Friday, December 4, 2009
The global warming hoax has woven itself into our government, our economy, our universities, our public schools and into the the United nations. Trillions of dollars are being risked on the global warming hoax, which is the biggest hoax in the history of the planet.
Although it is clear that the Earth is not in peril, CO2 is not a pollutant and polar bears have a bright future ahead,, can we allow this hoax to fail? The very survival of corporations, countries and educational systems depend on the survival of the global warming hoax.
IMHO, massive funding and publicity will be put into a concerted effort to suppress the truth and promote the lie about global warming. This hoax will not be unravelled without a fight. It is too big to fail. Too many careers, politicians, companies, schools and nations are depending on it. If you thought that you have seen massive propaganda about the global warming hoax in the past ten years, you ain't seen nothing yet.
Monday, November 30, 2009
This change was gradual over the years and almost went unnoticed until yesterday. What has happened to us? I noticed many youngsters in the store that were decked out with the latest fashions, fancy hair styles, tattoos, sexy clothes, chatting on the pricey cell phones, and being completely self-indulgent, while their grandparents and great-grandparents were struggling to earn minimum wage. Why are we not taking care of our seniors? I don't mean medicare, social security and food stamps. I mean why are their children not taking care of them? Do they think that it is not their responsibility? Do they think that the government will provide for them? Are they blind to this odd juxtaposition?
Where did the youngsters get the money to drive new tricked-out automobiles with blaring sound systems and exhaust while their grandparents carry groceries out to these cars? Are the fancy cars in the parking lot paid for with borrowed money that will never be payed back? Did they get college loans from Uncle Sam and buy new cars with the money instead? Are they depleting their inheritances from their grandparents who worked every day of their life so that their grand-kids could have an easier life? What happens when the money runs out and times get rough?
The old people seem to have character and they are willing to make sacrifices and "do whatever it takes", but what about today's youth? Do they have character? Will they have what it takes when push comes to shove? I think not. I think there will be anarchy, crime and riots when the next great depression hits. The pretty women will sell themselves as prostitutes. They already dress the part, with extremely provocative seductive clothing and demeanor. But now they just give it away for free for the fun of it, without marriage or commitment. They are cheap now, but in hard times they'll sell themselves to the highest bidder. The boys will become the thugs that they now emulate with their dress, language, attitude and song. They will loot these very same stores and trample the old folks to get what they need when scarcity becomes widespread. Only our old folks have the character, determination and moral restraint to turn things around. I fear for the days when they are gone.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Gay Marriage Has Been Defeated In Maine. Gay Marriage Has Now Lost In All 31 States In Which It Has Been Put To a Popular Vote
Yesterday, gay marriage was on the ballot in Maine and lost as usual. http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2009/11/04/politics-us-gay-marriage-analysis_7084392.html
IMHO, the gay activists themselves are responsible for the defeat of gay marriage every time it is put on the ballot.
Gay activists flocked to Maine in the weeks preceding the referendum on Gay marriage. During their rallies, gay activists often show their true colors. They are an intolerant bunch who who demonize their opponents by calling them haters, bigots, racists, and brainwashed bible thumpers. By doing so, they demonstrate their own hate, intolerance and prejudices. They also demonstrate their freakish nature with their antics, dress, profanity and extreme viewpoints. Click on this link to view photos of intolerant gay freaks protesting the outcome of prop 8 in California: http://zombietime.com/prop_8_gay_marriage_ruling/
Watch these eye opening videos and audio files from an anti-gay marriage rally in Maine: http://www.pamshouseblend.com/diary/13803/peter-labarberas-antigay-rally-at-maine-statehouse-draws-feeble-numbers
It seems that the numbers of the gay activists is much greater than the anti-gay activists, however the numbers at the ballot box prove to be the opposite.
Is this a result of racial profiling and/or discrimination in the Democrat controlled Congress?
Is this a result of a widespread sense of entitlement and/or reparations on the part of many of today's Blacks?
Am I a racist for writing about this topic?
Read this article from politico and decide for yourself. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29055.html
Friday, October 30, 2009
Blacks Are the Most Dangerous Cultural Group in America. Why is This Obvious Truth Ignored, Justified or Excused?
Blacks overwhelmingly outnumber Whites in suspensions and expulsion from public schools.
Over a three year period, when I drove a taxi in Chicago, there was an average of 11 cab drivers murdered per year, making it Chicago's most dangerous job. All of the solved murders of cab-drivers turned out to be Black men.
An overwhelming majority of street prostitutes do not "date" black men because they consider it too dangerous. Even Black hookers will not get into a car with a Black man. Some of these streetwalkers are strictly controlled by Back pimps who also do not allow their hookers to date Black men because it is too risky. They don't want to lose income when their girls get injured, disfigured or killed.
Why are these truths being suppressed? Why are they not taught in our schools as part of African American studies? Why is the danger of the American Black man rarely a topic of news and commentary in the media? Why is this obvious danger rarely portrayed in TV and movies?
How can solutions be found if we ignore the obvious facts?
Attitudes of victim-hood and entitlement are being used to ignore, justify and excuse dangerous behavior.
Instead of setting high standards for all Americans, today's popular culture is encouraging today's youth to sink to the lowest common denominator in order to be cool, popular and to fit in. As a result of celebrating and embracing the negative characteristics of Blacks, all American subcultures are becoming more like America's most dangerous cultural group.
The "great society" programs were just coming of age in the 60's, just after the civil rights movement. The unintended consequences of programs that sought to help poor and minority families actually did them more harm than good. These programs "nudged" many fathers out of their homes and replaced them with welfare, food stamps, aid to "women, infants and children", etc.
The entitlement mentality, coupled with a broken family, has led to a social, moral and cultural breakdown in many black families. More good would come from challenging and encouraging struggling families, rather than sapping their motivation by supporting them on a subsistence level. A saftey net that exists within their families, churches and communities would be more effective than an impersonal government bureaucracy. Government aide leads to resentment and a false sense of entitlement.
Most liberals genuinely hope that their programs will succeed. However, today's lawmakers are very corrupt and view many of these programs as "cash cows" that will increase their own power by putting them in charge of distributing more and more funds.
In the end, the demoralization of the recipients of these programs predictably results in perpetuating fatherless homes, decreasing self reliance and fostering criminal behavior and disrespect for authority, the family, the church and women.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
We have the right to succeed or fail by our OWN efforts, our own unique abilities, determination and hard work, with the voluntary help from our families, friends, churches, charities, luck and God. We also have the freedom to voluntarily choose who to help if we so desire. Our Constitution and laws protect us from unfair interference of our individual pursuits by government, criminals, invaders, and religious leaders.
Most of the constitution protects us from the government. Our founders understood that all of human history has proven that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Our constitution was carefully crafted to put checks and balances on governmental power in order to restrict governments encroachment on our natural instinct that yearns to be free.
We are guaranteed equal opportunity, but not equal outcome. Equal outcome is IMPOSSIBLE because all humans are unique individuals with different desires, talents, strengths, weaknesses, abilities, disabilities, and emotional makeups. No two people are alike. As such, it is only possible to guarantee individual freedom and opportunity, not equal happiness, not equal wealth, not equal housing, food nor health-care. We are free to try to acquire our desires in a free society, unfettered by government, religion, criminals and foreign powers.
Friday, October 16, 2009
Yesterday afternoon, the nations attention was focused on a loose helium balloon in Colorado. A six year old boy was allegedly aboard this saucer shaped balloon that got loose and was streaking through the Colorado skies.
All major news stations had live coverage as cameras tracked the balloon and rescue teams were dispatched. When the balloon finally landed, sixty miles away in a farm field, there was no boy aboard. Hours later, the boy was found hiding in a box in the attic of his house.
Later that night, when questioned by Wolfe Blitzer of CNN, the Boy said that he was hiding in the attic "for a show". Later in the interview, the boy's father became very defensive and indignant when Wolfe Blitzer asked why his son said that we were doing this for a show. Here is a link to a related article with 2 embedded videos.
In today's upside down world, parents are proud to teach their children to lie for TV reality shows. Some may call it acting or posing, but those are euphemisms for deception.
This family was on TV reality show about wife swapping twice. The father also has produced films of dangerous storms, while "storm chasing" in his car with his young son.
Most TV reality shows promote the superficial false values of popularity (self promotion), thrill seeking, selfishness, fame, money, pleasure, sex and beauty.
IMHO, the parents of these children are guilty of child abuse because they are damaging the spirit and soul of their children by instilling false values in order to exploit them for their own selfish reasons.
This just in: The entire family appeared of 4 morning news shows including Good Morning America and the Today Show. These unbelievable videos show the boy getting sick in the middle of the interviews with his family. The host appears concerned about the young boy's health while his parents are more interested in the TV interview. The host then has to prompt the 6 year old's mother to pry herself away from the TV camera to take care of her child.
Amazingly, after that interview, the Family appeared on the Today show, where the young boy vomited again. Here is a link to an article with 2 more embedded videos.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
This past weekend, Anita Dunn was all over the news because she was trashing FOX news for 9 minutes straight on a CNN interview. Dunn said that FOX news was an arm of the Republican party and She says that FOX reports lies and distortions. Later, the White House press secretary, Robert Gibbs, said that many stories on FOX News are untrue.
The white house has declared all out war on FOX news because they are reporting on the radical agenda of many of Obama's appointees that the MSM will not cover.
Glenn Beck's watch dogs are doing a great job uncovering the radical beliefs of those closest to the Obama White House. I fear for Beck's life.
The way Obama is controlling the media by discrediting his opponents, is common in communist, Marxist, tyrannical and totalitarian regimes, not Democratic Republics.
On the campaign trail, Obama promised to fundamentally change America. He does not like America's fundamentals, and the rewards and risks of our capitalist system.
Now, as president, Obama is sworn to protect and defend the constitution of the United States, yet he loathes our constitution and the visions of our founding fathers. He is trying to bring "redistributive change" to America. Hopefully, it will become so obvious before irreversible damage is done. Just like Zayela was removed from Honduras before he shredded their constitution, I hope that Obama is removed from office before he and his minions fundamentally change America.
Monday, September 28, 2009
This is a clear case of the inmates running the asylum. IMHO they are "normalizing" and encouraging behavior that is abnormal, unhealthy, spiritually depraved and dangerous. This is so outrageous that I can't believe that it is actually happening.
The nuts on the left seem to enjoy promoting anything that makes a mockery of the traditional American values that made America the freest, wealthiest, most benevolently powerful nation that this world has ever seen. I can't believe that they are doing this with a straight face.
We must not tolerate the glorification of unhealthy, abnormal and spiritually depraved behavior for one more minute. We must fight back and refuse to be cowered by their false charges of bigotry. They are truly nuts and leading us on a path that will result in pain and suffering for our nation as we devolve into an unprincipled corrupt third world nation.
This is why when you are casually called a intolerant, hateful and bigoted because of your opposition to gay marriage, you must fight these false accusations until these "nuts" back down or go away. I hope and pray that parents in California will fight this with vigor, persistence and determination. These deceptive, manipulative nuts running our public schools must not be tolerated. Our nation's future is at stake.
All of this is happening at a time when Obama is calling for more school hours required in public schools. More school hours will mean more indoctrination. More school hours will mean more government control and less parental control of our children.
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Amazingly, two women at each office instructed the fictitious couple about how to hide their illegal activity from the banks and law enforcement and how to evade paying taxes. Here are links to these shocking videos:
The Baltimore sting:
The Washington sting:
ACORN vehemently denied these charges and said that they were victims of a vicious smear campaign. However, they immediately fired the four ACORN employees who got caught up in the scandal.
ACORN has a history of scandal. ACORN is currently under investigation for voter fraud in the 2008 presidential election in over 14 states.
Over the years, ACORN has received 150 million dollars in federal funding. Also, 26 billion dollars of stimulus money is available to community organizations, such as ACORN, from the recently passed "economic stimulus bill". ACORN is also slated to work with the White House in gathering information for the 2010 census. President Barack Obama started out as a community organizer and worked as an instructor for ACORN. On the campaign trail Obama promised to community organization like ACORN to help formulate his policies.
Yesterday the census bureau within the White House cut all ties with ACORN.
Unfortunately, in this author's opinion, this is just a tactic by the White house to INSURE that they have THEIR people doing the counting. This was their intention when they moved the census department to be under direct White House supervision.
The same people will be gathering information for the census, committing voter fraud, and intimidating banks into giving mortgages to people who can't pay. The only difference is that they are now forced to do it under another name.
The scoundrels will remain the same but the name of the organization will change. They will break up ACORN into 1000 obscure organizations that will be more difficult to track. They were very clever to quash this scandal before it got out of hand. It will not deter their corrupt schemes one iota.
ACORN was too anxious to throw 4 employees under the bus (while denying the charges). The white House was too quick to put out a statement admonishing their beloved ACORN that Obama emphatically supports and used to work for himself. Common sense, reason and my personal experience is screaming out to me that something is very fishy about the White House's reaction to this case.
Radio talk show host Glenn Beck was right when he said, we must ignore their distractions. When they distract us with their right hand we must pay attention to what the other hand is doing. Fortunately, Glenn Beck is on the case. He has the leaders of ACORN and the SEIU (Service Employees International Union) under his scrutiny.
Last week Glenn Beck publicized the radical views of Van Jones, Obama's "Green Jobs Czar". Jones' views and public behavior was so out-of-touch with American Values that he was forced to resign his post last Saturday. During the past two weeks, Glenn Beck brought information to light that caused the White House to publicly cut ties with very powerful people and organizations. Beck is messing with some very powerful and ruthless people, including union thugs from SEIU. As I have written in a previous blog, I fear for Glenn Beck's life.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
I might also add that no American should have to choose between heath-care and Harley's, between health-care and chrome rims, between health-care and a cool sound system, between health-care and cigarettes, between health-care and cable TV, between health-care and cell phones, between health-care and gold jewelry, between health-care and extreme tattoos and piercings, between health-care and flat screen TVs, between health-care and fast food, etc.
If someone chooses to smoke 2 packs of cigarettes per day at a cost of $450 per month, should taxpayers be required to pay for his health insurance because he can no longer afford it?
If an illegal alien sends half of his income back to Mexico to support his extended family, should taxpayers be required to pay for his health insurance because he can no longer afford it?
If health-care is so important, why are so many people unwilling to make the personal sacrifices necessary to be able to afford the cost?
Do you have anything to add? Leave a comment.
Saturday, September 5, 2009
Often they have given up their role as parent in favor of trying to be their child's friend. Some rely on their children for emotional support and their own self esteem. They place their child's "self-esteem" above his sense of responsibility and obligation to himself, to his family, to his country and to God. Often the parents themselves have little concern for those things and crave the acceptance of their children in return for their appeasement and friendship.
Today's youth have grown up with a sense of entitlement because everything has been provided for them with little effort of their own. Many Americans have become accustomed to depending upon things being provided for them. Even those who live in "so-called" poverty need not worry about providing their own food, clothing, shelter, education and medical care. These things are no longer their priorities, they consider them rights not pursuits. Instead, pleasure and thrill seeking have become their paramount pursuits and many seek them through, drugs, attention, jewels, seduction, sex, and control, especially in our poorest neighborhoods.
This situation is unsustainable. Rugged individualism and self reliance made this nation become prosperous, powerful and free. Our unique "American exceptionalism" is withering on the vine in the current social and political climate.
Our founding fathers were inspired by God and the universal spiritual principles of man and nature. Those spiritual principles are no longer the foundation of American society. Without that foundation we are easily distracted, manipulated and deceived.
Politicians, the media and today's popular-culture are distracting, deceiving and manipulating today's American public, especially our youth, in a way that I have never seen before in this country. However, I have read about this type of manipulation being used to gain the support of an unsuspecting public in Cuba, Nazi Germany and Venezuela.
We are at the brink of very, very, very dangerous times. I fear that our nation will collapse if we don't wake up soon.
Friday, September 4, 2009
Parents should Have The Maximum Influence On Their Children, Not Obama, The Schools, Nor Pop-Culture
I was astounded to learn that the above video is being played for children in American Public schools.
I had previously thought that "hero worship" of political leaders was only done in monarchies, dictatorships and totalitarian governments. No wonder many parents are concerned about Obama's address to school children next week. Parental authority is being usurped by the state, the media and the arts.
Today's American youth have power over their parents and most authority figures who are frightened of disciplining them. If they get a spanking for misbehaving, they can turn their parents in to "child family services" and have them arrested and monitored by the state. They teach this to all children in today's schools. This has a very chilling effect on child rearing, when the state second-guesses the discipline of all children. Due to the misguided effort to protect a small minority of abused children, most children are actually suffering from a "disrespect for authority" and a disdain for reasonable self-restraint.
Look at the results. Today's youth have disdain for all that is good, right and proper and embrace and celebrate that which is twisted, abnormal, wrong and evil. This is the inevitable result when their parents are not their ultimate authority.
Today's popular culture ridicules, mocks, discredits and disrespects Christianity, the Boy scouts, the US military, the intact family and the police. At the same time they emulate, imitate and praise, gangsters, sluts, playboys, homosexuals, outlaws and foul language.
Today's popular music is filled with debauchery, drugs, crime, anger, profanity, violence and crude and explicit sexuality. The disrespect displayed by today's youth culture is so complete that they purposely wear tattered misfitting clothing, they show their underwear and purposely leave their shoelaces untied.
Most girls think that is is cool to get attention by dressing like seductive prostitutes, surgically enhancing their breasts and using their power of seduction over all-too-willing men.
They display symbols of evil on their clothing, tattoos and jewelry. Today's most popular symbols are skulls and crossbones which represent poison or murderous pirates (outlaws of the sea), daggers, the Nazi Iron cross, devils, serpents, the flames of hell, guns, barbed wire that represent the fences around prison and more.
They think it is cool to mutilate their own bodies with extremes tattoos and piercings that make them look freakish an non-human.
The last thing we need is for "these young minds full of mush" to be co-opted by politicians who could have selfish and/or malevolent intentions. The public schools, universities, the media and today's popular culture are teaching our youth to question most authorities including, the military, the police, their own parents and even God. It won't take much for a hip sounding president to win their loyalty through deceit and manipulation.
We need the opposite. We need the government to stop meddling with our youth. Our youth are already out-of-control because of the unintended consequences of the government's protection and propaganda. Government should have a minimum influence on children. Parents should have the maximum influence on their children, not the government.
Children need to learn their place and not be empowered by potentially tyrannical leaders, while churches and their parents are being neutered. Common sense says that children should learn from their parents who have more experience and wisdom, not the other way arround.
It is detrimental to our entire society and to our children themselves when their parents lose their complete authority over their children. Political leaders should never have influence over our children. Their parents need to filter the political propaganda for their children who are unable to discern the truth from the deceptive manipulations that are the mainstay of politics.
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Everything that Obama is doing backs up my assertion that Obama's main interest is to increase government control, not to improve health-care. Recent examples of increasing federal control are the bailouts of GM, Chrysler, AIG etc., the stimulus plan, cash for clunkers, the appointment of 36 White House Czars, the cap-and-trade bill, the largest federal budget in U.S. history and more.
If 47 million new people get free health care from Obama's plan, who will treat them if we still have the same number of doctors, hospitals, nurses, clinics and medical laboratories.
If taxes don't go up, the existing doctors, hospitals, nurses and clinics will have to spend less time with each patient. Health-care providers will be forced to treat more patients for the same pay. The quality of care is sure to suffer and the doctors will become overworked. Some doctors will quit and fewer people will be attracted to a medical career.There will be no other option besides rationing. Costly health-care in the last years of life will be be doled out frugally. Some call the bureaucrats that make these tough decisions "death panels". Individuals, families and doctors will have less input on these tough end-of-life decisions while bureaucrats will make the tough decisions for them based on budgetary concerns.
I believe that rugged individualism is what made this country great. I believe that a "pay-as-you go" system will lead to the best doctors, who will make the most money and the most profitable drug companies will produce the best medications. Without successful doctors and drug companies, we can not continue to provide the best health-care and most innovative medications, diagnostic equipment and procedures on the planet. Success in these fields will attract many more people into these fields, thus making health-care more available to everyone.
Health insurance should be priced affordably for individuals as well as for groups. This way health-care will not be handcuffed to your job. Tort reform will reduce the high cost of malpractice insurance for doctors as well as reducing unnecessary defensive medicine designed to cover the doctor's behind, instead of helping the patient. Although all emergency room patients will be seen, regardless of their insurance, every effort must be made to collect unpaid medical bills. Wages should be garnisheed and money transfers to foreign countries like Mexico must be screened for medical debts before being sent to pay medical debts. People who demand emergency services for ailments other than true emergencies should be treated like people who make false alarms for fire and police emergency services. they should be prosecuted and fined.
Health insurance should only be used for unexpected and expensive treatment. Everyday medical issues should be paid for by the patient directly. Those who can't afford to pay, or those who have chosen to spend their money on other things instead, will be taken care of by generous relatives, church groups, charities, free clinics and charity hospitals. America is the most charitable nation on earth. However, if Obama gets his way, socialized health-care will squeeze private charities, free clinics and family help out of the marketplace.
This is what Obama wants. He has stated many times he wants a single payer government health-care system. This will give the government control over one-sixth of the economy and bureaucrats, not families and doctors, will be making medical choices for us.
Socialised health-care will undoubtedly lead to mediocrity, shortages and rationing, just like Cuba, England and Canada experience. The president is trying so hard to push through a complicated and convoluted plan that will undoubtedly cost taxpayers more money and limit the quality and availability of health-care to the majority of people who are satisfied with their current plan.
Saturday, August 29, 2009
I believe that Beck puts his faith in God above all else due to his alcoholism and his second lease on life that he found in his recovery.
I believe that Beck has the courage and is willing to make sacrifices that few other journalists are capable of.
I believe that Beck is motivated by spiritual principles and not by power, property,and prestige.
I believe Beck is the only journalist who is truly motivated by seeking the truth and making it public. I believe that Beck is acting selflessly in an effort to restore our nation back to the spiritual principles that it was founded upon.
I believe that Beck will be fearless in his relentless pursuit of the truth regardless of the personal consequences. He is willing to lose his power, fortune and fame in the process.
Once you have lost everything due to alcoholism and/or drugs, including your pride, your family, your money and your health, material things and personal happiness become unimportant as compared with your own spiritual growth. At least that is what happened to me. I think it is the same for Beck.
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Almost every day I drove my car, while drunk, to purchase my drugs. One day on the way to "cop my dope", I hit and severely wounded a stray dog that was in the street. I never saw the dog until it was too late. I kept on driving and the dog probably died.
Ever since that day my greatest fear was that I would hit and kill a person while I was drunk and/or stoned. I knew of someone who was serving a 15 year sentence in prison for accidentally killing someone with his car while he was drunk.
Although I had no compassion for the innocent people in the street who could become a victim of my drunk driving, I did have a horrible fear that I might go to prison as a result of a drunken accident. However, this fear was not strong enough to overcome my strong addictions. I continued to drive drunk and/or high knowing the horrific consequences that I would face if something went wrong. Luckily, I never had another accident. I didn't even get a DUI.
After I got clean and sober ten years ago, I came to the realization that it was still possible for me to have an accident and kill someone while I was driving even though I was sober. But since I wasn't drunk or on drugs, it would not be a crime, it would be an accident and I would not go to prison.
Ted Kennedy took the same chance that I did and unfortunately someone died as a result of his drunken driving. He should have payed the penalty just like I would have if it happened to me.
Only luck and God's will prevented me from killing someone in the same manner Kennedy did. I am forever grateful for that.
It is unconscionable to leave the scene of a potentially fatal accident. However, if I had been in the same situation I truly don't know if I would have had the courage to stay and notify the rescue squad and face potential imprisonment and disgrace.
What we know for sure is that Ted Kennedy lacks conscience and courage for leaving the scene of a fatal accident to avoid facing the consequences. Courage and sacrifice are among the many spiritual principles that I have grown to admire. Ted Kennedy did not possess either.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
The health-care crisis began when the public was sold on the deception that health-care is a right. It is not. Rights are defined as things that our government can not take away from us, among these are the rights to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness. The government has no obligation to provide you with these things, but we are protected from the government taking them away. Of course there are exceptions like taxes, prisons, capitol punishment and eminent domain, but I will not discuss them here. The point that I am making is that rights are not entitlements.
In my opinion, there are seven reasons why health-care costs have risen so dramatically within our lifetime.
1) Insurance is a financial tool intended to reduce one's risk of unlikely, yet catastrophic events. The entire system becomes skewed when insurance is used for every-day expenses, such as routine doctor's visits, minor injuries and common illnesses. Automobile insurance guards against major losses from the unlikely event of fire, theft or collision. Automobile insurance was never intended to pay for routine maintenance, repairs, tolls and parking fees. Likewise, health insurance was never intended to cover routine check-ups, child birth, coughs, colds, childhood measles, mumps, etc. The fore mentioned heath concerns should be planned for and payed for as they arise. Just as most responsible Americans save for their retirement, responsible Americans need to save for the inevitability of their own medical costs. Just as with retirement, the only way you won't need to plan for these expenses is if you die early.
2) Medical advancements, innovations, procedures, drugs and equipment are available today that were not available 50 years ago. There is no doubt that many of these things save lives that would have been lost 50 years ago, however if we wish to take advantage of the miracles of modern medicine, we must pay for it.
Examples of these lifesaving innovations are kidney dialysis and transplant, open heart surgery, cancer treatments, laser treatments, MRIs, CT scans, etc.
We should be grateful that these miracles of modern medicine are available in today's day and age. John Rockefeller couldn't have attained lifesaving kidney dialysis if he required it in his time, yet this lifesaving treatment is available to everyone in today's America. As far as health-care is concerned, today's poorer Americans have much more health care available to them than wealthy people of days-gone-by.
The money that today's wealthy people spend for expensive drugs and "cutting edge" treatments, pave the way for routine and inexpensive treatments for the future. We need wealthy people to pay the high costs of cutting edge treatment so that some day, it will be within everyone's reach. This can only happen in a free market.
3) Most patients do not pay directly for their own treatment. When the government or an insurance company pays, this limits the options for the doctor and the patient. Often more expensive options are available, while cheaper ones are not.
For example, Medicare payed for my father's physical therapy for 3 months after he suffered a stroke. I estimate that the cost to medicare was $600.00 per week for the PT. After medicare determined that My father was no-longer entitled to physical therapy, I enrolled him in 2 programs that offer him virtually the same therapy, using virtually the same equipment and the same intensive supervision and one-on-one attention, in the same facility, for approximately $70.00 per week.
Another example is that physicians automatically prescribe costly name brand medications for those who's insurance will cover the cost. They often ask about your coverage before deciding whether to prescribe a costly name brand medication or a generic. It the patient was paying directly, the physician would discuss the pros and cons of name-brand versus generic medications and the patient would ultimately decide. This process would undoubtedly bring the price of name-brand drugs down because the drug companies would try to get a bigger market share by being more competitive.
4) The huge role that government plays in health-care (Medicare, Medicaid and other government programs) has crowded out families, churches and private charities from filling these needs. Families, Churches and charities used to provide a safety net for those in need. They did it in a more personal and efficient manner. Centralized bureaucracies are always inefficient and impersonal and leave the those they are trying to help with a feeling of resentment and entitlement, rather than with gratitude, appreciation and a willingness to give back.
5) Defensive medicine costs billions. A large expense in Americas health care system is defending heath care providers from costly litigations, judgments and settlements. Doctors often provide unnecessary testing, medications and procedures, just to "cover their asses" in case something goes awry. When something does go wrong, which is inevitable in any business, huge settlements and judgments are paid out. Health care providers routinely pay huge malpractice insurance premiums to protect themselves from this inevitability.
All medical outcomes are not good ones, regardless of good intentions. When things go wrong, patients and families seek someone to blame and to pay restitution. If the patients were paying for each test, procedure and medication, they would choose the most cost effective procedures and have no one to blame if something was undetected because a costly test was not done.
6) Hospital costs are extremely high because they must provide free emergency services to anyone who shows up at their door, regardless of their ability to pay for services rendered. The cost of uncollected hospital bills is passed on to all of the other paying customers.
I agree that this is the humane thing to do in a society that can afford this, but it turns out that people are taking advantage of this by showing up at ER's for non emergency treatment. This not only clogs up ER's with people who don't belong there, it also increases the cost and availability for true emergency services.
Just like there are penalties for those who commit false alarms for fire and police services, there should be criminal and civil penalties for those who misuse emergency medical services. Also, those who can not pay, should have their wages garnished to pay for their treatments, until they have payed for the emergency services that saved there life or their limbs. Few people will argue that there life or limbs are not worth any price.
This will lead to much less unnecessary use of ERs and this will create the need for more Charity hospitals, free clinics and/or cheaper hospitals that would offer an cheaper alternative for those with financial hardships.. Charitable Americans have always risen to meet such challenges in the past and will meet these challenges in the future by their own free will.
7) "behavioral risks". Health care expenses should be higher for those who practice behaviors that present a risk to one's own health. By some estimates, behavior accounts for one third of health care costs.
The cost of all auto insurance policies is based on the driver's behavior. Motorists with bad driving records, including traffic tickets, accidents, DUIs, and sports car owners are charged substantially higher premiums.
If the government sets the rules regarding health insurance premiums and rationing of limited medical resources, it is likely that the government will dictate personal behavior. They might make certain unhealthy behaviors illegal or certain risky behaviors might deem patients ineligible for certain treatments. This is an infringement on personal freedoms that I strongly oppose.
Once the government takes over, it is likely that the government will regulate the foods that we are allowed to eat, the sports that we are allowed to participate in and even the number of children we are allowed to bear. The government may mandate that we we take certain medications (cholesterol medications, blood pressure medications, psychotropic medications, etc). Smokers may be ineligible for heart surgery.
There are also many risky behaviors that are actually politically correct. I have read studies that assert that homosexual behavior is linked to more disease and a shorter lifespan, than heterosexual married men. Homosexual men are barred from donating blood due to this risk. Women who practice lesbian behavior are more prone to domestic violence, suicide, drug abuse and mental illness than married women.
Of course when the government gets involved, they will skew their regulations to accommodate political correctness which is inherently unfair.
My niece has a knee injury that is exacerbated by dancing. If the government sets more health-care rules, she might be barred from dancing and or working as an aerobics instructor, or face forfeiture of any treatment for related injuries. Although I think that my niece should have enough sense not to dance on bum knee, I think it is her right to make her own choices and live with the consequences and associated expenses.
Of course much government control in the areas that I mentioned already exists. The Government already provides half of our health-care through Medicare, Medicaid and other government programs. If we expand government involvement; regulations, restrictions and loss of freedoms will surely increase.
In my opinion, the government does not belong in the health care business. However, once they get their foot in the door, it is impossible to get them out because people feel a sense of entitlement. When the size and scope of the federal government increases, our individual freedoms, choices and aspirations will decrease. Our constitution guarantees us freedom from the government infringing on our right to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of health care.
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Democratic and Republican officials both fit into the same group. Our elected officials are politicians, not political ideologues. Our elected officials from both parties are narcissistic, power hungry POLITICIANS. They are mostly ALL of the same ilk. As the federal government grows in size, scope and power, our elected officials grow increasingly more corrupt. Politicians are hardly guided by political ideology. Politicians deceive and manipulate an unsuspecting public for their own selfishness, empowerment, enrichment and egotistical desires.
Having said that, I do not see many liberals running down to their local military recruiting office to sign up to serve and protect our great nation. They are too busy vandalizing the recruiting offices and harassing our military. Today's voluntary armed forces are made up overwhelmingly of conservatives who believe in a power greater than themselves, a loving God, just like our farmers.
Liberals, on average, donate much less money and time toward charitable giving, yet they insist that "other peoples money" be confiscated in the form of taxes for the charities (social programs) of THEIR choice.
My personal experience has taught me that most farmers work long hours and risk all of their assets every year in order to grow food at a very low price for the rest of us. My experience has shown me that most hardworking farmers in rural America are conservatives. They are a dying breed as their children flee the rural areas and fill our cities where they are free to seek higher education (indoctrination), and the thrills and luxuries of our modern world that modern farming has made possible for the vast majority of the American public.
I have spent several periods of my life as a homeless bum in large cities. I have found that most all of the bums were drug addicts, alcoholics and mentally ill people. I fit into all three categories. Liberals insist on enabling these neerdowells with social programs that help them maintain themselves with food and shelter from the elements, while they commit crimes to support their drug habits.
It was liberals that closed the mental hospitals in order to give mentally ill people their freedom. Now they have the freedom to roam the streets aimlessly and defecate and urinate in the streets and on themselves as they harass ordinary people who have the misfortune of passing by.
It is also true that most people who professionally sing, dance and are professional phonies (actors) are liberals. Also, most indoctrinators (teachers and professors) are liberals. Most sexual deviants (transgender, transsexuals and homosexuals) that I have met are liberals.
A dichotomy exists between spiritual leaders and modern educators, between producers of goods and providers of entertainment, between those who are responsible and those who are irresponsible, between those who fight for our American culture, traditions, values and institutions and who want to tear down our culture, tradition, values and institutions, between rugged individuals and an ever-growing centralized government. The latter groups make us weaker, poorer and less free. The former groups have made America the wealthiest, freest, most benevolently powerful nation that this world has ever seen.
Saturday, August 1, 2009
This federal program pays qualified participants up to $4,500 for their trade in when they purchase a new car that gets better gas mileage. The trade-in (clunker) must have an EPA estimated Miles-per-Gallon that is 4 MPG less than the new car that they purchase. This program also stipulates that that the trade-in must be destroyed and recycled into scrap metal, plastic and glass. None of the used car parts may be sold.
Click on video below to view the destruction of the engine of a "cash for clunkers" trade-in as required by federal regulations.
The stated purpose of this federal program is two-fold. First, to stimulate car sales in a soft market. Second, to improve the gas economy of the average vehicle on the road. However, like most well intentioned federal programs, there are always unintended negative consequences.
When I break down this program to its basics, one thing becomes very clear. This program will reduce the availability of used cars in the marketplace by destroying many usable vehicles rather than reselling them. Although new car sales will be stimulated by this program, there will be less used cars available, thus the price of used cars will increase and the sales of used cars will decrease. This will immediately have a negative economic effect on the used car business, the auto-repair business and the auto-parts business.
Also, poor people and young people who don't have trade-ins or have not established good credit, will now be priced out of the used car market. This program will make used cars unavailable or too pricey for those who would have been able to purchase used cars previously. This program reduces the number of cars on the road, because it destroys used cars rather than reselling them. There is no doubt that this program will make cars unavailable to many Americans.
In addition, some people who previously did not qualify for car loans, may now be eligible because of the huge down-payment provided by the "cash for clunkers" program. Undoubtedly, many of these newly qualified buyers will default on their auto loans, just as many under qualified "sub prime" borrowers defaulted on their housing loans.
Another negative economic consequence would be that many people will be induced to buy new cars now , rather than waiting for their car to wear out. They will be trading in a car that was already paid for and they will now go into debt in order to finance their new car. Although the improved fuel economy will save them between $25 and $100 per month, their new car loan will likely cost them between $300 and $500 per month. Due to their higher expenses, they will cut down on spending in other areas thus having a negative impact on other segments of the economy.
Finally, there are negative environmental consequences when you destroy usable vehicles, even if the glass, metal and plastic are recycled. There is much hazardous waste contained in each and every junk vehicle. This waste includes used motor oil, transmission fluid, grease, brake fluid, anti-freeze, battery acid, explosives contained in airbags, mercury contained in switches and lead. It is costly to recycle or properly dispose of this hazardous waste. It is also impossible to properly dispose of it all. Residues that remain will find their way into landfills along with many other auto parts that can not be recycled. Also, it takes a lot of energy and natural resources to produce a new car, even if some of the materials are recycled. It is much cleaner for our environment to keep an old car in good working order, as opposed to destroying it and building a new one from scratch. The auto plants and their suppliers use lots of energy and raw materials to produce each new car. All of that energy and most of the materials can be saved by stretching the life of the older cars.
Common sense and my personal experience tells me that when economic times are hard, it is best to repair and patch what you have, rather than destroying it and buying a new one. At the very least, our nation will be better off is we fix up our assets during tough economic times. At the very least, we can sell them so someone else can make use of them, rather than destroying them and forcing many people to do without.
It is fundamentally wrong to destroy usable assets. This is true whether it be done at the hands of vandals or at the hands of the federal government under the guise of the "cash for clunkers" program.
Saturday, July 25, 2009
Harvard Professor Henry Gates and US President Barack Obama Promote Racial Profiling of White Police Officers
Have you heard the recent story about the Harvard Professor, Henry Gates, who accused a police sergeant, James Crowley, of racism and racial "profiling"?
The police responded to a 911 call from a neighbor who observed 2 men breaking into Prof. Gates' house. It turned out that Gates himself had broken into his own house because he forgot his key. When the police arrived, they asked Gates for identification to verify that he lived there. Gates immediately became belligerent, verbally abusive and uncooperative with the cops. He accused the white police officer of racism.
The ridiculous and untrue allegations of racism, racial profiling were affirmed by President Obama during his press conference last Wednesday. Obama accused the police of acting "stupidly" and he said that anyone would have been angered by the situation that Prof Gates found himself in. Here is the video of Obama's comments: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LucTPdK8VTc
Of course it is ridiculous that anyone would have been angry in that situation. Most people would have thanked the police and their neighbor for "looking out" for them and politely cooperated with the police. Only someone with a "chip on his shoulder" would be angry with a police officer who was protecting his own property in response to a call from his neighbor. The police report confirms that this particular Harvard professor has anathema for white policemen. IMHO, this professor, like many others, are teaching their own prejudices to their unsuspecting and naive students.
Click here for the official police report on this incident: http://www.amnation.com/vfr/Police%20report%20on%20Gates%20arrest.PDF
If you examine all of the known facts in this case, it appears that Prof. Gates is guilty of racially profiling the white police officer. It appears that Prof. Gates was guilty of a "hate crime" because he broke the law by becoming disorderly and verbally abusive with a police officer, based solely on the officers race. Obviously the charges were dropped because Prof. Gates has the best lawyers in the world at Harvard Law school at his disposal who will spare no expense defending this petty case.
It turns out that Prof. Gates teaches African American studies at Harvard. IMHO, African American studies classes are designed to promote racial disparity in America by blaming white people for the condition of blacks. These classes emphasise white racism against blacks, while ignoring or actually justifying black racism against whites. Click on the following link to read an excellent article that makes this point.: http://patterico.com/2009/07/24/the-officer-didnt-stereotype-henry-louis-gates-henry-louis-gates-stereotyped-the-officer/
In my opinion, we should strive to become a color blind society. This goal will not be achieved by pigeonholing people into distinct racial and ethnic groups and then pitting one group against another in an effort to achieve equal outcomes in all areas. I believe that we should judge each incident on it's own merits without regard to race and/or ethnicity what-so-ever. I believe this is what Martin Luther King meant when he said: "Don't judge by the color of one's skin, but by the content of their character".
Clearly, Professor Gates judged Sergeant Crowley solely because he was a white police officer questioning a black man. In my opinion, Professor Gates exhibited racist behavior by prejudging the police officer based on his race.
This behavior is right out of the liberal playbook. Liberals like to divide people into two groups, victims and victimizers. According to what I hear from the mainstream media and from university professors, most all blacks and Hispanics are victims. Most all police are victimizers, especially the white cops. I suspect that Prof. Gates believes in this dichotomy with every fiber of his being. The reason why I say this is because the good professor is still claiming to be a victim of racial profiling in this case.
During previous years I have had similar discussions regarding other cases of so-called police brutality. My point has always been that the best way to avoid being a victim of police brutality is to be respectful and cooperative when dealing with the police. Do not run from the police unless you are sure that you can get away. If you are caught after running, your chances of getting beaten increase dramatically. If you verbally and/or physically combative with the police, you might get hurt. This happens to be true regardless of race, however, when a black man is abused by a white cop the victim often plays the race card. With the support of the liberal media, the charges are usually dropped against the alleged criminal and charges are brought against the police officer. It is obvious that this environment makes it difficult for police to effectively and safely perform their duties while protecting themselves and the public.
Why don't schools and universities teach their students be respectful and cooperative when dealing with the police? Instead they teach today's youth not to cooperate with cops and to push their "rights" to the limit. In effect, they are teaching them to infuriate the police to the point of abuse. In many cases, the victim hopes that abuse takes place, so that they can get publicity and/or sue. Also, the slightest hit of racism and/or abuse can help to get the original charges dropped.
From what I read about this case, it appears that Prof. Gates egged-on sergeant Crowley in an effort to prove his belief that white police treat black men unfairly. In my extensive experience with police, they generally treat you the same way that you treat them.
The only motivation that I can think of for the professor's behavior was to purposely get himself arrested and/or verbally abused and then make a big stink about it. Since Gates is a friend of Obama's, I wouldn't be surprised if he had that question planted at Obama's news conference. Questions at past Obama news conferences have been staged. Obama's answer might have been prepared.
If the professor thought that he was in any danger what-so-ever, he would have shown respect for the cops. Liberals are often very brave when they are in no real danger. This episode played out exactly like Prof. Gates intended. As a result of this incident he has been invited to the White house to have a beer with President Obama and to discuss the issue of racial profiling. Prof. Gates, like many successful liberals, is a master manipulator. The sad part is that he is deceiving and manipulating America's youth in his classrooms every day.
Thursday, July 16, 2009
I have heard these two points made many times by the MSM and by politicians. I have always been disturbed by them. It seems to me that we should be grateful that modern-day heath care is available. Modern health-care is a luxury that has never been available to humanity before. It is astonishing that something that has never been available in the past, is now considered an inalienable right by many in the media and in politics.
"Since 1999, health insurance premiums have increased 120 percent -- four times as much as wages."In the past decade, costly medical research, medications, revolutionary equipment and minimally invasive surgical techniques have been developed. New lifesaving treatments and quality-of-life improvements are available today that were not available a decade ago. New diagnostic equipment has been invented and made widely available. It stands to reason, that the cost of the development and implementation of these improvements to our heath-care system need to be paid for. It is a good thing that we are devoting a larger portion of our incomes to lifesaving and quality-of-life improvements due to medical advancements.
Freedom is defined as the ability to make your own choices. Today we have the freedom to choose life-saving medical diagnoses and treatments that were not available a generation ago. Often these treatments are costly and tough choices must be made. We are free to chose between costly medical treatment and the possible forfeiture of our savings and home. We are also free to hold on to our assets and risk the primitive treatments that were available generations ago. Today we have more health-care choices because many treatments are available today that were not available years ago. Although the cost is higher, we have more freedom to choose today. . In the past, death and/or discomfort was our only option.
"And about one and a half million American families lose their homes to foreclosure every year because of sky high medical bills."
IMHO, socialized health-care will reduce our health care options in the future.
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Van Jones, Obama's "Green Energy Jobs Czar", is an admitted communist and anarchist. http://newsbusters.org/blogs/sam-theodosopoulos/2009/07/10/fox-news-notes-communist-past-green-jobs-czar
John Holdren, Obama's Science Czar, says: Forced abortions and mass sterilization needed to save the planet. http://zombietime.com/john_holdren/
Why is our country changing without anyone noticing. We never had 28 Czars in the White House before. This needs to be challenged constitutionally. Obama is filling the White House with entire departments that have no congressional oversight nor system of checks and balances. Is the real power being wielded by these new Czars rather than the Cabinet Secretaries? Why didn't the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, accompany Obama on his recent summit tour in Europe? Are Obama's cabinet secretaries purely figureheads for ceremonial purposes without any real power?
Why is the executive branch making up new rules as it goes along? Our country is changing radically and no one is noticing.
The following is a list of current White House Czars:
1. Herb Allison-TARP Czar
2. Alan Bersin-Border Czar
3. Dennis Blair-Intelligence Czar
4. John Brennan-Terrorism Czar
5. Carol Browner-Energy Czar
6. Adolfo Carrion, Jr-Urban Affairs Czar
7. Ashton Carter-Weapons Czar
8. Aneesh Chopra-Technology Czar
9. Jeffrey Crowley-AIDS Czar
10. Cameron Davis-Great Lakes Czar
11. Nancy-Ann DeParle-Health Czar
12. Earl Devaney-Stimulus Accountability Czar
13. Joshua DuBois-Faith-based Czar
14. Kenneth Feinberg-Pay Czar
15. Danny Fried-Guantanamo Closure Czar
16. J. Scott Gration-Sudan Czar
17. Richard Holbrooke-Afghanistan Czar
18. John Holdren-Science Czar
19. Van Jones Green-Jobs Czar
20. Gil Kerlikowske-Drug Czar
21. Vivek Kundra-Information Czar
22. George Mitchell-Mideast Peace Czar
23. Ed Montgomery-Car Czar
24. Dennis Ross-Mideast Policy Czar
25. Gary Samore-WMD Czar
26. Todd Stern-Climate Czar
27. Cass Sunstein-Regulatory Czar
28. Paul Volcker-Economic Czar
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
FOX News and Michael Jackson Prove: Only a Feminized Society Can Be Obsessed With Singing And Dancing
Having said that, Michael Jackson was a troubled soul who could sing and dance extremely well. I don't understand why our culture places such a high value on singing and dancing.
Let me repeat that because this truly puzzles me. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY OUR CULTURE PLACES SUCH A HIGH VALUE ON SINGING AND DANCING. In my humble opinion, this is a sign of our society has become feminized.
On Friday there was virtually no news coverage on what might become the most significant legislation in Americas history. The House passed the "Cap and Trade" bill by a narrow margin. If this legislation is passed by the Senate, it will become the largest tax increase in US history. Also, it gives the federal government virtually limitless powers over the way that Americans live their lives.
IMHO, only a feminized public would be more interested in singing and dancing than the future of their country. FOX News was just giving the public what they wanted to see. If they did not give Jackson's death wall-to-wall coverage, many viewers would have simply found it elsewhere. However, I still blame FOX news for not having the integrity of covering the news on Thursday and Friday. FOX News should call itself FOX entertainment, because that is what it has proved itself to be.
Back to Jackson. Jackson's life is just another example that proves that an abusive childhood can cause mental disorders, including deviant sexual desires such as attraction to children and/or attraction to the same sex. IMHO, sexual deviants, like homosexuals, pedophiles, those with fetishes like cross dressing and S&M behavior, aren't born that way, but they are damaged emotionally in their early childhood which permanently alters their sexual desires.
Although Jackson was acquitted on all child molestation charges, Jackson has admitted that he has an affinity for children and he enjoys sleeping in the same bed as children and sees nothing wrong with this behavior (it is normal for him).
Also, Jackson found some legal loopholes that enabled him to purchase his own children by paying a woman (his wife at the time) to undergo in vitro fertilization and then turning the children over to him for adoption. Apparently, he chose not to conceive children like normal people do in order to have a family. As far as I know, he didn't have homosexual partner either. It appears that he was attracted only to children. However, it appears that he has not acted upon any illegal and/or immoral sexual relations with children. He was able to restrain himself, according to all indications in these abnormal sexual desires.
This proves two things:
1) Abusive childhood can lead to deviant sexual desires.
2) Deviant sexual desires can be controlled.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
First of all, once the baby is conceived, the father has no choice whether his potential son/daughter survives and whether his responsibility of fatherhood begins. It is only the woman's choice. Abortion laws only give the mother a choice, not the father.
Secondly, the vast majority of abortions are solely for the convenience of a pregnant woman. Most often abortions are performed because an unplanned pregnancy will interfere with the mothers schooling, career plans and/or dating and romantic life. IMHO, I think it is selfish and cowardly to deny life to your potential child because of those reasons. Could a man site those reasons for refusing to pay child support?
Even in today's day and age of moral equivalencies, most people understand that abortion is wrong and should only be used as a last resort. However, today's popular culture often glorifies, celebrates and embraces things that are wrong while they shun, mock and attack positive and noble lifestyles and institutions.
Adultery is clearly wrong, yet it is being celebrated and embraced by today's movies and TV shows. Our former president Clinton gained popularity after being "caught in the act" of adultery.
Divorce, which often results from adultery, affects a majority of today's married couples. Divorce is clearly wrong because it breaks a sacred promise between two people. However, divorce is no longer something to be ashamed of. Divorce is clearly one of the biggest failures that one can have in one's life, yet it is completely accepted by society without the slightest hint of stigma.
Why are liars and cheaters in business and politics despised, while liars and cheaters in marriage are not? If children are societies most valued asset, why are they utterly devalued by divorce and abortion?
Gang-bangers are celebrated and embraced. Today's popular culture imitates these psychotic outlaws in dress, language attitude and music. At the same time, Christianity, the Boy Scouts and the military are mocked and attacked by today's popular culture, the media, the arts and by universities.
In today's popular culture, which rejects many social and spiritual restraints, I see less value given to universal spiritual principles including love, selflessness, honesty, integrity, humility, patience, courage, sacrifice, compassion, forgiveness, acceptance, self-discipline, open-mindedness, perseverance, gratitude and faith in God. At the same time I see more value given to popularity, sexuality, wealth, pride, diversity ( as a virtue, in and of itself), fame, power, putting personal happiness first, thrill seeking and self esteem.
Clearly, the main reason for abortion has nothing to do with privacy. The main reason why 50 million potential souls were snuffed out through abortion in this country is because "girls just want to have fun".
In this atmosphere, right and wrong become indistinguishable and unimportant. That is why there is no public dialogue on abortion. If this attitude was prevalent 50 years ago there would have been no civil rights movement. If this attitude prevailed 150 years ago, there would have been no abolition of slavery.
The civil rights movement and abolition of slavery began in the Church, not in academia. Reverend Martin Luther King was a Minister first and a PHD in theology second.
The civil right movement was not based on a struggle between fun and restraint. The abortion issue is. That is the reason why abortion proponents are reluctant to discuss this issue. It is because they must hide the main reason why they are pro-abortion. That reason being: "girls just want to have fun"
Friday, June 26, 2009
Most people spend most of their health-care dollars in the final years of their life. Imagine how much savings could be achieved if we simply did not treat people who are deemed to be "unlikely to benefit from treatment" because they are elderly. Cost savings could also be achieved by limiting care to those who contributed to their own maladies with unhealthy behavior such as excessive drinking, narcotics abuse, smoking, poor diet and a sedentary lifestyle. Bureaucrats, not families, doctors or patients, will make these tough decisions if the government takes over our nations health-care system.
This approach will be totally justifiable when tough choices must be made by government bureaucrats, not individuals, about how to spend our limited health-care dollars. Procedures and surgeries for younger patients, with many more years of life expectancy potential, will obviously be a better investment than for treatment 80 year old infirm patients or chronic alcoholics.
Desperate times will call for desperate measures. Already our medicare and social-security systems are headed for bankruptcy. The best way to relieve this strain on an overburdened system is to ration care to the elderly and those who require a disproportionate share of medical care do to their lifestyle choices and unhealthy behavior.
Under Obama's proposals, euthanasia will eventually become an option. The government will run PSAs advising people that euthanasia is the patriotic thing to do for those who have no longer have the wherewithal to "give back" to their country in other ways.
There is no doubt that the cheapest form of health care is allowing patients to die. This has become part of health-care system in other countries with socialized medicine. Allowing patients to die will undoubtedly become part of an American socialized health-care system.
I have never seen a well intentioned liberal program that did not have "negative unintended consequences" that hurt the very same people that they were trying to help. In this case, nationalized health-care will limit expensive treatments to the elderly and to the poor the most.
Saturday, June 13, 2009
Collectivists often separate people into categories based on superficial differences such as race, income level, ethnicity and education. In my humble opinion, the important distinctions between people, are those of character and behavior. Collectivists often downplay or rationalize bad behavior, while emphasizing superficial differences of race and ethnicity.
Liberals find it hard to swallow that this deranged lone gunman acted on his own. News reports are trying to tie his actions to a white racist "collective". They are reporting that there is an increase of white supremacist racism in America. They are trying to connect imaginary dots to prove that he was just a pawn, that was "duped" into carrying out the dirty work of organized racist groups.
This is preposterous. White Americans have been cowered into showing extreme sensitivity toward all minorities, whether ethnic or racial. As a matter of fact, it has become so bad, that any criticism from the right on any person of color is considered as racist. Often criticism of Barack Obama or Sonia Sotomayor is deemed as racist based solely on the racial difference between them and their critics. Likewise opponents of illegal immigration are often labeled as xenophobes and racists. Also, opponents of gay marriage are often demonized as intolerant or bigoted.
Collectivist/Liberals look at one's race and ethnicity first, in an effort to categorize them and justify or criticize their behavior, and to demonize them or their critics. This is exemplified by affirmative action and racial quotas. On the other hand, most conservatives look at an individuals' behavior and character while completely ignoring his/her race.
In my experience, most racism in today's America originates from liberals and minorities themselves. A recent example is Obama's former pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Yesterday, when Rev. Wright was asked if he had been contacted by Obama recently, he said:
"Them Jews aren't going to let him talk to me. I told my baby daughter, that he'll talk to me in five years when he's a lame duck, or in eight years when he's out of office," Wright said, according to Virginia's Daily Press. "They will not let him ... talk to somebody who calls a spade what it is."
Wrights response is indicative of someone who looks at "David Axelrod", (Obamas campaign manager and top aid) and other top ranking officials in the Obama administration as "Jews" rather than an individuals. Rev. Wright is clearly a racist who can't see the Forrest for the trees. This "us against them" mentality is prevalent among liberals. When today's civil rights leaders preach with this attitude, they do a disservice to those who they claim to support.
We need to hold individuals accountable for their actions. Racial differences are superficial and are only taken into account by shallow, narrow-minded people. Often racists, disguised as civil rights leaders, try to stir up the pot of racism, hoping that they will end up on top. Many of them make careers out of "race bating". A good example is "Al Sharpton",
Reverend Martin Luther King was one of the greatest civil rights leaders of all time. He did not preach messages of racial disparity or divisiveness. Instead, Martin Luther King said, "Judge not by the color of one's skin, but judge by the content of of one's character. This message applies to whites, blacks, and people of all colors. According to King's words, there is no such ting as "reverse discrimination". All people should be color blind and judge people solely on their character and behavior. The time for racial divisiveness is over and new era based on behavior, and character has begun. Although King also holds a PHD in theology, often, today's liberals downplay that he was inspired by God and not by academia.
Unfortunately, race baiters like, Sharpton, and Wright and many so-called liberals, still cling to politics that emphasize racial and ethnic differences rather than emphasizing the meaningful differences that differentiate us. These meaningful differences include character, behavior and personal choices.
Monday, June 8, 2009
The Ashley Madison agency is an online dating web-site that specializes in finding dates for married people. I clicked on the site and found out that they charge $249.00 for a three month membership. They guarantee that you will have an "affair" or you get your money back. They claim to have nearly 4 million members. I didn't bother registering to find out more information. A limited amount of information can be gleaned from their home-page. here is the link: http://www.ashleymadison.com/
I find it amazing that advertisements that promote adultery are on main-stream talk radio stations. Adultery used to be illegal, now it is being marketed, promoted, packaged and sold shamelessly.
I understand that we are all imperfect and many people cheat on their spouses. However, it is infuriating that cheating has become accepted, celebrated and embraced by mainstream Americans. People literally can not tell right from wrong. This is the same feeling that I got during the Clinton impeachment hearings. I was Angry at Americans who accepted President Clinton's perjury and televised lies, rather than shaming him for it.
I understand that we are all imperfect and fall short at times. This is exactly why we often need help staying on the right track. Why is there no shame anymore? Isn't shame and stigma a nessisary part of a healthy society? Doesn't shame and stigma provide the nessisary motivation for us to do what is healthy and positive for ourselves, our families, our society and our nation?
I guess that there is some shame and stigma left in today's popular culture. Unfortunately it is used against conservatives, Christians and honorable Americans with traditional values.
Sunday, June 7, 2009
I once saw an episode of "Twilight Zone" where a horrific low-life gangster died and was immediately sent to the "afterlife". In this afterlife, his every wish was granted and his every desire fulfilled. He lived in a luxurious mansion. He was surrounded by beautiful women who were willing to fulfill all of his fantasies. He had servants, fancy cars, luxurious clothing and he was very popular. Everyone laughed at his jokes and when he gambled, he always won.
At first he was overjoyed at his good fate. However, he was a bit surprised that an evil man like himself would end up in heaven.
As time went by, he became bored with all of his luxuries and good fortune. Pretty soon his boredom tuned into discontent, anger, displeasure, and torment. As strange as it seemed, he could no longer tolerate his good fortune. Everything was too predictable. He asked to lose occasionally when he gambled. But this only infuriated him more, because he knew that when he lost, it was because he had asked for it to be that way.
Finally, at the end of the program, he told the man in charge that he was no longer happy. He demanded to be happy. He said that he was supposed to be happy in heaven. The man in charge looked at him and laughed heartily. He said, "heaven, what made you think that you are in heaven?". This is the other place.
My point is that if liberals got everything that they thought would make an ideal world, they would be miserable and spiritually depraved. This is exactly what we are witnessing in today's popular culture.
Monday, June 1, 2009
Our unique American culture has led us to be the freest, wealthiest, most benevolently powerful nation that this world has ever seen. This is NOT due to cultural diversity, but to the contrary, this was due to our founding principles and concept of "the American melting pot".
Freedom from religious persecution is one of our founding principles. Of course religious freedom is part of the American culture. However, a moral and religious people is required for self governance.
In today's day and age, Christianity is often ridiculed, mocked and discredited. Diverse cultures, that often lack faith in God and sometimes are incompatible with Jedeo-Christian principles, are often celebrated, embraced and encouraged by today's schools, the media, popular culture and the government. In my humble opinion, this trend needs to be reversed if we are to survive as a nation and a culture.
Our first founding document, The declaration of Independence states:
............We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness".................
This simple document eventually led to the idea of self-governance as outlined in our constitution and our bill of rights. These ideas eventually led to the abolition of slavery and the civil rights movement which set an example for the rest of the world. The experiment of American self-governance by a moral and religious people has brought charity, freedom and security to all corners of the globe. The American experiment has culminated in what later became the unique American culture.
Historically, many people have fled persecution, oppression and poverty to build a better life for their families in America. People from diverse cultures came to America with hopes and dreams of melting into our culture and raising American children who would have opportunities that were not available in their homeland. They left their old cultures behind to become Americans.
America became stronger when foreigners became Americanized. Immigrants took on American sounding names, they learned English, they sent their children to American schools, they dressed like Americans, they celebrated American holidays, they took pride in being American and they became part of the rich and wonderful American culture. For the most part, they left behind the culture, language and most of the customs of the land that they fled. This was true for my own grandparents and for most grandparents of my generation.
When we encouraged immigrants to take pride in America and become Americanized, we built a stronger, wealthier and freer nation.
If we encourage Americans to celebrate the various, cultures, languages and customs of the nations that these immigrants fled, America will inevitably become less united, weaker, poorer, more corrupt and less free, like the nations that these immigrants fled from in the first place.
Immigrants came here to seek a better life in the greatest nation that this world has ever seen. The more Americanized they become, the better they will be able to avail themselves of the boundless opportunities that America has to offer. We do ourselves and our immigrants a disservice if we do not insist on unity and pride in America's, culture, language and rich heritage.
United we stand, divided we will fall. Multiculturalism tends to divide, categorize and highlight the differences among people and cultures. Multiculturalism asks us to accept things that are not always in the best interest of America. The unique American culture has led us to prosper and grow and be a beacon of freedom and inspiration for the rest of the world. America has grown to become the freest, wealthiest and most benevolently powerful nation that this world has ever seen. This can only be diminished by diluting our rich culture, language and noble heritage with multiculturalism.
Sunday, May 31, 2009
However, today's pervasive popular culture values the exact opposite. They admire the unmitigated hubris and braggadocio of those who define their success by popularity, wealth and pleasures. Achieving popularity, wealth, thrills and self esteem are touted as the highest goals in today's popular culture. Seeking physical and mental supremacy is lauded, while spiritual growth is ignored and/or mocked. I beleive that we all need to achieve physical, mental and spiritual growth in order to fulfil our human potential and to ensure that our nation remains strong, prosperous and free.
Today's universities teach unproven theories, as if they were fact. These theories include the alleged dangers of AGW (anthropogenic global warming), spontaneous creation, evolution, the evils of American history and diversity and multiculturalism as a virtue. On today's college campuses, public discussion about religion is discouraged and mocked, yet discourse on sexuality is encouraged and taught in classes. Students who have faith in God are often discredited as gullible, brainwashed, child-like, primitive, bigoted and narrow-minded. Those who experiment with "alternative" sexual preference and behavior are touted as open-minded, enlightened, modern and cool.
It is clear to me that everything is upside-down on today's college campuses. "Up" has become the new "down". Strong social pressure is brought to bear on those who refuse to "go along with the program". Diversity of race, language, culture and sexual preference is encouraged, while diversity in the "arena of the above-mentioned ideas", is discouraged. Those who do not fall in line are socially ostracized by their peers on university campuses. University staff encourages labeling people who hold the above beliefs as narrow-minded, bigoted and intolerant by university staff.
Wisdom is humbling. Today's popular culture, as evidenced by the pervasive attitude on today's university campuses, proves that wisdom and humility are both in short supply.