An attempt at a sane explanation of my politics

This current blog is an irregular, randomly organized mixture of comments, quotes and observations that are very roughly related to my political and social views. Some are directed at individuals, some to the general public, and some are repeated. I am not a follower of or beholden to any ism, group belief system (religious, political or other), peer group, grant committee, dean or head of faculty, political or other boss, or corporate officer at any level, so I am free to speak my mind, mistakes and all. I consider myself a truly independent and liberal individual and a realist who knows what it means to conserve. No, that is not a contradiction.

This paragraph and the next are about any person’s position on anything and how they see where they fit on a representative scale from 1 to 100. The basis is something I learned in a PG class on human motivation I took at Case, Western Reserve University many years ago. Any dichotomous subject will work as an example. I have chosen political opinion, even though that is not really dichotomous and would truly apply only to a single factor—you can imagine one for your own satisfaction. Set the scale at 0 for the most extreme conservative, far right wing opinion and 100 for the most extreme liberal or left wing opinion. All opinions in between can then be represented by a number from 2 to 99. The theory, as explained by our professor, is that regardless of where you are in this spectrum, most individuals will view anyone 10 points or more lower as extremists of the right and those 10 points or more higher as extremists of the left. An individual at 50 would view all of those below 40 as extremists on the right and all of those above 60 as extremists of the left. That would mean that all of those from 40 to 60 would be considered slightly to the left, or right, or middle of the road. It would also mean that those at 80 would see 70 to 90 as the deciding limits while those at 20 would see 10 to 30 as the same limits.

This could generate a conundrum where an individual on the left at say, 90, would view another individual on the left at 70 as a right wing extremist. The individual range of 10 is arbitrarily chosen and might vary from 5 points to 50 points. Still, this basic, very simple explanation of where one can be placed on any such scale would hold true. I hope the reader will keep this in mind. The truth of the matter is that human concepts and behavior are never truly dichotomous even though we tend to treat them as such, a very simplistic action. In truth they range all over the map in three, or possibly even more dimensions. They are not black or white, but many shades of grey, and colors, and intensities, and variations in time—in short, they are extremely complex. Human behavior is individualistic and unimaginably complex Any group, even a harmoniously behaving one, can have individuals that behave and believe differently even when the group is labeled indicating solidarity to a cause or belief.
---------------------------------
My political beliefs are based primarily on logical thought processes and the realities of the world in which we live. I realize that human emotions are instinctive and control us more than we care to admit, yours truly included. My effort at not judging emotionally automatically puts me at odds with the almost completely emotional and irrational extremes of both left and right. It seems that feelings determine the political ideology of all extremists, on the left, the right, and in fact, all directions. Their reactions are almost without logical or rational content. But it is not a dichotomy as there are countless variations of almost infinite kinds. I am most definitely not a centrist, but would be called liberal in some ways, conservative in others, in between in still others, and undefinable in most. Part of this was written in response to one very thoughtful person who not only took issue with what I said, but wrote me several paragraphs of her thoughts. In among mostly thoughtful commentaries, she accused me of being a white Caucasian male who thought that made me superior or something like that. She also said she was proud that we had finally elected our first non Caucasian President. My response is several paragraphs down in this blog.

Dictionary Definitions of a few terms often misunderstood, for those who say, “whatever that means.”

Leftist - 1: one who espouses the principles and views of the political left; also: the movement embodying these principles 2: an advocate of or adherent to the doctrines of the left— left·ist noun or adjective

Examples of leftist - [the candidate's opponents are working overtime to paint him as an extreme leftist.]

First Known Use of leftist - 1920

Liberal - 1 a: of, relating to, or based on the liberal arts [liberal education] b archaic: of or befitting a man of free birth 2 a: marked by generosity: openhanded [a liberal giver] b: given or provided in a generous and openhanded way [a liberal meal] c: ample, full 3 obsolete: lacking moral restraint: licentious (NOTE: that meaning seems to have reemerged) 4: not literal or strict: loose [a liberal translation] 5: broad-minded; especially: not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or traditional forms 6 a: of, favoring, or based upon the principles of liberalism b capitalized: of or constituting a political party advocating or associated with the principles of political liberalism; especially: of or constituting a political party in the United Kingdom associated with ideals of individual especially economic freedom, greater individual participation in government, and constitutional, political, and administrative reforms designed to secure these objectives.

In common use today, liberal has become a virtual subset of leftist.

Examples of liberal - [ She is a liberal Democrat who married a conservative Republican.]
[She has a liberal attitude toward sex. ]

Personal: I consider myself to be a very liberal person, but certainly not in the modern political meaning of the word. which has almost become an oxymoron.

Origin of liberal - Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Latin liberalis suitable for a freeman, generous, from liber free; perhaps akin to Old English lēodan to grow, Greek eleutheros free

First Known Use: 14th century

Common usage: in common use there is little difference between leftism, liberalism, communism, socialism, fascism or feudalism. They are all totalitarian systems where a very small number of individuals have power over the masses of common people in a nation or state. Most of such countries are full dictatorships with a single powerful person in complete charge. Some of these countries are dictatorship by a group who are all beholden to a single individual or ideology. Where it is an ideology that rules, there is usually a single charismatic leader, “the meanest son-of-a-bitch in the valley,” who rules with an iron fist. Currently, virtually all Islamic nations have this type of rule, the ruling class being either chosen by religious leaders or the leaders themselves. In all of these states, there is very little the masses can say or do about their government. All they can do is endure what happens to them.

Conservative - 1 preservative 2 a: of or relating to a philosophy of conservatism b capitalized: of or constituting a political party professing the principles of conservatism: as (1): of or constituting a party of the United Kingdom advocating support of established institutions (2): progressive conservative 3 a: tending or disposed to maintain existing views, conditions, or institutions: traditional b: marked by moderation or caution [a conservative estimate] c: marked by or relating to traditional norms of taste, elegance, style, or manners 4: of, relating to, or practicing Conservative religion of any kind.

Examples of conservative:
She is a liberal Democrat who married a conservative Republican.
She's more conservative now than she was in college.

First Known Use: 14th century

Racism - 1: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race 2: racial prejudice or discrimination.

Examples of racism - the racism that was the basis of apartheid [Hitler's declaration of his belief in a “master race” was an indication of the inherent racism of the Nazi movement.]

First Known Use: 1933

Republic - a (1): a government having a chief of state who is not a monarch and who in modern times is usually a president (2): a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government b (1): a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law (2): a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government c: a usually specified republican government of a political unit [the French Fourth Republic]
2: a body of persons freely engaged in a specified activity [the republic of letters] 3: a constituent political and territorial unit of the former nations of Czechoslovakia, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, or Yugoslavia

Examples of republic - [when asked by a passerby what sort of government the constitutional convention had formulated for the new nation, Benjamin Franklin memorably replied, “A republic, if you can keep it”]

Origin of republic - French république, from Middle French republique, from Latin respublica, from res thing, wealth + publica, feminine of publicus public — more at real, public

First Known Use: 1604

Idiot - 1 usually offensive: a person affected with extreme mental retardation, mental age of less than 3 years 2: a foolish or stupid person

Examples of Idiot - Don't be such an idiot! [only an idiot would invest in a company just because a casual acquaintance recommended it] [Seeing the universally destructive effects of liberal Democrat policies combined with ruthless union power (example, Detroit, California, etc.) only an idiot, or one completely consumed with hatred for those more successful than they would vote Democrat.]

Origin of idiot - Middle English, from Anglo-French ydiote, from Latin idiota ignorant person, from Greek idiōtēs one in a private station, layman, ignorant person, from idios one's own, private; akin to Latin suus one's own — more at suicide

First Known Use: 14th century

NOTE: I am supplying the next three paragraphs to clarify common terms used in my writing and to hopefully remove any and all personal references..

I frequently use the terms liberal and leftist in my blogs. That is not an individual charge aimed at a single person, family or group, but a general classification of those active in movements generally described as liberal, progressive, socialist, communist, unionist, or even Democrat. I know there are a few differences, but these terms are all lumped by me into the group term liberals or leftists. There are many of these groups in the present USA. They include: many of those who hold office, most of the civil servants and bureaucrats who populate our government, and those who directly and indirectly support their efforts such as most of the media and entertainment world. They are generally defined as those who see more government as the answer to virtually every problem, real or imagined. The phrase, “The government should do something about this.” is one of their favorite utterances. They seem to overtly despise and speak out disproportionally against anything private including corporations, capitalism, free enterprise, profits, management, conservatives, and the wealthy, often abusing the words fair and fairness in their diatribes. To them, those words apply strictly to laws, ideas, and people that promote liberalism. (Whatever that means) Of course, they clearly exempt from their wrath those wealthy individuals who support their agenda no matter how they accumulated their wealth. They often express contempt for our Constitution and seek to circumvent its limitations on government that our founding fathers designed specifically to protect the people from any intrusive and dictatorial government. Though they claim to be champions of the poor and downtrodden, they actually use the ignorance of these people as tools to obtain power and gain wealth for the select few elitists that make up their ruling class. The leaders of this ruling class can often be identified by their lavish lifestyles, at taxpayer expense, and currently, their constant and liberal use of the labels, racist and racism, cast at their opposition at every opportunity. Their flagrant use of these terms along with other hate speech and negative campaigning with no noticeable rationale, are the hallmarks of virtually every liberal in or outside of any political campaign. Although the left constantly accuses conservative standard bearers of hate speech, it is they who actually do so. By accusing their opposition of evil actions, of which they are primarily guilty, they seek to disarm any pejorative argument against their own actions. They use a constant stream of true hate speech, ridicule, condemnation, and animosity against any who oppose them in any way. Incidentally, there are a number of Republican politicians that fall into the same ruling class category.

I also use the terms entrepreneurial, enterprising, and American in my blogs, words I consider virtually synonymous.. These terms represent those who work to earn a living and in the process, improve our economy and the lives of all our citizens. They are those who care about the realities of life and of bringing those with less up to a higher standard of living by their own efforts and hard work. They are the ones who have driven the American system of capitalism into the greatest engine to remove poverty of the masses that the world has ever known. They do this by being the only ones who create jobs that add to our gross domestic product, the true wealth of our nation. Notice that I did not use the term conservative. That is because I have issues with some so called conservative principals and the issues they favor. They are those who mostly oppose the efforts and agenda of liberals and leftists, who would have you believe that they should do all of your thinking and planning for you, and decide exactly where and for what your hard earned money should be spent. These genuine and independent people—these real Americans with their can do approach to life, believe that thousands of independent, privately owned and competing entrepreneurs, companies, and even corporations can do a far better job of providing for the welfare of all Americans than a government bureaucracy. Consider the success of the private competitors to the Postal Service, Amtrak, and virtually every other government entity. Not only are the private organizations far more efficient, but they make a profit for their owners who pay substantial amounts of taxes. These taxes are then used to subsidize their inefficient government counterparts. That’s not an opinion, but a proven fact. Those not on the left do not need to use derogatory terms similar to racism in describing their opposition as liberals do.

These notes are provided so the reader will understand just who the widely diverse groups are that I am speaking about. If I am ever speaking or directing my words to or at a specific individual or organization, I will identify them as such. So attention family and friends. Any remarks you may consider as less than positive or even nasty are generalities. They are not aimed at you individually, except as you identify yourself as a dedicated member of whatever subject groups I am referring to.

I am an active member of a discussion group called the Socrates Club whose members meet every Monday afternoon for about three hours to discuss subjects we select at the start of each meeting. They are almost all seniors from many walks of life from mostly retired professors and other educators to a truck driver, a restauranteur/artist, a couple of local politicians and one lonely engineer/writer/business person, me. We have some often emotional discussions and our moderator tries to restrain anger and contentious exchanges. Among the group, I am the recognized authority on matters of energy, hard science, global warming, and business. They have also learned that I carry with me, the latest printouts from the CBO and other revenue information sources that describe what our government receives as revenue, and what is going out as expenditures. I also carry a complete breakdown of our manufacturing, imports, exports, and consumption of goods and services. As a result, the mostly leftist group has become very careful about quoting financial statistics. One member routinely chides us for having military goods as far and away our largest export. He once claimed military goods and weapons were almost half of our exports. He quit repeating this completely when I provided government statistics showing the average of the last five years was 1.4% of exports

When the group doesn’t believe the statistics I provide, I hand them a printed copy and tell them to look it up for themselves. They have become extremely cautious about trotting out their wild data when they know I may drag out a few government statistics to prove them grossly in error.

It is extremely interesting to see who responds to my many email thought provokers, and what they have to say. I can almost always predict what those responses I do get will say and the attitudes they will express by whom the response is from. I am proud to say that most of my progeny offer open-minded, thoughtful responses even when they disagree with me. On the other hand, I get typical knee jerk and often nasty, closed minded responses from left leaning friends and family members. I also receive similar responses from extreme right wing individuals as well, surprise, surprise!. My obvious and valid conclusion is that the mind sets of these individuals are locked in a battle with anyone who doesn't accept their emotional, unthinking, fundamentalist belief system. Logic and rationality are completely overwhelmed with unreasoning animosity toward anyone or anything that doesn't agree with their holy belief system. Yes, I sometimes say harsh things about those I see as the enemies of America. Those who take my words as a personal affront always do so when I say something negative, unkind or damaging about the people or belief systems that determine their political views. I see my commentary as a shotgun effect aimed at a system or idea, not at any individual.

For example: I recently forwarded a little humorous bit using the cartoon character Maxine, to which I added my own commentary along with a few harsh comments. Here’s what I said along with one or two of the responses I received.

“My daughter sent me this. I think it's priceless. Of course, all you Obama lovers won't like it because the truth hurts. Oh how he and the other far left idiots love to fill the public bird feeders with other people's feed.

“Oh yeah, That French socialist that got his you know what in the wringer in spite of his $3,000 a night hotel suite and his first class seat on the aircraft? (paid for with other people's money) He would fit right in with the Obama/Clinton leftist crowd in every way. Just a poor, humble servant of the people.”

One response, not a family member, but from one who doesn’t want to be on my mailing list. (He’s gone) I think it is typical of what people of any stripe on the left and that react emotionally would say. You’ll see my reaction in my response that follows. What is really interesting is that I received three other responses using almost exactly the same words. A mantra? This is the only one that asked to be removed from my email list. Hmmmmm?

His email:

Mr. Johnson,

I'm not really sure how I got on your mailing list, but I think you are part of the writer's group from the COA.

Please do me that great honor of removing me from your just to the right of Adolph Hitler mentality platform of hate and racism wrapped up in the robes of Christianity and pillow case halos mailing list.

Sincerely, George (name changed to protect the guilty)

My response: George:

Thank you for your kind and thoughtful words and request. Of course I’ll remove your address and place it where it belongs.

I have just one question. Do all of you lefties get your orders and words to use in response to anything that doesn’t fit your holy all knowing, all seeing opinions from the same high poobah of liberalism/socialism/communism/fascism/feudalism? It seems you all use the same mantra of name calling of hate, racism, the religious right, and Hitler in every one of your responses to even the slightest deviation from your accepted language. It rather reminds me of play ground tactics where, lacking anything intelligent or creative to say, all that can be done is cursing (which you cleverly avoided doing) and name calling. (Which is all you did) Why don’t you try calling me something original or at least creative like Ghengis Kahn or Beelzebub. Heaven forbid you should utter a logical phrase or observation, or exhibit any sense of humor.

May peace and blessings be yours,

Ho

Another angry email sparked by the Maxine email:

I saw this and thought oh good, it is not going to be a mean, insulting email. This is the Ho I remember. I was wrong. It is mean, insulting, and disrespectful. Where are your manners? I am very close to marking your emails as junk.

From a good friend who shall remain nameless.

My response:

Sorry you feel that way. That’s just the way the world turns. I’ll not bother you any more, but I will share another negative response I received from a member of our writers group. (That's three negative and eight positive responses) Incidentally, this guy, George, hates almost everyone and left our group in snit when someone, not me, read something he didn’t like.

I included the above exchange with George, and continued:

Please don’t get the idea I see you as in any way similar to George. You most certainly are not. Methinks (I’m certainly not sure) maybe a lot of you folks take life far too seriously. As far as my words are concerned, for me it is a fight for survival. At 83 I am long past being useful to the American youth worshiping culture. I am now fighting for my life. Should almost anything happen to me that costs even a small bit like Barb’s health problem, I’m dead meat. Already I have been informed that I am too old for having knee replacements (which I am needing more and more) and receiving any help from medicare. Should Obamacare be put in place, I will not be able to get such surgery, or therapy for my bad back, even if I pay for it myself. Maybe I should just blow my brains out if anything serious comes my way. After all, I’m just using up resources that could better be used on some junkie who is twenty-five.

In spite of all that I am a deliriously happy person with a great life, a spectacular family, a dear lady who loves me and whom I love, and a passion for writing. Only a very small part of my writing is political. That, of course, is what all the fuss is about. I write about people and about real solutions to real problems. I have many dear friends and am active in a number of senior groups, most of whom at least say they like me and my writing. That includes a number of left leaning yet still open minded individuals. The only downers I know are doom and gloom leftists who have little positive or good to say about anything. I’m sure there are those on the right who fit the same bill, but most of my friends are pretty much leftists.

Enjoy life, its that brief bright light between two black eternities.

Ho
-------------------------------------------
An angry, accusative email response to the Maxine forward from a family member::

You know what, I don't see this as an Obama loving analogy at all. I don't call you an Obama hater, or an idiot, or any of the other names you throw at, well, your sister for one. I do often think you are downright nasty. But you are my relative.
-------------------------------------------
Another:

Please stop assuming what the 'Obama lovers" "far left idiots" 'the leftist crowd" or whatever [pick your own contemptious name] like, don't want to hear, won't accept, etc.etc. etc.

There is a saying: "when you assume, you make an ass of 'u' [you] and me".

Why do you feel compelled to put this type of commentary/snide remark of this in every one of your rants?

I'll make you a deal-stop belittling and assuming what I or any other "leftist" (whatever that means) thinks or will think about a subject, and I won't call every "conservative" (whatever that means) a "lying Limbaugh suck up".

I love you as family; I can't say I love your style of politics-- the opinions I accept and I might even agree with to some degree (surprise!), however, the manner in which they are presented makes me not want to read them. After all, I've already been told I don't want to hear it.

Just some constructive criticism.

BTW, I like Maxine, thought this was funny too, albeit overly simplistic..
------------------------------------------
I wonder? If I had said, " Obama supporters" "far left proponents" " the liberal Democrat crowd," would those have prompted the comment, “ [pick your own contemptous name]? Hmmmm?”
------------------------------------------
The following section was my response to the email of my “unnamed friend.”

I included the two emails above because their thoughts and opinions do count with me. My political rants and emails go out to more than 200 email addresses—friends, family, and acquaintances—a widely spread group. Some of the responses I receive from family and friends who are liberal are considerate and well thought out. An equal number (my guess, I didn’t count) including some family are far nastier than anything I have ever sent to anyone. I just figure it goes with the territory. Some recipients who take my comments as personal and aimed at them individually, which is most certainly not the case, and who respond in a less than hostile fashion, are added to my special l list. I have been sending them more individualized emails once I note their sensitivity. I have just added the two above to that list.

My dear sister once emailed me a speech delivered in the Senate by Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, the runner up to Ted Kennedy in pork barrel vote buying. The speech was a purely emotional, “nasty” diatribe against George Bush, Republicans, and conservatives. It was a much longer version of, DNC chairman Howard Dean's famous angry quip, "I hate Republicans, I hate conservatives, and I hate Rush Limbaugh." In the email she said, "We should all get behind this good man." I couldn't believe she would make such a statement.

I emailed back, "Your good man, Byrd, is a typical political opportunist who obviously loves power and prestige, but cares nothing for anyone but himself. I simply cannot imagine my own sister saying anything good about this petty despot. How could you even think of him as good in any way when he was an active member, and even a grand Dragon, of the Ku Klux Klan for many years. It is my understanding (and I am certainly not an expert on the subject) that in order to hold such an office in the Klan one must have participated in at least one lynching. (Doesn't that make him a murderer?) In speeches and interviews over many years, Byrd described Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. as, ‘one of the most dangerous men in America,’ even after King was murdered. In my opinion, Byrd is definitely an evil politician with no redeeming qualities. I am in shock that you would even consider using the word good in association with this poor excuse for a man." In retrospect it seems obvious that my sister and I have very different interpretations of the words good and evil. Apparently, to her, the only thing that counts is that Byrd mounted a hate diatribe against George W. Bush. He is forgiven all manner of evil up to and including murder of innocents just because he spoke the liberal party line. I have a very difficult time understanding how this can be, or how anyone, let alone my sister, could call him a good man..

I never did receive a response. Don't get me wrong. I love my sis and her family. Unfortunately, it is extremely difficult to have a rational discussion of anything remotely associated with politics, even social issues, with almost any of them. Their minds seem to be completely closed, at least to me. I would guess that they will rarely listen, read, discuss, or consider anything that disagrees with the mantras of the left. Facts don't count, logic doesn't count, reality doesn't count, it is pure emotion in control. They seem to view me as some sort of right-wing, fundamentalist Christian, highly opinionated nut-job. I know this because several of them have so described me. In truth, they haven't a clue about who I am, what I believe, or how I relate to others. I have learned to just accept that as a reality and not be concerned about it. Their loss, not mine.

When did I ever say that today’s problems were new problems? Hell, Socrates and Aristotle (both Caucasian males) spoke of many of the same problems quite a while back. Modern technology and instant access to information makes them flow through a much larger society infinitely faster. That's most of the difference.

You are right about your generation, my kids and grandkids. We tried to have them not endure the seeming hardships we had encountered as children. We were among the fortunate ones who usually had enough to eat. (My father, a Caucasian male, had planned for the depression) My friends and I regularly searched trash throughout the neighborhood for items we could salvage to play with. My very first (and only) bicycle was a wrecked one I salvaged after someone threw it away. I completely disassembled it and saved money earned from my paper route for several months to buy parts to repair it. When I finally got it put together, I was the proud owner of a new bike. Over several years I completely repainted it (purple), put new chrome fenders on it, and was finally able to replace the worn and patched tires. I used that bike on my paper route and as transportation until I graduated from high school in 1945. I sold it for $15 just before I enlisted in the Navy. It would be almost thirty years later, 1975, when I bought my first really new bike.

I knew I had a very good life, even then. I was incredibly happy and optimistic even though I knew I was going to die in the coming invasion of Japan. Then they dropped the bomb and the war was over. Thank you Harry S. and all your helpers! The anti bomb people won't acknowledge that had it not been for that bomb, the invasion of Japan would have taken the lives of probably millions of Japanese and maybe even that many young Americans. No, those are not the facts, but a very reasonable estimate of the probable casualties. Incidentally, the one major firebombing of Tokyo took almost twice as many lives as the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki put together, as did the saturation bombing of several German cities. War is indeed hell.

I don't give a damn what race, ethnicity, or other physical qualities our President has. He or she could be a purple vegetarian homosexual as far as I am concerned. What is important to me is that he or she: 1) respect and obey our laws and constitution, 2) consider that he or she and his or her cabinet are supposed to serve ALL the people, 3) believe in American exceptionalism, brought about by our unusual entrpreneurial spirit, 4) be an honorable and honest individual, and 5) understand the basics of math, physics, business, political and religious freedom and true American capitalism. As far as I am concerned, our current President misses on all counts as did the previous Democrat President (a Caucasian male) and his (so called) wife. I can't think of any President in my lifetime, Democrat or Republican, who didn't miss on at least two of those. Except for the latest, they were all Caucasian males. In reality, he is half Caucasian. If so, how can he be considered to be a black President?

I think you make a serious mistake in equating the recognition of the stating of a real problem and trying to find a solution with simple prophecies of doom and gloom. Who are all those people shouting doom and gloom anyway??? The first and most important rule of problem solving is to be able to recognize a problem and state it clearly. This I learned in my first year of engineering school. Once a problem is clearly stated, it almost defines a solution. Another rule is, "as long as you keep doing what you have been doing, you will get the results you have been getting." Another is, "use logic and rational processes to solve problems, and use emotions to make love." Those words make sense to me.

Here are a few related quotes, printed in my book on energy, the first reportedly from an18th century historian (a Caucasian male):

“A Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only last until the citizens discover they can vote themselves largess 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.” He was referring specifically of the Athenian democracy.

The actual author of the second quote 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 page 22 of Industrial Management in a Republic, Prentis (a Caucasian male) 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 (not Caucasians, but male) some three millenniums 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.”

These are the real malignancies we must overcome if we are to solve the rapidly growing problems, facing not just the US, but the entire world. The ultimate collapse of America will be death and destruction of unprecedented magnitude unless we reverse course soon. (Please note I did give us a way out.)

You said, "Your doom and gloom emails sound just like an episode of Glen Beck. We will solve our problems. It won't be easy. But we won't be rioting and under total chaos."

That sounds a lot like what many were saying right before the Civil War. Those so saying were dead wrong. We can chalk it all up to "Doom and Gloom," sit and watch TV, or we can try to do something about it. I don't listen to Glenn Beck (a Caucasian male) since he is a problem user, not solver. The media and the entertainment world also are almost exclusively problem users, not solvers. Politicians fall into the same category. I spent ten years writing a book about solutions to our increasing energy problems. I have written extensively about solutions, real and practical solutions, to many of our other problems. That is not doom and gloom, it is an effort to change things for the better. However, I am just one small voice in a sea of far more powerful voices. Still, I keep trying. It is unfortunate that you seem to join the multitude who see realistic observations only as expressions of doom and gloom, rather than efforts to recognize problems and do something positive about them. Do you think being a Caucasian male disqualifies one from being a fair-thinking, responsible member of society?

I concentrated on energy first because absolutely nothing happens without cheap and plentiful energy, and because my education and experience provided much knowledge in the field. As the cost of energy rises so does the cost of everything we call the necessities of life. This includes food, housing, transport, clothing, everything we use and/or consume, even health care. Everything has an energy cost. The standard of living anywhere in the world is almost completely dependent on the cost and availability of one or more forms of energy. There are but two ways to lower the cost of energy to the individual citizen, company, state, or nation. The two are: reduction of use, or reduction of price. Conservation, the reduction of use, is an effort with diminishing results. It can only do so much. No matter how hard you try, there is a limit to how low energy use at any cost can be to keep a house in northern Minnesota warm enough to sustain life. That limit appears to be about half the usual cost. Halving the cost of energy would achieve the same goal. If energy cost were cut to a third, it would exceed that goal. Of course, by using both, the cost to heat that home would be a small fraction, one sixth, of the original cost. That could be expanded to include every use of energy. My book, Energy. Convenient Solutions, has already received some great reviews in newspapers.

Here's one of my descriptions of the book: The author says, “We can replace all fossil fuels with renewable fuels and alternative energy sources within ten years and with only minor disruptions to present manufacturing and distribution systems.” He goes on to say, “This book describes most of the existing energy systems and some proposed new ones, all within current technology and present capabilities. Some of these proposed systems are quite unusual and some are very recently announced. It provides many unique and surprisingly workable, long-term answers to the many growing concerns about energy, the economy, and dwindling supplies of petroleum. Adopting these new systems would improve our balance of trade, our economy, our job opportunities, and our technological presence while eliminating the CO2 problem whether it is real or not. The point has been reached where we no longer have the luxury of time. The growing economic menace is here, now, real, and dangerous. If we don’t act immediately, the consequences could be catastrophic.”

Just because I point out dangers, is not doom and gloom even if the naysayers report that it is. I don't see very many news reports of solvers working on our problems. That's probably because solvers don't make the news, while problem users do. What we really need now are problem solvers and solutions, not problem users.

And why make the point about Caucasian males? I can understand it about British males, German males, and maybe even Scandinavian males, but ALL Caucasian males? Isn't that just a tiny bit of racial bigotry? Notice I didn't include American males because they come in all colors. [grin]

Oh yes, me grumpy? Most people who know me, including those who regularly read my blogs, even the far left contingent, say that I am one of the happiest people they know. Even at 83 with bad knees, a terrible back, lousy balance and hearing, and declining short term memory, I'm almost disgustingly happy---like a pig up to his middle in mud. Daphne certainly doesn't think I'm grumpy. Barb didn't either. Both were and are really bright lights in my life.

Barb and I certainly enjoyed those last few years together, in spite of all of her health problems. I always wanted her to be the same happy healthy vivacious lady she was during the first ten years of our marriage, but that was not to be. Still, through all of her illness I was very pleased to be able to take care of her. I learned a lot about myself that I liked during those last few years. Either one of us could have become grumpy and made life miserable for the other, but we didn't. We chose to be happy. So I intend to continue to skip joyfully through life, unfazed, or so it may seem, by pain and tragedy around me, yet still affected and offering comfort to those who need it, when they need it.

I like Kipling's poem, If, as well as some of the writings of Elizabeth Barrett Browning, Coleridge and many others of that era. I also like the philosophy of Eric Hoffer - the thoughts of E. O. Wilson - the books of Jared Diamond, Stephen J. Gould, Robert Heinlein, and Leonard Susskind - Nigel Calder’s Magic Universe - and many others no one has ever heard of like Sophie Burnham and Anne Lamont. (not all Caucasian males) These are merely examples of a much larger set of similarly different thoughts and ideas by many very different writers. There are many quotes of these and others in my book, Words from the Lakeside.

I devour the magazines, Scientific American, National Geographic, Smithsonian, and Astronomy, reading them from cover to cover. I'm certain that each of you reading this have your own sets of information sources that you value.

Maybe from your standpoint, people who are happy, are actually grumpy and trying to fool people.

My God have I ever wandered about. That's because I love communicating with a person who thinks. As you can tell, I have a tendency to ramble on and on. So keep on challenging me. It will make me. and I hope you, a better member of the human race.

I am so very pleased that so many people take the time from their busy day to respond to my ravings. Just remember, writing is what I do, it is my passion, other than family and friends. I may not always be accurate, I may not always even be lucid, but still I write what is on my mind. My goal is to jolt minds, to get people to think. I'll close with another of my favorite quotes. This one is from George Elliott:

"Oh, the comfort, the inexpressible comfort of feeling safe with a person; having neither to weigh thoughts nor measure words, but to pour them all out, just as they are, chaff and grain together, knowing that a faithful hand will take and sift them, keep what is worth keeping, and then, with the breath of kindness, blow the rest away."

Just a few treasured people fill that bill.
-----------------------------------------------
Some facts, some opinions, and some wild guesses. You’ll have to decide which.

To all of you left leaning souls, even you well meaning ones. I hear in your words echos of the emotionally powerful propaganda of the left that is being promoted by the entire entertainment world including the news media along with leftist politicians. Some of it is very subtle, some quite blatant. I am old enough to have heard many of the same old ideas in the speeches of Eugene V. Debs and Earl Browder, some nearly a century old. You may never have heard of them, but they were the leaders of the communist/socialist party in the twenties, thirties and forties. I believe it was Debs who ran for President several times in the early 20th century as a socialist/communist. Browder was the head of the American communist party and a union organizer for many years. Capitalizing on the depression, he talked about and promoted much the same old disproved socialist promises that the left promotes today. He hated capitalism, business and the wealthy. Those wealthy who espoused socialism/communism were, of course, exempted from his vitriolic speeches. He was a union thug and organizer. During the depression he came a lot closer to leading a Communist takeover of our government than most people will admit. Today he would fit right in with the liberal Democrats and their union cohorts. The last I heard of him was when he was interviewed about the American communist party by Mike Wallace in 1957.

Karl Marx wrote that a prosperous middle class was the biggest deterrent to communism and in effect, that the reduction of the middle class from independence to near poverty was a necessary part of any communist revolution. He also wrote, “Without violence nothing is ever accomplished in history.” Marx hated Russia and the Russians. Many people forget that.

A personal experience: Honest curiosity brought me to attend a rally of mostly blacks in the mid sixties outside Western Reserve University. The rally spilled over Euclid Avenue and completely blocked that main Cleveland Street for several hours. There were a number of socialist/communist groups that organized the rally that almost broke out into a race riot. In the midst of the crowd, I found myself very close to one young black speaker who electrified the crowd when he said the following, “There are bottles of cyanide in the school chemistry labs. Just over that hill (pointing south) sits the Baldwin reservoir. (The main water supply for the all white eastern suburbs of Cleveland) It would be unfortunate for a lot of white people if that cyanide found its way into the water in that reservoir.” That young man, who I had never heard of before, was the reverend Jessie Jackson. He had come from Chicago to speak at the rally. Now, I ask you, who is a racist? Incidentally, after that comment, I worked my way out of the crowd and headed for home, scared as hell. After I left, a number of white students from Case (now part of Case, Western Reserve University) were beaten badly.

I am a supporter of American capitalism, not the laissez faire or social capitalism of Europe. As such, I consider socialism as a great evil and enemy of the people. From this standpoint, and observing the goings on in our nation for many years, I have made a number of predictions that have been amazingly accurate. I don’t know, but I may have sent you a copy of some of my recent predictions. On the non political side (yes, I do a lot of non political thinking and writing. I don’t politicize things one tenth as much as liberals and the media do), I quite accurately predicted the dot com bust at least a year before it happened. I also predicted the mortgage melt down several years before it happened. In that prediction I wrote why it would happen and who was responsible. George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were severely criticized and called racists by the left when they tried to stop or prevent this debacle. And just who benefitted the most financially from these destructive efforts? Chris Dodd, Barney Frank and a new Senator from Illinois named Obama. I also predicted Obama’s stunning victory and the Democrat sweep of Congress even before he was nominated. I also predicted the insurmountable debt crisis we are now facing including a fairly accurate guess of both the lingering unemployment (which is actually around 14%-15% if figured the way it always was before the Obama era and the changes his administration made in how unemployment is estimated.) and the actual increase in the national debt. My figures for both 2010 and 2011 were about double the CBO estimates. (I was right, they were wrong) All of those predictions are documented. Several from our family, and quite a few of my liberal friends ridiculed every one of my predictions when they were made saying nothing like that would happen. They were, of course, dead wrong, but will never admit it. How were my predictions so accurate? Plain old common sense and a little basic math.

One thing you will never hear from the highly biased news media is what happened to middle America as a result of the mortgage crisis. Middle class Americans lost almost half of the total value of their homes. Many lost them completely to foreclosure. This was the largest transfer of wealth from individuals to banks/government that has ever occurred. In spite of being devastated, America’s middle class mostly survived financially. The actions of government officials, liberal governmentalists I call them, could not possibly have been accidental. No one could be that stupid. It is my contention that this was a deliberate effort, orchestrated by leftists in our government, within Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac, to destroy our middle class. In fact, every action taken by liberal Democrats since they took control in 2008 has been aimed at the economic destruction of our country. Obama used trickle down help in the mortgage crisis. Instead of providing mortgage help to middle Americans and small banks, he gave huge banks. Those “too big to fail” billions while middle class Americans and small banks were actually betrayed and defrauded. It would have been far less expensive to provide financial help “from the bottom up” by providing equalizing funds to hundreds of thousands of individuals with guarantees from small banks. Instead, Obama chose to reward his financial supporters in the huge banks on Wall Street, and especially Goldman-Sachs. Did you notice how many Goldman-Sachs executives ended up in his cabinet or among his many Czars?

Several respondents to my predictions said about possible food riots I predicted could happen said clearly, “It can’t happen here:” I don’t recall if any of those were from our family or not. When the IMF, supported by the five nations of China, Russia, India, Japan, and Brazil, replace the dollar as the world reserve currency, there are many really bad things that could and probably will happen in our country. That time is not far away. I believe the IMF will try to hold off until after the next Presidential election, but they might not be able to do that. This will certainly be the case if we don’t reduce government spending drastically and soon. What would the change of the reserve currency away from the dollar mean to Americans? First of all it will mean our government can no longer print money to pay our debts. What will that mean? Probably runaway inflation, rapidly declining paper assets and a government unable to meet its financial obligations. The serious problems will start when the government defaults, not on major debts, but when they can no longer make good on things like food stamps, medical bills, and payments of many types to individuals. How long do you think the millions of folks on food stamps will stay peaceful and quiet when grocers will no longer accept them for payment? What about when your credit card is suddenly unacceptable. How about when no one will cash your Social Security check? Is this a certainty? No. Is it a possibility? Definitely. How probable is it? I certainly don’t know, but I’ll guarantee it is a much greater probability than the left and their media buddies would even breathe about. They don’t want you to know. I know you’ll believe whatever suits you about that, but time will indeed tell.

“It can’t happen here.” is exactly what the folks in Iceland and Greece said. That’s what the folks in all of the other at risk nations like France, Portugal, Spain, and even Italy are saying right now, “It can’t happen here.” Don’t bet on it. What can we do to stop it? An immediate reduction by 20% of all federal government payments would be a good place to start. You wouldn’t know it, but Social Security payments have already been cut as much as 25%. That was accomplished by Bill Clinton and his Democrat Congress his first year in office. I’ll bet you didn’t know that. I’ll bet you didn’t know that Medicare has also been cut almost 30% over the last fifteen years. Welfare payments and health care for illegals has not been cut, but has been expanding during the same period. The details are a bit hard to explain. But they are all there in the federal budget reports if you care to dig for them. That’s all part of Democrat vote buying. No, I don’t think they are the only ones to blame, but it is almost exclusively their vote buying with taxpayer money that is the cause of our fiscal woes. Three minus four is not one, it’s negative one. Democrats don’t seem capable of understanding that. They also seem to believe that you can borrow yourself out of debt. That is not remotely rational.

Back to the world according to Obama: As far as I am concerned, we now have the most racist President and administration we have ever had, certainly since just a few years after the civil war. (When millions of Caucasian males died in a war to free their black brothers from slavery) In virtually every political discussion we have, Democrats bring up race as an issue. One example of many clearly racist actions by the Obama administration even reported by the media (since silenced) can be viewed at this site: http://opntalk.blogspot.com/2011/03/holder-will-not-investigate-his-people.html. There are numerous other examples including one in Ft Wayne in which my friend and neighbor at the lake (a Democrat politician) was involved. Without going into details, it involved six black men, members of ACORN, who used the mortgage system to scam local banks out of several hundred million bucks. They were caught and jailed for a while, but then, all charges were dropped. Can you believe it? As far as I can find out, all the records of this little escapade in Fort Wayne, including newspaper accounts, have mysteriously disappeared. Of course, I’m one of those ignorant people who sees racism as going more ways than one. (Are Latinos or Chinese racists as well?) I’m not accusing anyone, I would just like a little objective clarification.

The debt ceiling is a stupid joke unless we don’t raise it. What is the possible purpose of having a debt ceiling if every time you run out of money you simply raise the debt ceiling. If we have the good sense to stick to the ridiculously high debt ceiling as it is, the message to the world and our creditors will be that we are finally doing something about our runaway spending. Another thing we could do to lower the deficit would be to immediately cut all federal government payrolls by 20%. We could use a minimum federal wage (sound familiar) for those low on the pay scale and start a graduated scale of reductions at say $50,000 per year. Then at $200,000 we could up the reduction to 40%. It would do little good to include Congress since they get most of their wealth under the table from lobbyists, the public pork barrel trough, or ear marks. Incidently, did you remember Obama’s promise to get rid of earmarks? Yes he did promise that along with thousands of other things he has since reneged on. There have been more earmarks pushed through since the Democrats took power in 2008 than in any similar period in our history. It’s kinda like his promises to close Gitmo, end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and bring our troops home. But . . . he means well.

Oh yes, the Tea Party. I’ve been to two of their rallies here in Florida. I have also been to several anti-war rallies organized by the left during the Bush Presidency. There is an obvious and palpable difference between the two groups. Yes there were a few hate based signs at both Tea Party rallies, but not a hundredth as many as at the anti-war rallies. At the so called “peace” rallies, there were many race based signs (read anti white) that had nothing to do with war. I know there are bound to be a few really angry nut cases at any large political rally of any color. Still, there were huge differences in the behavior of those two groups. First of all, there was a great deal of obscenity and even violence at the peace rallies. At one rally, a small group carrying a tasteful banner disagreeing with the premise of the march were attacked by a group of thugs with sticks and beaten quite badly before police arrived to rescue them. Several were bloody and had to be hauled away in ambulances while the crowd around them shouted obscenities as I watched from a relatively safe distance. Some pro peace group that was. After the rally the parks where the rallies were held were cluttered with substantial amounts of trash including all of the signs they had been carrying. Incidentally, the Washington marches produced similar trash records.

In stark contrast, the only violence at either of the tea Party rallies was when a group of Obama supporters rushed one part of the rally crowd and destroyed a banner objecting to Obama’s health care plan. Also, the Tea Partiers picked up and carried away all of their trash leaving the site as clean or cleaner than before the rally. I saw no signs that could remotely be considered racist. Of course, Democrats will shout racism at even honest criticism of any non white individual.

I’m sorry, but I just can’t stand by silently and watch the system and Constitution that provided the highest standard of living for the most of its citizens be destroyed by a petty, self-serving, would be dictator and his cadre of dedicated and radical progressives who are actually socialist/communist/fascist/feudal elitists who hate America.

By the way, I am still recommending people stash a supply of well preserved food, and maybe invest in some non paper hard assets like gold or silver coins in case paper money goes the way it did for the Weimar republic and many other countries that over spent reality.

This entire process reminds me a bit of a Virginian named Jessie Rueben Johnson who wrote about the coming civil war in the 1850s, “I pray it never happens, but I fear it will.” He was a wealthy owner of several hundred acres of prime farmland, a livery stable, a drugstore, and a tavern. He had added considerably to tracts of land passed down through family from the around 1600 when they were given land grants in the Virginia colony by queen Elizabeth. Unfortunately he was one who on principal, supported the North, Lincoln, and abolition, unlike most of his neighbors. He had all of his considerable property in Virginia stolen—titles transferred to neighbors—while he sat in a Virginia jail as a political prisoner until the end of the war. He stayed behind to protect his property after helping his family move north to escape the war he was certain would come. He was dragged out of his home and put in prison for four or five years. He was lucky he was not murdered as several of his friends were. After the war he and his entire remaining family but for two sons who died fighting for the Union, moved west and settled in Indiana. Virtually all of the family’s possessions were lost. They were very poor, but were granted land in Indiana as a reward for the two boys that died while serving in the union army.

This all came to light when I was in my twenties and my father and I met with A Dr. Lorand V. Johnson who sold us a huge book about the Johnsons of Virginia. I have no idea what happened to that book or to the large folder of records, letters, and other papers that went with it. Maybe Lois’s family has it or possibly it just got lost or misplaced. According to my dad who found his family listed in the book, and the papers in that folder, that Jessie Johnson was my great grandfather. I have no viable proof, of course, but I would certainly like to get my hands on that book and the papers that were in that folder.

Ho

-----------------------------------------------
Tuesday, May 10, 2011 - Posted by HoJo at 10:58 PM

America's giving heart

Some time back I blogged about how our friends in the European news media had castigated America for being so stingy with relief for the tsunami that devastated Indonesia. They pointed out that the American government was fourth or fifth largest financial contributor to that relief effort. That is true, but what they neglected mentioning (deliberately, I am sure), was that Americas private giving totaled more than all of the worlds governments combined. Private Americans and American businesses provided more then half of the total relief effort. Also note that Indonesia is a Muslim nation.

Well, we did it again. From the e-news, Real News and Views comes another story you will not read in the New York Times or other government controlled media—or is it the reverse—media controlled government? Who knows?

-----------------------------------------------
May 10, 2011 - Real News and Views, a direct quote:

The recent earthquake and tsunami in Japan have created a tragic humanitarian crisis. Thousands of homes, businesses and lives have been destroyed. The situation at the Fukushima nuclear power plant remains uncertain. Our thoughts and prayers are certainly with the Japanese people in the midst of this terrible tragedy.

Yet, as with most major natural disasters in our time, the tragedy in Japan has once again showcased the amazing generosity of the American people. As aid pours into Japan from around the world, the United States, in keeping with her magnanimous spirit, has led the way.

So far, USAID and the Department of Defense have spent a combined $32,251,844, which includes sending two professional urban search and rescue teams maintained by the counties of Fairfax, Virginia and Los Angeles, California. The U.S. military immediately dispatched the aircraft carrier Ronald Reagan to Japan, along with other ships, to assist in relief efforts.

However, private donations to relief efforts from Americans already stand at $161 million or FIVE TIMES AS MUCH as public money - including millions of dollars from U.S. corporations such as Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan, Walt Disney, and FedEx.

America’s generosity arises not only from the faith and altruistic spirit of her people, but also from the fact that Americans have the means and the freedom to be generous. The means is a direct result of America’s capitalist economic system that allows for free enterprise, competition, and the creation of wealth, which gives Americans the freedom to give generously to others out of their discretionary funds. While some seek to denigrate wealth creation or tax business into oblivion, it is evident that America - her businesses and citizens - are abundantly generous to people facing crisis and disaster, precisely because they have both the heart and the ability to do so!

In the midst of this disaster we have an opportunity to reflect on America’s exceptional spirit, character, and people. Because America was founded on the principle that each person possesses a God-given dignity, her people are always quick to come to the aid of others in their time of need. The American people have always exhibited a great spirit of generosity and concern for the downtrodden, as exemplified now in their outpouring of aid and support to Japan and others at home and around the world. It is in times like these that we should all be particularly proud to be Americans.

End of quote.

I realize governmentalists would prefer to take private money by force and use it as they see fit rather than have the American people contribute directly to the needs and charities of their choice. That’s just who you are and what you do; small minded people who are always condemning, but never creating; using problems to build your power, but never solving anything; cursing and calling derogatory names any who oppose your power, but never offering any corrective, constructive ideas. Because you are completely void of any creative, constructive, or realistic ideas, all you can do is label those you oppose with rancid hatred. Your latest idea is to label as racists, anyone and everyone who raises any objections to your lust for power. It’s a cheap shot from mindless boobs who, in truth, are the real racists of America.

I’ll say one thing for you. You really know how to destroy. You have already virtually destroyed America’s education system, America’s inner cities (like Detroit), America’s middle class (the mortgage melt down), America’s once vibrant economy, and much of America’s manufacturing. Right now you are doing everything you can to destroy American free enterprise, discredit American exceptionalism, and move wealth from the middle classes to the most wealthy and elite individuals. (The easier to control it my dear.)

I have news for you idiots. True American exceptionalism, free enterprise genius, and fierce work ethic may just be more than you can handle. Just remember, you may bankrupt the government, but America’s wealth still lies in the hands of individuals, and I’ll wager not even you will be able to change that, not even with your corrupt judges, government bureaucrats, invincible bureaucracy, union thugs, and black militants. There is one single and powerful entity that stands in your way in spite of your efforts to minimize it. That happens to be the US Military. There is another group of real Americans that is growing in numbers and power in spite of all your ridicule and pointed hate speech. That group is the Tea Party. I rest my case. Just once you should try building instead of destroying. I realize just how much harder it is to design and build rather than curse, vilify, and destroy. You’re probably just not up to the effort.

-----------------------------------------------
Friday, April 01, 2011 - Posted by HoJo at 1:42 PM

Money in politics, The Koch brothers and George Soros

This preamble to the current BLOG points to how political power is for sale.

A review of: The Next Decade: Where We've Been . . . and Where We're Going
by George Friedman

George Friedman is widely respected political scientist and scholar; still one can respect Friedman without necessarily agreeing with him. This review is included to illustrate the rapidly changing economic and related information technologies that are driving what we call globalization.

The review:

In this book, his basic premise that the 21st Century U.S. is an imperial power in the manner of the Roman Empire and British Empire is simply wrong by any rational standards. The Roman Empire, at its height, was a centrally administered political entity in which imperial officials governed subject provinces, provincial subjects paid taxes and served in the Roman army, and the Roman Army (Cohorts and Legions) were stationed throughout the empire to protect imperial frontiers and maintain internal security. The Roman Empire was a discernable political entity with clear lines of authority between rulers and ruled. The British Empire was a centrally administered commercial empire held together by the Royal Navy and the imperial civil service who provided administrators (police and governors) for its colonial possessions.

The United States, by virtue of an extraordinarily high military budget, may be the predominant military power in the world, but its far flung military presence is not any thing like the control exercised by the Roman Legions or Royal Navy. Although the U.S. economy is largest in the world, Washington D.C. does not exercise anywhere the same direct influence over world commerce that Rome and London did at the height of their respective empires. In short it is difficult to see how the U.S. can be equated to either empire so the question asked by Friedman, if the U.S. Republic can withstand the strains of empire is a moot one.

Having begun with a false premise, Friedman compounds the error by building a set of prognostic descriptions of U.S. relations with individual countries and regions as the decade of 2010-2020 moves forward. In this effort he apparently fails to understand the effects that the phenomenon of globalization is having on the international stage. Now `globalization' is a widely used term with many interpretations. In this case the term is used to mean the rapidly growing inter-connectivity and inter-dependence of both nation states and geographical regions both economically and culturally. It is a major mistake to treat U.S. relations to specific countries or regions of the world as simply one-on-one relations without recognizing their global implications.
For these reasons, although this book as usual contains a good deal of wisdom, in the end it fails to provide a realistic prediction of U.S. international progress over the next decade.

A major part of globalization is enabled by the tremendous growth and expansion of information/communication technologies including: computers, the Internet, cell phones, and all of the related magic. I use the term magic to describe how these technologies may seem to the vast majority of even those who use them. We are just beginning to see the effects of this revolution. It came about so rapidly that the realization of the profound changes in our lives is just starting to be realized. The political implications have prompted many totalitarian regimes to place controls on access to the Internet with varying degrees of success. The possible results of having free access to all of this information strikes fear into the hearts of all despotic rulers, even more than a free press. These tyrants can rather easily control the press and local media. On the other hand, virtually any access to the Internet will thwart most attempts at control.

Totalitarian regimes of many types are having to deal with the freedom of information exchange provided by the Internet. This freedom is indeed bringing vast changes to the minds and activities of people wherever governments do not shut down or severely limit Internet access. Because freedom of information exchange is the enemy of all who would control the lives of individuals, many political groups, and especially those on the left, will try to control the Internet where they can. Even in the US citizens hear rumblings from some politicians about controlling and/or taxing Internet access. These individuals are the same groups that would destroy individual freedoms and place us all under growing government control. Free men must always be vigilant to protect freedom from those who would take it away. It is obvious to all truly free men and women that the political left will always use government to control people and force them to do their bidding. Just look at what has happened in the United States in the last three years. Our Constitution, originally designed to protect the people from their government, has been abrogated Our indebtedness has tripled while our nation has been economically damaged severely. It is obvious that the agenda of the left is the economic destruction of the middle class in The United States, and the reduction of its citizens to servitude to and dependence on their government. By overburdening entrepreneurs and all businesses other than the very largest with taxes and regulations, these policies have resulted in the largest concentration of wealth in very few hands that we have ever had in our history as a nation.

The recent mortgage debacle resulted in the largest destruction of personal wealth among the middle classes that the US has ever experienced. It also resulted in the greatest transfer of real wealth from most Americans into the hands of a very few, mostly bankers like Goldman Sachs. While those in power decry the evil giant corporations and Wall Street Bankers, they make secret deals with them so they pay little or no taxes, (Like GE last year) have access to political power, can arrange advantageous financial deals and government contracts, and receive advantages denied America’s small, medium and even large corporations not in the elite inside group.

EXAMPLE: The Export-Import Bank of the United States’ recent deal to provide Petrobras, Brazil’s petroleum giant with two billion dollars (that’s billions with a “b”) to fund offshore drilling, while using federal law to prevent American companies from drilling off our shores. It’s strange, isn’t it that one of the largest investors in Petrobras happens to be George Soros. The same multi billionaire George Soros who funds and runs moveon.org and other left leaning activist organizations.

This reference to George Soros leads us directly into the meat of this article.

Think Tanks and Political Organizations

In addition to donating directly to political candidates, parties and committees, the Kochs and Soros have funded numerous political think tanks and advocacy groups. These groups are not required to reveal their donors, therefore making it hard to come up with a comprehensive list of organizations that have financial ties to these individuals. The institutions mentioned are those most well-connected with the Koch brothers and George Soros.

Charles Koch co-founded the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, along with Edward Crane in 1977. Charles and David Koch, along with Richard Fink and Jay Humphries, co-founded the Citizens for a Sound Economy in 1984. In 2004, CSE broke off into two groups: Koch-linked Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks, headed by former congressman Dick Armey. According to its website, Americans for Prosperity "is committed to educating citizens about economic policy and a return of the federal government to its Constitutional limits." In addition to those mentioned above, Charles Koch has helped to build the Institute for Humane Studies, the Bill of Rights Institute and the Market-Based Management Institute.

David Koch is currently on the board of directors at Cato, as well as the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, a research center dedicated to “market-oriented ideas.” He is a trustee at the Libertarian Reason Foundation whose goal is to advance “free minds and free markets.”

George Soros founded the Open Society Institute which is his primary philanthropy organization. According to the website, "The Open Society Foundations fund a range of programs around the world, from public health to education to business development." While the foundation spends much of its resources on democratic causes around the world, OSI has also contributed to political advocacy groups such as the Tides Foundation. In 2004, Soros pledged $3 million to the progressive think tank, Center for American Progress. Soros is also a major financial backer of the Democracy Alliance, an organization committed to drive progressive activist funding and the recently formed Institute for New Economic Thinking, which was jump started by a $50 million pledge from Soros.

Both the Koch brothers and Soros have given generously to nonpartisan charitable organizations. David Koch, who is still receiving treatment for prostate cancer has donated $120 million to cancer research at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, $40 million to Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, $100 million to renovating New York City Ballet and Opera Theater, and $20 million to the American Museum of Natural History, among other donations. Soros recently pledged $100 million to Human Rights Watch, and he has made many other charitable donations such as $50 million for the Millennium Promise initiative to eradicate extreme poverty in Africa. In 2003, PBS estimated Soros had donated more than $4 billion since the 1980s.

VERDICT: Given the difficultly in tracking donations to nonprofits and charitable organizations, it's almost impossible to quantify whether the Koch brothers or Soros dominate this political realm. That said, both the Kochs and Soros have spent incredible riches in this area with no sign of stopping.

Capital Rivals is OpenSecrets Blog's ongoing series that plays political foes against one another on the playing field of money in politics.

Ever since Jane Mayer's recent New Yorker piece earlier this month, much of the media has risen to debate how much influence conservative and libertarian-leaning businessmen David and Charles Koch, the owners of Koch Industries, have in American politics.

Some critics of the article argue that the media cries foul over the Koch brothers, yet largely ignores liberal George Soros, the Hungarian-American currency speculator and stock investor, who has spent millions of dollars on liberal and nonpartisan causes (including the Center for Responsive Politics).

HoJo NOTE: What else would you expect our left leaning media to do

OpenSecrets Blog is here to investigate the numbers behind these bold-faced names in our new feature, Capital Rivals.

For starters, both Soros and the brothers Koch (pronounced "coke") are incredibly rich. And their political endeavors are numerous.

Koch Industries, started as an oil refiner, and is the nation’s second largest private company with about $100 billion in annual revenue. Soros is chairman of Soros Fund Management, a highly successful hedge fund that has provided financial and investment strategies to a variety of funds. As of June 30, 2009, the hedge fund had holdings valued at $4.2 billion.

David and Charles Koch are tied at No. 24 on Forbes top billionaires list with a personal fortunes of $17.5 billion each. Soros is No. 35 on the list with a net worth of $14 billion.

The Koch brothers, Soros and their respective companies have spent millions of dollars on politics, ranging from federal lobbying to candidate support to bankrolling political committees, according to a Center for Responsive Politics review of their political activity.

The Kochs and Soros have also funded think tanks, foundations and political organizations -- money that is sometimes notoriously difficult to track.

These individuals aren’t exactly flying under the radar as the Kochs hold leadership positions and are featured on the websites for the Cato Institute, Reason Foundation and the Mercatus Center among others. Soros also runs the Open Society Institute -- website Soros.org -- as well as the recently created Institute for New Economic Thinking.

Still these individuals have provided major funding to groups that aren't particularly transparent, such as Soros-backed Democracy Alliance, which doesn't provide information on the projects it funds.

David Koch's Americans for Prosperity Foundation has a more detailed website, but it is unclear why Koch is seemingly uninvolved in the similar organization, Americans for Prosperity. David Koch contends that no Koch foundations have provided funding to Americans for Prosperity, the citizen advocacy group organizing Tea Party events around the country. A Washington Post article from January of this year connects the Kochs with the Tea Party movement, citing records of their foundation giving $3.1 million to Americans for Prosperity, but according to the Kochs, this is false, as the money only went to the Americans for Prosperity Foundation.

Below is the Center for Responsive Politics' analysis federal political activity by Soros and the Kochs. Note that while direct political donations are relatively easily to track, it's difficult to create a full compilation of the political groups that these individuals are connected with due to secondary and indirect affiliations. Therefore, the groups listed at the end of the are the most well-known organizations linked to these three individuals.

Organization-Driven Political Activity

The Koch brothers’ company, Koch Industries, has been a big player in both campaign donations and lobbying. Koch Industries currently leads the oil and gas industry as the top contributor to federal candidates and parties, and is the fifth highest lobbying spender in the industry this year. Soros’ hedge fund, Soros Fund Management, has also lobbied at the federal level, but employees have not made campaign donations through a Soros-sponsored political action committee. Because of the notable lobbying involvement of a Soros-funded think tank, the Open Society Policy Center, this group's data is also included for the purpose of this comparison:

Political Action Committee Spending (1989 to 2010)
Koch Industries: $5,938,993 (83 percent going to Republicans)
Soros Fund Management: $0

527 Group Contributions (2001 to 2010)
Koch Industries: $574,998 (100% going to Democrts.)

$186,598 – Democratic Governors Association
$150,000 – Republican State Leadership Committee
$103,400 – Republican Governors Association

Soros Fund Management: $0

Lobbying Expenditures (1998 to 2010)
Koch Industries: $50,972,700

Soros Fund Management: $860,000
Open Society Policy Center (Soros-Funded): $11,930,000


According to federal lobbying reports, Koch Industries’ top issues include energy, environmental, tax and homeland security policies. The Open Society Policy Center has mainly lobbied on issues relating to foreign relations, civil rights, and law enforcement policy. The graph below outlines these organizations lobbying history since 1998:

Koch vs Soros Lobbying Expenditures.bmp
VERDICT: When it comes to the combination of institutional lobbying, 527 group donations and PAC expenditures, Koch Industries far out-spends Soros’ hedge fund and think tank, $57.4 million to $12.8 million. Most of this money is attributable to lobbying expenditures.

Individual-Funded Political Activity

Soros and the Koch brothers have all donated to federal political campaigns and committees. While Soros has far out-spent the Koch brothers in donating to 527 groups, especially when considering his incredible $23.7 million in donations to the groups between 2003 and 2004, the Koch brothers have donated more money to federal candidates and committees.

The Koch brothers give almost exclusively to Republicans just as Soros donates predominately to Democrats and Democratic organizations. Overall, Soros has spent $34.24 million and the Kochs have spent $4.06 million. (Note: This study only covers donations to federal candidates - to see donations to state candidates, go to Followthemoney.org and search for Soros and Koch. For example, as Ben Smith of Politico wrote recently, David Koch and his wife have given $74,000 to a Democrat, Andrew Cuomo, New York's State Attorney General.)

Individual donations to federal candidates, parties and political action committees (1989 to 2010)
Koch Brothers: $2.58 million
George Soros: $1.74 million

David Koch: $2,224,170

$667,500 – National Republican Congressional Committee
$555,000 – Republican National Committee
$191,400 – National Republican Senatorial Committee

Charles G. Koch: $363,100

$58,900 – National Republican Senatorial Committee
$50,000 – Republican National Committee

George Soros: $1,748,627

$252,670 – Democratic National Committee
$147,216 – Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee
$259,716 – Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee


David Koch’s Favorite congressional members:
$17,100 – Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.)
$7,600 – Elizabeth Dole (R-N.C.)
$7,200 – Mark Foley (R-Fla.)
$6,600 – James Inhofe (R-Okla.)
$5,000 – Sam Brownback (R-Kan.)

George Soros’ favorite congressional members:
$6,500 – Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.)
$6,200 – Jon Cranley (D-Ohio)
$6,000 – Ken Salazar (D-Colo.)
$6,000 – Dan Maffei (D-N.Y.)
$5,500 – Tom Perriello (D-Va.)

Individual donations to 527 organizations (2001 to 2010)
George Soros: $32.5 million
Koch Brothers: $1.5 million

A note from Howard Johnson about NPOs: Non-profit, tax exempt organizations (NPOs) sound great, don't they? These marvelous organizations are without the stigma of that terrible word, PROFITS. However, They do pay their employees, sometimes quite handsomely. They can thus become a practical conduit for all kinds of donations, government grants, and other subsidies, into the pockets of those on their payrolls. These individuals, frequently the organizer of the NPO, may not take out profits, but they can charge travels and stays at fancy hotels and resorts to the NPO in addition to their pay. Although their pay is subject to income taxes, their travel and miscellaneous expenses as well as the costs of often lavish offices and support personnel are not. This certainly applies to 527 groups. They seem to act just like many members of our legislatures, don't they?

So-called 527 groups are non-profit, tax-exempt organizations that are allowed to raise money for political activities including voter mobilization efforts, issue advocacy and other actions. They are allowed to raise unlimited amounts of money from individuals, corporations and unions. Until earlier this year, they could not use these unlimited contributions to expressly advocate for the election or defeat of a federal candidate. Federal court rulings -- including Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission and SpeechNow.org v. Federal Election Commission -- have broken down that restriction.

As mentioned previously, Soros spent $24 million in under two years and did so in his determination to defeat George W. Bush in 2004. He told the Washington Post in November 2003, "America under Bush, is a danger to the world. I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is." Since December 2008, Soros has only donated $4,000 to these types of groups.

NOTE from Howard Johnson: Did you ever wonder why George Soros hated George w. Bush so much that he spent more then $20 million of is own money trying to defeat him in 2004?

Consider the source of his money and then consider the same thing for the Koch brothers. Soros is a hedge fund operator and has made much of his money manipulating currencies using other people's money. This type of speculation generates zero wealth and few jobs. In 1992 he made more than a billion dollars (that's with a "b") by shorting the British pound, one basic method of manipulating a currency if you have enough money and can get enough people with money to go with you. According to many financial experts, "Soros brought down the Bank of England with a $10 billion leveraged position." Many of the records of his financial dealings are hidden from public view so it is difficult o get a full picture. There were few jobs created in the US because of his efforts. I'll only mention the $2 billion that the Export-Import Bank of the United States intends to loan to finance exports to the Brazilian oil company Petróleo Brasileiro S.A., known as Petrobras, over the next several years. This has been heralded by Obama as a plus for the US. Or is it really a plus for Obama supporter, George Soros, who is heavily invested in Petrobras?

On the other hand, the Kochs, through their parent company, Koch Industries, made their billions in the oil refining, and associated business, right here in the US. Koch Industries is the largest privately owned corporation in the US with petroleum related transport and refining locations on the west coast, mid-west and Calgary, Alberta. Their subsidiary companies include, Koch Minerals, LLC and Koch Carbon, LLC with diverse operations all over the world. Recent acquisitions include, Invista, the world's largest fibers company, and Georgia Pacific, the American pulp and paper products giant. Their companies employ thousands of Americans and make a major contribution to our manufacturing and refining industries. Remember the differences with George Soros organizations as you read the remainder of this blog.

On June 30th of this year, David Koch made a $1 million donation to the Republican Governors Association, his largest one-time donation to date.

David Koch: $1,472,000

$1,352,000 – Republican Governors Association
$100,000 – Americans for Better Government


George Soros: $32,506,500

$12.05 million – Joint Victory Campaign 2004
$7.5 million – America Coming Together
$2.5 million – MoveOn.org
$3.65 million – America Votes
$3.5 million – The Fund for America
$150,000 – Win Back Respect
$120,000 – Majority Action
$100,000 – Campaign Money Watch

Soros certainly wins the 527 group spending battle, beating the Koch brothers $32.5 million to $1.5 million. A graph below show the history these donations:

Soros vs Koch 527 donations CORRECT.bmp VERDICT: Soros rules this category, having poured more than $34.2 million into political channels, compared to $4.06 million for the Koch brothers.

-----------------------------------------------
Sunday, March 06, 2011

HoJo's Predictions and Some Repercussions

Some very personal reactions and responses 2-15-2011

On Jan 14, 2011, at 8:39 PM, Howard Johnson wrote and sent the following email:

Dear family and friends:

In October of 2004 I emailed the following warning to most of you:

Is a national mortgage collapse imminent? I am certainly no financial wizard and few people pay attention to my predictions, but I very accurately predicted the collapse of the PC market that led to the dot com debacle. I made some very accurate observations that were as plain as the nose on my face to me. Few people paid me any attention.

Well, here I am again with a new prediction that to me is just as obvious. Some time ago, liberals Democrats in our government managed to remove all reasonable controls on mortgages in order to “make home ownership easier for all people.” As a result, the government’s Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac mortgage banks began providing mortgage money to finance increasingly risky mortgages. In addition, they started bringing pressures to bear on other banks to engage in the same practices. This has resulted in a substantial run up in the price of housing and many new mortgage gimmicks like sub-prime and adjustable rate mortgages. Many of these home buyers hoped to flip these homes in a rising market and make a profit. A rather large percentage of these buyers will not be able to pay their mortgages, especially when the second tier rates kick in in a year or so. It’s a risky process with the certainty of dire consequences in the near future.

I believe that because of these practices, housing prices will eventually stop rising and start going down. This will begin accelerating as people begin defaulting on their high risk loans. When this happens, prices of homes will begin dropping precipitously. The mortgage market will very quickly begin to collapse as home owners suddenly find their mortgages are much larger than the new, declining value of their houses, and buyers will be few, even at lower prices..This will then cause the economy to begin shrinking as construction will almost stop. The resulting job losses will then expand, the stock market will crash, and we will be in a major recession. It could even be worse than the great depression that began with the crash of 1929. Consider yourselves forewarned.

END OF 2004 WARNING, my email continued:

I doubt that many people paid attention to my warning because, who am I to have the audacity to predict such things. I have no string of letters after my name to verify my predictions. Despite this, I am now warning you of another financial disaster I see in our future—our very near future. Once more, the media, the pundits, politicians, and especially the government are not talking about it. I think this is a deliberate deception for reasons only known to those who refuse to tell the truth of the situation.

More than 100 cities in the US are now bankrupt. Six states are in even worse condition and 27 others may be bankrupt this year. The federal government cannot bail them out because the federal government is virtually bankrupt as well. The government is printing money as fast as the presses will run. All that does is dilute the value of the existing dollars and scare hell out of our creditors.

I’m certain you all notice the rapidly rising cost of food and fuel, the lifeblood of our economy. With deficits in the trillions, we will soon reach the place where if all of us were taxed at 100% of income it would not be enough to balance our budget. The US has become the world’s largest debtor.

The Chinese and the Arabs are about to pull the plug. Both have slowed their buying of US treasury notes and are talking of switching to another currency. When, not if, that happens, it will yank the rug out from under our economy as the cost of imports will skyrocket. This collapse has already started as evidenced by the accelerating rises in the prices of precious metals and oil. Today oil passed $91 per barrel and will soon reach $100. The price of gasoline at the pump flew by $3 per gallon several weeks ago and will probably reach $4 by the end of the coming summer. It was about $1.65 here in Florida just a year ago so it almost doubled in just one year. Food prices are following a similar accelerating pace.. Look for cereal to cost $5 a box in six to eight months. Everything else will do much the same.

It is interesting to note that Bill Clinton, aided by his first liberal Democrat Congress, removed food and fuel prices from the federal COLA (cost of living allowance) used to calculate Social Security payments. Had this been left as it was, most Social Security payments would today be almost 25% more than they are now. Democrats deliberately reduced Social Security while at the same time warning the elderly that “Republicans are planning to reduce your Social Security checks.”

Also in recent years, unemployment has been estimated by counting those receiving unemployment checks. Real unemployment, the way it was counted before 1970 is the number who can work, but don’t have a job. Today this is about double the number the government reports. 18% would be a far more accurate number than what we get from Washington. To me it verges on criminal that the main stream media does not inform the public of these facts.

I suggest you try to find ways to protect yourself from the mayhem that will follow the economic collapse of our federal government. There could be food riots in many major cities as merchants begin refusing food stamps and credit cards, knowing they will never be paid. As the government runs out of money and the value of the dollar plummets, it will make the great depression look like a cake walk. These things are already happening in Europe. Greece. Ireland, and Iceland have already collapsed and six other European nations will soon follow. All of these things are the direct result of the growth of liberal socialist policies foisted on us by the left.

Be prepared for your government to take over your retirement account. Some members of Congress are already considering this. Then there are your bank accounts, your investments, your home. If they can take your IRA (in exchange for soon to be worthless government notes) they can also take anything else you own. They are even now writing the laws and the regulations that will give them the right to do so. Who says might doesn’t make right? They continue to try to abrogate our “right to bear arms” while they have the guns and handcuffs to enforce their laws. As Robert Heinlein said, “When only the police have guns it’s called a police state.”

I am sure that many of you will say, “That can’t happen here.” How many of you thought that when I accurately predicted the dot com bust? Or how about the mortgage meltdown? Did my predictions even register with you? I’d really like to hear from you regarding my predictions. Don’t say it won’t happen simply because it hasn’t happened before. If you don’t like my prediction and choose a rebuttal, please do not use platitudes and euphemisms, use facts and figures, real figures. While you are at it, look at the lessons of history. You might also tell me how the Greeks are going to solve their economic problems, or the Icelanders, or Californians.

I have the answer, but I doubt the short-sighted among our voters will ever let it happen here.

Ho
- - - - - - - -
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 11:40 PM, One of my very dear friends responded:

Ho,

You are so interesting. Below is not the person I have in my mind. Doom and gloom. What's your point? Does this help? Liberals versus conservatives. If there were no liberals, would it be the perfect world? If conservatives ran the world, our economy would be great and our future bright? It is greed that gets us into these sorts of problems. I wish it were so simple as being conservative or liberal. And I can't help but to get the feeling that you enjoy being right about your predictions and would take a certain amount of satisfaction watching our country's demise as you describe below. How does this letter help me? What should I do? My day was not so good. Thanks for making it worse.
- - - - - - - -
Dear friend,

I’m quite sorry I messed up your day.

I want you to know how I treasure your responses to my rants. I read them carefully and try to digest what you have to say. You are one of those few people who question me and work to keep me on track and I really appreciate it. I think you may have missed my point. Possibly because I didn't make it clear enough. Besides, I am actually an optimist.

The dichotomous and emotional positions of liberal vs conservative ignores reality and removes most rational conclusions about what is happening to our nation and what should be done about it. And yes, for a multitude of reasons I believe that application of liberal, socialist ideas, the proven destructive policies of the left, are responsible for the mess we are now in and for the coming, even more damaging debacle. I hear few ideas from liberal Democrats that address the real problems either. It is always my hope that the public, even all humanity, will see what's coming and take the necessary steps to either correct for it, or adapt to it. Sadly, those steps often come too late or are never taken. If I remember, I will attach a little thing I wrote about problems and how they are used. It sort if relates to this whole thing.

No, I certainly do not hope that this will happen. I will certainly take no joy in my predictions being correct. Unfortunately there are many sound reasons I make this prediction. I do not think our politicians on either side have a clue what to do. If they do, they are ignoring their own knowledge. I believe that as a people, Americans have become so luxury loving, self serving, irresponsible, and real work hating that we will not make the hard decisions necessary to stop the train wrecks such as the one we are already in the midst of. I certainly take no joy in my predictions being correct. I hope and pray that I am very mistaken.

Several people profited greatly from my earlier warnings by taking actions based on my predictions. One person sold most of his investments in computer companies when I told him of the coming PC business crash. He told me later I saved him from losing hundreds of thousands. Even though he was just an acquaintance he handed me a check for a thousand dollars in appreciation saying, "That's the cheapest good financial advice I have ever received." I was amazed. I know of no other such dramatic beneficiary.

A fairly close friend who had just sold his house for a handsome price was negotiating the purchase of another home when he read my prediction about the mortgage market. After looking further into what was happening, he decided not to buy right away and moved into a rental house. He called me about six months ago to tell me he just bought a home for around $200,000 that would have cost nearly twice that amount had he bought right after selling. He thanked me for warning him. Of course, he didn't do that on my say so alone. He studied the situation and sought advice of several people in the mortgage business before making his decision to wait. He saw my words not as gloom and doom, but as a positive, a valid warning. Oh, and several of those in the mortgage business laughed at my predictions. They were probably trying to sell him a big expensive house.

My point is to warn people of the menace that is coming their way so they can prepare. It is far better to prepare for a calamity and not have it happen than not to prepare. There are some relatively simple and inexpensive precautions one can take to minimize the damage in any calamity. I assume you have insurance of several types and that your car has seat belts and even airbags. How about considering a little insurance against this probable catastrophe. Oh, I am not selling such insurance so my motive is not to profit.

If I warned you about a train coming loudly down the tracks where you were sitting—if you then noticed the great noise it was making and heard its loud horn, would you consider my words as doom and gloom? If you lived in tornado country and someone warned you of an approaching tornado would you call that doom and gloom? I think not.

Well, the noise from the coming disaster is deafening, if you listen for it. There is a great deal a person can do to prepare. There are even books written about it. A six month supply of staple foods is a good way to start, as long as you tell no one about it. A batch of candles or a stash of flashlight batteries would not be a bad idea should the electric grid fail. There are even flashlights you can crank to charge their batteries. I would even suggest a quantity of bottled water if you don’t have a well These inexpensive preparations are minimal and will not go to waste. Necessary medicines are another thing that a six month supply would not be prohibitively expensive and wouldn’t take up much room. A cache of silver coins might be another, just in case paper money became useless. Just think about it. These are preparations you would not lose as you could use them from your supply and then replenish as you go along until things go bad. Some of these things we already have as part of our preparations for a possible hurricane here in Florida.

I warn people because I care about them. I want them to be able to prepare, not wring their hands in despair after a disaster happens. Do you think it would be better if I kept silent?

Ho
- - - - - - - -
NOTE: I inserted my comments in (italics.)

Hello,
Sorry for my delay in responding. We are in the midst of a blizzard warning and it made me realize I had not responded. Below makes me feel a little better but I still don't see the person that I met in your writings. Your predictions remind me so much of my own mother who is talking about a revolution (by black folks) etc. Plus all one has to do is listen to Fox radio and hear the same predictions so nothing new in these predictions.

1 (Actually, my predictions are quite different in detail from those on Fox. Similar in the main, but the devil is in the details.)

I am surprised that you describe the problems so simply and without nuances. You blame everything on liberals.

2 (No, I merely look at the results, the actual realities. Places where liberals have the most power and where unions are most powerful are always in the most financial difficulty. It was certainly not conservative efforts that drove textiles, then steel, then electronics, then autos, along with most of our manufacturing base overseas, or destroyed Detroit, or bankrupted California, Michigan, New York and other states.)

A remark that changed my outlook forever was a statement made by a German man who gave tours at Dachau (sp?). A young American guy told him that he had heard that the Nazi women were even more vicious than the Nazi men and wanted to know if this was true. This tour guide looked at this young man and told him that the reason he took the 7AM train every morning and did these tours in his retirement was that he wanted people to realize that all of us are capable of the atrocities that were done by the Germans in that era. That in the right circumstances we all have the capability to behave so poorly. In that tour I learned what I never learned in the history lessons in the USA.....that Germany had never recovered after WW1 and there was extreme poverty in the country.

3 (We studied the Weimar republic and what happened to Germany after WWI along with many other parts of history that our dumbed-down schools of later years did not teach. I wonder what group was responsible for that change?)

I find it so interesting that Americans living in their fancy homes and driving their fancy cars can make so many judgments of people that live in conditions that they cannot possibly even imagine. Instead of being grateful we are judgmental.

4 (Hey, lady, you forget. I grew up during the depression when our fancy car was a five year old Nash, we had several dirt streets in our neighborhood and I learned to eat quickly if I hoped to get any of the meager seconds Mom put on the table. Christmas was the only time we had oranges, tangerines, or candy. My buddies and I regularly prowled the trash cans in the neighborhood looking for discarded things we could fix and play with. My first and only bicycle was one I rescued from the trash. It took me at least three months to earn enough from my paper route to buy the parts to fix it up so it was rideable. I rode that bike for five years, constantly fixing and repainting it until it looked really good. I sold it for $15 when I graduated from high school. Thanks to my father’s hard work and resourcefulness, we were better off than most. That’s my reality and we were very grateful for what we had.)

Having digressed a bit I guess my point is this. WE are the reason for the problems. There were so many layers to the mortgage problems that had nothing to do with being liberal or conservative.

5 (It wasn’t conservatives that forced banks to write mortgages to folks they knew would never be able to pay for. It wasn’t conservatives that ran Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into bankruptcy. It wasn’t conservatives that paid Clinton protégé and Fannie Mae President, Franklin Raines $90 million in bonuses even as this government entity was going bankrupt.)

The common denominator was greed and denial. And we all benefited from the stupidity that was going on. (No, all of us didn’t) In my case, it was the great returns that I was getting from the stock market and the low interest rates that allowed us to buy a nicer home than we would have been able to buy in the 80's. Thankfully we were experienced consumers and did not end up like a lot of folks did. But I wonder. Had I been buying my first home at the ripe age of 23 (as was the case in 1983) would I have done the right thing? We looked to the bank and the realtor to tell us what sort of home we could afford. Also in 1990 when we bought our second home we were guided by the realtor and bank as to what we could afford. When we bought homes in 2001 and 2007 we were shown homes that were valued at more than 100,000 dollars more than the value of the homes that we eventually bought. And the hint that was given by the realtors......that other people in our salary range were living in much nicer homes. Now, because we humans could not do the right thing, the government will step in with more regulations. And many of those regulations will be just plain stupid. But the people working in the industry nor the consumers were capable of guiding themselves. (They would have been capable if parents and government schools taught responsibility and self reliance, but no, they taught greed, irresponsibility, and how to be a victim and blame it all on corporations and the wealthy.)

My predictions for the future are not the same as yours. I predict that health care and education will be the next "crisis". And why? (Those have both been in growing crisis stages for years, mostly due to efforts of our government.) Because the so called professionals that work in those fields have let greed and denial guide them also. (As taught by the media and in government schools) Take my profession. Hospitals have made money from PT's and abused situations where therapy gets involved. Many times I am just pushing an IV pole as someone walks down the hallway. This could easily be done by an aide. So instead of aides walking patients, physical therapy is ordered. This drove up the need for therapists and thus salaries and in the end more expensive for hospitals. Now the government has stepped in with regulations which limits this activity. There has also has been extensive fraud of therapy in various settings which has had to be limited also. (And just where was it virtually all of that fraud occurred? Answer: taxpayers' money dispensed by government workers under government programs.) Some of the regs are absolutely ridiculous and actually hurt the patient more than help. However, it was just human nature that created this whole mess and we were unable to guide ourselves. And there are so many other areas of waste in healthcare especially with end of life care. People will lose a dignified death if too many doctors become involved in a case. I have a friend who is a pediatric oncologist. She told me her nickname is Dr. Death. She has the highest number of patients die on her shift. The reason........she explains exactly what is involved with a lot of care and the eventual outcome. She says that many doctors view death as failure and will go to extremes to prevent a patient from dying on their shift. Ironically, she takes her nickname as Dr. Death as a compliment. All of this talk of death panels killed the conversation that needed to be had in this area. I think we are just starting to see the beginning in Arizona where the governor stopped all transplants for it's Medicaid recipients as the state can no longer afford it. And what do most people think? Well those people are on Medicaid/State aid. It won't happen to me. Well guess what? It will happen to everyone. Health care will have to be "rationed". Our technology is too expensive and our ability to keep dying people alive is too good. And now add obesity to the problem. We simply cannot afford it. There will be an adjustment. And we will probably blame each other and it will be very political. In the end I think it may be better. I think it will make people live a healthier lifestyle. That obese patient who is denied dialysis because of her poor prognosis related to her weight will make people take note of their own weight. But there will be lots of outcry first. And people in the USA get so many unnecessary medical treatments that only make the quality of their life worse. This waste will have to stop and the patient will be better off.

6 (A lot of this would take care of itself if it wasn’t completely free! A small local hospital near my home in Indiana cut the waste and abuses of their emergency room by charging each patient a $5 cash fee for every patient who used the emergency room. Of course, some people refused to pay and were treated anyway, but the hassle helped cut useless ER visits down to almost none and the hospital made much better use of its ER. I have often wondered why our helpful government hasn’t forced the hospital to stop this practice because of the efforts of some do gooder.)

As far as education goes, I can't explain it like my husband can who was in the field from the mid 80's to 2007.

7 (You can very easily see the effect the teachers union has had on education by what’s happening in Wisconsin and elsewhere. The unions would rather have half their members laid off than give up a tiny part of their income to keep them all working.)

But back to your emails. I can appreciate the entertainment in provoking people. But there are some difficult issues ahead of us. And when people of your intellect only add to the problem, well, I lose my patience. Your emails mostly promote blame. And yes, I can hear you say that you offer solutions but they start off with a lot of blame and putting people on the defense. Problems will not be solved with this strategy. Your emails also many times just address one side to an issue. Again, someone of your intellect should be able to see both sides and the nuances. Makes me think of an article that I read that promoted staying involved in Afghanistan. Then I read another article that discussed all the reasons to leave Afghanistan. Both had very good points. Big problems are complex. My concern now is that there is so much negative communication out there. Yours and my generation did not grow up with all the negativity and inflamed news stories that run 24/7 now. Someone with you age, experience, intellect, and most importantly, the ability to articulate should be offering encouragement to the next generation. Assuring them they have the ability to solve these problems. That we have faced many problems in the past and overcame them. It doesn't matter if there is a black, yellow. or purple president, or that Congress is liberal or conservative. What matters is us. And talking about people taking up their guns and taking your money just does not help us. Those worries are better kept from the written word and forwarded to lots of people.

8. (The first step in finding a solution to any problem is to define the problem. Doing so frequently requires calling attention to those responsible for the problem. If you call that blame, that is your choice. I call that defining the problem. Once the problem is defined, the next step is to use that definition to find a solution. I do not buy that there are two sides to every problem. There is only one side to a person who is being drowned by another. Stopping that person and getting the victim out of the water and give them air to breathe. There is only one side to any organization, group or whatever when they are drowning in debt, stop spending more than you take in. There is much more in my full response after the end of your message.)

I will end this email as I started it. The blizzard warning. After 9-11 and the anthrax scares my husband assured me that these were not major concerns for him..... that we had an immediate danger right next to our house that he worried about. I must back up and tell you that Larry taught a Risk Assessment course at Cornell so his outlook has always been interesting. I asked him what that danger was. His reply......the railroad tracks a mile away from our house. He then noted all the containers of chemicals that passed through on a daily basis on those tracks. One derailment could cause a lot of problems. So it never hurts to be prepared. His other comment. People mostly die in bed. Given that statistic, is bed a dangerous place? Should we avoid laying in our beds? Complexity and simplicity.......Oh, and one other of my husband’s comments when, as a toxicologist, is asked about dangers......Wear your seatbelt.

Your friend
- - - - - - - -
Hi there:

This is a very long response to parts of your last email message. You took the time to say what you thought and wanted me to hear. I appreciate that and listened carefully to what you said. I thought I would return the favor, so here it is. Incidently I don’t care much for sound bytes. They are emotional chirps that miss virtually all of the nuances, subtleties, and rational parts of any idea, proposal, or position. Sadly, the sound byte has come to constitute the majority of communications of news and many personal communications. Maybe that is because so many people now text message or use facebook or twitter. Sound bytes, text messages and postings on social networks are more like dogs barking than communications between thinking humans.

Oh, and about seat belts? I first installed seat belts in my car in 1952 when the only ones you could find to buy were surplus military or aircraft seat belts. I have used them ever since then, even when I had to install them myself. Like the boy scouts, I like to be prepared.

Perhaps I have not provided you with an adequate understanding of where I get the basis for my opinions or what my political reasoning is. First of all, I am not a follower of or beholden to any ism, group belief system (religious, political or other), peer group, grant committee, dean or head of faculty, political or other boss, or corporate officer at any level, so I am free to speak my mind, mistakes and all. I consider myself a truly independent and liberal individual and a realist who knows what it means to conserve. No, that is not a contradiction.

I have written extensively about things like:

1) the decimation of our environment, and impending menace that is more likely to end humanity than anything else. See http://decimatenviro.blogspot.com.

2) legalizing drugs to remove the money from illegal drugs and stop all associated criminal activity, http://hjdrugprb.blogspot.com.

3) a completely new taxing system that will remove tax revenue from the control of politicians, http://jtax.blogspot.com. My tax plan would include a negative income tax to replace welfare. It would also make it difficult for a few people to control a large number of industries, corporations, or political patronage.

Does that sound like I am a right wing conservative?

My personal social, environmental, and political beliefs are based closer to the world of science and humanity described in books like those by Eric Hoffer - The True Believer and The Temper of our Times, E. O. Wilson - several books, Jared Diamond - Collapse, The Last Chimpanzee, and Guns, Germs, and Steel, Stephen J. Gould - Bully for Brontosaurus, Nigel Calder - The Magic Universe, consumer advocate, John Stossel - Give Me a Break and Myths, Lies, and downright Stupidity, and even parts of the Bible. Included in my regular reading are several magazines: Scientific American, Astronomy, National Geographic, and Smithsonian, each of which I read cover to cover. No, I don’t agree with everything they have to say, but I don’t always agree with everything I have to say, either.

In truth, I do not blame everything bad on liberals. The blame actually falls on the idiots who vote for politicians: that use class hatred and promise voters things impossible to deliver: or that use taxpayers money to buy their seats in legislatures, be they professed Democrat, Republican, libertarian, liberal, socialist, conservative, or whatever. I am not specifically anti liberal, but I am definitely anti government, and in particular, the huge, self serving Jaba the Hut monster our government has become. It has doubled in size in the last thirty years and more than doubled in cost. Since liberal Democrats took control of Congress in 2007, our government has expanded from about 32% of GDP to as much as 44%. This after holding steady at around 30% for many years. Our current government has been growing in power and wealth at the expense of primarily the American middle class, and the benefit of mega corporations, politicians, the super wealthy, and Wall Street bankers and others mad for power. (Check how many on Obamas cabinet or among his czars are ex Goldman-Sachs executives, for instance.)

The latest crop of self serving egomaniacs (there are a majority of these in all political parties) have conspired to move great wealth and power out of the hands of the American people and into those of the elite royals in government. The unbelievably expensive vacations of the Obamas, Nancy Pelosi’s private jet (now taken away and sold), Hillary’s extravagant senate offices she used for such a short time, are but recent examples of the personal excesses of those elitists who have been running our government for most of the last fifty years. They have been running it as if it were their own private property and with our money. They do these things because they have learned that the power to control great wealth is at least the equal of actual ownership.

Obama’s just proposed budget represents $30,500 spent for each American household or $11,290 spent for each man, woman, and child in the nation. That’s your money he and Congress propose to confiscate, control and spend. Much and possibly most of it goes for purely political pay offs to keep incumbent politicians in office. For those not aware of such things, that’s buying votes.

In all the years I have voted in national elections, I have only voted FOR a candidate five, maybe six times. Two of those were Democrats, Harry Truman and Evan Bayh of Indiana. The others were Republicans Dwight Eisenhower, Ronald Reagan, and Frances P. Bolton in Ohio’s 22nd congressional district. I came to regret voting for Bayh who once he arrived in Washington, quickly changed, joined the Washington elite ruling class, and became a dedicated, fiscally idiotic, liberal Democrat, beholden to lobbyists. Who knows why?.

I’ll give you my reasons for being so anti government in a few examples of the thousands available for anyone who looks. They are in concert with my idealism tempered by a logical acceptance of reality. The best example is quite simple and it consists of just one question and an answer:

Do you think our country—any country—and the populace are better off with economic freedom or a government controlled economy?

Same question stated differently:

Are thousands of independent entrepreneurs and corporations with the freedom to make their own choices and stand or fall in a competitive, capitalist environment where profit is necessary for survival better able to control an economy for the benefit of the most individuals, or is a single government bureaucracy with employees that cannot be fired , managed by individuals appointed and/or chosen by politicians and unions, and not beholden to any profit motive or performance controls?

Here’s another example taken from my HoJo2Rants blog at http://hojo2rants.blogspot.com.

Remember King Lyndon’s Great Society programs? Part of that was his Model Cities program which cost billions of taxpayer dollars and was a total failure. I need only repeat one of King Lyndon’s pronounced promises: “Detroit will be a shining example of the benefits of our Model Cities program.” It is quite telling how accurate Johnson’s prediction was. It certainly has become an example of the results of the policies of his great society programs now being greatly expanded by Obama and his cronies. Go to the following site for a more in depth description of the results of this example the efforts and policies of liberal Democrats and their uniom bosses.

http://www.thedailycrux.com/content/3247/Government_Stupidity

Or better still, take a drive through the inner city of Detroit and see for yourself the results of fifty years of liberal Democrat policies and labor union efforts. Be sure to do so in broad daylight with several friends in your car because doing so at night or alone carries a high risk of being car jacked and murdered. Actually, you can see a lot of abandoned homes and buildings just by driving through on I-75. I did that just a few days ago and burned out homes and factories were quite evident, even from the Interstate. Inner city Detroit looks more like the bombed out center of a third world city than an American one. The media elite boneheads are now beginning to extol a growing renaissance of Detroit in direct denial of realty and in spite of the fact unemployment is nearing 50%. Also, 30% of those working are employed by government. This shining example of liberalism in action has lost 60% of its population in the last 50 years. Those who fled the city were mostly middle class workers and included virtually all of the whites. They have been largely replaced by uneducated and poor Muslims and Hispanics with their huge birthrates.

Now those same morally deficient snake oil salesmen and tyrants are using the same process that has clearly devastated all of the most liberal states, to do the same thing to America with absolute certainty. There may in fact be enough ignoramuses at the public welfare and employment trough, in government unions, and that listen to a totally corrupt and deceptive media, to win the next election. Maybe there are enough of those who have had their fires of hate fanned by emotional blackmail to bring down America. (Thank you reverend Wright!) It is obvious to me that the left’s “spread the wealth to equalize economic conditions” means making everyone poor and dependent on government. Well, that's one way to level the field of economic opportunity in America.

When I pointed this out to my Socrates discussion group, one of the many liberal members said I was wrong, that it was not liberal Democrat policies that brought about the demise of the American auto industry that caused Detroit to collapse. I then asked him what he thought was the real cause of the demise of the Detroit’s auto industry. “Why, the failure of the auto industry to compete with cheaper and higher quality foreign cars.” He replied.

I then asked him what he thought was the reason for that. “Older factories, antiquated equipment and the failure of management to modernize and adapt new manufacturing techniques.” He answered.

“I couldn’t agree more,” was my surprising (to him) reply. “And just who or what was it that prevented the industry from doing those important things?”

He had no concrete answer and mumbled something about greedy executives and poor management, so I continued. “The UAW demanded benefit and labor cost increases that took capital that could have been used for modernization, while union work rules prevented the adoption of new manufacturing methods, especially in the use of automation and robots. These union efforts were backed and supported totally by all liberal Democrats. That’s why liberal policies and politics are directly responsible for the demise of much of America's auto industry and the city of Detroit. I will stand on my original reasoning. He had no response.

These examples are undeniable realities, and there are many many more. If Detroit is not enough, think the entire states of Michigan, New York, California, Wisconsin, New Jersey, and all the other blue states that are bankrupt or nearly so. It certainly wasn’t conservatives who ran them into the ground. Now that the voters in several of those states threw out the Democrats and elected Republican governors and state legislatures, Democrats are using every legal and illegal tactic they can to continue the fiscal carnage they have wrought. What do you think they will look like in five or ten more years?

And how about Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Amtrack and the Postal Service? Competitive private entities clearly beat the pants off these government operations. These private companies make a profit (that word liberals hate) and pay taxes (the word liberals love) to boot. Those four (and every other government operation) require huge infusions of tax payer money to keep operating.

Then there were my predictions on the mortgage melt down. These were based on some unique realities in my experience. Barb’s younger son is a mortgage banker, has been since the 1990s. More than ten years ago he told me about some of what he was seeing in the mortgage markets that made him nervous. The relatively small bank he worked at then was told by agents of our federal government to make loans to disadvantaged (read mostly black or hispanic) home buyers that were far riskier than the bank’s rules allowed. When his bank refused, the government stepped in and actually seized the bank with some technical nonsense, turning it over to a much larger area bank. The bank owners received about twenty cents on the dollar, a major rip-off. Adam did not stay with the new bank, but went to work for another regional bank that had been trying to hire him for some time.

This bank also was ordered to make risky loans and also refused. Fortunately, they were big enough to weather the resulting storm even though they could no longer sell their mortgages to Fannnie Mae and Freddie Mac. (the federal government mortgage banks.). We talked about the situation for some time and that’s when I made my prediction about the coming collapse of the mortgage market. What would eventually happen was as plain as day to anyone who looked at it rationally. Yes there were a number of greedy people who bought houses to flip and make a fast buck, but the billions in loans to people who would never be able to fulfill their obligations was infinitely larger. This was a financial house of cards that had to crumble. When the Bush administration and conservative Republicans in Congress tried to check this fiscal lunacy, they were ridiculed and called racists by many in the media and shouted down in Congress by the likes of Maxine Waters, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and most of the other liberal self servers.

Along with all the other solvent homeowners, my six children each lost a major portion of the equity in their homes. Fortunately, none of them became upside down. Each retained some equity.

In actual fact, that debacle was by far the largest financial loss the American middle class had ever suffered. It resulted in the transfer of more than half of the percentage ownership of all American homes from individuals to banks. (I’m sure you can understand that math.) Then the government forced hundreds of small and medium sized banks to close their doors or be taken over by larger banks. The total value of the nearly 400 banks that were closed between 2008 and the present was in excess of $633 trillion. Who ended up with those assets? Remember those few huge “too big to fail” banks? So much for liberal Democrats taking care of the small business owner. “Let’s give those megabanks a few hundred billion in taxpayer money and let all those small banks go under.” No wonder Goldman Sachs is now in bed with the Obama administration. Talk about interlocking directorates. How about interlocking ownership between the megabanks and federal government. Wall street bankers and the Whitehouse are definitely sharing the same bed. The media screams about corporate executive bonuses, but never mentions the huge bonuses paid to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac executives—$90 million to Clinton buddy Franklin Raines of Fannie Mae alone—even as those two were going bankrupt. That’s reality, an undeniable fact. It sure as hell does not have “another side.”

Why the dichotomous “two sides to everything” stance anyway? If the truth be known, there are usually more sides to any question of opinion than there are people interested in it. Sometimes, there is only one side. For example: statements of truth (not opinions) have but one side, the factual. One plus two equals three does not have another side. That the sun rises every day does not have another side. The reality of the mortgage debacle does not have another side. The deliberately engineered mortgage collapse does not have another side. These are undeniable realities, they happened.

On the other hand, opinions almost never have two opposite sides, but usually many different sides.. Some are very close to the same while others can be quite different. Different does not mean opposite and visa versa. The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend. He or she could be an even worse enemy.

While all this mortgage business was going on, my neighbor in Indiana (he ran for Congress a couple of years ago and lost) told me about a little problem the Fort Wayne banks were having. It seems there was a group of six men who cooked up an interesting real estate scheme. All were south side politicians, three were lawyers, two were real estate agents, and one was a professional appraiser. They would buy a run down southside (the slum neighborhood) house for between $5,000 and $15,000 and fix it up cosmetically for as little as they had to spend, usually between $5,000 and $10,000. Then they would find a buyer or someone to pose as a buyer. They would sell them the house for say, $100,000 and, using the appraiser and with government aid and guarantees, obtain a loan for still more than the appraisal. They would cut a check for the home buyer for $20,000 or a bit more, and pocket the difference, usually between $50,000 and $90,000. (Talk about greed) Neither this nor even the whole mortgage collapse would have happened if it were not for housing and mortgage policies put in place by liberal politicians under Carter and then Clinton. These policies were opposed by Republicans and by the Bush administration as I mentioned earlier. Their rational efforts brought them scalding condemnation from liberals and their friends in the media. The fact that they were so right will never be mentioned by the liberal propagandists we call the main stream media.

What happened next was quite predictable. The owners would finally default on their mortgage, walk away from the place and leave it empty. Within a week or so, strippers would remove everything useable from the house including pulling the wiring. (copper sold as scrap) sometimes they even removed doors and windows. When they foreclosed, the bank got a property with a house that would cost far more to fix than it would ever be worth. Many of them were set afire before they could be bulldozed down. Others became crack houses or shelters for transients and drug dealers. The city received no taxes and the resulting blighted neighborhood rapidly went down hill. I don’t know it for a fact, but I’ll bet the same thing happened on a much larger scale in Detroit. Drive through parts of the south side of Fort Wayne and you’ll see what I mean. It’s Detroit on a much smaller scale.

The six men were sued by the banks. The city was working up a criminal suit as well. My neighbor knew all the details about this while it was happening. (and told me plenty) He knew because he was a member of the law firm involved in the suit for the city. The six men were—guess what—black liberal Democrats. They were also higher ups in the local ACORN group. Surprise, surprise! After making news in all the local media for about a week, things suddenly became very quiet. Remember, this was the spring of 2009 and ACORN’s buddy was in the Whitehouse. To make a long story short, the whole thing quickly and quietly was being swept under the rug. No more mention in any of the media—ever. The criminal suit was gone and so was the bank suit. I could find no records of either in a search of Fort Wayne public legal records on the Internet. Those records disappeared or at least public Internet access to them disappeared. They were there one day and gone a few weeks later. My friend now claims he knows nothing more about it and no longer will talk about it, even in private. Hmmmmmm? You can make your own assumptions about what happened there. Incidentally, I often wonder if the newspaper accounts of this are still in the archves? I'll bet they too have mysteriously gone missing.

The things described in these paragraphs are all hard realities, not opinions. You can see them, photograph them, even buy them. Both Detroit and Ft Wayne would love some new owners who would pay taxes. Wherever government controls anything, you will find huge waste, crippling graft, crime, corruption, gross inefficiency and almost total financial irresponsibility.

You mentioned health care, your field, and the unconscionable waste and poor use of resources. Isn’t most of this paid for by medicare, medicaid and health insurance? Do you think a government single payer system would do better? And about rationing of healthcare I have had two experiences with government agencies that reflect the realities of government running anything. When Barb became ill with PPS in 2000 and had to step down from the pulpit, her healthcare was covered for one entire year by the Methodist church. During that year we tried obtaining a new healthcare policy with little success. We then applied for SSI which would have helped us quite a bit. She was denied coverage many times (at least ten times) over the next few years with no explanation or recourse. In 2003, after her surgeries and heart attack cost us half a million dollars (really), a friend of ours put us in touch with Mike Pence, a Republican Congressman, not from our district, but whose wife I believe also had PPS. He was wonderful. Within a month we started receiving Barb’s SSI checks. Incidently, our own Republican Congressman did nothing for us.

About two years ago I applied for a federal grant from the Department of Energy to help with the publication and promotion of my book on energy, Energy, Convenient Solutions. I jumped through all of the hoops, filled out all of the forms, and made certain that I was income qualified. After dozens of phone calls I was given an appointment for an interview with a grant officer in Jacksonville. It was fifteen months after my application was sent in. When I walked into the office and saw the grant officer I was certain I was in trouble. The officer who had just called me in was a black woman about fifty weighing at least 350 pounds. I walked over to her desk and handed her my papers. She took them, compared them with some papers she had on her desk, picked up a large rubber stamp, stamped and signed my papers and hers. Then without a word she handed them back to me and called out the name of her next victim. The big Denied in red told me everything I would ever learn about why the grant request was denied. (And there was no appeal) If I wanted to try again for a grant I would have to go through the entire process again. She must have felt a great sense of satisfaction in turning down my application without a word of explanation or help. I wondered what would have happened if I had been black or had slipped a few $100 bills inside those papers. Those are my two latest experiences with the federal bureaucracy. I can only imagine what a chaotic mess our government will make of our health care system if Obamacare

Oh yes, now even the Obamacare proponents are admitting the bill will not save any money. My estimate of the cost of Obamacare is at least double the cost of our present system. It will be run like any government operation, a monstrous, overburdening bureaucracy with all the waste, inefficiency, corruption, and political favoritism that guarantees. My cost estimates of government expenditures have routinely been far more accurate than those of the CBO. The history of their estimates of expenses is one of missing the final costs by factors of from two to four. I wonder why? Is there another side to those facts, or are they merely conjured up out of thin air in Lalaland?

Incidentally, have you ever spent any time in or visited a VA hospital? When I was in the dental business we did a lot of maintenance work on dental equipment in the VA hospital near Cleveland. We actually had to jump our bid prices about a third higher than what we charged private dentists because of all the costs associated with dealing with their red tape and special requirements, few of which made any sense at all. It finally became so expensive to deal with them we quit bidding. The first time we didn’t bid, their purchasing agent called and begged me to bid, admitting no one else had either. Then he said the following, “I don’t care if you double the regular price, we need that service.” I bid on two more small jobs and then quit for good. I have no idea how or from whom they purchased their service and supplies after that.

I was going to list the similarities between the Carter and Obama effects on our country and compare them to those of the Reagan years, but everyone knows the difference in the budgets, the deficit, the unemployment rates, and inflation. Remember Carter’s 20% interest rates, 12% inflation, and double digit unemployment? They say inflation is under control, but is it? Have you noticed the price of gasoline, diesel, and heating oil has doubled in the last year? (It just went from $3.14 a gallon to $3.55 a gallon in two weeks here.)

And how about food prices? Have you seen that they have increased by 50% or more during the same period? Ever wonder why those increases don’t seem to affect the government’s inflation index, or bring about an increase in COLA, the cost of living allowance used for Social Security and military pay? That’s because liberal Democrats under Bill Clinton, removed food and fuel from those calculations. This has seriously affected the poor who can least afford it because food and fuel consume a major portion of their income. And the unemployment rate that was 4.2 % when Reagan left office is only 9.4% under the way it is calculated using Obama’s new method. The current way to figure the unemployment rate does not include those who have stopped actively seeking work or are no longer receiving unemployment checks. If figured the same way it was during previous administrations including Reagan’s, the current rate would actually be close to 18%. And these deliberate deceptive manipulations of statistics by our government go on and on. I wonder, where is the media outrage about those two hidden, but hugely deleterious changes?

Is it any wonder that our federal government is mired in debt along with virtually every blue state in the nation? I ask you again, who is more responsible, liberals or conservatives? Few people will pay any attention, and certainly few politicians are willing to address these serious problems. Could we correct these problems and once again become the dynamic leader of the free world? Yes, with the right leadership. Will we? I seriously doubt it. I am going to use two very telling quotes and related information that will explain why we will probably end up on the trash heap of history.

A prediction of where we seem to be headed may have come from far back in history, when the 13 colonies were still part of England. The first quote is often attributed to a Scottish Historian, Alexander Tytler or Tyler. The true origin of the quote is obscure and might actually have originated in the early 20th century from an unknown politician or writer. Nevertheless, this does not detract from its accuracy.

One version of this quote on why democracies always fail and a near exact description of what is happening in our country right now, 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.”

The origin of the second is described after the quote:

“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 millenniums 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.”

The person who is the actual author of the second quote that is frequently included with the first as a part of a single quote is Henning Webb Prentis, Jr., President of the Armstrong Cork Company. It is from 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 page 22 of Industrial Management in a Republic.

Those words of Prentis clearly echo your comments about the health industry, indeed, it probably holds true for any industry or functioning body deeply dependent on insurance, government, or any other source of money poorly controlled by the rules of economics. It is so very clear that laziness, fraud, and being wasteful, ignorant, and destructive are easily accomplished by a growing section of our populace while hard work, honesty, thrift, and being creative and constructive are now limited to a shrinking number.

In stark contrast, look at China. After decades of oppressive economic conditions, the government permitted an expanding number of economic freedoms including private ownership of farms, businesses, and even industries. The results of this complete reversal of policy has been the amazing growth of their economy and the creation of a rapidly expanding middle class of consumers, and a number of newly created, quite wealthy entrepreneurs. I believe that this economic growth and freedom will lead to more personal freedoms for the Chinese. They have let the capitalist free enterprise genie out of the bottle. It is hard to predict just where it will take them, but it is obvious that their direction is the opposite from where we in America along with most of the Western world are heading. The road up is a lot happier then the road down. Quite obviously, they are between courage to liberty; and liberty to abundance, while we are between apathy to dependency; and dependency back to bondage.

Yes, these last two paragraphs are personal opinions, but just look at the present realities of America compared to China. The factual realities are so obvious I think you would find it impossible to come to any very different conclusions. The lessons of history are pretty damned hard to deny. They have repeated over and over again.

Oh yes, wasn’t it Pogo who said, “I have met the enemy, and he is us?”

It is easy to see that two opposing groups have squared off for battle in Wisconsin and elsewhere over mostly government unions who are married to the liberal Democrats. This battle is over whether the SEIU, the teachers union, and their like run things or the voters of Wisconsin do. Voters who have finally awakened to see the ruthless self-service of government unions.

Incidentally, one of our esteemed US Presidents said, “Government workers, however, don’t generate profits. They merely negotiate for more tax money. When government unions strike, they strike against taxpayers. Such an action is unthinkable and intolerable.” Which one was it? Here's a hint, it wasn't a Republican.

Here’s another quote, “It is impossible to bargain collectively with the government.”
That wasn’t Newt Gingrich, or Ron Paul, or Ronald Reagan talking. That was George Meany -- the former president of the A.F.L.-C.I.O -- in 1955. Government unions are unremarkable today, but the labor movement once thought the idea absurd. My how times and politics have changed. Unions now routinely extort money and gain power by threatening to shut down critical government services. And who do the unions, Democrats, and the government media slaves blame for the shut downs they brought about? One guess.

Here’s another link you might want to check out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsH8xvjTAlo Tells how Obama and Eric Holder are joining in supporting a foreign nation and a criminal drug cartel against the state of Arizona. This is an evil unprecedented in our entire history.

Incidentally, I have the perfect answer to the illegal drug problem. It would remove all of the incentives for criminal activity and put the drug cartels out of business permanently. Check out http://hjdrugprb.blogspot.com. The only problem is all the drug cartel’s money that is paid to American politicians to keep drugs illegal and keep the Mexican border porous for the drug cartels. Why do you think Obama and Eric Holder are suing Arizona for enforcing federal law when they won’t? Hell, it’s pretty plain to see they want the drug cartels to keep on making money and killing Americans. I wonder how much of that Mexican drug cartel money flows into their coffers? Hmmmmm?

Remember prohibition? Of course you don’t. You are too young. Prohibition created many huge and powerful criminal gangs, the remnants of which still operate in many America cities. Just think Al Capone, Big Bill Thompson, (Republican and one of the most corrupt politicians in American history), Jake Arvey, the Daleys, and the current Democrat political machine in Chicago as one example. These criminal gangs pour billions into keeping drugs, prostitution, guns, and who knows what else illegal. They love those laws because they know it secures their illegal businesses. Just as prohibition created thousands of criminal organizations to supply alcohol, drug laws create thousands of criminal organizations to supply illegal drugs. The same thing applies to prostitution and guns wherever they are illegal.

Good old Rom Emanuel, remember him as Obama’s right hand man? Anyway, as a member of the current version of the Capone gang structure, was there any doubt he would be able to run for mayor even when his candidacy was illegal according to Chicago law? We all knew a way would be created to circumvent that law. As with any law they want to break, they simply get one of their judges to rule in favor of what they want, regardless of any law. On the larger scale, it looks as though that same criminal organization is now running the country, and running it into the ground.

Tell me where I’ve been wrong and have sweet dreams!

Cordially, Ho

How the European leftist news media misrepresents America, and how Americans are fighting back via the Internet.

Some time back I blogged about how our friends in the European news media had castigated America for being so stingy with relief for the tsunami that devastated Indonesia. They pointed out that the American government was fourth or fifth largest financial contributor to that relief effort. That is true, but what they neglected mentioning (deliberately, I am sure), was that Americas private giving totaled more than all of the worlds governments combined. Private Americans and American businesses provided more then half of the total relief effort. Also note that Indonesia is a Muslim nation.

Well, we did it again. From the e-news, Real News and Views comes another story you will not read in the New York Times or other government controlled media—or is it the reverse—media controlled government? Who knows? However, they are now joined at the hip, the media gushingly in attendance. They will, of course, be widely separated and antagonistic the instant Republicans regain control in 2012. (I hope!)

May 10, 2011 - Real News and Views:

The recent earthquake and tsunami in Japan have created a tragic humanitarian crisis. Thousands of homes, businesses and lives have been destroyed. The situation at the Fukushima nuclear power plant remains uncertain. Our thoughts and prayers are certainly with the Japanese people in the midst of this terrible tragedy.

Yet, as with most major natural disasters in our time, the tragedy in Japan has once again showcased the amazing generosity of the American people. As aid pours into Japan from around the world, the United States, in keeping with her magnanimous spirit, has led the way.

So far, USAID and the Department of Defense have spent a combined $32,251,844, which includes sending two professional urban search and rescue teams maintained by the counties of Fairfax, Virginia and Los Angeles, California. The U.S. military immediately dispatched the aircraft carrier Ronald Reagan to Japan, along with other ships, to assist in relief efforts.

However, private donations to relief efforts from Americans already stand at $161 million or FIVE TIMES AS MUCH as public money - including millions of dollars from U.S. corporations such as Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan, Walt Disney, and FedEx.

America’s generosity arises not only from the faith and altruistic spirit of her people, but also from the fact that Americans have the means and the freedom to be generous. The means is a direct result of America’s capitalist economic system that allows for free enterprise, competition, and the creation of wealth, which gives Americans the freedom to give generously to others out of their discretionary funds. While some seek to denigrate wealth creation or tax business into oblivion, it is evident that America - her businesses and citizens - are abundantly generous to people facing crisis and disaster, precisely because they have both the heart and the ability to do so!

In the midst of this disaster we have an opportunity to reflect on America’s exceptional spirit, character, and people. Because America was founded on the principle that each person possesses a God-given dignity, her people are always quick to come to the aid of others in their time of need. The American people have always exhibited a great spirit of generosity and concern for the downtrodden, as exemplified now in their outpouring of aid and support to Japan and others at home and around the world. It is in times like these that we should all be particularly proud to be Americans.

End of quote.

I realize you liberals would prefer to take private money by force and use it as you see fit rather than have the American people contribute directly to the needs of their choice. That’s just who you are and what you do. You are small minded people who are always condemning, but never creating; using problems to build your power, but rarely solving anything; cursing and calling derogatory names any who oppose your power, but offering very few corrective, constructive ideas if any. Because you are relatively void of creative, constructive, or realistic ideas, all you can do is label those you oppose with rancid hatred. Your latest idea is to label as racists, anyone and everyone who raises any objections to your lust for power. It’s a cheap shot from mindless boobs who, in truth, are the real racists of America.

I’ll say one thing for the left. They really know how to destroy. They have already virtually destroyed America’s education system, America’s inner cities (like Detroit), America’s middle class (the mortgage melt down), America’s once vibrant economy, and much of America’s manufacturing. Right now you are doing everything you can to destroy American free enterprise, discredit American exceptionalism, and move wealth from the middle classes to the ruling class of relatively few, wealthy and elite individuals and corporations. (The easier to control it my dear.)

I have news for you anti patriots. True American exceptionalism, free enterprise genius, and fierce work ethic may just be more than you can handle. Just remember, you may bankrupt the government, but America’s wealth still lies in the hands of individuals, and I’ll wager not even you will be able to change that, not even with your corrupt judges, government bureaucrats, invincible bureaucracy, union thugs, and black militants. There is one single and powerful entity that stands in your way in spite of your efforts to minimize it. That happens to be the US Military. There is another group of real Americans that is growing in numbers and power in spite of all your ridicule and pointed hate speech. That group is the Tea Party. I rest my case. Just once you should try building instead of destroying. I realize just how much harder it is to design and build rather than curse and destroy. You’re probably just not up to the effort.