good job covering for this administration.

While a one time trip like this  for the president’s family could be acceptable, it came after a 17 day Hawaiian vacation in December; a safari trip to southern Africa in the fall ;  a vacation to Marthas Vineyard in the summer;  skiing last year at Vail and Beaver Creek; and a vacation to Spain the year before.

The president for all of his talk of being for the working man lives in his elitist bubble with his Chicago cronies. He  and his wife operate in a world that is easily the one percent he continuously criticizes. He is a hypocrite and we pay the price on a daily basis.  Maybe someday I could go to Aspen too? Nah, I would only see elitist democrats and fat cat Hollywood types.  They probably even pay the window rate for  daily lift tickets.  There is at least that justice.

The last three days have revealed a lot about Rick Santorum and Barack Obama. In the case of Obama, I wasn’t surprised; In the case of Santorum, I was.

On Friday, the president stood before his podium and told us what a great compromise he had just created to protect religious institutions from doing what they considered immoral. In his lecturing, condescending manner, he announced that everything was fixed, and  religious institution’s consciences were spared.  Just one thing,  their insurance companies would have to provide the services at the heart of the matter at no cost.

Wow, what a genius! How could anyone possibly object to such a Solomon-like solution. And of course,  many in the mainstream media fell in line and declared the issue settled. It’s just those pesky bishops that demurred. They ultimately stated this was still unacceptable.

Of course it is. What right thinking person  would think that the administration’s sleight of hand in any way addresses the main issue: Government interference in private health care issues. His grand executive compromise, that only he created,  further exacerbates the situation, and now has the government telling private businesses what they have to do.

What right does the president of the United States have to tell private companies what they have to provide? And to demand that they do it for free?  Rich Galen, a political analyst and writer of the Mullings Report,  put it this way:” The Obama Administration has, by executive fiat, determined that a private company must give away its services to a class of people it (“The Administration”) has determined should get these services.”  This is absolutely preposterous!.

Perhaps it is good that this issue is raised again prior to the general election. This is just the beginning of a government bureaucracy controlling our health care needs among other things. I for one do not want the government involved with my provider or telling me what I must cover for other people; do you ?

Having said that, I come to my next issue this weekend. Coming off his recent surprising  victories in three republican primaries, Rick Santorum said something at CPAC on Saturday, that disturbed me.  He asked the audience if they wanted someone elected in November that was a principled conservative “OR  if they just wanted to achieve  a “Hollow victory.”  Whoaa… I raise my hand for a hollow victory if it means no more Obama, and I hope others do to. Clearly this was a shot at Mitt Romney,  but it says a lot about Mr Santorum. Would he rather we all go down in flames supporting him than  defeat Obama?  It really sounds that way, and gives me yet another reason to question Mr Santorum’s qualifications to be the republican nominee.

Last week we had a number of people weigh in on the Santorum rise in the polls and how that would effect their support for the republican candidate. I find it worrying that solid republicans and thoughtful independents have such unease about Santorum.  This is not a good sign. We cannot afford four more years of Obama, and the President’s tactics last week are just a sample of what he will try if he gets another term.

A  good friend asked the following question today: ” Whose hand do you want on the tiller of the ship of state?”  A great question considering the state of the country and the bloody political primaries in the Republican party. The  many coments on the last blog item indicate that there is a great deal of passion here.

Tonight we see the current captain of the ship of state try to tell us that things are getting better and that he needs more time to finish his mission. Does anyone really accept that? Okay, what about contenders for his job. Do we want Mitt or Newt at the helm? This is a critical question and has to be looked at without the passion of the debate spectacles. I just read that Newt is threatening to pull out of debates if cheering and applauding are not allowed. That concerns me. Actually, these so called “debates” are not really debates at all. I wonder why they even exist and  why people participate. I think it is time to revamp the entire process on how we get to know candidates. It is now a circus or a hatchet job, or both. What do we really learn?

But to get back to the original question, whose hand do you want on the tiller of the ship of state? A mercurial unpredictable Newt or a lacklustre bland Mitt?  It is hard to put passion aside as there really is a visceral dislike for the president: but we must. What is your opinion?