Just today one of my blogger friends reminded me of a blog I wrote in February 2006 in response to an email sent to me by Arianna Huffington. Read it and see what you think.
My, how things really don't change. Check out the following post.
http://hjarianna6210.blogspot.com/
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Friday, October 09, 2009
Some musings and quotes
The financial crisis explained in simple terms.
NOTE: This is a version of a story heard on talk radio and embellished by the author of this blog, who adds, “The crisis was created deliberately by Liberals aided by greedy bankers and politicians buying votes.”
________________________________________
Heidi is the proprietor of a bar in Berlin . In order to increase sales, she decides to allow her loyal customers - most of whom are unemployed alcoholics - to drink now but pay later. She keeps track of the drinks consumed on a ledger (thereby granting the customers loans).
Word gets around, promoted by liberal politicians and their adoring media and as a result increasing numbers of customers flood into Heidi's bar.
Taking advantage of her customers' freedom from immediate payment constraints, Heidi gradually but steadily increases her prices for wine and beer, the most-consumed beverages gradually. Her sales volume increases massively as do her profits (and tax payments)
A young and dynamic customer service consultant at the local bank recognizes these customer debts as valuable future assets and increases Heidi's borrowing limit. Deciding to expand she opens several new bars on her greatly expanded credit.
He sees no reason for undue concern since he has the debts of the alcoholics as collateral.
At the bank's corporate headquarters, expert bankers transform these customer assets into DRINKBONDS, ALKBONDS and PUKEBONDS. These securities are then traded on markets worldwide. No one really understands what these abbreviations mean and how the securities are guaranteed. Nevertheless, as their prices continuously climb, the securities become top-selling items.
One day, although the prices are still climbing, a risk manager (subsequently of course fired due his negativity) of the bank decides that the time has come to demand payment of the debts incurred by the drinkers at Heidi's bar and by Heidi for her greatly expanded business.
However they cannot pay back the debts.
Heidi cannot fulfill her loan obligations and claims bankruptcy.
DRINKBOND and ALKBOND drop in price by 95 %. PUKEBOND performs better, stabilizing in price after dropping by 80 %.
The suppliers of Heidi's bar, having granted her generous payment due dates and having invested in the securities are faced with a new situation. Her wine supplier claims bankruptcy, her beer supplier is taken over by a competitor.
The bank is saved by “the Government” following dramatic round-the-clock consultations by leaders from the governing political parties.
The funds required for this purpose are obtained by a tax levied on the non-drinkers.
Finally an explanation I understand...
_____________________________________
In addition, the non-drinkers are mostly business people, some very wealthy, who hire 90% of the people employed and generate most of the new jobs. Seeing their profits deeply cut by the expanded taxes, they reduce their one-year and five-year financial budgets, cut their plans for expansion, reduce their payroll (that’s lay off many of their employees), and cancel orders for new equipment.
The stock market drops by 50% as investors move their holdings to safer places (like gold and Ireland).The media morosely reports the layoffs and order cancellations announcing, “We are now in a terrible recession brought about by greedy businessmen.” Consumer confidence (a very nebulous quality) drops precipitously, profits (and taxes) take a huge drop, and more and more businesses fail.
The government (who can’t manage anything and would seriously “screw up a one car parade”) takes over those failing “business that are too big to fail.” Between feuding and self-serving politicians and anal retentive government bureaucrats the economy collapses in line with a quote often attributed to a Scottish Historian, Alexander Tytler or Tyler. The true origin of the quote is obscure and might have originated in the early 20th century from an unknown politician or writer. Nevertheless, this does not detract from its accuracy.
One version of the quote on why democracies always fail is:
"A Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only last until the citizens discover they can vote themselves largesse out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that the Democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy, to be followed by a dictatorship, and then a monarchy."
A version of the second part of the misquote, attributed in 1983 to Arnold Toynbee is:
"The release of initiative and enterprise made possible by self-government ultimately generates disintegrating forces from within. Again and again, after freedom brings opportunity and some degree of plenty, the competent become selfish, luxury-loving and complacent; the incompetent and unfortunate grow envious and covetous; and all three groups turn aside from the hard road of freedom to worship the golden calf of economic security. The historical cycle seems to be: from bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to apathy; from apathy to dependency; and from dependency back to bondage once more."
But the person who appears to be the actual author is Henning Webb Prentis, Jr., President of the Armstrong Cork Company. In a speech entitled "Industrial Management in a Republic," delivered in the grand ballroom of the Waldorf Astoria at New York during the 250th meeting of the National Conference Board on March 18, 1943, and recorded on p. 22 of Industrial Management in a Republic, Prentis had this to say:
“Paradoxically enough, the release of initiative and enterprise made possible by popular self-government ultimately generates disintegrating forces from within. Again and again after freedom has brought opportunity and some degree of plenty, the competent become selfish, luxury-loving and complacent, the incompetent and the unfortunate grow envious and covetous, and all three groups turn aside from the hard road of freedom to worship the Golden Calf of economic security. The historical cycle seems to be: From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to apathy; from apathy to dependency; and from dependency back to bondage once more.
“At the stage between apathy and dependency, men always turn in fear to economic and political panaceas. New conditions, it is claimed, require new remedies. Under such circumstances, the competent citizen is certainly not a fool if he insists upon using the compass of history when forced to sail uncharted seas. Usually so-called new remedies are not new at all. Compulsory planned economy, for example, was tried by the Chinese some three milleniums ago, and by the Romans in the early centuries of the Christian era. It was applied in Germany, Italy and Russia long before the present war broke out. Yet it is being seriously advocated today as a solution of our economic problems in the United States. Its proponents confidently assert that government can successfully plan and control all major business activity in the nation, and still not interfere with our political freedom and our hard-won civil and religious liberties. The lessons of history all point in exactly the reverse direction.”
For more information about these quotes and their sources go to http://www.lorencollins.net/tytler.html
_____________________________
A very interesting interview about Obama’s “share the wealth” plan.
INTERVIEWER: Hello.
SUBJECT: Hey! How are you doing?
INTERVIEWER: Very well, sir, thank you.
SUBJECT: All right. My wife had a hard time trying to understand why Obama's plan to "spread the wealth" was unfair. She couldn't see (sigh), you know, what was wrong with taking from those who have and giving to those who don't have so what I did was I simplified it for her. She's a woman that prides herself on education. She's working on a PhD at Vanderbilt and she makes excellent grades.
INTERVIEWER: Oh, no.
SUBJECT: Now, I told her, I said --
INTERVIEWER: Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute. You are depressing me. Your wife's a PhD, working on a PhD, she makes excellent grades.
SUBJECT: Yes, and we have four kids.
INTERVIEWER: No, it makes total sense that she would think what she thinks because the culture she's immersed herself in, academia, is teaching her this stuff.
SUBJECT: (laughing) Well, let me finish. Let me show you what I did.
INTERVIEWER: Yes. Sorry for the interruption.
SUBJECT: That's okay. Let me just show you what I did to bring her around. I said, "You know, what if you made a hundred on a test and another guy in your class made a 60? This guy has a failing mark and you have a high passing mark. Would it be fair to say 20 of your points, bring you down to an 80, give the 20 to the guy that made the 60 and bring him up to 80 and everything is equal?" She said, "No." I said, "Why?" She said, "Because I earned that grade." I said, "Don't you think rich people earned the money that they get?" And so she was speechless. She couldn't say anything. She'd said, "No, I earned it." I said, "Think about it, Baby. "You're bringing a guy up from a failing grade to a passing grade, and we gonna bring you down to his level." I said, "Now you apply that type of example with everybody in the classroom, everybody being the dumper. Nobody would ever get out of your class because everybody would have a failing grade." So she then understood the point I was trying to make. Sometimes you have to use other examples to get other people to think, you know, to try to get the point across of what you're trying to say. That's all I wanted to say.
INTERVIEWER: Well, you did a great job out there. I don't know how much you made her "think" as you made her "realize."
SUBJECT: Yeah.
INTERVIEWER: But I need to ask you something, Tim.
SUBJECT: Go ahead.
INTERVIEWER: Has this conversion held? Does she still get it now that you've explained it to her.
SUBJECT: She gets it but she hates it.
INTERVIEWER: Well, I tell you, if she goes back to class where she's studying for her PhD and she runs this story either by a fellow student -- or even worse, a professor -- the professor will say, "Well, here's what you shoulda said when your husband posed this question: 'The people who have a lot of money didn't earn it. They have stolen it.'" This is Obama's belief. This is why they've stolen it. They have unfairly taken what's not theirs. They haven't earned it. That's the whole point, they cheated and steal and had lied to get it and that's why he's going to take it from them and give the money to like these poor people lining up at Cobo Hall in Detroit for it. That's what he believes. You gotta stay on this, my man, because a professor's going to tell her that if she dares tell this story, and the professor is going to say, "Well, you can't compare wealth to grades because there isn't anybody else... You can't take somebody else's grade but you could take somebody else's money from them while they weren't looking. You could cheat 'em, you could steal." They'll work on them like this. This is going to be an ongoing thing. You did a great thing here, a great thing. You've taken a big, giant step here.
SUBJECT: Oh, yeah. Well, I just appreciate that. She doesn't like to listen to anything that disagrees with her beliefs. I'm like, "Whatever." I think sometimes she just don't want to listen because people are realists.
INTERVIEWER: Well, look, she's like a lot of people. Her worldview is safely wrapped inside a cocoon in which she lives, and if anything penetrates it that upsets this security blanket she's living in, you're right, she doesn't want it.
SUBJECT: Yep.
INTERVIEWER: She does not want to be challenged with anything that would question her beliefs.
SUBJECT: Yeah.
INTERVIEWER: You have a huge challenge out there.
SUBJECT: Well, I'm teaching the four kids, bringing them up in the right way, teaching them.
INTERVIEWER: God less you. This is a great interview. I appreciate the fact that you're doing this, and I appreciate the fact that you are telling us.
SUBJECT: All right, have a good one.
INTERVIEWER: Thank you, Thank you very much. Well, sometimes it's just a simple little explanation like that is all it takes when you make it personal.
__________________________
Another difference between public and private enterprise.
Cheats and thieves in private business pay heavy fines and are sentenced to prison when caught. Liberal Democrats in government who do even worse are rewarded with bonuses and plush jobs. Ah, the blessings of liberalism/socialism/communism/feudalism.
One example of the results of the tireless efforts of Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, (then Senator) Barack Obama, Franklin Raines, Jim Johnson, was the melt down of the mortgage market.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac problems were started by democrat administration personnel. Two Senators receive more campaign contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac than all others from 1989-2008. Number 1 – Senator Chris Dodd, (D) CONN Chairman Senate Banking Committee and former 2008 Democrat candidate for President. Number 2 - Senator and now President Barack Obama. How did Barack Obama do this after only 3 years as a Senator? You fill in the blanks.
Remember when Barack Obama stood up for his Vice Presidential Search Committee member Jim Johnson? It was June 2008 and Jim Johnson had to resign because of a “controversy” about his time at embattled Countrywide Mortgage. It was not important that Jim Johnson received loans at a below market rate.
It was also largely ignored that Jim Johnson was former CEO of Fannie Mae. It seems that the CEO’s of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were cooking the books. The CEO’s had been inflating yearly earnings to receive their annual bonuses! They would then amend the earnings statements later in the year. Typical government chicanery, like base line budgeting.
Those CEOs cost several orders more Americans to lose several orders more of their hard earned equity than Enron’s executives. Ken Lay who was demonized in the media, sent to prison by the government, and was held up as an example of “evil capitalists.” Not a single CEO of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac missed their annual bonuses. For example, Franklin Raines made $90 Million in bonuses from Fannie Mae in 6 years! It seems capitalists go to prison and pay heavy fines while liberal Democrats in government are paid bonuses and are even awarded jobs in government when they do the same thing. Ah, the blessings of liberalism/socialism/communism.
One other note: I find it hard to believe that these people, who directly brought about the mortgage collapse, are that stupid. Ergo, this was a deliberate action intended to do just what it did. For instance, in California, homeowner’s equity in the housing market dropped from around 60% to about 30% while the banks’ equity (mortgages) increased from about 40% to 70% of the housing market. Sure, some foreclosures cost banks a bit, but overall they almost doubled their share of the mortgage market. I wonder how much of that is controlled by Goldman Sachs? Hmmmmm!
_______________________
Obama money at Cobo Hall in Detroit
A huge crowd assembled at Cobo Hall in Detroit when it was announced that the federal government would disperse several millions in recovery funds to individuals in hard hit Detroit. A reporter from radio station WJR went there and interviewed several who were there waiting to apply for some of the money.
WJR interviewer finds a Model Obama Citizen - October 7, 2009
ROGULSKI: Did you get an application to fill out yet?
WOMAN: I sure did. And I filled it out, and I am waiting to see what the results are going to be.
ROGULSKI: Will you know today how much money you're getting?
WOMAN: No, I won't, but I'm waiting for a phone call.
ROGULSKI: Where's the money coming from?
WOMAN: I believe it's coming from the City of Detroit or the state.
ROGULSKI: Where did they get it from?
WOMAN: Some funds that was forgiven (sic) by Obama.
ROGULSKI: And where did Obama get the funds?
WOMAN: Obama getting the funds from... Ummm, I have no idea, to tell you the truth. He's the president.
ROGULSKI: In downtown Detroit, Ken Rogulski, WJR News.
Another woman is questioned:
ROGULSKI: What are you doing here?
WOMAN: We’re all here to get some Obama money.
ROGULSKI: How much money will you be getting?
WOMAN: I don't know, but it will be worth the wait.
ROGULSKI: Where's the money coming from?
WOMAN: I don’t know. It’s government money Obama’s giving us.
ROGULSKI: Where did he get it from?
WOMAN: It’s Obama money. He’s got lots of money.
ROGULSKI: And where did Obama get the funds?
WOMAN: He’s the President. He promised us money. God bless Obama.
ROGULSKI: In downtown Detroit, Ken Rogulski, WJR News.
NOTE: There were 65,000 who went to Cobo in hopes of getting a cash handout. Only 3,500 will actually receive any money. What do you think is going to happen in Detroit when those 61,500 find out they will not get any money?
___________________________
Some interesting facts about American car sales:
The latest sales figures from the auto industry tell a great deal about the people's faith in their government when it comes to running auto companies. (Or anything else for that matter.)
GM reported a drop of about 44% in sales from a year ago. Chrysler reported a 48% drop. Ford, the only major American auto company still in private hands, reported a drop of just 4%. That's a pretty good indicator of the faith the American people have in their government, at least the car buying public. Roughly the same trend was shown in the results of the "cash for clunkers" program. The public has eloquently expressed their opinion!
I had to add this exchange with one of my SFN friends
Al:
Don't worry about idealists on the left coming down on you. Mostly they are decent, caring people who see everything remotely political in their own definition of black and white, no shades of gray anywhere. White is anything that follows the emotional mantras handed down by their high priests. Black is anything that does not. They are firmly indoctrinated in the fundamentalist religion of the left and live in a la la land with hardly a clue as to what is actually happening. No matter how factually wrong they are or how factually right you are, their belief system overrides facts, and logic never comes into play. I have a whole bunch of them in my family that I love dearly.
Remember that great liberal Democrat Howard Dean’s rant of a few years back, "I hate Republicans! I hate Conservatives! I hate Middle America! YEEEARGH!!!" This is the brand of unreasoning passion that controls the minds of so many liberals.
Add to that this thought. I hear echos of the old Al Capone/Big Bill Thompson/Jake Arvey/Richard Daly I and II machine now ringing through Washington. I lived enough in Cook County to have personal experiences with that gang. In fact, the son of Capone's accountant was a long time drinking buddy of mine. I could tell hundreds of horror stories. Of course, most libs wouldn’t listen to any of them, let alone believe anything counter to their liberal belief system. Most idealists on the left haven't a clue what that gang is really up to. Doesn't bode well for our country unless the people wake up soon. I'm encouraged because I see that beginning to happen. I just hope it is not too late.
Ho
____________________________________________
Ho:
I agree. I expected more intelligence out of Don, but Liberalism seems to carry its own set of blinders. My elder brother is a retired Physics professor. Very intelligent. UNTIL politics is mentioned. Then he reverts to his Pavlovian conditioning and his brain flies south. You'd think a "scientist" would apply scientific rigor to politics as well (if it doesn't work, the theory is wrong), but that doesn't seem to be the case. But then, he was never a researcher, just a teacher in California where the teachers are all super libs. You'd think an ex-Navy career officer would be able to withstand the peer-group propaganda better.
Al
NOTE: This is a version of a story heard on talk radio and embellished by the author of this blog, who adds, “The crisis was created deliberately by Liberals aided by greedy bankers and politicians buying votes.”
________________________________________
Heidi is the proprietor of a bar in Berlin . In order to increase sales, she decides to allow her loyal customers - most of whom are unemployed alcoholics - to drink now but pay later. She keeps track of the drinks consumed on a ledger (thereby granting the customers loans).
Word gets around, promoted by liberal politicians and their adoring media and as a result increasing numbers of customers flood into Heidi's bar.
Taking advantage of her customers' freedom from immediate payment constraints, Heidi gradually but steadily increases her prices for wine and beer, the most-consumed beverages gradually. Her sales volume increases massively as do her profits (and tax payments)
A young and dynamic customer service consultant at the local bank recognizes these customer debts as valuable future assets and increases Heidi's borrowing limit. Deciding to expand she opens several new bars on her greatly expanded credit.
He sees no reason for undue concern since he has the debts of the alcoholics as collateral.
At the bank's corporate headquarters, expert bankers transform these customer assets into DRINKBONDS, ALKBONDS and PUKEBONDS. These securities are then traded on markets worldwide. No one really understands what these abbreviations mean and how the securities are guaranteed. Nevertheless, as their prices continuously climb, the securities become top-selling items.
One day, although the prices are still climbing, a risk manager (subsequently of course fired due his negativity) of the bank decides that the time has come to demand payment of the debts incurred by the drinkers at Heidi's bar and by Heidi for her greatly expanded business.
However they cannot pay back the debts.
Heidi cannot fulfill her loan obligations and claims bankruptcy.
DRINKBOND and ALKBOND drop in price by 95 %. PUKEBOND performs better, stabilizing in price after dropping by 80 %.
The suppliers of Heidi's bar, having granted her generous payment due dates and having invested in the securities are faced with a new situation. Her wine supplier claims bankruptcy, her beer supplier is taken over by a competitor.
The bank is saved by “the Government” following dramatic round-the-clock consultations by leaders from the governing political parties.
The funds required for this purpose are obtained by a tax levied on the non-drinkers.
Finally an explanation I understand...
_____________________________________
In addition, the non-drinkers are mostly business people, some very wealthy, who hire 90% of the people employed and generate most of the new jobs. Seeing their profits deeply cut by the expanded taxes, they reduce their one-year and five-year financial budgets, cut their plans for expansion, reduce their payroll (that’s lay off many of their employees), and cancel orders for new equipment.
The stock market drops by 50% as investors move their holdings to safer places (like gold and Ireland).The media morosely reports the layoffs and order cancellations announcing, “We are now in a terrible recession brought about by greedy businessmen.” Consumer confidence (a very nebulous quality) drops precipitously, profits (and taxes) take a huge drop, and more and more businesses fail.
The government (who can’t manage anything and would seriously “screw up a one car parade”) takes over those failing “business that are too big to fail.” Between feuding and self-serving politicians and anal retentive government bureaucrats the economy collapses in line with a quote often attributed to a Scottish Historian, Alexander Tytler or Tyler. The true origin of the quote is obscure and might have originated in the early 20th century from an unknown politician or writer. Nevertheless, this does not detract from its accuracy.
One version of the quote on why democracies always fail is:
"A Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only last until the citizens discover they can vote themselves largesse out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that the Democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy, to be followed by a dictatorship, and then a monarchy."
A version of the second part of the misquote, attributed in 1983 to Arnold Toynbee is:
"The release of initiative and enterprise made possible by self-government ultimately generates disintegrating forces from within. Again and again, after freedom brings opportunity and some degree of plenty, the competent become selfish, luxury-loving and complacent; the incompetent and unfortunate grow envious and covetous; and all three groups turn aside from the hard road of freedom to worship the golden calf of economic security. The historical cycle seems to be: from bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to apathy; from apathy to dependency; and from dependency back to bondage once more."
But the person who appears to be the actual author is Henning Webb Prentis, Jr., President of the Armstrong Cork Company. In a speech entitled "Industrial Management in a Republic," delivered in the grand ballroom of the Waldorf Astoria at New York during the 250th meeting of the National Conference Board on March 18, 1943, and recorded on p. 22 of Industrial Management in a Republic, Prentis had this to say:
“Paradoxically enough, the release of initiative and enterprise made possible by popular self-government ultimately generates disintegrating forces from within. Again and again after freedom has brought opportunity and some degree of plenty, the competent become selfish, luxury-loving and complacent, the incompetent and the unfortunate grow envious and covetous, and all three groups turn aside from the hard road of freedom to worship the Golden Calf of economic security. The historical cycle seems to be: From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to apathy; from apathy to dependency; and from dependency back to bondage once more.
“At the stage between apathy and dependency, men always turn in fear to economic and political panaceas. New conditions, it is claimed, require new remedies. Under such circumstances, the competent citizen is certainly not a fool if he insists upon using the compass of history when forced to sail uncharted seas. Usually so-called new remedies are not new at all. Compulsory planned economy, for example, was tried by the Chinese some three milleniums ago, and by the Romans in the early centuries of the Christian era. It was applied in Germany, Italy and Russia long before the present war broke out. Yet it is being seriously advocated today as a solution of our economic problems in the United States. Its proponents confidently assert that government can successfully plan and control all major business activity in the nation, and still not interfere with our political freedom and our hard-won civil and religious liberties. The lessons of history all point in exactly the reverse direction.”
For more information about these quotes and their sources go to http://www.lorencollins.net/tytler.html
_____________________________
A very interesting interview about Obama’s “share the wealth” plan.
INTERVIEWER: Hello.
SUBJECT: Hey! How are you doing?
INTERVIEWER: Very well, sir, thank you.
SUBJECT: All right. My wife had a hard time trying to understand why Obama's plan to "spread the wealth" was unfair. She couldn't see (sigh), you know, what was wrong with taking from those who have and giving to those who don't have so what I did was I simplified it for her. She's a woman that prides herself on education. She's working on a PhD at Vanderbilt and she makes excellent grades.
INTERVIEWER: Oh, no.
SUBJECT: Now, I told her, I said --
INTERVIEWER: Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute. You are depressing me. Your wife's a PhD, working on a PhD, she makes excellent grades.
SUBJECT: Yes, and we have four kids.
INTERVIEWER: No, it makes total sense that she would think what she thinks because the culture she's immersed herself in, academia, is teaching her this stuff.
SUBJECT: (laughing) Well, let me finish. Let me show you what I did.
INTERVIEWER: Yes. Sorry for the interruption.
SUBJECT: That's okay. Let me just show you what I did to bring her around. I said, "You know, what if you made a hundred on a test and another guy in your class made a 60? This guy has a failing mark and you have a high passing mark. Would it be fair to say 20 of your points, bring you down to an 80, give the 20 to the guy that made the 60 and bring him up to 80 and everything is equal?" She said, "No." I said, "Why?" She said, "Because I earned that grade." I said, "Don't you think rich people earned the money that they get?" And so she was speechless. She couldn't say anything. She'd said, "No, I earned it." I said, "Think about it, Baby. "You're bringing a guy up from a failing grade to a passing grade, and we gonna bring you down to his level." I said, "Now you apply that type of example with everybody in the classroom, everybody being the dumper. Nobody would ever get out of your class because everybody would have a failing grade." So she then understood the point I was trying to make. Sometimes you have to use other examples to get other people to think, you know, to try to get the point across of what you're trying to say. That's all I wanted to say.
INTERVIEWER: Well, you did a great job out there. I don't know how much you made her "think" as you made her "realize."
SUBJECT: Yeah.
INTERVIEWER: But I need to ask you something, Tim.
SUBJECT: Go ahead.
INTERVIEWER: Has this conversion held? Does she still get it now that you've explained it to her.
SUBJECT: She gets it but she hates it.
INTERVIEWER: Well, I tell you, if she goes back to class where she's studying for her PhD and she runs this story either by a fellow student -- or even worse, a professor -- the professor will say, "Well, here's what you shoulda said when your husband posed this question: 'The people who have a lot of money didn't earn it. They have stolen it.'" This is Obama's belief. This is why they've stolen it. They have unfairly taken what's not theirs. They haven't earned it. That's the whole point, they cheated and steal and had lied to get it and that's why he's going to take it from them and give the money to like these poor people lining up at Cobo Hall in Detroit for it. That's what he believes. You gotta stay on this, my man, because a professor's going to tell her that if she dares tell this story, and the professor is going to say, "Well, you can't compare wealth to grades because there isn't anybody else... You can't take somebody else's grade but you could take somebody else's money from them while they weren't looking. You could cheat 'em, you could steal." They'll work on them like this. This is going to be an ongoing thing. You did a great thing here, a great thing. You've taken a big, giant step here.
SUBJECT: Oh, yeah. Well, I just appreciate that. She doesn't like to listen to anything that disagrees with her beliefs. I'm like, "Whatever." I think sometimes she just don't want to listen because people are realists.
INTERVIEWER: Well, look, she's like a lot of people. Her worldview is safely wrapped inside a cocoon in which she lives, and if anything penetrates it that upsets this security blanket she's living in, you're right, she doesn't want it.
SUBJECT: Yep.
INTERVIEWER: She does not want to be challenged with anything that would question her beliefs.
SUBJECT: Yeah.
INTERVIEWER: You have a huge challenge out there.
SUBJECT: Well, I'm teaching the four kids, bringing them up in the right way, teaching them.
INTERVIEWER: God less you. This is a great interview. I appreciate the fact that you're doing this, and I appreciate the fact that you are telling us.
SUBJECT: All right, have a good one.
INTERVIEWER: Thank you, Thank you very much. Well, sometimes it's just a simple little explanation like that is all it takes when you make it personal.
__________________________
Another difference between public and private enterprise.
Cheats and thieves in private business pay heavy fines and are sentenced to prison when caught. Liberal Democrats in government who do even worse are rewarded with bonuses and plush jobs. Ah, the blessings of liberalism/socialism/communism/feudalism.
One example of the results of the tireless efforts of Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, (then Senator) Barack Obama, Franklin Raines, Jim Johnson, was the melt down of the mortgage market.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac problems were started by democrat administration personnel. Two Senators receive more campaign contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac than all others from 1989-2008. Number 1 – Senator Chris Dodd, (D) CONN Chairman Senate Banking Committee and former 2008 Democrat candidate for President. Number 2 - Senator and now President Barack Obama. How did Barack Obama do this after only 3 years as a Senator? You fill in the blanks.
Remember when Barack Obama stood up for his Vice Presidential Search Committee member Jim Johnson? It was June 2008 and Jim Johnson had to resign because of a “controversy” about his time at embattled Countrywide Mortgage. It was not important that Jim Johnson received loans at a below market rate.
It was also largely ignored that Jim Johnson was former CEO of Fannie Mae. It seems that the CEO’s of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were cooking the books. The CEO’s had been inflating yearly earnings to receive their annual bonuses! They would then amend the earnings statements later in the year. Typical government chicanery, like base line budgeting.
Those CEOs cost several orders more Americans to lose several orders more of their hard earned equity than Enron’s executives. Ken Lay who was demonized in the media, sent to prison by the government, and was held up as an example of “evil capitalists.” Not a single CEO of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac missed their annual bonuses. For example, Franklin Raines made $90 Million in bonuses from Fannie Mae in 6 years! It seems capitalists go to prison and pay heavy fines while liberal Democrats in government are paid bonuses and are even awarded jobs in government when they do the same thing. Ah, the blessings of liberalism/socialism/communism.
One other note: I find it hard to believe that these people, who directly brought about the mortgage collapse, are that stupid. Ergo, this was a deliberate action intended to do just what it did. For instance, in California, homeowner’s equity in the housing market dropped from around 60% to about 30% while the banks’ equity (mortgages) increased from about 40% to 70% of the housing market. Sure, some foreclosures cost banks a bit, but overall they almost doubled their share of the mortgage market. I wonder how much of that is controlled by Goldman Sachs? Hmmmmm!
_______________________
Obama money at Cobo Hall in Detroit
A huge crowd assembled at Cobo Hall in Detroit when it was announced that the federal government would disperse several millions in recovery funds to individuals in hard hit Detroit. A reporter from radio station WJR went there and interviewed several who were there waiting to apply for some of the money.
WJR interviewer finds a Model Obama Citizen - October 7, 2009
ROGULSKI: Did you get an application to fill out yet?
WOMAN: I sure did. And I filled it out, and I am waiting to see what the results are going to be.
ROGULSKI: Will you know today how much money you're getting?
WOMAN: No, I won't, but I'm waiting for a phone call.
ROGULSKI: Where's the money coming from?
WOMAN: I believe it's coming from the City of Detroit or the state.
ROGULSKI: Where did they get it from?
WOMAN: Some funds that was forgiven (sic) by Obama.
ROGULSKI: And where did Obama get the funds?
WOMAN: Obama getting the funds from... Ummm, I have no idea, to tell you the truth. He's the president.
ROGULSKI: In downtown Detroit, Ken Rogulski, WJR News.
Another woman is questioned:
ROGULSKI: What are you doing here?
WOMAN: We’re all here to get some Obama money.
ROGULSKI: How much money will you be getting?
WOMAN: I don't know, but it will be worth the wait.
ROGULSKI: Where's the money coming from?
WOMAN: I don’t know. It’s government money Obama’s giving us.
ROGULSKI: Where did he get it from?
WOMAN: It’s Obama money. He’s got lots of money.
ROGULSKI: And where did Obama get the funds?
WOMAN: He’s the President. He promised us money. God bless Obama.
ROGULSKI: In downtown Detroit, Ken Rogulski, WJR News.
NOTE: There were 65,000 who went to Cobo in hopes of getting a cash handout. Only 3,500 will actually receive any money. What do you think is going to happen in Detroit when those 61,500 find out they will not get any money?
___________________________
Some interesting facts about American car sales:
The latest sales figures from the auto industry tell a great deal about the people's faith in their government when it comes to running auto companies. (Or anything else for that matter.)
GM reported a drop of about 44% in sales from a year ago. Chrysler reported a 48% drop. Ford, the only major American auto company still in private hands, reported a drop of just 4%. That's a pretty good indicator of the faith the American people have in their government, at least the car buying public. Roughly the same trend was shown in the results of the "cash for clunkers" program. The public has eloquently expressed their opinion!
I had to add this exchange with one of my SFN friends
Al:
Don't worry about idealists on the left coming down on you. Mostly they are decent, caring people who see everything remotely political in their own definition of black and white, no shades of gray anywhere. White is anything that follows the emotional mantras handed down by their high priests. Black is anything that does not. They are firmly indoctrinated in the fundamentalist religion of the left and live in a la la land with hardly a clue as to what is actually happening. No matter how factually wrong they are or how factually right you are, their belief system overrides facts, and logic never comes into play. I have a whole bunch of them in my family that I love dearly.
Remember that great liberal Democrat Howard Dean’s rant of a few years back, "I hate Republicans! I hate Conservatives! I hate Middle America! YEEEARGH!!!" This is the brand of unreasoning passion that controls the minds of so many liberals.
Add to that this thought. I hear echos of the old Al Capone/Big Bill Thompson/Jake Arvey/Richard Daly I and II machine now ringing through Washington. I lived enough in Cook County to have personal experiences with that gang. In fact, the son of Capone's accountant was a long time drinking buddy of mine. I could tell hundreds of horror stories. Of course, most libs wouldn’t listen to any of them, let alone believe anything counter to their liberal belief system. Most idealists on the left haven't a clue what that gang is really up to. Doesn't bode well for our country unless the people wake up soon. I'm encouraged because I see that beginning to happen. I just hope it is not too late.
Ho
____________________________________________
Ho:
I agree. I expected more intelligence out of Don, but Liberalism seems to carry its own set of blinders. My elder brother is a retired Physics professor. Very intelligent. UNTIL politics is mentioned. Then he reverts to his Pavlovian conditioning and his brain flies south. You'd think a "scientist" would apply scientific rigor to politics as well (if it doesn't work, the theory is wrong), but that doesn't seem to be the case. But then, he was never a researcher, just a teacher in California where the teachers are all super libs. You'd think an ex-Navy career officer would be able to withstand the peer-group propaganda better.
Al
Friday, September 18, 2009
Not so fast on the H1N1 vaccines
What is the real reason for all the emotional promotion by government and media of the fear driven panic over H1N1 flu and the supposed dire need for vaccines? All for a disease that has already proven extremely mild? Do you actually believe all that propaganda foisted off on a gullible public by a patently dishonest government? Somebody must be making lots of moolah. I wonder who?
By doubting we are led to inquire; by inquiring we perceive the truth.
Here are excerpts from a couple of articles that pose serious questions that should certainly be answered. The web addresses of the articles are included so the full articles can be easily read.
http://truth11.wordpress.com/2009/09/18/why-millions-of-americans-don’t-need-the-swine-flu-vaccine-all-of-the-risk-none-of-the-benefit/
Mike Adams
Natural News
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
(NaturalNews) The FDA has now suddenly granted approval to four different H1N1 vaccines, all on the same day! With virtually no testing, these fast-tracked vaccines are now approved for use on everyone: Infants, children, adults, senior citizens and even expectant mothers. But does everyone really need these vaccines? And all for a disease that is little more deadly than the common cold?
Even for those who got sick, virtually everyone survived the sickness. After a few days of extra rest in bed (and hopefully some nutritional supplementation), they were able to kick the virus and return to normal life. This is all a normal part of beating any flu.
All these millions of people who were infected by H1N1 and didn’t die have naturally made their own swine flu antibodies. They are now immune to the swine flu, and they now have zero risk of being infected or killed by this H1N1 swine flu in the future. The actual risk of serious illness or death from the H1N1 flu may be statistically less than the risk of taking the vaccine.
__________________________________________________________
http://truth11.wordpress.com/2009/07/21/now-legal-immunity-for-swine-flu-vaccine-makers/
Global Research
July 20, 2009
The US Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, has just signed a decree granting vaccine makers total legal immunity from any lawsuits that result from any new “Swine Flu” vaccine. Moreover, the $7 billion US Government fast-track program to rush vaccines onto the market in time for the Autumn flu season is being done without even normal safety testing. Is there another agenda at work in the official WHO hysteria campaign to declare so-called H1N1 virus—which has yet to be rigorously scientifically isolated, characterized and photographed with an electron microscope—the scientifically accepted procedure—a global “pandemic” threat?
Now just why would she do that?
With no legal liability, could it be that Baxter (a pharmaceutical company) is preparing to sell hundreds of millions of doses containing highly toxic aluminum hydroxide as adjuvant?
The current official panic campaign over alleged Swine Flu danger is rapidly taking on the dimensions of a George Orwell science fiction novel. The document signed by Sebelius grants immunity to those making a swine flu vaccine, under the provisions of a 2006 law for public health emergencies. Now just why would she do that?
This could easily mean that Sebelius knows that the expensive (and profitable) vaccines will pose more of a health risk than the disease itself.
With this immunity, vaccine makers can completely ignore safety testing costs. I wonder who benefits from the millions of dollars thus saved? Just where does all that money go? Who gets the payoff? I wonder how much will flow into Sebelius’ coffers?
By doubting we are led to inquire; by inquiring we perceive the truth.
—Peter Abelard
Here are excerpts from a couple of articles that pose serious questions that should certainly be answered. The web addresses of the articles are included so the full articles can be easily read.
http://truth11.wordpress.com/2009/09/18/why-millions-of-americans-don’t-need-the-swine-flu-vaccine-all-of-the-risk-none-of-the-benefit/
Mike Adams
Natural News
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
(NaturalNews) The FDA has now suddenly granted approval to four different H1N1 vaccines, all on the same day! With virtually no testing, these fast-tracked vaccines are now approved for use on everyone: Infants, children, adults, senior citizens and even expectant mothers. But does everyone really need these vaccines? And all for a disease that is little more deadly than the common cold?
Even for those who got sick, virtually everyone survived the sickness. After a few days of extra rest in bed (and hopefully some nutritional supplementation), they were able to kick the virus and return to normal life. This is all a normal part of beating any flu.
All these millions of people who were infected by H1N1 and didn’t die have naturally made their own swine flu antibodies. They are now immune to the swine flu, and they now have zero risk of being infected or killed by this H1N1 swine flu in the future. The actual risk of serious illness or death from the H1N1 flu may be statistically less than the risk of taking the vaccine.
__________________________________________________________
http://truth11.wordpress.com/2009/07/21/now-legal-immunity-for-swine-flu-vaccine-makers/
Global Research
July 20, 2009
The US Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, has just signed a decree granting vaccine makers total legal immunity from any lawsuits that result from any new “Swine Flu” vaccine. Moreover, the $7 billion US Government fast-track program to rush vaccines onto the market in time for the Autumn flu season is being done without even normal safety testing. Is there another agenda at work in the official WHO hysteria campaign to declare so-called H1N1 virus—which has yet to be rigorously scientifically isolated, characterized and photographed with an electron microscope—the scientifically accepted procedure—a global “pandemic” threat?
Now just why would she do that?
With no legal liability, could it be that Baxter (a pharmaceutical company) is preparing to sell hundreds of millions of doses containing highly toxic aluminum hydroxide as adjuvant?
The current official panic campaign over alleged Swine Flu danger is rapidly taking on the dimensions of a George Orwell science fiction novel. The document signed by Sebelius grants immunity to those making a swine flu vaccine, under the provisions of a 2006 law for public health emergencies. Now just why would she do that?
This could easily mean that Sebelius knows that the expensive (and profitable) vaccines will pose more of a health risk than the disease itself.
With this immunity, vaccine makers can completely ignore safety testing costs. I wonder who benefits from the millions of dollars thus saved? Just where does all that money go? Who gets the payoff? I wonder how much will flow into Sebelius’ coffers?
Thursday, September 03, 2009
GM - Government Motors
Have you seen the GM ads for the Equinox?
“The all new Equinox - 32 mpg highway - better than CR-V, Rav4, and even Escape Hybrid”
You’d better take that number with a substantial grain of salt. Now that the “government” owns and operates GM (Government Motors) we should expect projected favorable numbers to be skewed as far afield as possible just like their estimates of the finances of any favored program. These cost numbers are usually understated by a factor of two while income or revenue is overstated by the same factor.
Such being the case the Equinox should get about 16 mpg. But just maybe the Government Motors new owners are afraid the motoring public wouldn’t accept their usual highly suspect estimates and didn’t stretch them as far from reality as usual. Such being the case let’s say they only exaggerated a little and the reality is about 24 mpg, still not up to the three vehicles they claim to beat. I’ll wager that’s a bit closer to the truth.
Like the honesty of their statement, “We don’t intend to run GM.” After making this public statement they fired the President and who knows who else, ordered corporate headquarters moved from Warren into the inner city of Detroit, and closed nearly 2,000 dealers (many highly profitable ones and nearly all supporters of Republican candidates). The new Obama auto "CZAR" (or is it Kommisar), basically put the UAW in charge. That sure sounds like running the company to me. They’ll probably do the same excellent job of managing their auto company as they have Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Fannie May, Freddie Mac, the Postal Service, Amtrak, and the list goes on and on. Lots of taxpayer money going down federal rat holes, lots of political payoffs, graft, corruption, and why not? It costs those politicians and bureaucrats not one penny. Mr. Taxpayer Sucker pays for it all as two previously major tax paying companies become major tax consuming companies.
The response of Mr. Average American car buyer to the “Cash for Clunkers” program demonstrates clearly how the public thinks. Overwhelmingly they rejected GM and Chrysler products whose sales dropped far below last year while Ford, the only remaining privately owned American car company, posted substantial gains. Of course, by far the largest sales gain was posted by Toyota. The public knows how poorly any government operated entity is run. I surely wouldn’t buy a new car from such an operation. I seriously doubt either Chrysler or GM will be around for long and I certainly wouldn’t buy any of their stock.
Oh yes, the management and stockholders of Ford want to thank the Obama administration for making them the only remaining privately owned American car company and for giving them such a huge boost in sales.
“The all new Equinox - 32 mpg highway - better than CR-V, Rav4, and even Escape Hybrid”
You’d better take that number with a substantial grain of salt. Now that the “government” owns and operates GM (Government Motors) we should expect projected favorable numbers to be skewed as far afield as possible just like their estimates of the finances of any favored program. These cost numbers are usually understated by a factor of two while income or revenue is overstated by the same factor.
Such being the case the Equinox should get about 16 mpg. But just maybe the Government Motors new owners are afraid the motoring public wouldn’t accept their usual highly suspect estimates and didn’t stretch them as far from reality as usual. Such being the case let’s say they only exaggerated a little and the reality is about 24 mpg, still not up to the three vehicles they claim to beat. I’ll wager that’s a bit closer to the truth.
Like the honesty of their statement, “We don’t intend to run GM.” After making this public statement they fired the President and who knows who else, ordered corporate headquarters moved from Warren into the inner city of Detroit, and closed nearly 2,000 dealers (many highly profitable ones and nearly all supporters of Republican candidates). The new Obama auto "CZAR" (or is it Kommisar), basically put the UAW in charge. That sure sounds like running the company to me. They’ll probably do the same excellent job of managing their auto company as they have Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Fannie May, Freddie Mac, the Postal Service, Amtrak, and the list goes on and on. Lots of taxpayer money going down federal rat holes, lots of political payoffs, graft, corruption, and why not? It costs those politicians and bureaucrats not one penny. Mr. Taxpayer Sucker pays for it all as two previously major tax paying companies become major tax consuming companies.
The response of Mr. Average American car buyer to the “Cash for Clunkers” program demonstrates clearly how the public thinks. Overwhelmingly they rejected GM and Chrysler products whose sales dropped far below last year while Ford, the only remaining privately owned American car company, posted substantial gains. Of course, by far the largest sales gain was posted by Toyota. The public knows how poorly any government operated entity is run. I surely wouldn’t buy a new car from such an operation. I seriously doubt either Chrysler or GM will be around for long and I certainly wouldn’t buy any of their stock.
Oh yes, the management and stockholders of Ford want to thank the Obama administration for making them the only remaining privately owned American car company and for giving them such a huge boost in sales.
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
The truth about health care, several views
From moveon.org, an Internet mouthpiece for the far left, with a little corrective information, the real truth.
Top Five Health Care Reform Lies—and How to Fight Back
Lie #1: President Obama wants to euthanize your grandma!!!
The truth: These accusations—of "death panels" and forced euthanasia—are, of course, flatly untrue. As an article from the Associated Press puts it: "No 'death panel' in health care bill." What's the real deal? Reform legislation includes a provision, supported by the AARP, to offer senior citizens access to a professional medical counselor who will provide them with information on preparing a living will and other issues facing older Americans.
The real truth: “Death panels” and forced euthanasia are only the worst possible result of medical decisions being made by bureaucrats when they run out of money which they certainly will. Look at what’s already happening in some European nations under similar circumstances. Let the camel’s nose in the tent and before long it fills your tent and you are forced out.
Lie #2: Democrats are going to outlaw private insurance and force you into a government plan!!!
The truth: With reform, choices will increase, not decrease. Obama's reform plans will create a health insurance exchange, a one-stop shopping marketplace for affordable, high-quality insurance options. Included in the exchange is the public health insurance option—a nationwide plan with a broad network of providers—that will operate alongside private insurance companies, injecting competition into the market to drive quality up and costs down.7
If you're happy with your coverage and doctors, you can keep them.8 But the new public plan will expand choices to millions of businesses or individuals who choose to opt into it, including many who simply can't afford health care now.
The real truth: Apparently the writer of the above has not read the only health care plan in the Democrats’ arsenal. (If Obama has a plan, where is it?) The only existing Democrat plan specifically states that changes in plans or in the supplier of the plan will not be permitted. The only point of that section of their plan is to drive private health care insurance out of the business.
Lie #3: President Obama wants to implement Soviet-style rationing!!!
The truth: Health care reform will expand access to high-quality health insurance, and give individuals, families, and businesses more choices for coverage. Right now, big corporations decide whether to give you coverage, what doctors you get to see, and whether a particular procedure or medicine is covered—that is rationed care. And a big part of reform is to stop that.
Health care reform will do away with some of the most nefarious aspects of this rationing: discrimination for pre-existing conditions, insurers that cancel coverage when you get sick, gender discrimination, and lifetime and yearly limits on coverage. And outside of that, as noted above, reform will increase insurance options, not force anyone into a rationed situation.
The real truth: Obama’s non existing plan, if it follows the house Democrats’ plan, will result in weeks, months, or even years of waiting as demands for care will far outpace the medical profession’s ability to supply it. Just look at Canada, Scandinavia, or England, and the realities there.
Lie #4: Obama is secretly plotting to cut senior citizens' Medicare benefits!!!
The truth: Health care reform plans will not reduce Medicare benefits. Reform includes savings from Medicare that are unrelated to patient care—in fact, the savings comes from cutting billions of dollars in overpayments to insurance companies and eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse.
The real truth: There is no government run system ever created that has come close to competing with private operations. The truth is waste, fraud, and abuse are the hallmarks of government bureaucracies because employees call most of the shots and are notoriously inefficient. Compared to private organizations they have never been able to effectively compete on anything close to a level playing field without massive subsidies. UPS, FedEx, USPS, the perfect example. I rest my case. Oh yes, have you ever heard of any government cost estimates that have been even close to the final cost. Usually the final costs are five to ten times the original estimates, and that’s conservative.
Lie #5: Obama's health care plan will bankrupt America!!!
The truth: We need health care reform now in order to prevent bankruptcy—to control spiraling costs that affect individuals, families, small businesses, and the American economy.
Right now, we spend more than $2 trillion dollars a year on health care. The average family premium is projected to rise to over $22,000 in the next decade—and each year, nearly a million people face bankruptcy because of medical expenses. Reform, with an affordable, high-quality public option that can spur competition, is necessary to bring down skyrocketing costs. Also, President Obama's reform plans would be fully paid for over 10 years and not add a penny to the deficit.
We're closer to real health care reform than we've ever been—and the next few weeks will decide whether it happens. We need to make sure the truth about health care reform is spread far and wide to combat right wing lies.
The real truth: If you speak only of health care insurance, most people without it are without it by choice (they don’t want to spend the money) or are illegal aliens. If you are speaking of health care, since 1968 it has been illegal by federal law to deny medical care to anyone in need This includes those without insurance, or the money to pay for services, including illegals. So, anyone needing health care in America will get it. There is no health care crises other than the excess of demand over supply. We don’t have enough health care professionals available to serve the demand. Any federal health care insurance system will not even address this problem, and will certainly make it much worse. What we really need is a massive program of growth in education of health care workers at all levels. We need acceptance of new medical intermediates to do many of the simple services that now must be done by doctors. These could include many examination, diagnostic and treatment procedures that could be handled by professionals with much less time and money consuming education. There is a growing shortage of physicians and trained nurses. What is needed are training systems for professionals at several levels between nurses aides and nurses and between technicians and physicians.
We're closer to the major desolation of the best health care system in the world than we've ever been. This so called reform proposal is a recipe for the destruction of that incomparable health care service.
Currently, all levels of health care professionals are entering the US in substantial numbers from all manner of education systems from all over the world. They are staffing our hospitals, clinics, and all manner of health care facilities in steadily increasing numbers. Why is it our schools and colleges are not turning out enough graduates? That is indeed the biggest problem and it is not even mentioned in the Democrats’ only proposal.
Another thing that would reduce costs considerably would be limits on the fees trial lawyers could collect from suits against members of the health professions and health organizations.
These statements are the real truth about our situation with health care. They may not be as emotionally stimulating from either political standpoint as they are not fightin’ words, just realty that must be dealt with.
Top Five Health Care Reform Lies—and How to Fight Back
Lie #1: President Obama wants to euthanize your grandma!!!
The truth: These accusations—of "death panels" and forced euthanasia—are, of course, flatly untrue. As an article from the Associated Press puts it: "No 'death panel' in health care bill." What's the real deal? Reform legislation includes a provision, supported by the AARP, to offer senior citizens access to a professional medical counselor who will provide them with information on preparing a living will and other issues facing older Americans.
The real truth: “Death panels” and forced euthanasia are only the worst possible result of medical decisions being made by bureaucrats when they run out of money which they certainly will. Look at what’s already happening in some European nations under similar circumstances. Let the camel’s nose in the tent and before long it fills your tent and you are forced out.
Lie #2: Democrats are going to outlaw private insurance and force you into a government plan!!!
The truth: With reform, choices will increase, not decrease. Obama's reform plans will create a health insurance exchange, a one-stop shopping marketplace for affordable, high-quality insurance options. Included in the exchange is the public health insurance option—a nationwide plan with a broad network of providers—that will operate alongside private insurance companies, injecting competition into the market to drive quality up and costs down.7
If you're happy with your coverage and doctors, you can keep them.8 But the new public plan will expand choices to millions of businesses or individuals who choose to opt into it, including many who simply can't afford health care now.
The real truth: Apparently the writer of the above has not read the only health care plan in the Democrats’ arsenal. (If Obama has a plan, where is it?) The only existing Democrat plan specifically states that changes in plans or in the supplier of the plan will not be permitted. The only point of that section of their plan is to drive private health care insurance out of the business.
Lie #3: President Obama wants to implement Soviet-style rationing!!!
The truth: Health care reform will expand access to high-quality health insurance, and give individuals, families, and businesses more choices for coverage. Right now, big corporations decide whether to give you coverage, what doctors you get to see, and whether a particular procedure or medicine is covered—that is rationed care. And a big part of reform is to stop that.
Health care reform will do away with some of the most nefarious aspects of this rationing: discrimination for pre-existing conditions, insurers that cancel coverage when you get sick, gender discrimination, and lifetime and yearly limits on coverage. And outside of that, as noted above, reform will increase insurance options, not force anyone into a rationed situation.
The real truth: Obama’s non existing plan, if it follows the house Democrats’ plan, will result in weeks, months, or even years of waiting as demands for care will far outpace the medical profession’s ability to supply it. Just look at Canada, Scandinavia, or England, and the realities there.
Lie #4: Obama is secretly plotting to cut senior citizens' Medicare benefits!!!
The truth: Health care reform plans will not reduce Medicare benefits. Reform includes savings from Medicare that are unrelated to patient care—in fact, the savings comes from cutting billions of dollars in overpayments to insurance companies and eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse.
The real truth: There is no government run system ever created that has come close to competing with private operations. The truth is waste, fraud, and abuse are the hallmarks of government bureaucracies because employees call most of the shots and are notoriously inefficient. Compared to private organizations they have never been able to effectively compete on anything close to a level playing field without massive subsidies. UPS, FedEx, USPS, the perfect example. I rest my case. Oh yes, have you ever heard of any government cost estimates that have been even close to the final cost. Usually the final costs are five to ten times the original estimates, and that’s conservative.
Lie #5: Obama's health care plan will bankrupt America!!!
The truth: We need health care reform now in order to prevent bankruptcy—to control spiraling costs that affect individuals, families, small businesses, and the American economy.
Right now, we spend more than $2 trillion dollars a year on health care. The average family premium is projected to rise to over $22,000 in the next decade—and each year, nearly a million people face bankruptcy because of medical expenses. Reform, with an affordable, high-quality public option that can spur competition, is necessary to bring down skyrocketing costs. Also, President Obama's reform plans would be fully paid for over 10 years and not add a penny to the deficit.
We're closer to real health care reform than we've ever been—and the next few weeks will decide whether it happens. We need to make sure the truth about health care reform is spread far and wide to combat right wing lies.
The real truth: If you speak only of health care insurance, most people without it are without it by choice (they don’t want to spend the money) or are illegal aliens. If you are speaking of health care, since 1968 it has been illegal by federal law to deny medical care to anyone in need This includes those without insurance, or the money to pay for services, including illegals. So, anyone needing health care in America will get it. There is no health care crises other than the excess of demand over supply. We don’t have enough health care professionals available to serve the demand. Any federal health care insurance system will not even address this problem, and will certainly make it much worse. What we really need is a massive program of growth in education of health care workers at all levels. We need acceptance of new medical intermediates to do many of the simple services that now must be done by doctors. These could include many examination, diagnostic and treatment procedures that could be handled by professionals with much less time and money consuming education. There is a growing shortage of physicians and trained nurses. What is needed are training systems for professionals at several levels between nurses aides and nurses and between technicians and physicians.
We're closer to the major desolation of the best health care system in the world than we've ever been. This so called reform proposal is a recipe for the destruction of that incomparable health care service.
Currently, all levels of health care professionals are entering the US in substantial numbers from all manner of education systems from all over the world. They are staffing our hospitals, clinics, and all manner of health care facilities in steadily increasing numbers. Why is it our schools and colleges are not turning out enough graduates? That is indeed the biggest problem and it is not even mentioned in the Democrats’ only proposal.
Another thing that would reduce costs considerably would be limits on the fees trial lawyers could collect from suits against members of the health professions and health organizations.
These statements are the real truth about our situation with health care. They may not be as emotionally stimulating from either political standpoint as they are not fightin’ words, just realty that must be dealt with.
Monday, August 03, 2009
A collage of tasty bits of information
All you leftists should be ecstatic with the Obama administration and Democrat Congress. They are systematically destroying or nationalizing private business. Banks and Auto companies fell first, the insurance industry is next and the oil business will soon follow. I wonder where it will stop? Probably not before the government owns and runs all industry and business. They’re well on their way as it is. I wonder what you have to say about the following short bits of info?
- - -
The deliberate action of the federal government brought on the mortgage collapse. They succeeded in cutting 35% to 60% of the value of personally held real estate, most of which was mortgaged an average of around 55%. In a single action, government destroyed more than 90% of personal equity in real estate. Banks ( like Goldman Sachs, loved and rewarded by Obama) now own more than 90% of privately owned real estate. Isn’t that great that we have soaked those evil wealthy people that own their homes.
The “governmentalists” in Washington are doing everything they can to destroy private enterprise and replace it with inept government workers.
- - -
Reporting from Orange County and Washington — Regulators took on the mortgage industry's best-known figure Thursday, accusing former Countrywide Financial Corp. Chief Executive Angelo Mozilo of hiding his alarm about risky loans the company was making at the height of the housing boom while he was reaping nearly $140 million in profits on stock sales.
In a fraud and insider-trading lawsuit against Mozilo, the Securities and Exchange Commission
quotes e-mails in which the executive derided certain Countrywide loan products as "toxic" and "poison" more than three years ago -- well before "toxic debt" entered the popular lexicon as the cause of the housing crash and the resulting global financial crisis and deep recession.
- - -
I wonder why so many Goldman Sachs executives are in the government? Read:
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/09/22/paulson-goldman-bailout/
- - -
Re: Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac:
Fannie Mae executive Franklin Raines reaped 90 million in bonuses while Fannie Mae collapsed due to bad loans. Barney Frank was reporting, “Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are sound financially.” even after they were already bankrupt. He then denied he said it in spite of TV recordings of his speech.
As I understand it, the common and preferred shareholders are basically being wiped out, but the government is backing Fannie and Freddie's existing debt, the value of which therefore rose. So here's my question: if Fannie and Freddie were heading for bankruptcy but for the government's intervention, why didn't the Treasury Department bargain hard with major holders of their existing debt (such as the Chinese government), and threaten to let Fannie and Freddie go bankrupt unless the debtholders agreed to write down the value of the debt? After all, there was no explicit guarantee of such debt, and Treasury still could have agreed to explicitly guarantee FUTURE Fannie and Freddie debt.
The way the bailout is structured, it seems that Fannie and Freddie shareholders, and the American taxpayer, are paying the price, but holders of the GSE's debt get made whole at the latter's expense. Why?
The Country Wide debacle went right along with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
- - -
Acorn real estate deals in Ft Wayne:
Some time ago I heard on local radio in Ft Wayne about a real estate loan scam that was conducted in that city. Three local banks charged a number of people (5 or 6 were members of Acorn by the way) with conspiracy to defraud the banks with loans made based on fraudulent appraisals. I checked the website they sighted and copied the following information about how they did it:
They bought up low value inner city homes in Ft Wayne for between $20,000 and $40,000. Then they did some cosmetic improvements that cost between $3,000 and $6,000. Next they had appraisals made for 3 or four times their cost by their appraisers. (I wonder how much of a kick back those appraisers received.) Then they found local people to buy these houses securing loans from these banks backed by Fannie Mae for 100% of the purchase price. They paid these people $15,000 to $30,000 from the loan proceeds and pocketed the remainder. When the buyers realized they could not keep up the payments they walked away. When the banks finally foreclosed they were left holding mortgages three or four times the value of the homes. In many cases strippers moved in soon after the house was vacated and stripped everything of value including copper piping and wiring that was sold as scrap. These stripped houses lost their entire value as repair costs were prohibitive. The losses to the mortgage holders were substantial. Recently I went back on the Internet to get links for this paper and, lo and behold, they were gone without a trace. I searched under every name and title I could think of and nothing turned up. I wonder how that happened?
For more info on Acorn goto: http://www.fortwaynenews.com/index.php/2008/09/28/democrats-seeking-to-line-the-pockets-of-acorn/
- - -
The Obama Government paid healthcare bill is not about healthcare. It is principally an effort to destroy private insurance companies and replace them with government bureaucracies. It includes the eventual replacement of all private insurance with single payer government run healthcare. It also includes euthanasia and withholding services from the elderly, and rationing. It has never worked in any nation that tried it. Ask the French, Britons and Canadiens.
- - -
The entire Democrat campaign is based on class warfare with hate for the wealthy. Apparently Obama’s method of leveling the playing field for income is based on reducing the income of all productive, middle class and wealthy individuals to that of the poor. They have sure got a good start on doing just that. It doesn’t help the poor one little bit but it sure does punish those evil wealthy people. Wouldn’t it be better to help bring those on low incomes up rather than tearing the rich down? I guess Democrats are so filled with hate they would rather hurt successful people and punish them for being successful than try to raise the incomes of the poor and enable them to be more productive .
- - -
Obama’s promise of no tax increases for those earning less than $250,000.00 per year were absolutely useless. Now he says that even the poor will be taxed. I wonder, did he forget that everyone including the poor already pay 20% to 25% of every dollar they spend in hidden taxes on virtually everything.
- - -
The promise of a max of 8% unemployment after the stimulus was pure fiction. It is already above 9.5% and heading higher.
This unemployment is a direct result of the expected reduction of business profits as increases in taxes prompt business executives to cut employment and plans for growth which must be paid for out of profits.
- - -
The Obama administration’s predictions of the results of their actions have all been terrible failures.
- - -
Government bureaucracies cost at least twice as much as private businesses doing the same things. They are also much less efficient.
- - -
Tax cheat Timothy Geitner promises massive tax increases. Michael Rozbruch, a Certified Tax Resolution Specialist says, “Unfortunately, the Obama Administration may be sending the wrong message to the American taxpaying public by apparently condoning the behavior of Tim Geitner and Tom Daschle. Although Daschle withdrew his name as a nominee for the Health and Human Services Secretary is still leaves a bad taste in people’s mouths. And I am positive that if he weren’t named as a nominee he would still owe the IRS $120,000 + today.”
- - -
Raising taxes above 15% on business profits will always result in lower revenue receipts. Lowering taxes on business profits down to 15% has always resulted in higher tax revenues.
- - -
The Chinese who hold most of our debt are about to cut off our credit line.
- - -
Income tax receipts down 22 %, business tax receipts are down 28% from a year ago. That’s the biggest drop since the great depression. Nice going, Obama!
- - -
A few Obamaisms:
“If you are a family with income of less than $250,000 my plan will not raise your taxes one iota.” Obama. - Ha!
“If you are a family with income of less than $200,000 my plan will give you a reduction in your taxes.” Obama. - Ha!
“My health care plan will let you keep your present insurance.” Obama. The truth is just the opposite.
“We will not be running the Auto companies.” Obama.
Hey Pres! Firing the president and ordering the main offices moved from Warren to downtown Detroit is running the company. Try doing anything the government doesn’t approve and you’ll see who’s running the company.
- - -
The Post Office is hemorrhaging money at such a rate they are considering closing as many as 1,500 post offices (and releasing 10,000 employees). I thought government employees couldn’t be fired or cut.
- - -
Democrats plan on repealing the 22nd amendment. I wonder why?
- - -
The deliberate action of the federal government brought on the mortgage collapse. They succeeded in cutting 35% to 60% of the value of personally held real estate, most of which was mortgaged an average of around 55%. In a single action, government destroyed more than 90% of personal equity in real estate. Banks ( like Goldman Sachs, loved and rewarded by Obama) now own more than 90% of privately owned real estate. Isn’t that great that we have soaked those evil wealthy people that own their homes.
The “governmentalists” in Washington are doing everything they can to destroy private enterprise and replace it with inept government workers.
- - -
Reporting from Orange County and Washington — Regulators took on the mortgage industry's best-known figure Thursday, accusing former Countrywide Financial Corp. Chief Executive Angelo Mozilo of hiding his alarm about risky loans the company was making at the height of the housing boom while he was reaping nearly $140 million in profits on stock sales.
In a fraud and insider-trading lawsuit against Mozilo, the Securities and Exchange Commission
quotes e-mails in which the executive derided certain Countrywide loan products as "toxic" and "poison" more than three years ago -- well before "toxic debt" entered the popular lexicon as the cause of the housing crash and the resulting global financial crisis and deep recession.
- - -
I wonder why so many Goldman Sachs executives are in the government? Read:
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/09/22/paulson-goldman-bailout/
- - -
Re: Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac:
Fannie Mae executive Franklin Raines reaped 90 million in bonuses while Fannie Mae collapsed due to bad loans. Barney Frank was reporting, “Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are sound financially.” even after they were already bankrupt. He then denied he said it in spite of TV recordings of his speech.
As I understand it, the common and preferred shareholders are basically being wiped out, but the government is backing Fannie and Freddie's existing debt, the value of which therefore rose. So here's my question: if Fannie and Freddie were heading for bankruptcy but for the government's intervention, why didn't the Treasury Department bargain hard with major holders of their existing debt (such as the Chinese government), and threaten to let Fannie and Freddie go bankrupt unless the debtholders agreed to write down the value of the debt? After all, there was no explicit guarantee of such debt, and Treasury still could have agreed to explicitly guarantee FUTURE Fannie and Freddie debt.
The way the bailout is structured, it seems that Fannie and Freddie shareholders, and the American taxpayer, are paying the price, but holders of the GSE's debt get made whole at the latter's expense. Why?
The Country Wide debacle went right along with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
- - -
Acorn real estate deals in Ft Wayne:
Some time ago I heard on local radio in Ft Wayne about a real estate loan scam that was conducted in that city. Three local banks charged a number of people (5 or 6 were members of Acorn by the way) with conspiracy to defraud the banks with loans made based on fraudulent appraisals. I checked the website they sighted and copied the following information about how they did it:
They bought up low value inner city homes in Ft Wayne for between $20,000 and $40,000. Then they did some cosmetic improvements that cost between $3,000 and $6,000. Next they had appraisals made for 3 or four times their cost by their appraisers. (I wonder how much of a kick back those appraisers received.) Then they found local people to buy these houses securing loans from these banks backed by Fannie Mae for 100% of the purchase price. They paid these people $15,000 to $30,000 from the loan proceeds and pocketed the remainder. When the buyers realized they could not keep up the payments they walked away. When the banks finally foreclosed they were left holding mortgages three or four times the value of the homes. In many cases strippers moved in soon after the house was vacated and stripped everything of value including copper piping and wiring that was sold as scrap. These stripped houses lost their entire value as repair costs were prohibitive. The losses to the mortgage holders were substantial. Recently I went back on the Internet to get links for this paper and, lo and behold, they were gone without a trace. I searched under every name and title I could think of and nothing turned up. I wonder how that happened?
For more info on Acorn goto: http://www.fortwaynenews.com/index.php/2008/09/28/democrats-seeking-to-line-the-pockets-of-acorn/
- - -
The Obama Government paid healthcare bill is not about healthcare. It is principally an effort to destroy private insurance companies and replace them with government bureaucracies. It includes the eventual replacement of all private insurance with single payer government run healthcare. It also includes euthanasia and withholding services from the elderly, and rationing. It has never worked in any nation that tried it. Ask the French, Britons and Canadiens.
- - -
The entire Democrat campaign is based on class warfare with hate for the wealthy. Apparently Obama’s method of leveling the playing field for income is based on reducing the income of all productive, middle class and wealthy individuals to that of the poor. They have sure got a good start on doing just that. It doesn’t help the poor one little bit but it sure does punish those evil wealthy people. Wouldn’t it be better to help bring those on low incomes up rather than tearing the rich down? I guess Democrats are so filled with hate they would rather hurt successful people and punish them for being successful than try to raise the incomes of the poor and enable them to be more productive .
- - -
Obama’s promise of no tax increases for those earning less than $250,000.00 per year were absolutely useless. Now he says that even the poor will be taxed. I wonder, did he forget that everyone including the poor already pay 20% to 25% of every dollar they spend in hidden taxes on virtually everything.
- - -
The promise of a max of 8% unemployment after the stimulus was pure fiction. It is already above 9.5% and heading higher.
This unemployment is a direct result of the expected reduction of business profits as increases in taxes prompt business executives to cut employment and plans for growth which must be paid for out of profits.
- - -
The Obama administration’s predictions of the results of their actions have all been terrible failures.
- - -
Government bureaucracies cost at least twice as much as private businesses doing the same things. They are also much less efficient.
- - -
Tax cheat Timothy Geitner promises massive tax increases. Michael Rozbruch, a Certified Tax Resolution Specialist says, “Unfortunately, the Obama Administration may be sending the wrong message to the American taxpaying public by apparently condoning the behavior of Tim Geitner and Tom Daschle. Although Daschle withdrew his name as a nominee for the Health and Human Services Secretary is still leaves a bad taste in people’s mouths. And I am positive that if he weren’t named as a nominee he would still owe the IRS $120,000 + today.”
- - -
Raising taxes above 15% on business profits will always result in lower revenue receipts. Lowering taxes on business profits down to 15% has always resulted in higher tax revenues.
- - -
The Chinese who hold most of our debt are about to cut off our credit line.
- - -
Income tax receipts down 22 %, business tax receipts are down 28% from a year ago. That’s the biggest drop since the great depression. Nice going, Obama!
- - -
A few Obamaisms:
“If you are a family with income of less than $250,000 my plan will not raise your taxes one iota.” Obama. - Ha!
“If you are a family with income of less than $200,000 my plan will give you a reduction in your taxes.” Obama. - Ha!
“My health care plan will let you keep your present insurance.” Obama. The truth is just the opposite.
“We will not be running the Auto companies.” Obama.
Hey Pres! Firing the president and ordering the main offices moved from Warren to downtown Detroit is running the company. Try doing anything the government doesn’t approve and you’ll see who’s running the company.
- - -
The Post Office is hemorrhaging money at such a rate they are considering closing as many as 1,500 post offices (and releasing 10,000 employees). I thought government employees couldn’t be fired or cut.
- - -
Democrats plan on repealing the 22nd amendment. I wonder why?
Thursday, July 09, 2009
The Power of Celebrity
Michael Jackson - The Power of Celebrity
First of all it is sad whenever anyone dies, sad for family, sad for friends, especially when they pass at a relatively young age. But the exercise in celebrity worship over Michael Jackson was a circus. It would have been comedic had it not been about a death. The aim of this article is not to condemn Jackson, but to point out how celebrities, the wealthy, and the powerful can get away with actions that would bring disgrace and even jail time on ordinary people. The bigger the celebrity, the greater their wealth, the more powerful the individual, the more they can get away with. Think of Henry the Eighth, the ultimate combination of celebrity, wealth and power.
The TV funeral showed clearly how some people, and especially celebrities and other “fans” can get caught up in an almost religious fervor over a celebrity who was never directly connected to their lives. Oh, maybe a few of the “big” celebrities (I won’t comment about their eulogies) met him or knew him professionally, but most of those only knew him from his performances. They came seeking the spotlight and in hope some of his celebrity might “rub off” on them.
Of course, there were those “look at me” self promoters like Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton, who appear at most newsworthy events seeking the media spotlight. Then there were some of the Hollywood crowd, darlings of the media and overflowing with tears—acting? I saw a few cuts of their actions and words on the news as I chose not to watch the media circus. Granted, Jackson displayed great talent and for that gained super celebrity status, but just look at some of the realities of his life.
He must have hated being black, something none of his “fans” ever mentioned or considered. Just look at him. He had all semblance of his racial origins changed to Caucasian. Just compare early pictures of him, before the surgeons and dermatologists reworked him into a pasty faced, non-black. Then, did he choose a black woman to mother his children? This alone should have angered or at least upset the black community. Of course, his wealth and celebrity overwhelmed any of that and the many celebrants at his funeral oozed adulation.
Then there was his notorious actions with young boys that resulted in several charges, later dropped after multi million dollar payments. In a taped interview with Martin Bashir he said about young boys, "Why can't you share your bed? The most loving thing to do, is to share your bed with someone."
The entire interview can be read at:
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=30853.
But for his celebrity and wealth he would be a registered sex offender who spent time in prison. True, there are some of these famous folks that take a fall, but these are usually minor celebrities with little wealth or power. Look at the known but well hidden parade of females Lyndon Johnson and John Kennedy had, even in the White House. Then there is Bill Clinton who did the same thing but with far less panache compared with the other two. Clinton was so crude he got caught, but even then he got away with it in spite of lying publicly to the entire nation. The dalliances of powerful public figures have been known for a very long time and will probably continue. As someone once said, “Hell, if you have enough money and power you can get away with murder.”
Such is the power of celebrity. Michael Jackson is just one example of the very different playing field the rich and famous have compared to ordinary people. There are many other obvious and a few less obvious examples. It is apparent that to the American media, celebrity, wealth and power count far more in positive news than honor, honesty, integrity or even decency. And a large number of Americans follow and believe the main stream media whose celebrities are right there amidst the Hollywood crowd. It’s no wonder instincts and emotion override logic and rationality in the judgement of so many people. “Like diarrhea, it runs in the genes.” Thinking and logic have become quite unpopular in recent years. Today with the majority of Americans it’s all about “looking good,” “following the crowd,” “being cool,” and “me first.” Oh yes, one final remark: if you happen to be a successful business person or politically a non-liberal no matter how decent, you will be reviled, cursed and condemned while your equally wealthy celebrity or leftist is admired, emulated, praised, and excused for all manner of evils. You can thank the media part of the entertainment world for that.
First of all it is sad whenever anyone dies, sad for family, sad for friends, especially when they pass at a relatively young age. But the exercise in celebrity worship over Michael Jackson was a circus. It would have been comedic had it not been about a death. The aim of this article is not to condemn Jackson, but to point out how celebrities, the wealthy, and the powerful can get away with actions that would bring disgrace and even jail time on ordinary people. The bigger the celebrity, the greater their wealth, the more powerful the individual, the more they can get away with. Think of Henry the Eighth, the ultimate combination of celebrity, wealth and power.
The TV funeral showed clearly how some people, and especially celebrities and other “fans” can get caught up in an almost religious fervor over a celebrity who was never directly connected to their lives. Oh, maybe a few of the “big” celebrities (I won’t comment about their eulogies) met him or knew him professionally, but most of those only knew him from his performances. They came seeking the spotlight and in hope some of his celebrity might “rub off” on them.
Of course, there were those “look at me” self promoters like Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton, who appear at most newsworthy events seeking the media spotlight. Then there were some of the Hollywood crowd, darlings of the media and overflowing with tears—acting? I saw a few cuts of their actions and words on the news as I chose not to watch the media circus. Granted, Jackson displayed great talent and for that gained super celebrity status, but just look at some of the realities of his life.
He must have hated being black, something none of his “fans” ever mentioned or considered. Just look at him. He had all semblance of his racial origins changed to Caucasian. Just compare early pictures of him, before the surgeons and dermatologists reworked him into a pasty faced, non-black. Then, did he choose a black woman to mother his children? This alone should have angered or at least upset the black community. Of course, his wealth and celebrity overwhelmed any of that and the many celebrants at his funeral oozed adulation.
Then there was his notorious actions with young boys that resulted in several charges, later dropped after multi million dollar payments. In a taped interview with Martin Bashir he said about young boys, "Why can't you share your bed? The most loving thing to do, is to share your bed with someone."
The entire interview can be read at:
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=30853.
But for his celebrity and wealth he would be a registered sex offender who spent time in prison. True, there are some of these famous folks that take a fall, but these are usually minor celebrities with little wealth or power. Look at the known but well hidden parade of females Lyndon Johnson and John Kennedy had, even in the White House. Then there is Bill Clinton who did the same thing but with far less panache compared with the other two. Clinton was so crude he got caught, but even then he got away with it in spite of lying publicly to the entire nation. The dalliances of powerful public figures have been known for a very long time and will probably continue. As someone once said, “Hell, if you have enough money and power you can get away with murder.”
Such is the power of celebrity. Michael Jackson is just one example of the very different playing field the rich and famous have compared to ordinary people. There are many other obvious and a few less obvious examples. It is apparent that to the American media, celebrity, wealth and power count far more in positive news than honor, honesty, integrity or even decency. And a large number of Americans follow and believe the main stream media whose celebrities are right there amidst the Hollywood crowd. It’s no wonder instincts and emotion override logic and rationality in the judgement of so many people. “Like diarrhea, it runs in the genes.” Thinking and logic have become quite unpopular in recent years. Today with the majority of Americans it’s all about “looking good,” “following the crowd,” “being cool,” and “me first.” Oh yes, one final remark: if you happen to be a successful business person or politically a non-liberal no matter how decent, you will be reviled, cursed and condemned while your equally wealthy celebrity or leftist is admired, emulated, praised, and excused for all manner of evils. You can thank the media part of the entertainment world for that.
Friday, June 05, 2009
America decends into dark, gray Marxist totalitarianism
Note from HJ: When I read this it confirmed what I have been saying in many different ways for many years and is at the heart of my book, The Feudals, that I have been working on for at least twelve years. That's why it is repeated here.
Note from Don Wildmon: For years I have refused to use words such as Marxism, socialism or similar words when describing our current situation. However, it is time to call a spade a spade, regardless of how those who oppose us label us. Rome is burning. The article below was written by Stanislav Mishin, a blogger and columnist for the Russian newspaper Pravda.
American capitalism gone with a whimper . . . . .
It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American decent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I meant people.
True, the situation has been well prepared on and off for the past century, especially the past twenty years. The initial testing grounds was conducted upon our Holy Russia and a bloody test it was. But we Russians would not just roll over and give up our freedoms and our souls, no matter how much money Wall Street poured into the fists of the Marxists.
Those lessons were taken and used to properly prepare the American populace for the surrender of their freedoms and souls, to the whims of their elites and betters.
First, the population was dumbed down through a politicized and substandard education system based on pop culture, rather than the classics. Americans know more about their favorite TV dramas than the drama in DC that directly affects their lives. They care more for their "right" to choke down a McDonalds burger or a BurgerKing burger than for their constitutional rights. Then they turn around and lecture us (Russia) about our rights and about our "democracy". Pride blinds the foolish.
Then their faith in God was destroyed, until their churches, all tens of thousands of different "branches and denominations" were for the most part little more then Sunday circuses and their televangelists and top protestant mega preachers were more then happy to sell out their souls and flocks to be on the "winning" side of one pseudo Marxist politician or another. Their flocks may complain, but when explained that they would be on the "winning" side, their flocks were ever so quick to reject Christ in hopes for earthly power. Even our Holy Orthodox (Russian Orthodox) churches are scandalously liberalized in America.
The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama. His speed in the past three months has been truly impressive. His spending and money printing has been a record setting, not just in America's short history but in the world. If this keeps up for more than another year, and there is no sign that it will not, America at best will resemble the Wiemar Republic and at worst Zimbabwe.
These past two weeks have been the most breath taking of all. First came the announcement of a planned redesign of the American Byzantine tax system, by the very thieves who used it to bankroll their thefts, loses and swindles of hundreds of billions of dollars. These make our Russian oligarchs look little more than ordinary street thugs, in comparison. Yes, the Americans have beat our own thieves in the shear volumes. Should we congratulate them?
These men, of course, are not an elected panel but made up of appointees picked from the very financial oligarchs and their henchmen who are now gorging themselves on trillions of American dollars, in one bailout after another. They are also usurping the rights, duties and powers of the American congress (parliament). Again, congress has put up little more then a whimper to their masters.
Then came Barack Obama's command that GM's (General Motor) president step down from leadership of his company. That is correct, dear reader, in the land of "pure" free markets, the American president now has the power, the self given power, to fire CEOs and we can assume other employees of private companies, at will. Come hither, go dither, the centurion commands his minions.
So it should be no surprise that the American president has followed this up with a "bold" move of declaring that he and another group of unelected, chosen stooges will now redesign the entire automotive industry and will even be the guarantee of automobile policies. I am sure that if given the chance, they would happily try and redesign it for the whole of the world, too. Prime Minister Putin, less then two months ago, warned Obama and UK's Blair, not to follow the path to Marxism, it only leads to disaster. Apparently, even though we suffered 70 years of this Western sponsored horror show, we know nothing, as foolish, drunken Russians, so let our "wise" Anglo-Saxon fools find out the folly of their own pride.
Again, the American public has taken this with barely a whimper...but a "freeman" whimper.
So, should it be any surprise to discover that the Democratically controlled Congress of America is working on passing a new regulation that would give the American Treasury department the power to set "fair" maximum salaries, evaluate performance and control how private companies give out pay raises and bonuses? Senator Barney Franks, a social pervert basking in his homosexuality (of course, amongst the modern, enlightened American societal norm, as well as that of the general West, homosexuality is not only not a looked down upon life choice, but is often praised as a virtue) and his Marxist enlightenment, has led this effort. He stresses that this only affects companies that receive government monies, but it is retroactive and taken to a logical extreme, this would include any company or industry that has ever received a tax break or incentive.
The Russian owners of American companies and industries should look thoughtfully at this and the option of closing their facilities down and fleeing the land of the Red as fast as possible. In other words, divest while there is still value left.
The proud American will go down into his slavery with out a fight, beating his chest and proclaiming to the world, how free he really is. The world will only snicker.
Stanislav Mishin
Note from Don Wildmon: For years I have refused to use words such as Marxism, socialism or similar words when describing our current situation. However, it is time to call a spade a spade, regardless of how those who oppose us label us. Rome is burning. The article below was written by Stanislav Mishin, a blogger and columnist for the Russian newspaper Pravda.
American capitalism gone with a whimper . . . . .
It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American decent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I meant people.
True, the situation has been well prepared on and off for the past century, especially the past twenty years. The initial testing grounds was conducted upon our Holy Russia and a bloody test it was. But we Russians would not just roll over and give up our freedoms and our souls, no matter how much money Wall Street poured into the fists of the Marxists.
Those lessons were taken and used to properly prepare the American populace for the surrender of their freedoms and souls, to the whims of their elites and betters.
First, the population was dumbed down through a politicized and substandard education system based on pop culture, rather than the classics. Americans know more about their favorite TV dramas than the drama in DC that directly affects their lives. They care more for their "right" to choke down a McDonalds burger or a BurgerKing burger than for their constitutional rights. Then they turn around and lecture us (Russia) about our rights and about our "democracy". Pride blinds the foolish.
Then their faith in God was destroyed, until their churches, all tens of thousands of different "branches and denominations" were for the most part little more then Sunday circuses and their televangelists and top protestant mega preachers were more then happy to sell out their souls and flocks to be on the "winning" side of one pseudo Marxist politician or another. Their flocks may complain, but when explained that they would be on the "winning" side, their flocks were ever so quick to reject Christ in hopes for earthly power. Even our Holy Orthodox (Russian Orthodox) churches are scandalously liberalized in America.
The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama. His speed in the past three months has been truly impressive. His spending and money printing has been a record setting, not just in America's short history but in the world. If this keeps up for more than another year, and there is no sign that it will not, America at best will resemble the Wiemar Republic and at worst Zimbabwe.
These past two weeks have been the most breath taking of all. First came the announcement of a planned redesign of the American Byzantine tax system, by the very thieves who used it to bankroll their thefts, loses and swindles of hundreds of billions of dollars. These make our Russian oligarchs look little more than ordinary street thugs, in comparison. Yes, the Americans have beat our own thieves in the shear volumes. Should we congratulate them?
These men, of course, are not an elected panel but made up of appointees picked from the very financial oligarchs and their henchmen who are now gorging themselves on trillions of American dollars, in one bailout after another. They are also usurping the rights, duties and powers of the American congress (parliament). Again, congress has put up little more then a whimper to their masters.
Then came Barack Obama's command that GM's (General Motor) president step down from leadership of his company. That is correct, dear reader, in the land of "pure" free markets, the American president now has the power, the self given power, to fire CEOs and we can assume other employees of private companies, at will. Come hither, go dither, the centurion commands his minions.
So it should be no surprise that the American president has followed this up with a "bold" move of declaring that he and another group of unelected, chosen stooges will now redesign the entire automotive industry and will even be the guarantee of automobile policies. I am sure that if given the chance, they would happily try and redesign it for the whole of the world, too. Prime Minister Putin, less then two months ago, warned Obama and UK's Blair, not to follow the path to Marxism, it only leads to disaster. Apparently, even though we suffered 70 years of this Western sponsored horror show, we know nothing, as foolish, drunken Russians, so let our "wise" Anglo-Saxon fools find out the folly of their own pride.
Again, the American public has taken this with barely a whimper...but a "freeman" whimper.
So, should it be any surprise to discover that the Democratically controlled Congress of America is working on passing a new regulation that would give the American Treasury department the power to set "fair" maximum salaries, evaluate performance and control how private companies give out pay raises and bonuses? Senator Barney Franks, a social pervert basking in his homosexuality (of course, amongst the modern, enlightened American societal norm, as well as that of the general West, homosexuality is not only not a looked down upon life choice, but is often praised as a virtue) and his Marxist enlightenment, has led this effort. He stresses that this only affects companies that receive government monies, but it is retroactive and taken to a logical extreme, this would include any company or industry that has ever received a tax break or incentive.
The Russian owners of American companies and industries should look thoughtfully at this and the option of closing their facilities down and fleeing the land of the Red as fast as possible. In other words, divest while there is still value left.
The proud American will go down into his slavery with out a fight, beating his chest and proclaiming to the world, how free he really is. The world will only snicker.
Stanislav Mishin
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Feudalism Rears its Ugly Head
by Howard Johnson
Straight out of the medieval period, feudalism is about to turn all American common people into serfs—virtually the property of their wealthy and powerful masters, the politicians. We are now facing the comprehensive controlling power of governmental officials—the kings, queens, lords and ladies now in control of our growing feudal political system.
Socialism, Communism, Fascism, Liberalism—no matter what it is named, it is the current version of the cruel, totalitarian feudal system of the middle ages. The Sheriff of Nottingham would be right at home in our new government of “change.” For those educated in our failing government schools, I suggest you read “The Legend of Robinhood” to learn about the Sheriff of Nottingham. If you can’t read, go to your video store and ask for the movie, “Robinhood of Sherwood Forrest.”
Names and dates of movies about Robinhood
The Robin Hood legend has long been popular with movie makers, inspiring the silent version starring Douglas Fairbanks, the Errol Flynn classic of 1938, Sean Connery and Audrey Hepburn's "Robin and Marian" in 1976, Disney's own live-action version "The Story of Robin Hood and His Merrie Men" in 1952, and Kevin Costner's latest version in 1991.
* * *
"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
President Barack Obama, July 2, 2009
He may already have this force in place. It’s now called ACORN.
Sounds like Hitler’s Brown Shirts in 1929 to me. See later at the end of this blog
* * *
I have had it! I have listened to hatred spewed from the mouths of idiots, fools, and buffoons for years. Hatred and animosity is constantly aimed at anyone who disagrees with the “HOLY” positions, actions, pronouncements, and agendas of the left. This vilification comes with curses and damnation from so-called “objective” and “compassionate” liberals. I myself have been cursed, called all manner of names like stupid, ignorant, and received many other abusive and demeaning labels and actions. All from the colossal frauds, the minions of the liberal left, that pass themselves off as humanitarians saviors of “the people.” Over many years you leeches on the left have succeeded in using ignorant mobs of blind followers to put in public office all manner of self-serving low lives: liars, thieves, cheats, and worse—men and women without honor or human decency.
All your politicians of the left seem to want is more power, more money, and more control. Just listen to what your President said today, March 27, 2009. He actually said, “The government will tell you when to turn the lights in your homes on and off.” He obviously intends to do just that. This is pathetic!
Powered by a voting public of celebrity worshiping, historically ignorant people, the power hungry tyrants that have driven the corrupt Cook county Democrat machine for decades have invaded and taken over our national government. There is an old phrase reserved for people of high and mighty reputation—those that rise to the top. That phrase is “la creme de la creme,” literally, the cream of the cream. Well let me tell you, there is another material that “rises to the top.” If you have ever seen the disgusting slurry that fills a cesspool or septic tank you will remember the foamy scum that floats on the top. That could be described as “la scum de la scum.” This is a deceptively accurate description of those who have “risen to the top” in the federal government, both elected, appointed, and hired into the bureaucracy. These are la scum de la scum of America. The few exceptions in the federal government merely make the evil majority all the more visible. They have been caught in so many lies and other deceptions in recent years as to have lost credibility with all but the blindest of their slavish followers. As this is being written many protesters are at “TEA” parties shouting, “No more bailouts!” Is it possible the public are finally catching on to what is going on?
Actually, I don’t blame you on the left for your emotional diatribes. To borrow one of your mantras, “It’s not my fault. I can’t help myself.” Maybe it just like one comedian of years ago often said, “The Devil made me do it.” You are merely exhibiting those very human animal instincts, those emotionally driven processes, the instincts that provided homo sapiens the reproductive success that is now overrunning the planet. Humanitarian concerns and reason are completely overwhelmed by angry emotions incited into hatred by the mob leaders you have selected. The bus of state is being driven by a committee of permanent adolescents with little real experience, and questionable backgrounds. These include tax cheats controlling the financial powers of our government. They are so disorganized they frequently counter each other’s arguments. Democrat legislators are passing major legislation virtually none of them have read. I wonder who it was that actually wrote the $800 billion “porkulous” bill? And how about that huge Democrat boondogle, “The Federal Budget?” Who wrote that? Those who would destroy our nation could hardly have dreamed in their wildest imagination that such an instrument of our devastation could been proposed by our own government.
This condition has been brought about by a selection process designed two and a quarter centuries ago for people who mostly walked from place to place, sent mail by horse or boat, traveled on the water by canoe or sail, and couldn’t read. There were exceptions, mostly among the “wealthy,” people who could read and had horses for transport. To use this ponderous, antiquated, and unwieldy process in the age of instant access to the Internet, world wide transport in hours rather than months, and the vast technology available to rapidly expanding numbers of people in most of the world. Because of this, I propose we make a huge change in the selection of all elected officials, federal and state. We will need a major revision of our Constitutionally defined process of selecting all political offices and positions. This proposal is described as a simplified method and easily instituted system for selection of legislators and executives as well as other offices.
I propose we do away with elections which have enabled self-serving, power hungry individuals and groups to bully and buy their way into control of the election process for the legislature. This new process would remove completely the power money and influence have over our current election process. A lottery system for selection of legislators would accomplish the replacement of all financial influence with chance, removing virtually any undue influence by anyone. Any legislature chosen at random from the public would be relatively free of the influence now so powerful a force in government. It couldn’t possibly be any worse than what we have now.
Here’s a first effort at how it would work: Using the social security system, all those with social security numbers would be able to enter the “pool” of citizens for the lottery. Entry into the pool would be optional. Those who did not want to participate could merely not register. Registration would be conducted by the current systems being used to register voters. Current Congressional districts could be used to determine the numbers of representatives and the constituency from whom they would be chosen. All those registered in any district would be in that district’s pool. Each district would draw numbers of nine individuals from the pool. This would provide the members of the second level pool.
The second level pool: The entire group for each state would meet and elect one member as their Senator along with an alternate for each Senate seat. Once the Senators and alternates are chosen, the groups of nine would meet and select two of each group to be their representatives in Congress. Two alternates would also be chosen in each group. Representatives would be selected every two years while Senators would serve four years. By using nine members in each group, the possibility of a tie would be avoided. The purpose of the two alternates would be to replace the one originally chosen should that person be unable to perform their duties for any reason. Any felony conviction would be cause for immediate expulsion.
Reselection: Once their terms in office are over, sitting members of both houses would automatically be included in the next selection group from their district or state. This would make selection groups of eleven and add one more Senate candidate in each state group. These “Incumbents” would face the same election process as other members of each group. Terms would be limited to three for any one office. That is six years for Representatives and twelve years for Senators.
States could set up similar systems for selection of their legislatures. This new lottery system would apply only to legislators. Other offices could still be elected by the existing system.
“Seek not the favor of the multitude; it is seldom got by honest and lawful means. But seek the testimony of few; and number not voices, but weigh them.”
“All our knowledge begins with the senses, proceeds then to the understanding, and ends with reason. There is nothing higher than reason.”
Emmanuel Kant
“All our passions begin with emotions—instinctive reactions driven by millennia of evolution. There is no reason, rationality, or knowledge in passion, only the animal actions of flight, consummation, procreation, self-preservation, or combat.”
Howard Johnson
* * *
Subject: Something of Historic Proportion is HappeningDate: Friday, March 13, 2009, 3:10 PM
by Pamela Geller
Pamela "Atlas" Geller began her publishing career at The New York Daily News and subsequently took over operation of The New York Observer as Associate Publisher.
She left The Observer after the birth of her fourth child but remained involved in various projects including American Associates, Ben Gurion University and being Senior Vice-President Strategic Planning and Performance Evaluation at The Brandeis School.
After 9/11, Atlas had the veil of oblivion violently lifted from her consciousness and immersed herself in the education and understanding of geopolitics, Islam, terror, foreign affairs and imminent threats the mainstream media and the government wouldn't cover or discuss.
Her website, www.AtlasShrugged.com, winner of the "Best New Blog" 2005 Jewish and Israeli Blog Award and finalist in the 2005 Weblog Awards, is a counter terrorism site fighting the great fight, changing the world one word at a time. Leading authorities are regularly interviewed. She routinely confers with leading scholars on the Middle East, Islam, Eurabia , China and Russia ..
The objective of her website is to cover related but little reported events of great import. She provides an unblinking, glaring examination of global affairs and is a member of Pajamas Media.
href="http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/a...ing-of-hi.html
Subject: "Something of Historic Proportion is Happening" by Pam Geller
I am a student of history. Professionally. I have written 15 books in six languages, and have studied it all my life.. I think there is something monumentally large afoot, and I do not believe it is just a banking crisis, or a mortgage crisis, or a credit crisis. Yes, these exist but they are merely single facets on a very large gemstone that is only now coming into a sharper focus.
Something of historic proportions is happening. I can sense it because I know how it feels, smells, what it looks like, and how people react to it.
Yes, a perfect storm may be brewing, but there is something happening within our country that has been evolving for about 10 - 15 years. The pace has dramatically quickened in the past two.
We demand and then codify into law the requirement that our banks make massive loans to people whom we know can never pay back. Why? We learn just days ago that the Federal Reserve, which has little or no real oversight by anyone, has "loaned" two trillion dollars (that is $2,000,000,000,000) over the past few months, but will not tell us to whom or why or disclose the terms. That is our money. Yours and mine. And that is three times the $700B we all argued about so strenuously just this past September.
Who has this money? Why do they have it? Why are the terms unavailable to us? Who asked for it? Who authorized it? I thought this was a government of "We the People," who lent our powers to our elected leaders..Apparently not.
We have spent two or more decades intentionally de-industrializing our economy. Why? We have intentionally dumbed down our schools, ignored our history, and no longer teach our founding documents, why we are exceptional, and why we are worth preserving. Students by and large cannot write, think critically, read, or articulate. Parents are not revolting, teachers are not picketing, and school boards continue to back mediocrity. Why?
We have now established the precedent of protesting every close election (now violently in California over a proposition that is so controversial that it wants marriage to remain between one man and one woman. Did you ever think such a thing possible just a decade ago?). We have corrupted our sacred political process by allowing unelected judges to write laws that radically change our way of life, and then mainstream Marxist groups like ACORN and others to turn our voting system into a banana republic. To what purpose?
Now our mortgage industry is collapsing, housing prices are in free fall, major industries are failing, our banking system is on the verge of collapse, Social Security is nearly bankrupt, as is Medicare and our entire government. Our education system is worse than a joke (I teach college and know precisely what I am talking about.) The list is staggering in its length, breadth, and depth. It is potentially 1929 x 10. And we are at war with an enemy we cannot name for fear of offending people of the same religion who cannot wait to slit the throats of your children if they have the opportunity to do so.
And now we have elected a man no one knows anything about, who has never run so much as a Dairy Queen, let alone a town as big as Wasilla , Alaska . All of his associations and alliances are with real radicals in their chosen fields of employment, and everything we learn about him, drip by drip, is unsettling if not downright scary (Surely you have heard him speak about his idea to create and fund a mandatory civilian defense force stronger than our military for use inside our borders? No? Oh, of course. The media would never play that for you over and over and then demand he answer it. Sarah Palin's pregnant daughter and $150,000 wardrobe is more important.)
Mr. Obama's winning platform can be boiled down to one word: Change. Why?
I have never been so afraid for my country and for my children as I am now. This man campaigned on bringing people together, something he has never, ever done in his professional life. In my assessment, Obama will divide us along philosophical lines, push us apart, and then try to realign the pieces into a new and different power structure. Change is indeed coming. And when it comes, you will never see the same nation again.
And that is only the beginning.
I thought I would never be able to experience what the ordinary, moral German felt in the mid-1930's. In those times, the savior was a former smooth-talking rabble-rouser from the streets, about whom the average German knew next to nothing. What they did know was that he was associated with groups that shouted, shoved, and pushed around people with whom they disagreed; he edged his way onto the political stage through great oratory and promises. Economic times were tough, people were losing jobs, and he was a great speaker. And he smiled and waved a lot. And people, even newspapers, were afraid to speak out for fear that his "brown shirts" would bully them into submission.
And then he was duly elected to office, with a full-throttled economic crisis at hand [the Great Depression]. Slowly but surely he seized the controls of government power, department by department, person by person, bureaucracy by bureaucracy. The kids joined a Youth Movement in his name, where they were taught what to think.
How did he get the people on his side? He did it promising jobs to the jobless, money to the moneyless, and goodies for the military-industrial complex. He did it by indoctrinating the children, advocating gun control, health care for all, better wages, better jobs, and promising to re-instill pride once again in the country, across Europe , and across the world.
He did it with a compliant media - Did you know that? And he did this all in the name of justice and .. . . change. And the people surely got what they voted for. (Look it up if you think I am exaggerating.) Read your history books. Many people objected in 1933 and were shouted down, called names, laughed at, and made fun of. When Winston Churchill pointed out the obvious in the late 1930's while seated in the House of Lords in England (he was not yet Prime Minister), he was booed into his seat and called a crazy troublemaker. He was right, though ..
Don't forget that Germany was the most educated, cultured country in Europe . It was full of music, art, museums, hospitals, laboratories, and universities. And in less than six years - a shorter time span than just two terms of the U. S. presidency - it was rounding up its own citizens, killing others, abrogating its laws, turning children against parents, and neighbors against neighbors. All with the best of intentions, of course. The road to Hell is paved with them.
As a practical thinker, one not overly prone to emotional decisions, I have a choice: I can either believe what the objective pieces of evidence tell me (even if they make me cringe with disgust); I can believe what history is shouting to me from across the chasm of seven decades; or I can hope I am wrong, close my eyes, have another latte and ignore what is transpiring around me.
Some people scoff at me; others laugh or think I am foolish, naive, or both. Perhaps I am.. But I have never been afraid to look people in the eye and tell them exactly what I believe—and why I believe it. I pray I am wrong. I do not think I am.
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for dinner. Liberty is a well-armed lamb."
Benjamin Franklin
See if you see any similarity to the present U.S.
The National Socialist German Workers' Party, (German: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, abbreviated NSDAP), commonly known in English as the Nazi Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei), was a political party in Germany between 1919 and 1945. It was known as the German Workers' Party (DAP) before the name was changed in 1920.
The party's last leader, Adolf Hitler, was appointed Chancellor of Germany by president Paul von Hindenburg in 1933. Hitler rapidly established a totalitarian regime known as the Third Reich.
Nazi ideology stressed the failure of the economy, the failure of democracy, and the failure of laissez-faire capitalism.
During the 1920s Hitler organized the De-Sturmabteilung.ogg Sturmabteilung, abbreviated SA, (German for "Assault detachment" or "Assault section", usually translated as "stormtroop(er)s"). Originally a “civilian security force” (sound familiar?) that functioned as a paramilitary organization of the NSDAP – the German Nazi party. It played a key role in Adolf Hitler's rise to power in the 1920s and 1930s.
SA men were often called "brownshirts", for the color of their uniforms; this distinguished them from the Schutzstaffel (SS), who wore black and brown uniforms. I wonder what color shirts members of ACORN wear?
"History is the witness of the times, the light of truth."
--Cicero
"Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it."
--George Santayana
Saturday, March 21, 2009
NASA's Global CO2 Surveyor
My son recently sent me an article about NASA’s global CO2 surveyor satellite that unfortunately didn’t achieve orbit and was destroyed. I could not find any links to the article, so I attached it to this email. In it I found some interesting statements that prompted the following response:
Dear Mike:
I often become suspicious of the veracity and the political motives of articles published by some “scientists” when those articles contain statements that are patently false or at least misleading. I also view as suspect the common assumption made that CO2 generated by human activity is a major factor in and causes catastrophic global warming. This one assumption runs counter to conclusions from many long studied and well known factors that affect climate. The following paragraph is from that article. It caught my eye because one little sentence in italics, the basis for the accuracy of the entire project, is untrue.
“Carbon dioxide molecules aren’t measured directly; the instrument tabulates the absorption of sunlight by CO2 and molecular oxygen molecules before and after sunlight is reflected off the Earth’s surface. Since each molecule has a unique infrared signature, they can be singled out and counted. There are two detectors for CO2 because it is easier to spot near the Earth’s surface at 1/61 microns and in the atmosphere at 2.06 microns. The molecular oxygen A-band channel acts as a survey control because its presence in the atmosphere is constant.”
In rebuttal I offer a substantiated quote from my book, A Convenient Solution, and an article I published in 2007. The full article on global warming can be found at http://hjgulfstream.blogspot.com. Should you want to read the section in my book it is available on the web at http://acsexcerpts.blogspot.com.
From page 47 of the book: With the exception of hydrogen, all gaseous, liquid, and solid fuels produce carbon dioxide when burned in any energy process. In addition, the production of hydrogen by any means other than by electrolysis, using energy from nuclear, wind, water or tidal power plants will add carbon dioxide to the atmosphere from both the energy and the raw materials used to create the hydrogen (coal-fired power plants for instance). It is interesting to note that for each pound of carbon oxidized to carbon dioxide, four pounds of oxygen are removed from the atmosphere. For every thousand tons of CO2 added to the atmosphere, eight hundred tons of oxygen are removed. In all the concern about CO2 there has never been a single mention of that fact.
The obvious conclusion is that the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere is not a constant as stated in the article in Aviation Week.
It should be interesting to note that I do not agree with those who say atmospheric CO2 has a catastrophic effect on climate or with those who argue it has absolutely no effect. It is just that the amount of that effect, though real, is so small as to be insignificant compared to other, well known factors. In just the same way, pouring a bucket of water into Lake Erie raises the lake level. I do not think shore dwellers need to fear that will flood their homes. This puts me solidly against global warming proponents in government who use it to gain power and as a huge cash cow of tax revenue. In addition there are literally thousands of groups using proven tactics to frighten the public into compliance donations, and mindless support.
From my article on global warming: Any global warming from the effects of CO2, if indeed it exists or poses any danger at all, is grossly distorted relative to the facts at hand. Most of the data used to show global warming are at best statistical and at worst, anecdotal. Both of which provide great opportunities for opinions (and agendas) to mitigate the data we can obtain. We know for certain that addition to the atmosphere of any gas will contribute that gas’s infrared absorption properties with all its complexities. Actually, all gases in the atmosphere have some “greenhouse” effect. This includes, nitrogen (75.0% - 78.08%), oxygen (20.11% - 20.95%), argon (0.89$ - 0.93%), and carbon dioxide (0.035% - 0.038%). The percentages in parentheses are of air at sea level. Ranges are shown because air also contains a variable amount of water vapor (from 1- 4% ±0.25%) and trace amounts of other gases. Each gas has a complex rate of infrared absorption and emission at various infrared frequencies. Water vapor has from 30 to 90 times the temperature effect of CO2 depending on various conditions.
The warmer air becomes, the more water vapor it can hold. Remember the weatherman’s favorite “dew point” predictions? When the temperature lowers to that point, the air can hold no more water vapor so it condenses out as “dew” or rain in the big picture. Using the same rationale as the global warming folks use for CO2, increasing amounts of water vapor would cause a much larger increase in atmospheric temperatures than CO2 resulting in still warmer air and still more water vapor. Shouldn’t this lead to a runaway greenhouse effect? Wouldn’t this drive atmospheric temperatures higher and higher until the oceans boil and all life is extinguished? Obviously this has not happened so something about these assumptions must be wrong for water vapor and CO2 as well.
Water vapor adds still another factor to the mix. That is the heat of vaporization or condensation of water. Tremendous amounts of the sun’s radiant energy evaporates water all over the earth. All of that energy enters the atmosphere in water vapor. The warmer the ocean or wet land, the more energy goes into the air. When all this water vapor condenses out as rain, that energy is released and the air warms. This is the driving energy that causes the air to move and creates windstorms, tornados and hurricanes. For all practical purposes, the CO2 content of the air has zero effect on the amount of energy that goes into the atmosphere or heats the air when water condenses.
One huge factor that man has affected greatly is the water vapor that green plants give off and particularly dense rain forests. Our continuing decimation of all types of rain forests is removing a huge source of water vapor that formerly entered the air. One example of this effect was used incorrectly as an example of global warming, which it was not. The disappearing snows of Mount Kilimanjaro are not an effect of global warming. Studies have shown that the cutting of the forest around the base of the mountain so reduced the amount of water vapor in the air flowing up the mountain that both the rainfall and snowfall on the higher slopes has been reduced dramatically. This is one correct example of where human activity has interfered with nature. Deforestation worldwide has done far more damage to our environment and effected climate far more than even tripling the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere could do. It alone could arguably be responsible for any temperature increase over the last hundred years as a reduction in the amount of water vapor would reduce cloud cover resulting in less of the sun’s energy reflected away. Why don’t we do something about that?
Whatever the effect of carbon dioxide, it is so small in comparison as to raise questions about the real amount of the danger it poses. Certainly it is not the degree of danger claimed by the high priests of global warming. I seriously question the validity of the often quoted phrase, “Overwhelming numbers of scientists support the theory that man’s use of fossil fuels is bringing about catastrophic global warming.” In the first place, the worldwide destructive clearing and burning of rain forest results in putting far more net carbon dioxide into the air than all the vehicles in the entire world. Second, shrinking rain forests mean less water vapor is released into the air. This could in turn mean less rain and snow where the air over land is drier. The questions remain, does the evaporation from the oceans increase and make up for this loss, and what effect does the drier air have on cloud cover and the resulting reflection of the sun’s energy away from the earth? All of these interacting variables have much larger net effects on global temperatures than CO2.. Because of this, “Overwhelming numbers of scientists” may have no real clue about the degree of effect that CO2 might have on atmospheric temperatures leading to global warming. Obviously it is much smaller than that of water vapor.
Dear Mike:
I often become suspicious of the veracity and the political motives of articles published by some “scientists” when those articles contain statements that are patently false or at least misleading. I also view as suspect the common assumption made that CO2 generated by human activity is a major factor in and causes catastrophic global warming. This one assumption runs counter to conclusions from many long studied and well known factors that affect climate. The following paragraph is from that article. It caught my eye because one little sentence in italics, the basis for the accuracy of the entire project, is untrue.
“Carbon dioxide molecules aren’t measured directly; the instrument tabulates the absorption of sunlight by CO2 and molecular oxygen molecules before and after sunlight is reflected off the Earth’s surface. Since each molecule has a unique infrared signature, they can be singled out and counted. There are two detectors for CO2 because it is easier to spot near the Earth’s surface at 1/61 microns and in the atmosphere at 2.06 microns. The molecular oxygen A-band channel acts as a survey control because its presence in the atmosphere is constant.”
In rebuttal I offer a substantiated quote from my book, A Convenient Solution, and an article I published in 2007. The full article on global warming can be found at http://hjgulfstream.blogspot.com. Should you want to read the section in my book it is available on the web at http://acsexcerpts.blogspot.com.
From page 47 of the book: With the exception of hydrogen, all gaseous, liquid, and solid fuels produce carbon dioxide when burned in any energy process. In addition, the production of hydrogen by any means other than by electrolysis, using energy from nuclear, wind, water or tidal power plants will add carbon dioxide to the atmosphere from both the energy and the raw materials used to create the hydrogen (coal-fired power plants for instance). It is interesting to note that for each pound of carbon oxidized to carbon dioxide, four pounds of oxygen are removed from the atmosphere. For every thousand tons of CO2 added to the atmosphere, eight hundred tons of oxygen are removed. In all the concern about CO2 there has never been a single mention of that fact.
The obvious conclusion is that the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere is not a constant as stated in the article in Aviation Week.
It should be interesting to note that I do not agree with those who say atmospheric CO2 has a catastrophic effect on climate or with those who argue it has absolutely no effect. It is just that the amount of that effect, though real, is so small as to be insignificant compared to other, well known factors. In just the same way, pouring a bucket of water into Lake Erie raises the lake level. I do not think shore dwellers need to fear that will flood their homes. This puts me solidly against global warming proponents in government who use it to gain power and as a huge cash cow of tax revenue. In addition there are literally thousands of groups using proven tactics to frighten the public into compliance donations, and mindless support.
From my article on global warming: Any global warming from the effects of CO2, if indeed it exists or poses any danger at all, is grossly distorted relative to the facts at hand. Most of the data used to show global warming are at best statistical and at worst, anecdotal. Both of which provide great opportunities for opinions (and agendas) to mitigate the data we can obtain. We know for certain that addition to the atmosphere of any gas will contribute that gas’s infrared absorption properties with all its complexities. Actually, all gases in the atmosphere have some “greenhouse” effect. This includes, nitrogen (75.0% - 78.08%), oxygen (20.11% - 20.95%), argon (0.89$ - 0.93%), and carbon dioxide (0.035% - 0.038%). The percentages in parentheses are of air at sea level. Ranges are shown because air also contains a variable amount of water vapor (from 1- 4% ±0.25%) and trace amounts of other gases. Each gas has a complex rate of infrared absorption and emission at various infrared frequencies. Water vapor has from 30 to 90 times the temperature effect of CO2 depending on various conditions.
The warmer air becomes, the more water vapor it can hold. Remember the weatherman’s favorite “dew point” predictions? When the temperature lowers to that point, the air can hold no more water vapor so it condenses out as “dew” or rain in the big picture. Using the same rationale as the global warming folks use for CO2, increasing amounts of water vapor would cause a much larger increase in atmospheric temperatures than CO2 resulting in still warmer air and still more water vapor. Shouldn’t this lead to a runaway greenhouse effect? Wouldn’t this drive atmospheric temperatures higher and higher until the oceans boil and all life is extinguished? Obviously this has not happened so something about these assumptions must be wrong for water vapor and CO2 as well.
Water vapor adds still another factor to the mix. That is the heat of vaporization or condensation of water. Tremendous amounts of the sun’s radiant energy evaporates water all over the earth. All of that energy enters the atmosphere in water vapor. The warmer the ocean or wet land, the more energy goes into the air. When all this water vapor condenses out as rain, that energy is released and the air warms. This is the driving energy that causes the air to move and creates windstorms, tornados and hurricanes. For all practical purposes, the CO2 content of the air has zero effect on the amount of energy that goes into the atmosphere or heats the air when water condenses.
One huge factor that man has affected greatly is the water vapor that green plants give off and particularly dense rain forests. Our continuing decimation of all types of rain forests is removing a huge source of water vapor that formerly entered the air. One example of this effect was used incorrectly as an example of global warming, which it was not. The disappearing snows of Mount Kilimanjaro are not an effect of global warming. Studies have shown that the cutting of the forest around the base of the mountain so reduced the amount of water vapor in the air flowing up the mountain that both the rainfall and snowfall on the higher slopes has been reduced dramatically. This is one correct example of where human activity has interfered with nature. Deforestation worldwide has done far more damage to our environment and effected climate far more than even tripling the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere could do. It alone could arguably be responsible for any temperature increase over the last hundred years as a reduction in the amount of water vapor would reduce cloud cover resulting in less of the sun’s energy reflected away. Why don’t we do something about that?
Whatever the effect of carbon dioxide, it is so small in comparison as to raise questions about the real amount of the danger it poses. Certainly it is not the degree of danger claimed by the high priests of global warming. I seriously question the validity of the often quoted phrase, “Overwhelming numbers of scientists support the theory that man’s use of fossil fuels is bringing about catastrophic global warming.” In the first place, the worldwide destructive clearing and burning of rain forest results in putting far more net carbon dioxide into the air than all the vehicles in the entire world. Second, shrinking rain forests mean less water vapor is released into the air. This could in turn mean less rain and snow where the air over land is drier. The questions remain, does the evaporation from the oceans increase and make up for this loss, and what effect does the drier air have on cloud cover and the resulting reflection of the sun’s energy away from the earth? All of these interacting variables have much larger net effects on global temperatures than CO2.. Because of this, “Overwhelming numbers of scientists” may have no real clue about the degree of effect that CO2 might have on atmospheric temperatures leading to global warming. Obviously it is much smaller than that of water vapor.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
The Card Check bill in Congress
I know a lot of you are extreme liberals, but even you should be up in arms about what labor bosses are trying to ram through Congress.
Wake up Americans! Democrat politicians are about to reward labor unions for their help in the last election by doing away with a basic right of all Americans, the right to a secret ballot for elections. First they said they were bailing out the American auto industry with your billions of dollars. That is pure BS. All they were doing was padding the pay checks of lazy and conniving UAW workers with money from the public treasury. No wonder Toyota, Honda and the other off-shore auto companies are beating the pants off of UAW auto companies with their autos, even those built by American workers in American factories. Their labor costs are about half of what the UAW members get paid for the same work. They have crippled our once great auto industry that will certainly go down the tubes anyway, just like our electronics industry and many others that were highly unionized.
Now the Democrat controlled government is about to demolish the foundation of our Democratic Republic, the secret ballot. The American public should be screaming against this destruction of a basic right. Where is the massive outcry from the third estate? Are the masses just so stupid they can’t see what’s happening? Maybe they just don’t give a damn. It’s beyond my comprehension.
And how about those so called protectors of human rights in the media? They should be haranguing everyone to urge their representatives to throw this evil proposal out. Where are all their calls of “foul?” Perhaps they are over enamored with the “Royals,” now controlling our government. Maybe they’re getting a payoff of some sort to ignore what’s happening. Something is very rotten there and it ain’t in Denmark.
Next the Democrats will be rewriting our election laws and doing away with the secret ballot in public elections. How will you like it when politicians know exactly how you vote? There wouldn’t be any goons using coercion and beatings on those who didn’t vote their way, would there. Of course not! This is America. Americans don’t do those kinds of things. Ha!
The Cook County Democrat machine is, in fact, already doing that in a round about way. They know quite well who votes how in the local precincts and their goons are not shy about punishing those who don’t toe the line. Now we have a product of that corrupt machine as our President. Democrat machine politics with all its intimidation, corruption, payoffs, ballot box stuffing, votes by dead and non existent voters, and associated criminal activities—those machine politics have completed their take over of Washington. I wonder how long it will be before we see Democrats elected by 100% of the vote just like Kim Il Sung was in North Korea.
Newt Gingerich explains what is happening in a much less pointed manner than I do. Here’s what he has to say:
_______________________________
March 11, 2009 | Vol. 4, No. 10
Dancing to Big Labor's Tune
by Newt Gingrich
After spending an astounding $61 million to elect Democrats in the 2008 elections, union bosses are getting their payback this week.
Yesterday, so-called "Card Check" legislation was introduced in both the House and the Senate.
Card Check strips American workers of the right to a secret ballot and gives the federal government the right to impose labor contracts on workers.
The timing of this assault on the freedom of the American workplace could not be worse. A new study shows that for every three workers coerced into joining a union under Card Check, one job will be eliminated by besieged American businesses.
Card Check Could Eliminate 600,000 Jobs In Its First Year
Card Check is a job killer. Even Obama supporter Warren Buffet opposes it, saying "I think the secret ballot is pretty important in the country. I'm against card check." Watch him here.
But as far as Big Labor is concerned, a deal's a deal. Their goal is to get their allies in Washington to ram Card Check through Congress this week, before anyone notices that American workers and businesses are losing fundamental rights.
What's happening in Washington this week is old style, quid-pro-quo politics - the kind President Obama pledged as a candidate to end. Supporters of the so-called Employee Free Choice Act (that's their Orwellian name for Card Check - it would more correctly be called the Union-goon authorization-to-bash-your-head-in-if-you-don’t-vote-us-in act.) claim to be all about protecting American workers.
But leave it to Vice President Joe Biden to inadvertently tell the truth.
In a meeting with the AFL-CIO last week, Biden made it clear who's calling the shots when it comes to American workers, businesses and jobs. He told the gathering of union big-wigs:
"You all brought me to the dance a long time ago, and it's time we start dancing."
82% of Democrats Oppose Eliminating the Secret Ballot
For big labor and their allies in Washington, it's time to start dancing - and dancing fast.
Vice President Biden and the union bosses hope to duplicate with Card Check the Obama Administration's success in rushing the mammoth $787 billion stimulus bill through Congress so quickly most members never had time to read it.
The reason they have to act quickly is simply this: The vast majority of Americans - 77 percent of Republicans, 82 percent of Democrats and 79 percent of independents - oppose what they're trying to do.
Not only that, but the latest surveys show that a full 82 percent of Americans say they don't want to belong to a union.
The Stakes Are High This Week
But it's precisely this kind of pro-secret ballot, pro-freedom sentiment among the American people that makes union bosses so eager to pass Card Check.
Under Card Check, union organizers and their enforcers will be able to go into any small business, hospital or construction site and coerce workers into signing cards. If they get 50 percent plus one, the deal's done, and the workers are forced into a union. And if management and the new union fail to reach a negotiated contract, the federal government will just impose one. Coerced unionization allows for what is effectively a new, unaccountable form of forced taxation. Workers will have a portion of their paycheck going to the union to be spent as the bosses (many are convicted extortionists) see fit, including political donations to parties and candidates that the workers may not even support.
Talk about an "offer you can't refuse." There's no vote. No secret ballot. No right to freely negotiate the contract. The workers, the workplace, and a portion of the worker's paychecks are controlled by the union bosses.
For Americans like you and me, the stakes are high this week. Hanging in the balance are literally hundreds of thousands of jobs, not to mention fundamental freedoms like the ability of small businesses to create and sustain jobs, the freedom of American workers to have a say in how their workplace is organized, and the freedom of American workers to freely choose whether they want to give money to politicians and political parties.
Congress Is Holding Hearings This Week
Make Your Voice Heard at AmericanSolutions.com/FreedomNotFear
The time to act is now - this week, while Congress holds hearings on Card Check.
You can make your voice heard by the people who matter most by joining in American Solutions' "Freedom Not Fear" campaign.
Freedom Not Fear is grassroots petition drive to preserve American jobs and preserve the right of the secret ballot for American workers. Over 80,000 Americans have already gone to AmericanSolutions.com/FreedomNotFear and signed the petition, but we need more help.
Remember the "Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less" campaign from last summer? With your help we were able to change hearts and minds on Capitol Hill about the necessity of using more safe, clean American energy.
We can do the same with Freedom Not Fear. Congress needs to hear from the sweeping majorities of Americans of all political parties who oppose this massive power grab by Big Labor.
The union bosses want to silence the voices of American workers and businesses. Go to Americansolutions.com/FreedomNotFear today and let them know that we won't go down without a fight.
_____________________________________
A response:
This is a balled faced lie! Get your facts straight! Card check does not do away with the secret ballot, it simply offers an alternative. As your Quoted hero Newt proclaims,"the secret of Politics is to Lie, Lie, Lie, and then Lie some more." Have a good misinformed day .
____________________________________
Another response:
You and Newt sure got it right. I was working in a small automotive supplier in Ft. Wayne for many years, right from the git go. Once the company got big enough to be noticed, the UAW moved in. It didn’t take most employees long to realize that if you didn’t support the union, you were in for a bad time. I only lasted about a year until I found a job with Volkswagen in Ohio. It was for a little less money, but the atmosphere was very much better. Everyone worked. We were all part of “the team.” The goon squads and intimidators will love the power the new law will give them. Once the unions come around, extreme coercion will be the norm. Look what they’ve done to the big three as it is.
_____________________________________
By way of correcting any misunderstanding, here are some facts and some opinions. Of course, the emotionally intense hatred most liberals express for anyone with whom they disagree causes great confusion on their part as to just which are facts and which are opinions. This makes sensible communication damn near impossible, but I try anyway. Incidentally the first responder did what so many liberals do constantly, quoted Newt out of context. I have searched high and low, but can’t come up with the exact line quoted. The closest is a line given in a speech to a Republican organization in Atlanta, date unknown. In that speech he said, “The secret of liberal politics is to lie and lie, cheat and cheat, and tell the victims of your efforts you are working for them.” But Newt was correctly dubbed as one of my political heroes along with so many who have stood up for independence, freedom and personal responsibility. Men like Washington, Jefferson, Madison, and most of our founding fathers as well as Reagan and a few other so often vilified by the left. At least Newt is not trying to destroy what they so masterfully built.
Reality trumps intentions every time. This new law would remove the right of the company to request a secret election, a right they now enjoy. This offers protection to workers who really don’t want a union, but are intimidated to sign the cards. In its place the new law gives that option over to the employees. The law states clearly that only the employees can request a secret ballot election. This gives union goons an open invitation to intimidate employees to sign cards requesting a union and not ask for a secret ballot. They use the same kind of intimidation organized criminals use to intimidate witnesses. I wonder where they learned that? Once more than 50% signed, the union is in, even without an election. I’m sure those disgruntled union members would request a secret ballot election, wouldn’t they. Ha!
I’ve seen the UAW in action unionizing one company started in 1920 in a small town in Indiana. The company and town shall remain nameless to protect the author. It was a small family owned business with about 100 employees that built bodies on Ford and GM truck chassis. Their wage and benefit scale was actually above union standards at the time. The UAW wanted to collect dues and impose their own work rules. During 1948 we were in the plant as part of our engineering studies at Purdue during the time the union began trying to “organize” its employees. None of the employees I spoke with were favorable to the union. Most said the “The old man (the owner) and his boys take good care of us. We don’t need a union.”
We were at the plant several times a week for three weeks. By the time we left things changed and there were some nasty incidents. Employees who spoke out against the union often had an “accident.” Several ended up in the hospital and one died. No one was ever charged. There were three elections several months apart. The union lost in the first two, but won on the third. Within the year the owners decided it was no longer in their best interest to continue operating the plant. Pickets marched in front of the plant as it was shut down and dismantled. The owners shut down their assembly line after finishing the bus contract already underway. They sold their remaining contracts, inventory and machinery to a manufacturer in Tennessee, and all moved to Florida. (There was a rumor that the company in Tennessee belonged to a member of the family, but I have no confirmation of that rumor.)
The small town was devastated as this was one of their largest employers and a sizable portion of the town’s economy. During the year, we studied the effects on the town and determined that there were more than a dozen dependent businesses that soon closed their doors and about 300 people lost there jobs. The fallout undoubtedly left the city’s economy in ruin for a long time. The plant stood empty for many years. I happened by the plant many years later and found a paved parking lot full of weeds, a battered fence and a few empty buildings. I have no idea what became of the owners or their family, but I’m sure they had a good and successful life wherever they went. Maybe they took over that plant in Tennessee. I do know that they remained substantial financial supporters of Purdue University for many years after they closed their Indiana plant. Great job, UAW.
Some of my liberal family and friends constantly vilify me as a Rush Limbaugh worshiping, George Bush loving, far right Republican member of the extreme far right, a Christian fundamentalist homophobe, racial bigot and all that other crap on their long hate list. The truth is they all simply hate anyone who doesn’t go along with their “holy” far left agenda handed down to them from the George Soros crowd and the New York Times. (I wonder why he doesn’t just buy the Times? It’s going broke, you know.) Talking to them is like negotiating with Al Queda or the Taliban. It’s their “holy” way or off with your head. Well, it’s hasn’t come to that quite yet, but one never knows when.
No amount of reason or logic will ever sway their emotional attachment to what they are “supposed” to believe or to “political correctness.” Talk about mind-numbed robots, I realized long ago how fruitless it is to have a rational conversation with any of them about virtually anything with the remotest hint of political content. To me, liberalism is one of the most fundamentalist religions on the planet. It is totally devoid of any rational content, often exuding pure hatred.
One of my very liberal friends was visiting a few years ago and ran across a pamphlet titled, A Real Answer to the Drug Problem laying on our coffee table. He read through it while I was doing something else and asked if I had read it.
When I allowed I had he immediately said, “I think it’s a great idea. I suppose you are very much against it, aren’t you?”
I replied, “Take a look at the back of the pamphlet.” The back of the pamphlet listed seven “solutions” I had developed and written down. It offered pamphlets like the one he held on all of the ideas—my ideas.
“You . . . wrote this?” he asked with great incredulity.
“And all of the others as well.”
“That’s amazing!” he exclaimed. “That sounds more like a liberal idea, than one you would come up with.”
I smiled. “It only goes to show how little you really know about me, doesn’t it? And how little you know about anyone you consider a conservative, or for that matter, anyone who isn’t in side that tight little exclusive box of ideas you virtually worship.”
“Now, don’t get nasty.” he warned.
“By getting nasty I suppose you mean saying anything that doesn’t fit inside your tight little box of ‘liberal’ ideas. It has been my observation that most liberals consider anything proposed or even uttered by a non-liberal that doesn’t fit in that box is considered hate speech.”
“Not really.”
“No? Tell me please, what political proposal that violates any of the holy tenets of liberalism by what Republican politician has not been labeled as hate speech.”
He couldn’t think of any. Incidentally, I wrote the original in 1999 and posted it to my blog in September 2005/ It was updated once in 2008, but still remains essentially as first written down. It’s at http://hjdrugprb.blogspot.com. Click on it if you’d like to see it.
In light of what is happening near our border with Mexico as I write this, my solution could put an immediate stop to all those murders. I am working on revising my proposal in this light very soon.
Wake up Americans! Democrat politicians are about to reward labor unions for their help in the last election by doing away with a basic right of all Americans, the right to a secret ballot for elections. First they said they were bailing out the American auto industry with your billions of dollars. That is pure BS. All they were doing was padding the pay checks of lazy and conniving UAW workers with money from the public treasury. No wonder Toyota, Honda and the other off-shore auto companies are beating the pants off of UAW auto companies with their autos, even those built by American workers in American factories. Their labor costs are about half of what the UAW members get paid for the same work. They have crippled our once great auto industry that will certainly go down the tubes anyway, just like our electronics industry and many others that were highly unionized.
Now the Democrat controlled government is about to demolish the foundation of our Democratic Republic, the secret ballot. The American public should be screaming against this destruction of a basic right. Where is the massive outcry from the third estate? Are the masses just so stupid they can’t see what’s happening? Maybe they just don’t give a damn. It’s beyond my comprehension.
And how about those so called protectors of human rights in the media? They should be haranguing everyone to urge their representatives to throw this evil proposal out. Where are all their calls of “foul?” Perhaps they are over enamored with the “Royals,” now controlling our government. Maybe they’re getting a payoff of some sort to ignore what’s happening. Something is very rotten there and it ain’t in Denmark.
Next the Democrats will be rewriting our election laws and doing away with the secret ballot in public elections. How will you like it when politicians know exactly how you vote? There wouldn’t be any goons using coercion and beatings on those who didn’t vote their way, would there. Of course not! This is America. Americans don’t do those kinds of things. Ha!
The Cook County Democrat machine is, in fact, already doing that in a round about way. They know quite well who votes how in the local precincts and their goons are not shy about punishing those who don’t toe the line. Now we have a product of that corrupt machine as our President. Democrat machine politics with all its intimidation, corruption, payoffs, ballot box stuffing, votes by dead and non existent voters, and associated criminal activities—those machine politics have completed their take over of Washington. I wonder how long it will be before we see Democrats elected by 100% of the vote just like Kim Il Sung was in North Korea.
Newt Gingerich explains what is happening in a much less pointed manner than I do. Here’s what he has to say:
_______________________________
March 11, 2009 | Vol. 4, No. 10
Dancing to Big Labor's Tune
by Newt Gingrich
After spending an astounding $61 million to elect Democrats in the 2008 elections, union bosses are getting their payback this week.
Yesterday, so-called "Card Check" legislation was introduced in both the House and the Senate.
Card Check strips American workers of the right to a secret ballot and gives the federal government the right to impose labor contracts on workers.
The timing of this assault on the freedom of the American workplace could not be worse. A new study shows that for every three workers coerced into joining a union under Card Check, one job will be eliminated by besieged American businesses.
Card Check Could Eliminate 600,000 Jobs In Its First Year
Card Check is a job killer. Even Obama supporter Warren Buffet opposes it, saying "I think the secret ballot is pretty important in the country. I'm against card check." Watch him here.
But as far as Big Labor is concerned, a deal's a deal. Their goal is to get their allies in Washington to ram Card Check through Congress this week, before anyone notices that American workers and businesses are losing fundamental rights.
What's happening in Washington this week is old style, quid-pro-quo politics - the kind President Obama pledged as a candidate to end. Supporters of the so-called Employee Free Choice Act (that's their Orwellian name for Card Check - it would more correctly be called the Union-goon authorization-to-bash-your-head-in-if-you-don’t-vote-us-in act.) claim to be all about protecting American workers.
But leave it to Vice President Joe Biden to inadvertently tell the truth.
In a meeting with the AFL-CIO last week, Biden made it clear who's calling the shots when it comes to American workers, businesses and jobs. He told the gathering of union big-wigs:
"You all brought me to the dance a long time ago, and it's time we start dancing."
82% of Democrats Oppose Eliminating the Secret Ballot
For big labor and their allies in Washington, it's time to start dancing - and dancing fast.
Vice President Biden and the union bosses hope to duplicate with Card Check the Obama Administration's success in rushing the mammoth $787 billion stimulus bill through Congress so quickly most members never had time to read it.
The reason they have to act quickly is simply this: The vast majority of Americans - 77 percent of Republicans, 82 percent of Democrats and 79 percent of independents - oppose what they're trying to do.
Not only that, but the latest surveys show that a full 82 percent of Americans say they don't want to belong to a union.
The Stakes Are High This Week
But it's precisely this kind of pro-secret ballot, pro-freedom sentiment among the American people that makes union bosses so eager to pass Card Check.
Under Card Check, union organizers and their enforcers will be able to go into any small business, hospital or construction site and coerce workers into signing cards. If they get 50 percent plus one, the deal's done, and the workers are forced into a union. And if management and the new union fail to reach a negotiated contract, the federal government will just impose one. Coerced unionization allows for what is effectively a new, unaccountable form of forced taxation. Workers will have a portion of their paycheck going to the union to be spent as the bosses (many are convicted extortionists) see fit, including political donations to parties and candidates that the workers may not even support.
Talk about an "offer you can't refuse." There's no vote. No secret ballot. No right to freely negotiate the contract. The workers, the workplace, and a portion of the worker's paychecks are controlled by the union bosses.
For Americans like you and me, the stakes are high this week. Hanging in the balance are literally hundreds of thousands of jobs, not to mention fundamental freedoms like the ability of small businesses to create and sustain jobs, the freedom of American workers to have a say in how their workplace is organized, and the freedom of American workers to freely choose whether they want to give money to politicians and political parties.
Congress Is Holding Hearings This Week
Make Your Voice Heard at AmericanSolutions.com/FreedomNotFear
The time to act is now - this week, while Congress holds hearings on Card Check.
You can make your voice heard by the people who matter most by joining in American Solutions' "Freedom Not Fear" campaign.
Freedom Not Fear is grassroots petition drive to preserve American jobs and preserve the right of the secret ballot for American workers. Over 80,000 Americans have already gone to AmericanSolutions.com/FreedomNotFear and signed the petition, but we need more help.
Remember the "Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less" campaign from last summer? With your help we were able to change hearts and minds on Capitol Hill about the necessity of using more safe, clean American energy.
We can do the same with Freedom Not Fear. Congress needs to hear from the sweeping majorities of Americans of all political parties who oppose this massive power grab by Big Labor.
The union bosses want to silence the voices of American workers and businesses. Go to Americansolutions.com/FreedomNotFear today and let them know that we won't go down without a fight.
_____________________________________
A response:
This is a balled faced lie! Get your facts straight! Card check does not do away with the secret ballot, it simply offers an alternative. As your Quoted hero Newt proclaims,"the secret of Politics is to Lie, Lie, Lie, and then Lie some more." Have a good misinformed day .
____________________________________
Another response:
You and Newt sure got it right. I was working in a small automotive supplier in Ft. Wayne for many years, right from the git go. Once the company got big enough to be noticed, the UAW moved in. It didn’t take most employees long to realize that if you didn’t support the union, you were in for a bad time. I only lasted about a year until I found a job with Volkswagen in Ohio. It was for a little less money, but the atmosphere was very much better. Everyone worked. We were all part of “the team.” The goon squads and intimidators will love the power the new law will give them. Once the unions come around, extreme coercion will be the norm. Look what they’ve done to the big three as it is.
_____________________________________
By way of correcting any misunderstanding, here are some facts and some opinions. Of course, the emotionally intense hatred most liberals express for anyone with whom they disagree causes great confusion on their part as to just which are facts and which are opinions. This makes sensible communication damn near impossible, but I try anyway. Incidentally the first responder did what so many liberals do constantly, quoted Newt out of context. I have searched high and low, but can’t come up with the exact line quoted. The closest is a line given in a speech to a Republican organization in Atlanta, date unknown. In that speech he said, “The secret of liberal politics is to lie and lie, cheat and cheat, and tell the victims of your efforts you are working for them.” But Newt was correctly dubbed as one of my political heroes along with so many who have stood up for independence, freedom and personal responsibility. Men like Washington, Jefferson, Madison, and most of our founding fathers as well as Reagan and a few other so often vilified by the left. At least Newt is not trying to destroy what they so masterfully built.
Reality trumps intentions every time. This new law would remove the right of the company to request a secret election, a right they now enjoy. This offers protection to workers who really don’t want a union, but are intimidated to sign the cards. In its place the new law gives that option over to the employees. The law states clearly that only the employees can request a secret ballot election. This gives union goons an open invitation to intimidate employees to sign cards requesting a union and not ask for a secret ballot. They use the same kind of intimidation organized criminals use to intimidate witnesses. I wonder where they learned that? Once more than 50% signed, the union is in, even without an election. I’m sure those disgruntled union members would request a secret ballot election, wouldn’t they. Ha!
I’ve seen the UAW in action unionizing one company started in 1920 in a small town in Indiana. The company and town shall remain nameless to protect the author. It was a small family owned business with about 100 employees that built bodies on Ford and GM truck chassis. Their wage and benefit scale was actually above union standards at the time. The UAW wanted to collect dues and impose their own work rules. During 1948 we were in the plant as part of our engineering studies at Purdue during the time the union began trying to “organize” its employees. None of the employees I spoke with were favorable to the union. Most said the “The old man (the owner) and his boys take good care of us. We don’t need a union.”
We were at the plant several times a week for three weeks. By the time we left things changed and there were some nasty incidents. Employees who spoke out against the union often had an “accident.” Several ended up in the hospital and one died. No one was ever charged. There were three elections several months apart. The union lost in the first two, but won on the third. Within the year the owners decided it was no longer in their best interest to continue operating the plant. Pickets marched in front of the plant as it was shut down and dismantled. The owners shut down their assembly line after finishing the bus contract already underway. They sold their remaining contracts, inventory and machinery to a manufacturer in Tennessee, and all moved to Florida. (There was a rumor that the company in Tennessee belonged to a member of the family, but I have no confirmation of that rumor.)
The small town was devastated as this was one of their largest employers and a sizable portion of the town’s economy. During the year, we studied the effects on the town and determined that there were more than a dozen dependent businesses that soon closed their doors and about 300 people lost there jobs. The fallout undoubtedly left the city’s economy in ruin for a long time. The plant stood empty for many years. I happened by the plant many years later and found a paved parking lot full of weeds, a battered fence and a few empty buildings. I have no idea what became of the owners or their family, but I’m sure they had a good and successful life wherever they went. Maybe they took over that plant in Tennessee. I do know that they remained substantial financial supporters of Purdue University for many years after they closed their Indiana plant. Great job, UAW.
Some of my liberal family and friends constantly vilify me as a Rush Limbaugh worshiping, George Bush loving, far right Republican member of the extreme far right, a Christian fundamentalist homophobe, racial bigot and all that other crap on their long hate list. The truth is they all simply hate anyone who doesn’t go along with their “holy” far left agenda handed down to them from the George Soros crowd and the New York Times. (I wonder why he doesn’t just buy the Times? It’s going broke, you know.) Talking to them is like negotiating with Al Queda or the Taliban. It’s their “holy” way or off with your head. Well, it’s hasn’t come to that quite yet, but one never knows when.
No amount of reason or logic will ever sway their emotional attachment to what they are “supposed” to believe or to “political correctness.” Talk about mind-numbed robots, I realized long ago how fruitless it is to have a rational conversation with any of them about virtually anything with the remotest hint of political content. To me, liberalism is one of the most fundamentalist religions on the planet. It is totally devoid of any rational content, often exuding pure hatred.
One of my very liberal friends was visiting a few years ago and ran across a pamphlet titled, A Real Answer to the Drug Problem laying on our coffee table. He read through it while I was doing something else and asked if I had read it.
When I allowed I had he immediately said, “I think it’s a great idea. I suppose you are very much against it, aren’t you?”
I replied, “Take a look at the back of the pamphlet.” The back of the pamphlet listed seven “solutions” I had developed and written down. It offered pamphlets like the one he held on all of the ideas—my ideas.
“You . . . wrote this?” he asked with great incredulity.
“And all of the others as well.”
“That’s amazing!” he exclaimed. “That sounds more like a liberal idea, than one you would come up with.”
I smiled. “It only goes to show how little you really know about me, doesn’t it? And how little you know about anyone you consider a conservative, or for that matter, anyone who isn’t in side that tight little exclusive box of ideas you virtually worship.”
“Now, don’t get nasty.” he warned.
“By getting nasty I suppose you mean saying anything that doesn’t fit inside your tight little box of ‘liberal’ ideas. It has been my observation that most liberals consider anything proposed or even uttered by a non-liberal that doesn’t fit in that box is considered hate speech.”
“Not really.”
“No? Tell me please, what political proposal that violates any of the holy tenets of liberalism by what Republican politician has not been labeled as hate speech.”
He couldn’t think of any. Incidentally, I wrote the original in 1999 and posted it to my blog in September 2005/ It was updated once in 2008, but still remains essentially as first written down. It’s at http://hjdrugprb.blogspot.com. Click on it if you’d like to see it.
In light of what is happening near our border with Mexico as I write this, my solution could put an immediate stop to all those murders. I am working on revising my proposal in this light very soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)