Concepts and Judgments

Moving on.

2010-06-01T10:48:00.000-07:00

Just wanted to let you all know that LoudPing is now live.

And look! Whadda surprise, someone put up a post about Ariel...

Some things on there will be rehashes from this blog. Currently, the website is going through some teething as we get things situated. Please note that I'll be going by Conan over there.

This blog may become stale now, FYI.

Transition!

2010-04-15T00:08:00.000-07:00

No, I have not forgotten about this blog, but I may soon...

I have taken the advise of a few of my dedicated readers here, and I am now working on putting together a website that will cater to politics, movie reviews, games, books and current news. True, that does sound like a bit much, but think of it as a Drudge Report meets American Thinker with Rotten Tomatoes and Reading for Sanity all mixed together in perfect harmony. Well, as perfect as we can get it.

The website is called loudping.com (You can click on that link, but the website is under construction with joomla web manager.)

Odd? Yeah, well, we spent a week trying to find a name that isn't taken. Don't think because you type "wiseguys" into a url, and nothing shows up, means it isn't taken. Nope. There is an internet registry with millions of squatters sitting on cool names, which you can buy or lease from them. For example, you can buy kari.com for $63,000, if you are so interested. Or, you could lease "wiseguys" for $79.00 for 3 years. So I went through a crapload of creative names, including 100 Latin words, some Greek, one Swahili, and anything else I could think of. No dice. I haphazardly mentioned "loudping" to my associates and it was unanimous. I was shocked! And it was free -- no cost for us.s

Right, I said "we." Considering how often I update my blog (which here after will be even less), I cannot command enough reason to have a website, unless like-minded people offer to help keep it fresh. So, essentially a bunch of friends of mine have come together with our common sense to address today's issues. Again, not specifically politics, but there will be a focus on that aspect especially by yours truly.

The website will be fully functional by the end of the month, and we'll continue to adjust it as we find our direction. I will be bringing in outside articles from my favorite sites -- typically the ones I site in my own articles -- for people to peruse. Again, I am trying to make a 'one stop shop' for politics because there are a lot of good articles out there, but no one source to find them. Of course, it'll be subject to my bias.

So, I hope you all can make the transition to loudping with me as this was basically your idea as some of you have expressed before on my blog. Rest assured, we are not just now coming together on this. Actually, we have very long debates on our 13 panel email exchange and after being chastised there as well as here, it became evident that we should be discussing these out in the open for others to opine on as well. We're not traditional experts, we won't pretend to be, but we do feel that more of this information needs to be public for the record. We'll have forums for discussing the topics, too. Most of you will already know some of the other contributors to this website, by the way.

And yes, I'll do a movie review on The Little Mermaid... filthy flighty fish.

In Sickness or in Healthcare

2010-03-21T21:46:00.000-07:00

Yeah, it's been a while. I was looking for my compass, or maybe trade winds, to continue to push me along as I was feeling just a tad burned out on politics, as you may have noted in my last post.

Well, after tonight, it would be sufficient to say that I am mad as hell at a congress and presidency that completely ignored the will of the majority in this country, and passed an unconstitutional law mandating that we buy health care coverage or face a seemingly massive penalty and/or up to 5 years in prison. There is so much more tripe in this bill of +2000 pages that I'm not even going to bother touching it any more, as I've already discussed it in other blog posts. But, mark your calendars accordingly: July 4th, Independence Day; March 21st, Dependence Day.

As promised by Obama, this will fundamentally change this country forever, when your freedoms were sold to politicians for back-door deals and illegal means.

***

I heard someone say the other day that Obama is alienating his voter base. I would argue that he is, in fact, not. He was never a "democrat" to begin with. When he first ran for political office in Chicago, for the state Senate, he ran on the "New Party" ticket, which is a Marxist platform, or in other words, Communism. It wasn't until his reelection that he switched to being a supposed democrat. He isn't alienating his party, he is alienating their party by pretending to be one of them.

I fear this all goes back to Bill Ayers, former member of the SDS and Weatherman Underground, wherein he stated that in order to change, fundamentally change, the US, between 25-30 million people would need to be eliminated. I feel Obama has gotten us one step closer to this realization. People are starting to be afraid now. They've seen what Washington can do, and I bet gun sales really start to take off starting tomorrow.

It's not all that hard to fathom, really. It happened in Russia, China, Vietnam, Cambodia and such government will continue to happen, even on our soil, as we saw tonight.

Immigration reform is next on the docket for Obama. Now that the major hurdle of Healthcare has been breached, really, what's to stop anything else?

Hopefully, the Tenthers.

Nothing specific for Mr. Scatter-braindead

2010-02-17T22:57:00.000-08:00

Well, I've let a bit of time pass since my last blog update, and in truth, it's because I haven't much to say these days. Yeah, odd. Apparently, considering the dearth of comments from the last 3 posts, no one else has had anything to say either. No, I don't live by the crumbs left on my blog -- otherwise I'd update this puppy daily. Just making a point that perhaps we're being a little more introspective these days.

I mean, sure, a lot more has come out about the falsified information on global warming, with even one of the head honchos stating there hasn't been significant warming since 1995 -- and he (Phil Jones) was a huge propagator to pushing AGW. Not much coverage in the US about this, huh? I wanted to post about all this, but more stuff keeps coming out. I guess the science isn't settled on the matter.

And then there's all the talk of Greece going under financially, which has been killing the Euro (but bolstering the dollar). Spain, Portugal and Ireland not far behind...

I honestly do not want to make another post about the US/global financial market (as my last post is seemingly spot-on still), but I did find this rather relevant post on AT as to why economists are stating that the US is financially "unsustainable" right now. And it came with graphs! I love graphs! [But not hockey-stick graphs...]

Anyway, I guess I am sorta taking a mental break from economics and even politics. There comes a point when your head starts spinning and you just can internalize everything being thrown at you. It's hard enough parsing through the "news" and trying to piece together the real truth. Every time I hear something out of Keith Olberman or Chris Matthews, I get angry rather quickly. Talking heads spewing hateful rhetoric, tearing down Palin at any opportunity, blaming Bush, calling people names or labeling them "worst person" in libelous fashion.

Going back to blaming Bush because Obama "inherited" this mess. Uhm, ya know what, this has been inherited by every president since LBJ who instituted MediCare, MediCaid & Welfare. [And technically, no president has inherited them more than the tax payer.] Sure, they are great programs (heh), but they are fiscally insolvent and will continue to be until the demise of the US, which is practically guaranteed with the current captain at the helm. Back to back trillion dollar deficits will break any bank, and China is selling off US Treasuries so where will these deficits get funding, besides the local money printing shoppes?

Moving on to more frivolous topics...

***

However, I have also been re-examining Ariel from the Little Mermaid. Yes, I still do not like her. But Snow White has been steadily climbing up in the depth chart of "stupid princess" ranks. This is due to the fact we got this movie for Christmas, and I've had to watch it a few times ... in one day. Several times over.

How could I attack her? Well, it is still marginally a free country, but also, Snow White just doesn't get it. How many warnings does she need and does she dye her hair often because there seems to be some obvious blond roots lurking constantly in the foreground (no offense to smart blonds much like myself). "Watch out for the queen, watch out for the queen!" Oops, she fell for it again. In the original story, she gets tricked 3 times. Disney thankfully shortened it to one encounter. Still, Snow White, since you cannot listen to an easy command that would save your life, I dub thee the dumbest princess in the book. Yet, that is better than my opinion of Ariel... Stupid sexually charged, disobedient, belligerent, statutory enabling, homicide provoking, red-headed, air-brained, animal deceiving, royalty brat! "Oh Prince Eric, you're so handsome ... blah, blah, blah, let me sell my soul so we can make out and have an underage marriage happily ever after!" Blech!

Sadly, my daughter likes the above two princesses the most, and I don't know which is worse: a hide-out blond with a fetish for 7 freakish men and an inability to 'just say no' or, the emotionally charged 'my way or highway' mermaid who falls in love by the mere visage of prince Eric.

I need more Cinderella or Belle around here. Classy, smart girls with good work ethic, a wholesome sense of fashion, and the patience to not jump into things without looking where they leap. Either of which I would recommend over getting into current economics or politics... Just sayin'.

Be prepared.

"If" or "When?"

2010-01-21T20:30:00.000-08:00

Well, I figure it is about time we talk about the economy. I mean, we've only been dealing with a declining economy since December of 2007, or so we were told. And it doesn't appear to be getting much better. Can we agree to that? Doesn't matter, your opinion is not valid here. My blog. MY BLOG!

Let's recap a few things I have already covered in previous posts. The Federal Reserve is neither Federal (government) nor does it have a "reserve" in the strictest of senses. Basically, in 1913, President Woodrow Wilson was convinced that the Federal Reserve was the answer to keeping the economy on track and avoid further depressions. Their track record ... is worse than drunken Mario Cart. They have failed to accomplish their original purpose. And despite having literal control over our money, they report to nobody as no audit has ever been conducted on their business deals. Yet, since its inception, the value of the US currency has dropped precipitously. You already know this; in the 1980s I could buy 4 candy bars for a dollar, today, I can buy one and have a little change left over for ... nothing.

There are some mitigating circumstances that need to be taken into consideration. First, during the Great Depression, in 1933 Congress passed a law stating private ownership of gold (besides collectibles) was thereby illegal. (It was confiscated at $20 an ounce, then resold at $35 an ounce shortly thereafter. Classic governmental price fixing.) In that era, you could still pay for and buy things with gold up until that law passed.

It should be pointed out that the US Constitution specifically states that our currency is to based/backed on Gold and Silver. In 1868 a Supreme Court decision allowed paper currency as long as it was backed by gold. (see previous link) No mention of non-gold backed paper currency whatsoever was permitted. As a matter of fact, our governments first paper currency, before the Constitution was even penned, failed under massive inflation. So I imagine they were leery about paper currencies.

Then came the Bretton Woods accords in 1944, which was put together to insure currencies by having their value relative to the value of gold. The argument was that due to economic discrimination and trade warfare, such calamities as World War 2 were inevitable. They would go on to form other entities of note; the IMF and World Bank. The Bretton Wood ideology finally failed when Nixon did two things; he legalized citizens' rights to own gold bullion again, but delinked the dollar to the gold standard completely. Now, last I heard, the US had 10,000 tons of gold as back-up (between Ft. Knox and the NY Federal Reserve, which doesn't own all its gold), but our money is not backed by gold, nor silver, nor anything for that matter. It's called fiat money, and I think this wiki description states it best: state-issued money which is neither legally convertible to any other thing, nor fixed in value in terms of any objective standard.

Does that instill a lot of confidence into the all-mighty dollar for you?

We pretty much know what happened after that, a recession happened in the 1970's were inflation was rampart. My parents told me they bought a Datsun 210 @ 24% interest during that saga. They took on a new job just to pay for the interest on that vehicle.

Here's what happened when the dollar was permenantly removed from the gold standard: the Federal Reserve became a credit card with an unlimited loan amount. All our gold in reserves were no longer associated with actual paper money -- they were independent of each other, and now whenever the government needed money, it could literally make more and not have to offset the costs with precious metal, or with anything for that matter. It's fiat money, baby! It's worth what the government says it's worth.

We've been paying off this national debt since before WW2. During WW2, the national debt soared to 119% of our total economic output. That was okay, because we were a good industrial nation with lots of potential and, coincidentally, the winners of the war. Innovation and business surged over the next few decades, and we pushed that debt down to 40% of our economic capabilities. Then, at the end of the 70's, it started to grow again. We would sell US Treasury notes to offset the yearly deficits because as a country we have a AAA debt rating.

As you know, it has been growing exponentially since then. I'm not going to point fingers, as every president since FDR has "inherited" a mountain of national debt. Oh, and yes, Clinton did balance the budget one year, but that excess wasn't put towards the national debt. And technically, he didn't balance anything, but had a surplus in taxation.

Okay, we are done with the recap. The above is a visceral explanation as the whole process is more complicated and time consuming. What is important to note is that where we are at right now took a few acts of power to achieve, and has not been good for our nation as a whole. Now lets talk about imminent failure.

The baby-boomers are setting to retire, huge throes of them. And over the last 40 years, politicians have been robbing them of this day. There is not enough money in Social Security nor MediCare to take care of them all. And FICA, that taxation removed from their check every payday since they first started working, was supposed to be putting that money away for their retirement. It doesn't exit. This is part of what people talk about when they say we owe this national debt to ourselves. Yep, we sure do. And guess what, that money is gone! Somewhere in the neighborhood of 9 trillion dollars of our total debt is missing that was supposed to support these boomers through retirement and to the grave. Where are we going to get that money?

Same goes for MediCare, this government agency will be completely bankrupt in a few short years already, with Social Security nipping at its heels. There is no remedy for this save for people will have to go without. Sorry, this huge scam is coming to a close and it will crush us unless the boomers continue working to their grave and buy personal insurance, unless they took the initiative to invest along the way.

Just a couple of days ago, there was a headline about raising the debt ceiling to almost 14 trillion. They raised the debt ceiling back in December as well. The reason they have to do this is that if we surpass our ceiling, it will raise the interest rates on our outstanding loans, which are about 12 trillion right now. Basically, we would lose our AAA rating. But buy raising it, we buy into the unlimited money supply ideology that Congress gets drunk off.

We all know the current administration put up a 1.4 trillion dollar deficit for `09. I hear it'll be close to the same for this year, with perhaps another stimulus on the way. If so, then this new debt ceiling may last to the end of the year. Even if it does, our GDP is about 14 trillion when not in a recession. Or in other words, it'll be like post WW2 with our debt being over 100% of our total economic output.

The difference, however, is that we are not the same nation as before. In fact, we export our jobs over seas, and we build less than 10% of what we used to at the end of the 1940s. And, our currency is worth less, and we have over 10% of the workforce drawing unemployment. Which means not only are they not paying taxes, they are taking money away from the government (no offense to anyone, I was unemployed a year ago as well).

Here's the next problem; the States of America are 77 billion dollars in the red, and California is over 20 billion behind on the budget. The "governator" just asked for a Federal Bailout and was rebuffed. The 8th largest economy in the world is in the tank. What happens if the Feds say 'yes' to the bailout? How many more states will ask for money as well? Where will this money come from? Less and less countries are interested in buying US Treasure bonds, and I don't blame them. In part, the rest of the world has less money to spend, but also, they just watched us sell 1.4 trillion in Treasury bonds, and less than 400 billion were bought. The rest of the money was printed off.

This time last year gas was $40 a barrel, under $2.00 a gallon at the pump. Global demand had taken a nose dive. One year later, and we have a 50% increase in price at the pump. For what? Save reason gold surged past $900, 1000 & 1100 dollars an ounce last year. The value of your dollar is dropping dramatically because of inflation so the price of gold rises accordingly. Inflation hasn't hit everywhere, and that is because the oil industry is always ahead of the game, and gold is nobody's fool. The reason you have not seen huge inflation increases elsewhere is because the banks are sitting on that excess money, unsure whether to loan it out, our wait for Obama's next Marxist move. (Of note, today Obama mentions tightening the grip on banks, and the Dow drops over 200 points.) Once that money does hit the streets, you will notice a lot more. And it is important to remember that inflation is the invisible tax that you never see. You earn 1.00, but by the end of the month when you get paid, it is worth .90 cents.

So going back to California, if the Federal government does not bail them out, they will be fiscally insolvent and bankruptcy will ensue. This will adversely affect the Federal government's pockets, because, again, 8th largest economy in the world supporting the largest economy in the world. It will create a nightmare, one that will exacerbate this frail economy. So bail them out. Then New York, proposing a $1 billion tax on their already excessively taxed populace, may want a bailout as well. Then Michigan. Then New Jersey, and so on and so forth. If that does happen, more money will need to be printed off. If we don't bail them out, states could declare bankruptcy which will affect the US government's bottom line, causing them to have less money overall as well, and increase the deficit. Either scenario is extremely risky.

What of external issues? Oh, you mean like the country Greece that is hedging toward financial disaster? Yep, same issue as California. Greece is at 113% of its GDP and heading to 120% soon. It is part of the European Union and therefore, allowed a bailout by the other Euro countries, but to do so would mean they have to assume Greece's debt, which would devalue the Euro (good for the dollar...). But if they don't, then Greece doesn't have to pay its debts through bankruptcy, and those other nations will be out of the money they invested. If that happens, then maybe Spain, another country is financial dire straights, will follow suit and absolve themselves from debt. What do you think will happen next? Another country declares bankruptcy? Why not. Fresh start!

The problem in part is that we are all inter-connected and even though Luxembourg is a small country, it has nearly 2 trillion in debt. And if tiny Luxembourg fell, then Greece, then Spain, and on down the line, this economic world is over. Undeveloped nations can get away with declaring bankruptcy (such as Mexico in the `80s and Argentina in `01), but well-established countries cannot, under any circumstances, be allowed to fail -- too big to fail! But only because the dominoes start to topple after that, but, as I stated above, to save them greatly devalues their respective currencies, causes inflation, and affects everyone regardless of whether you actually live in the country.

Some have argued that China will save us, but the guy who predicted the fall of Enron, and made money off it, has similarly predicted the same for China. But also, if the US fails, China will as well, since we are their money bags, besides holding over $1 trillion of our debt -- thank you China. But if China fails, this would have adverse effects as well. Oh, and Japan will probably fail as they are at 170% of their GDP.

What could save us from this? Bring back the gold standard for one. Balance the budget would be another. Caps on government spending, re-employment, voting conservatively... Just saying. Obama did announce he is putting forth a commission to help him cut spending. Like any of this will ever happen (not real pessimism, I do have hope).

So I've given to very real reasons that certain economic catastrophe is going to happen; either internally or externally, besides the inevitable inflation and baby-boomer demise. Do you go off and buy gold now? No. At +$1100 an ounce, it simply is not worth it because historically, silver has maintained a 1/16 price of gold, yet silver is around $18 an ounce, so there is a huge price disparity between the two precious metals which leads me to conclude that even gold is in its own bubble currently. That, or silver is way under priced and in that case, go buy some. I actually went to buy silver bars last Saturday, but strangely, they only accept cash!

Why buy precious metals when we should focus on survival? Because, in the event of total global meltdown, bartering will be paramount. And if you need medication, or a tank of gas, they may not be willing to trade two cans of pitted black olives for you. You can buy 1 ounce silver bars for under $20. That's a good start for bartering. If not, maybe you will not mind giving up that wedding band. But once that is gone, then what?

Fellow readers, I've waxed on a bit much. My point is this: I may be wrong which is totally acceptable to me, and we still have time to rectify this, but I exhort you to be prepared on three fronts. Food. Protection. Bartering. And it wouldn't hurt to say your prayers.

And Now You Know...

2010-01-16T00:23:00.000-08:00

My mom sends out an army of forwards every 3-4 days. Since she is relatively new to the web, most of it I have already seen. Typically there is about 1 in 10 that are noteworthy. Below is one such case.

This is a harsh, nigh-unpalatable piece of information, nevertheless, it posses difficult situations wherein you would have to respond and live with the consequences. Because it paralleled my goals for 2010, I thought it appropriate to post here. Reader beware, it is not an easy, nor short, read. I have made it better as the forward was corrupted with too many additions from other people, as well as terrible sentence structure and grammar errors. I have cleaned it up and edited it. I do not know the original author, but considering his expertise, it does have value worth learning.

***

COA Analysis of Common Survival Strategies,
by JIR

Having spent a lot of years on military planning staffs, I cannot overlook war-gaming scenarios. Course of Action (COA) development is a big part of Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield (IPB) and is a fairly reliable way of looking at possibilities and choosing likely outcomes, given certain scenarios. In effect, it is a way of predicting war-gaming in the future.

There are a number of horror scenarios that seem to me to be fairly probable and they keep going around and around in my head as I try to sequence them and assign probabilities to each one. I am haunted by the possible future, an occupational hazard for a professional planner. I sincerely hope our civilization outlives me because it's failure could be truly horrible.

I agree completely with you on relocation to safer areas and stocking a remote retreat in the outer-boonies. That's the optimum solution and in worst case situations, it's really the only solution likely to work long term. Any of you readers stuck in less than optimum situations are going to make a valiant effort to survive, but their odds are not as good. I am one of these folks. I worry about the golden hoard more than anything else. I would like to pass on some thoughts on the subject of what the general populace will be doing after "the end of the world as we know it" (TEOTWAWKI).

I am only guessing, but my guesses are made using history as a template. If anyone disagrees with my analysis, I would love to hear about it.

What about those totally unprepared? What are they going to do? There are many survival strategies open to the unwashed masses other than sitting down and starving to death. We all need to compare our own plans with these other strategies because I guarantee some of these strategies will be used by the teeming masses. When the power grid drops and the food shipments end, the average citizen is going to get a huge shot of reality. Guessing what they are going to do when the (stuff) hits the fan is central to all other survival planning, especially in the Eastern US or Europe.

ASSUMPTIONS:

I am talking here about a total collapse situation, not a slow slide decline or regional disruption. You can pick your own favorite cause from an EMP event to a finance system failure. They all cause roughly the same sequence of events. The results of any catastrophic collapse could easily be worse than any fiction you have ever read. The worst case scenarios all result in disruption of services and quick spiral into anarchy, but leave most of the population alive and hungry. This is the stuff of nightmares.

To recap our unprecedented bad situation: The vast majority of people live in urban or suburban areas near large population centers. They are poorly prepared for any emergency and completely unable to live self-sufficiently. The food production systems that currently supply their food are fragile and subject to catastrophic failure. Most people's very lives depend on a fragile triad made up of the transportation network, power grid and finance system. All three of these systems depend on the other two and they are all three unbelievably fragile. (There are many dependencies, but I see these as the three key points of failure.)

Most people currently live shoulder to shoulder in unthinkable crowding. Once the triad of services breaks down, the vast majority of people will suddenly be living on a very limited amount of capital in the form the tiny amount of consumables on hand in each city. Once the Evian is gone and the toilets don't work, they will have no way to get drinking water or even dispose of their own sewage. They are literally less than a week away from serious acute hunger.

This situation will not get better unless the government is able to restore critical systems very quickly. The odds of restoring order get worse the longer the crisis lasts as the teeming masses start migrating and civil order disintegrates. Assuming the government fails, the countryside cannot feed the population of the USA without modern fuel, finance, power and distribution systems in place. Using 19th century techniques (where that is possible), the farmland in the USA cannot begin to feed everyone. (Europe has the same problem). In short, people are living where there will be no resources, and farmland (and farmers) will be overtaxed just to support locals with produce. We don't have the capital goods (horses, tack, hand plows, tools, seeds, etc. ) or skills to go back to old farming methods quickly. The math points to a die-off larger than anything recorded in history. Did I miss any main points?

People are not going to starve to death quietly. They never do unless there is a government to enforce it. Every last one of them is going to try something to survive or even just hang on one more day. Humans are survivors. They are intelligent, ruthless and deadly omnivores. We use the terms "sheeple", or "Joe Six-pack" pretty flippantly, but even the most stupid human is very dangerous and many of the "sheeple" are not stupid or incompetent. They are, in fact, the most dangerous predators on earth. You are much better off surrounded by hungry tigers than hungry humans.

On the other hand, these are real people that used to be your neighbors, mothers, fathers, daughters. When you look them in the face it's going to be very hard to pull a trigger.

AVAILABLE STRATEGIES:

This is not an all inclusive list. People are going to try all of these concurrently. I expect to see a general sequence of strategy choices, but it's not iron clad. While you would expect it much later
in the crisis, you might run into a professional army on day one! The interplay of each strategy with the others is also hard to predict. People are going to try other things too (that I haven't thought of). Local variables will effect how each strategy plays out and what events are likely to occur.

The interplay of all these activities is where my analysis breaks down in complexity. You have to evaluate them with local variables, so generalizations can only go so far. I believe people will try all of these strategies. Some of them will work, but most of them will fail. There are only so many resources.

1. Begging/bartering. This is probably the first strategy you will encounter. Begging will go on until the very end. This strategy is open to everyone. It will work better for weak individuals, but ultimately, charity is going to dry up as resources get tighter. The vast majority of people who depend solely on begging will ultimately starve to death. (Unfortunately, most people will beg, barter, steal and kill, in that order. Even a single mother may cut your throat to save her children.)

PLANNING NOTE: In a total meltdown, the numbers will crush you if you let them. You have stored a finite amount of food, but there is an almost infinite number of beggars out there. Can you turn away a family with children who only want a bite to eat? You better think this out carefully and steel yourself for whatever you decide to do. If you give too many of your supplies away you will starve. If you turn everyone away, you may feel really bad. Think about it. How are your wife and kids going to react to begging? Watching a die-off is going to be tragic.

a. Bartering services. This could be prostitution or offering to act as security guard. This is actually a viable strategy for anyone with end-of-the-world useful skills. Find someone (or preferably a community) with food and sell yourself. If you have military training and equipment or specific skills, this could work. I don't expect all the doctors to starve.

a. Bartering goods. Rich people may try to buy basic supplies at scalper's prices. You might get a great deal on a Rolex or Mercedes.

2. Stealing/looting. This is a no-brainer once law enforcement breaks down. Even while there is some order, people are going to steal anything they can get their hands on, even at the risk of being hurt or killed.

If we drop into anarchy, expect crowds of hungry people or "professional rioters" to sweep the city streets. As the public-access shops and warehouses begin to empty, crowds may move into residential areas for a while, but I don't expect this to last long. Big crowds will probably disband completely when resources become more scarce or they have to travel further to get to them. A warehouse of food or shopping center near the inner city may support this behavior, but a suburban neighborhood 10 miles away won't. Residential areas within cities may be in serious peril. The closer you are to densely populated areas and/or poor areas, the more peril you face.

Once the big flash-crowds disappear or people start to forage in the suburbs, small groups will splinter off and begin raiding (see item #5 below). There will also be a lot of solitary (or small groups) burglars and sneak-thieves. If you keep chickens in your yard, watch your neighbors closely. If you plan to go to work and leave your house empty, it may be looted while you are away. Gasoline tanks without locks will be prime targets for night visitors. Suburban gardens are prime targets. This applies to slow-slide declines too.

Beggars can turn into looters quickly if nobody is watching. If nobody answers a door, they may try to break a window. The suburbs may be swamped with beggars/looters. As they get more desperate, looters will get bolder and more dangerous. The further out of town you live the safer you will be from this group. Of course, the more isolated you are, the more vulnerable you are to raiders.

3. Some people will sit tight and wait for things to somehow return to normal. Most people who have food and other resources will try to live on them and wait it out. If they stay in small family groups, they will be easy prey for mobs or raiders. Still, I expect most urbanites will do this until they are almost out of resources...then they will join the beggars and looters. This group will grow smaller every day and swell the numbers of looters.

4. Banding. Almost all people will band together for mutual protection and support. How well this works depends on many factors, but ultimately the only safety anywhere will be provided by numbers. Single survivors will get swallowed up quickly.

a. Banding by family unit. This is the basic family group and will be the the first and most common grouping. These groups are small in size but very cohesive. Most families will quickly band with other families into larger groups. The ones who don't will be easy prey.

b. Banding by geography. Neighborhoods will try to form bands for mutual protection. Neighborhoods will try to do this, but historically, this is often not very effective, especially if the distance between neighbors is large. Sharing of resources within neighborhood bands is spotty and as individuals run low, they tend to leave. Rural neighborhood watches are doomed by small numbers, and urban neighborhood watches are doomed from having too many people.

Populations of small towns will band together to put up road-blocks and keep from being overwhelmed. This is the only way most small communities will be able to survive, even if they are capable of supporting themselves by farming. Unless they band effectively and very quickly, they are doomed to be overrun by refugees or raiders. Even the communities who quickly band together may get soft-hearted and let in too many people to support. I think pitiful refugees are more dangerous than raiders. It's a rare American who can watch genuine suffering and not try to help. This is especially dangerous if it looks as though the situation could improve and things go back to normal. If there is hope of getting help from outside the community, most people are inclined to save as many others as possible. I feel that this issue will doom many small communities.

PLANNING CONSIDERATION:

If your plans include banding with a farming community, you must take steps immediately to close off the flow of refugees into the area. Convincing others to take steps this drastic will be hard or even impossible, especially early in a crisis. Closing your community and isolating it may very well be impossible. If it is, you are at the mercy of fate and geography. You had better have a plan-b.

c. Banding by profession. Cops, medical workers, emergency workers, soldiers, and perhaps factory workers may band with co-workers. You will especially see this behavior with professional military groups. Beware of military installations in a total breakdown! You have a lot of very young, very scared and highly trained young men with no families there. It might get very dangerous to be near a military town if the government totally disappears. (In a slow slide disaster or regional disaster, Army Towns are perhaps the safest places to be. But once the chain of command disappears, watch out.)

d. Banding by religion. This is perhaps the easiest, most effective band to join, since the churches already congregate groups of like-minded people within a small area. Religious bands will probably be the basis for "small community group banding" and are usually the strongest bands possible to form on short notice. All the church groups in an area or a town will likely band together and put on the mantle of "local government". I anticipate local churches forming the backbone of most local governments. They will be equipped with arm bands and represent "legitimate" government when they come to loot your supplies. Joining one of these bands will be a good survival strategy for many people, but in a total collapse, they are very likely to keep as many people alive as possible until they run out of resources and then starve together.

Expect to see local polities formed from church groups going to war as resources get scarce. They will go after both looters and hoarders. Fascism in America will probably arrive carrying a cross.

e. Banding by racial or ethnic group. You will see racially or ethnically pure groups in some regions. This could be very important factor in places like Los Angeles or New York almost immediately and may take precedence over geography or religion. It's an ugly thought, but being the wrong color may be a death sentence some places. (Ironically, I don't expect any serious racial tension in the deep South.)

f. Banding by gang or club affiliation. Not only urban gangs and bikers, but also gun-clubs, country clubs, and survival groups fall into this category. Some clubs will obviously not band effectively in an emergency (like a yacht club for instance), but you can bet the Aryan Brotherhood will cleave together like real brothers. Your survival group can form a strong group if you have like minds and have clear plans for how to band, where to meet etc.

PLANNING NOTE: (Unfortunately, you are very unlikely to be able to form a survival group large enough to defend yourselves. You may have more success joining your survival group with a local church group or community group or some other band to increase your numbers. The only way you will be able to do that is to store enough food. Plan this out carefully. How big is your optimum band size and how will you feed everyone? Remember, you can use the same tactics other groups will use.... like confiscation of warehouses, if your numbers are large enough and you are quick enough. But, If your ultimate size gets too large it will become unwieldy and impossible to control or feed. This is a conundrum you need to give some thought to now.)

Consider this topic well because your group belief system will vary depending on how you form the group and who you let in. A church group will have to use different tactics than a biker club or a neighborhood watch. This will limit or shape your options and set the tone of everything you do. No church group is going to seriously consider cannibalism, for instance.

5. Raiding/Banditry. Raider bands are going to spring up everywhere. Some will start as low level looters and graduate into larger scale violence. Some, however will start out as systematic raiders. There are some very bad perpetrators out there and there will be even more once the prisons empty. In the short term, violence will be very lucrative. Raiders will take casualties over time. They will also replenish their numbers somewhat, but fortunately these are mostly anti-social types and may have trouble integrating new members. The further you are from them at the start, the safer you will be, but they can hit you anywhere, anytime. I don't see a good solution for this other than sheer numbers or good diplomatic tactics. They won't attack an obviously hard target and of course, they can't attack what they don't know about. They have to win to stay in business, so they won't attack unless they feel they can win.

Distance will spread out the number of groups and allow other survivors to thin their numbers in numerous gun battles. True raiders may not last long, but they are going to be a real problem in the short term. I expect raiding to take two main forms. The roadside ambush and the home invasion.

Home invasions are always dangerous and often brutal. If the raiders attack your home, they will try to take you by surprise and kill every combatant in the house before anyone can react. They will force every thing at a very fast pace to prevent you from reacting. They may use some kind of distraction or disguise to gain surprise. Home invasion, carried out with professionalism and gusto is fairly safe and easier than you would think. Expect to see some of them wearing body armor, dressed in police uniforms and carrying badges. (Some of them will have professional entry training...like SWAT and military). Failing at a stack entry, they may use CS gas to drive out the occupants. Failing that, they will use fire.

Waylaying travelers on the roads is very easy and safe. Cars are just too vulnerable to gunfire. The roads outside small communities could be very dangerous to travel. Don't ever underestimate the vile depravity of human beings. Anarchy is the dirtiest word in the English language. Rape and torture may be common. I believe as food gets harder to find, many people will turn to cannibalism to sustain themselves. (I wish this were not true, but historically, it's very common.) I am not advocating cannibalism in any way, but in all fairness, cannibalism can greatly extend a group's supply base. There are a whole lot of people out there and people are made of meat. While easy targets are available, some groups may prosper for some months eating human flesh. It could be a fairly successful strategy for some groups. Beware. History of other collapses warns us that this may be common.

A longer term problem you should watch for is what I call "part time raiders". Historically, most raids have been conducted by young men in one community raiding a nearby community. This phenomenon won't happen overnight in most places but it will probably happen eventually unless somebody forms a central authority within a year or two.

6. Extortion. Outlaw bands will give way to professional armies in some places. Possibly with a core of military trained personnel, a hundred or more killers traveling together can extort more than smaller groups can steal. These groups will get larger as time goes by but they are doomed unless they can take over someone else s farmland and extort "taxes". You may see groups like this move in to agricultural areas and set up shadow governments, taxing all the farmers nearby...or selling protection. Anyone who doesn't play ball will be burned out. Expect them to use classic tactics like assassination, kidnapping, and terrorism to cow the locals.

Local governments are going to probably hire many thugs and enforcers too. Telling the good guys from the bad guys might get difficult. Anyone trying to take your food is probably a bad guy, but it might be worth your while to pay him off.

7. Hiding. Some people are going to try to hide from the die-off. Hiding inside a city or suburbs (in my opinion) is not going to work. People are going to systematically search every building for food. You could conceivably scare off or outfight wave after wave of looters and finally be looted by a local government or burned out by a large gang or rioters. The fact that you are living there will be impossible to hide when they try to search your building. If you are there, you will eventually have to fight or surrender your supplies.

Hiding in the suburbs is just not possible and staying in an apartment building (even if you band with the other occupants for mutual protection) will eventually get you killed. Hiding in a rural area is possible, just because of the distances involved. The number of hungry mouths will be less in the country, but local citizens are still going to confiscate your "Hoarded" food if they need it. Your best hiding place is in an area that will be defended by well-fed people. (If you have a well-fed community defending you, you should really help them defend it, don't you think?)

The second best hiding place is a wilderness area with no roads or natural resources that someone will want. A wilderness hide site takes a lot of skills to pull off. Also, it is not sustainable without some planning and a lot of discipline. Essentially, this is hunkering down in a remote place and eating supplies you brought with you while you wait patiently for the teeming masses to die off. Living quietly in the wilderness, mostly underground is a hard way to live, especially in bad weather, but it could be your best chance to miss the die-off if you are healthy and have a solid set of outdoor tactical skills.

8. Bug out (presumably to a safe place). This is going to be very popular, even for people who have no place to go. Once the power is off and the sewage starts backing up, the cities are going to start losing people. The exodus may begin immediately or be delayed several days (depending on the scenario). Either way, the refugees will generally try to leave in family groups. They will mostly follow interstates, highways, state roads, and farm roads, in that order. Nobody (almost nobody) is going to just start walking in a random direction and go cross country. They will drive until they have to walk and try to re-supply along the way.

While there is order, the roads may be jammed with cars leaving the cities going nowhere. In practice, almost everyone is going to be driving out of the city with a definite destination in mind. Some relative, some small town they know of, etc. Most of these destinations are going to be just as bad as the ones they just left, but these will be desperate people.

Many of them are going to seriously overestimate their vehicle range. (Traffic jams eat a lot of fuel, probably more than most people will plan for). Most of those thousands of cars on the interstate are going to run out of gasoline in a matter of hours and wherever they finally run out, that's where the occupants are going to start walking. Of course most of them are going to pull off the highways and interstates just before they run out and mob every town along the highway. (This is a historic fact, proven by every hurricane evacuation we have ever attempted).

I expect people to turn very nasty when they run out of fuel. When they cannot buy fuel or food, the towns along America's highways will be filled with armed, hungry desperate people who may kill for a gallon of gas or a drink of water. Sound like fantasy? Don't bet on it. It's happened even during regional crisis with help on the way.

In a general meltdown, I expect lots of violence in small towns and strip communities along highways and especially interstates. There may be long columns of desperate refugees walking the interstates, but I don't foresee this. Most people will congregate in towns along the route. It's difficult to predict what desperate people will do without knowing local variables. If there is a hopeful destination within perceived walking distance, I would expect a lot of foot traffic. Of course, there will be a large number of breakdowns, but probably no mass migrations on foot unless they are being chased by something like a fire or chemical spill etc.

PLANNING NOTE: If you wait too long to get out of Dodge,you won't make it. I believe G.O.O.D. movement of any kind is going to be very dangerous. Moving vehicles are just too vulnerable, and there are going to be a lot of desperate, armed people stranded on the roads. This specifically includes law enforcement. They are not going to let you drive by with a load of gas cans in the back when their patrol car is sitting empty. Get out early or don't try it.

9. Going on with your life and ignoring the crisis. I think this will be a very popular early response. Some people will still try to make it to work, just like they always have. Until the crisis really gets bad, you will probably see shopkeepers, lawyers, bankers etc trying to commute to work. I really hope the police and firemen do this for as long as possible--and garbage collectors and power workers too! In fact, this is probably our best defense against a general melt-down. If everyone would stay calm and keep trying to make the system work, our society could survive almost anything. (I am betting on the exact opposite).

10. LaMOE (LAst Man On Earth) of the wilderness. Some people will grab their outdoors gear and head for the woods planning to live out of a rucksack and forage or hunt for their food. I include fishermen in this category. I expect the wilderness areas to be absolutely stiff with "sportsmen" who are going to try to camp their way out of trouble. Maybe not, but I have heard a lot of people talk about it. This is a losing proposition, but hat's not obvious to everyone.

PLANNING CONSIDERATION: If you attempt to hide in a wilderness location, you are going to have to avoid these knuckleheads. Choose your hide site well.

11. Throw yourself on the mercy of the government. Another VERY popular option. America has become the land of the entitlement. This generation seems to believe the government is there to take care of them from cradle to grave. I expect lots of folks to gather around anything even remotely resembling government. This will only last while government offices are open, but it might allow formation of groups or bands that will later loot and burn the city.

12. Go nuts and start burning everything in sight. It's happened before and will probably happen again. For some reason, arson seems to be some kind of release mechanism for unstable personalities. These folks are yet another reason to avoid urban areas. They won't last long, but they can cause a lot of damage in the short term.

13. Something else. This is only a partial list of all the possible strategies people will use. If you can think of something, expect someone to try it. Look at your local variables and think about it.

EXPECTED SEQUENCE:
Tricky, but in general terms, I expect urbanites to hang onto their city as long as supplies hold out and then attempt a bug-out. Some, of course, are going to bug out almost immediately. Some will never bug out. Most people are going to sit tight until they get hungry and then either attempt a bug-out or try to barter/beg/or loot food.

Looters will start looting as soon as they can get away with it. Their numbers will be fairly small in the beginning, but will grow as more people get hungry. They will continue until there is nothing to loot...then they will have to change strategies.

The next strategy up the scale is raiding. Most people will never make that transition to violence, but I estimate up to 5% of the total population will easily make that transition and another 10% are capable of doing it if they have more time to get used to the idea (and get hungry). These numbers are not really supportable historically, but I feel that they are very close to reality...just personal opinion. If I am right, that means even a city of 100,000 people could produce 5,000 potential murderers in a few days. That's a lot of bad guys. Raiders, bandits and bad guys are going to prey on the weak until somebody establishes order or they run out of easy targets. This order will probably be in the form of locally formed polities (local governments and committees, neighborhood watches, and church groups.) Once we reestablish real order, most remaining Raiders are going to try to change strategies. Some of them may join your church.

Unfortunately, the horrible die-off will encompass multiple years. It won't end until local communities reach equilibrium and produce as much food as they consume. That could easily take more than two years. (The first harvest after a major crisis is going to be a disappointing time for some communities.) Some of the starving polities (probably after the first harvest) may choose war over starvation and attack neighbors. Sounds really grim, but I call `em like I see `em.

Livestock mortality the first two years is going to be astronomical. People are going to have to literally allow other humans to die while they feed livestock. Also, they are going to be very valuable commodities and prone to theft. Wildlife and fish mortality will also be very high. Everybody who sees a deer will attempt to kill it. After a year or two, I expect deer, bear and wild hogs to be nearly extinct in the Eastern US. Small game will also suffer huge losses to poaching and so will fish.

SO, WHAT STRATEGY DO I PLAN TO USE?
I live in a nice suburban neighborhood of a small town within 45 minutes of a large urban area. The area surrounding us is a poor rural agricultural area in Southern Georgia. My town is near a secondary line of drift from Savannah. Not the worst place to live, but not good either. In a slow slide scenario, I will stay in place, participate in the neighborhood watch and go to work every day. I even have plans to set up a soup kitchen, field bakery and water purification plant at a local church if needed. My plan is to make myself valuable to the community. If things get really bad, I have the ability to arm up to 6 others. I have enough spare stored food, equipment and weapons to do this and still be postured for plan-B.

Plan-B. In the event of a "the end of the world as we know it," I intend to use several options. I intend to bug-out with a truck-load of supplies to a pre-selected wilderness area (within 15 minute ride of home), establish a hide site and wait out the carnage. (I have about seven months upplies for my family plus a couple of caches with extra food and weapons nearby for a total of roughly nine months of rough living. I believe our odds of remaining unnoticed for six or more months are very good while maintaining a fairly high standard of living. (Living this close to Savannah, this is the best plan I could come up with).

Why hide out? First, I have the skills, equipment and a good area. But mostly, I know myself. Having seen real hunger in Africa and the Balkans, I don't believe I have the emotional hardness to watch people suffer and die without joining them by trying to help. Hiding out and missing the die-off will be hard, but watching it happen (for me) is just impossible. I can't watch. When things cool down, I will scout the area and attempt to barter my skills to local farmers or whoever is in power. (I have acquired quite a few barterable skills over the years). So, if I show up at your retreat door six months after a collapse looking for work: don't shoot! It's just me! - JIR

***

And now you know, and knowing is half the battle. The other half, obviously, is violence.

Good goals go bang!

2010-01-06T22:13:00.000-08:00

2010 is going to usher in a new batch of politics, and so I'll just sorta skip it for tonight. Sure, there are lots of things to be discussed, sometimes you just need a break from the monotony of it all, because it gets depressing really quick. As noted in the news, a few key democrats are throwing in the towel and not even bothering with the embarrassing defeat that is sure to come this November. But I think by then, it may be too late. Immigration reform is already in the works, and the craptacular Healthcare reform is almost a shew-in at this point. So really, let's not talk about it right now.

Well, it is that time of the year again, when we saddle up hopeless goals that quickly fall by the wayside and earnestly forgotten thereafter. And I mean that seriously, as I have no recollection of the goals I made this time last year. Maybe I did achieve them and thus forgot about them because of my perpetual awesomeness for attaining goals in a timely fashion. But most likely not.

Since it is highly unlikely that I completed my goals from last year, I figured this year I would write them down for whoever wanted to peruse them, and heckle me in 11 months. So here we go.

I'm no going to make illusions of losing weight or making more money. I am kinda working out as is, uh, kinda, meaning getting into heated online discussions about politics probably burns something out of my body; calories, brain cells, feces, whatever. I also have a habit of playing video games, so don't even think of challenging me at thumb wrestling -- I will cheat. And though I would like to earn more money, my wife prohibits me from selling my body, on the street or for science. Both vetoed. Lack of imagination on her part.

So I'm going with something more tangible, and taking my own advice for once (typically a bad idea).

Goal #1: I want my house to have a one year food supply, and it has to be stuff we will actually eat.

Goal #2: The means to protect the house, family, and food supply.

We have been doing a somewhat meager job of food storage thus far. And yes, that includes a 50# bag of raw wheat. I have no idea what to do with that. I don't even have the means to process wheat kernels. We don't eat them unless it's in bread, ground to bits, and tasty. So I am just gong to skip that crap because it has little value in our home. No, you can't have it. Go get your own hernia carrying 50# bags of wheat.

A week ago I went to the Dollar Tree and bought 12 cans of SPAM for 12 dollars. Spam is SPiced hAM. No, we don't eat it on a regular basis, but it is the first real attempt of having stored meat, even if it is mildly gross. But the point is we now have a little more variety with our otherwise Top Ramen fueled food storage. And I mean that seriously. Henceforth, every time we go shopping, I will be buying something additional that can be stored for our family. Even if I cap that cost at $10 for every 2 weeks (normal shopping periods for our house), then that is $260 towards having an emergency storage for whatever event. And you can easy buy 10 pounds of rice for less than $10 -- and have change left over for dried beans. That could feed a family for a few days. Rice and beans isn't luxury, but it beats eating dirt. The rice can even supplement our Top Ramen cache.

So my first goal is totally attainable and measurable as well. This leaves out any ambiguity about whether it was actually achieved. I'll add that I need to inventory what I have so I don't wind up with 100 pounds of rice and one loan bag of black beans. Still, I feel this is a good goal for the way things are shaping up around here. (Yeah, that's me being pessimistic about politics and the declining dollar.)

Goal #2 is the more fun one, because it's a man topic: guns! Now let's not be naive around here, Hero's house is not to be reckoned with. But, no self-respecting man should go without a shotgun, and that's my folly. Of course, a shotgun is just the tip of the manly iceberg. But, we'll limit it to that for the time being because I also want to be able to load my own shells to cut costs. And lucky me, a friend offered to give me his reloading kit if I get a shotgun.

I need to put this into a more contextual circumstance, however. My wife also has a goal this year, and of course it maligns mine (that's marriage, folks!). My wife has a goal of getting rid of debt. Apparently it is unconscionable to live like we're the federal government -- debt and deficit spending for years on end. True, with our newest addition to the family, we have some medical debt to deal with as well as credit card debt. Overall, we're not in bad shape, and things should be just peachy in a short while. Thus, there is a 90 day moratorium on spending for frivolous things of wantonness starting Jan. 1st.: We will only buy what we need. It'll be scary, because we need a shotgun. I can probably get away with goal #1 during this time, but #2 may have to wait. Probably wait until next fall, sadly.

So there you have it. You can follow along to see how we're doing. Most likely my wife will get her goal first, and then I'll put mine off until November. Fine, December. But still, I'll feel like a winner because I'll have the best collection of SPAM and a new shotgun to guard it. Trades welcome.

Health Care to Die for

2009-12-22T21:02:00.000-08:00

Primed for a vote on Christmas Eve, the largest monstrosity of a bill, noted as ObamaCare, will drastically change America for the worst. That's right, we're heading straight into business tonight.

I am stark raving mad over this 2100 page "Health Care Reform" currently waiting on the docket in the Senate. I cannot believe that anyone in their right mind would actively support this bill. And I'll tell you why.

First and foremost, how did we get into this mess to begin with? I mean, think back one year. Think of everything you remember. All the talk was about the ailing housing market, the auto magnets going bankrupt, the failing stock markets, the wars, Obama's inauguration coming up, and everything else in the mix, and you still have an acute lack of any issues with the health care industry! No one complaining about their health insurance! Nothing at all. And yet, here we are at the precipice of massive overhaul.

So let's pretend there was a real need for this. Who is to blame? Is it the insurance carriers? Sure, insurance premiums are expensive. But do you know what? Life is the most precious commodity on earth, and so we'll pay whatever fee is necessary to keep that heart beating, and we won't mind too much what the bill is so long as we keep breathing air. But let's get beyond my quasi-philosophical rhapsody.

In 1945, the McCarran - Ferguson bill was passed. This regulated insurance companies from interstate commerce. It was supposed to keep an insurance monopoly from happening. Basically what it did was make it nigh impossible for an insurance company to offer an individual in NEw York City, the same rate as someone in North Dakota. Considering there are 10 times as many people in NYC as compared to all of North Dakota, and people in NYC pay 5 times as high a rate for health insurance, you can see where price fixing would come in handy as a insurance carrier.

I think the next big problem, again introduced by our legislature by Nixon, is the 1973 HMO Act (Health Maintenance Organization). This bill stated that any employer with more than 25 employees had to, by law, offer mandatory HMO insurance enrollment. This Act eventually ended in 1995, but by then, the largess of the market was already dominated by HMO companies. Almost all of the smaller insurance companies had been bought up or went under. Once again, with a few large companies in control of the market, price fixing was afoot. And I don't know if you've ever dealt with an HMO (like Kaiser), but they are retroactive entities, rather than pro-active. Meaning, if you need an MRI, they wait until it is absolutely necessary rather than getting you in immediately. Not only that, but you have to find a doctor on their list -- and every single one of those doctors is bought and paid for by the HMO, so try to remember that when asking for something -- they are shy to bite the hand that feeds them.

I'll just briefly discuss MediCare, as I've already done so before. But in 1965, as part of LBJ's "Great Society" propaganda, he established MediCare. Now, I admit that some people need help, especially as they get older and try to live on a meager Social Security check. But this MediCare states that anyone over the age of 65 can get on it and have, essentially, free health care. Good for them, however, it also eliminated all insurance companies abilities to offer health care because they were undermined by extremely low costs from the government. And MediCare will be broke in a few years because they continue to offer the best deal by breaking the bank (i.e., the tax payers).

So here we have three solid reasons for there to be issues in health care, even though we weren't complaining about it. And all three reasons stem from the government and their unhelpful intervention. And now they want to help us all...

The Heritage Foundation, which is an excellent source of facts, has put together a good report on the two bills. Two bills? Yes, the one which the House passed with Nancy Pelosi at the helm, and the current bill that Harry Reid is pushing to pass. This report states what these bills would do if they pass and consolidate (just read the first 3 paragraphs). Even if the bill passes the Senate, the house will still have to vote on it since the Senate basically rejected the House's version. Anyway, there is nothing positive in these bills. It is all bad. And we still haven't gotten to the part that really pissed me off yet.

As I've stated before, Americans live a long and healthy life, except for the fact that we drive fast and play war. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with how we do our health care system, aside from the aforementioned mingling from the government. The question becomes, then, what is the point of all this? Why does the government need control of our very lives? Call me a nut (preferably a cashew), but doesn't this feel like slavery here? I said in the beginning, people will pay whatever cost to stay alive, and when the bureaucrats have this sort of power, what else should this be called?

And no, still not to the part that ticked me off.

As pointed out on the American Thinker website, this well gifted Health Care Reform bill offers some benefits ... to the trial lawyers as it creates 26 new loopholes for attorneys to file medical malpractice suits against physicians because of the litany of paperwork they will have to plow through to get you the necessary treatment. That will surely increase costs and thus reduce benefits for everyone.

But that didn't make me very mad.

So here's something to consider: in Reid's version of the bill, it is mandatory to have health insurance. If you do not, you are in violation of the law and fined $15,000 and/or punishable up to one year in prison. For not having insurance, or, for not signing up for free insurance. Can you believe the precedence that is setting? Is this even legal?

And here's the part that got me: are you kidding me?

Yep, not only is this 2100 page behemoth the worst bill ever written, Mr. Reid has put in there that this Health Care bill CANNOT BE repealed. Even parts of the Constitution can be repealed or amended if necessary, but this arrogant imbecile is making this law unbreakable, unfixable, or untouchable, for that matter. What if it is a catastrophe? Oh well, what is written is written. We'll live with this tyranny. Watch the video of Senator DeMint on the Senate floor.

And frankly, there is nothing we can do about it except yell. Senators have been bought and paid for, just as the HMOs do for doctors. Senator Nelson of Nebraska got an unmeasurable amount of benefits for his MediCare recipients in his state because they will never face a cut-back, ever. What that means is that there will be rationed care, just not in Nebraska. And he is the 60th vote. Is that legal, what he did? Probably not, because other states could sue Nebraska, maybe even mockingly use the "separate but equal" tag line from Brown v. Board of Education case.

Senator Nelson wasn't the only recipient of bought votes. Apparently Senator Dodd gets a $100 million grant to build a new hospital in his state, listed as a provision within the bill. Isn't that nice of Reid? Politics as usual, I suspect.

There is a small window of hope. Sure, the public polls are overwhelmingly against this, even liberals don't like it. That small glimmer of hope, however, lies with congressmen such as Parker Griffith, a democrat who just changed parties today. As a former physician, he would be one to recognize a bad idea in this field. Since the Senate bill will be remanded back to the House for approval, congressmen jumping ship could be our saving grace. I know, it's a stretch of the imagination, but it is the only shot we have at this point, because there are still 60 Senators in favor of this anti-American bill.

Well, as I stated before, I just cannot understand why anyone would get behind this bill and positively assert that it is for the greater good. If you have something of merit regarding this bill, pass it along. I will look into it with the hopes that there is something of worth, otherwise, the future looks bleak and our health and freedom will play second fiddle in this orchestra of events.

P.S. I wrote this quick and carelessly. I may have made-up a word or two.

The Last Race

2009-12-13T15:49:00.000-08:00

There I go again, being "afk" for long periods of time. It's because I spend so much time researching, that, you know, I just don't have the excess time to post... right.

No politics today, just the realization of life creeping upon me. And by that, I mean a blast from the past recently dying and making the news while doing so. Not in a "shoot-out at local school" sort of way. But rather, in a prevalent manner which is all too akin to where I grew up; at the coast.

I grew up in a small town. Sure, we all pretty much say that, and maybe we pine for pity points with such exclamations, but I graduated high school with 35 other kids. True, it was the smallest graduating class since the 1950s in that school, and true, we started out our senior year with 42 kids, but that half-dozen dropped out for greener pastures. So, in our student body of 250 kids, our small class never won any Spirit Awards because all the other classes were more than twice our size. Hated Spirit week, except for getting to wear hats for one week of the school year.

I went to 4 different grade schools growing up. At the second to last one I met a semi-bratty child named Steve. who was in the 5th grade just like me, but in another class. The reason we knew each other is that his mom was our Den Leader for Webelos Scouts. So we spent a lot of time together. Even then he had a size complex -- a Napoleon in training -- and that would be his issue for the rest of his short life.

During the Pine Wood Derby, he totally trashed my car's design saying it was going to lose. His was this flat, uninspiring gold wedge, while I carved this tall car with a tail fin and ornate flames painted on the side. He had hollowed out the bottom for the 5oz of lead filler, and I opted to have the lead in the front of the car to represent exhaust pipes coming from the engine. Fancy that, the championship race came down to his and my car, and Mr. Trashy-talkie took the long walk home, thank-you-very-much! Of course, it was the cheap year for Pine Wood Derby racing, so instead of a trophy or neat metal, I got a blue ribbon.

After that, I moved further north and into a different school, and lo and behold, Steve shows up one day and we go through high school together. I could get a long with him fine enough, we were friendly towards each other, didn't hang out together, but we hung out with the same people and he seriously dated a friend for years. Uh, not entirely sure if he actually graduated. Hmm.

Well anyway, the point is that after high school, I left the area and hardly maintained contact with any of my fellow graduates. We didn't even have a 10 year reunion. I heard mention that a handful got together and got drunk at the beach, but then this last summer we had a 15 year reunion, and nearly 1/3 came! Yeah, so 11 people showed up. Steve wasn't one of them. Too bad, as I was willing to remind him of the Pine Wood Derby back in the late `80s.

Then, later week, via Facebook (through my wife's account) a post stated that they were still looking for Steve. Apparently he was working on a crabbing vessel when he got tangled in some line that scooped him over board. He was found a few hours later, drowned in the mouth of the Columbia River. There are over 2000 ship wrecks in that area for ~150 years of record-keeping, and half as many claimed lives. It is a treacherous terrain with huge swells and nasty undercurrents. He was aged 32, accordingly. He was a small snip-it in the evening news, an unfortunately segue between other pressing stories. They didn't mention anything about his untenuous Webelos claims on Pine Wood Derby designs (not giving that up just yet...).

This wasn't the first tragedy to befall my small school compatriots. A few years ago Casey was shot through the neck in a drug deal gone sour. While discussing this with one school mate, Casey had made a lot of people miserable, and now lives as a quadriplegic in a special home. You kinda new that would be his fate, or something similar. I didn't feel that strongly about Steve, but I figured at least some highlight of probation therein, since he didn't join the military straight out of high school (7 classmates did, or rather, 1/5 of them).

So there it is, one classmate down, one in a wheel chair, and most of them having had divorces of those that got married. Maybe there was something in the water up there. I wish I had more statistics on my small class, perhaps I could compile some information, see an apparent algorithm and thus warn them all of impending doom. Now that's pessimism, but honestly, for a class this small, they shouldn't be dying off just yet.

I can't say that I will miss Steve, but I would have liked to see him again. If only to say something about my stupid blue ribbon of worth from a cheap Pine Wood Derby year.

Mean Green Lies

2009-11-24T19:19:00.000-08:00

There is so much to talk about right now, more prevalent being those of the new monstrosity of a health bill, and then the "Climategate" evidence that has recently surfaced. Since the health care bill still has some running to do, and the climate scandal has just surfaced, let's go with the latter.

If you haven't heard about this week old Climategate as of yet, there is a pretty good reason. Here's an article talking about how none of the major news agencies are talking about it, save for Fox. Not too surprising, they tried to ignore the ACORN sandal, Van Jones scandal, and anything else that that challenges their M.O. Yet, 11 AP journalists are working overtime to find any disparaging information in the new Sarah Palin book. Too bad we don't have the same thing going on Barak's books...

So, in case you've been gone for the past decade or so, Al Gore and company have been jetting across the globe, promoting world carbon reduction in an effort to save the planet. Originally, it was called global warming, but as just about everyone has noted, it is certainly not getting hotter around here. Thus, more recently, it is monikered, "climate change" which is utterly ridiculous because obviously, the climate does change. It changes a lot, actually. Right now it's friggin' cold and windy.

Climate change is supported by many respected individuals within the scientific community. Accordingly, the data collected over the last several decades has (had?) pointed to a growing trend of earth being heated. In this case, the data suggested that 1998 was the hottest year on record. Since then (and thus the change from "global warming" to "climate change") the global temperatures have declined a bit. Nevertheless, upon the horizon, or so we were informed, it was going to get much warmer, so much so, in fact, that glaciers would melt, deserts would expand, droughts increase, and seas would rise. (see link below)

This ideology of reducing our carbon footprint gained a lot of traction, mainly due to "science," press/propaganda and now, after this scandal emerged, fraud. Of course, there were legitimate scientists debating the actual cause of climate changes even before this scandal emerged, but accordingly, "the debate is over" was the battle cry 4 years ago. As a matter of fact, no vis-a-vis debate ever took place! Instead, the UN jumped on board and the IPCC was more than willing to push data for funding, which is exactly what has come to light with this recent scandal; Climategate.

Enter in a hacker. Typically, hackers can be 'thrown under the bus' as they say all too often these days. A hacker gets into your computer, steals your data, then uses it for ... everything. But in this case, this hacker, perhaps the only good one out there, hacked into CRU, Britain's Climate Research Unit facility. 61 megabytes of information were taken. CRU pushes what is called the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) theory, or in other words, man-made global warming. In this stolen data we have years of email correspondence, research data and manipulated evidence. What's interesting is that in the emails, there appears to be deliberate collusion between these leading scientists to use false information in their concurrent publications. In turn, these reports are used by the IPCC and then, the UN. Of course, Al Gore uses it in his presentations which trickle down into our media and schools.

This information couldn't have come at a better time, however. In December we have the global climate change conference in Copenhagen. Consider this the new version of the overly failed Kyoto Protocol, but on steroids. This conference is armed to the teeth with pro-climate change goons heavily fed on information cooked up by the CRU, IPCC and lobbied by the UN. Ergo, this scandal undermines their standing. Seeing how pleased our current administration is on getting cap-n-trade achieved here, I would not be too surprised if something with our name on it got signed during that conference. But with this new evidence coming to light, and the fact that this scandal is finally getting some traction, perhaps this one false science can be put to rest.

Perhaps calling this a false science is over-simplifying it. There may be climate change, but the relevance of human impact may be so insignificant, that there is very little we can actually do to change it. As I said before, the climate does change, everyday for those outside of the southwest. They recently stated that when Mt. Krakatoa erupted, it affected [cooled] global climates for several months. One volcano erpution.

Let me say, that, from my state, we are conscientious about the environment. And, my goal isn't to make anything less habitable. I'd rather see cities grow-up (high-rises) rather than grow out (expand). But, this climate science is flawed, deliberately. Cars emit 97% less pollution now than 35 years ago. Appliances met energy star requirements to be more efficient. We have better insulation for walls, better windows, furnaces, clean coal plants, and on and on. And we didn't need false science to push for all that. We did it. Made ourselves more efficient through innovation, even capitalism. Besides, when was the last time you heard about acid rain?

While this is good news in terms of commerce and personal freedom, it makes you wonder what other data is being manipulated to push an agenda. Eh? Did you say health care? Yes, yes, I'll get to that topic again, trust me.

Be Vigilant

2009-11-04T22:11:00.001-08:00

I have been wondering for the past few weeks about a scenario that would be plausible if, for example, the current administration was, in fact, totally against the current status quo of the United States of America.

As you know, I've opined often enough that I believe the democrats are well intentioned, but that their basis for getting to their utopia is flawed. Giving government handouts and taxing the citizens will never lead to a perfect world. You have to change people's hearts for the good of mankind in order to achieve the perfect world ideology. Giving handouts and taxing the honest workers will only make one class entirely dependent on the government, and another class totally bitter. In essence, class warfare (Gasp! A communist manifesto!).

So let's go to the other side of the coin: Obama and his colleagues are anti-American and eager to destroy this great country.

Looking at Obama's history thus far in the White House, we can certainly conclude that he has least "American" ideology to have occupied the Oval Office. Shall we enumerate a few examples? Of course! From a recent article:

He wants to deny individuals access to the marketplace --where they can make their own decisions about their own health care -- and instead put the government entirely in charge.
He's willing to give government control over American businesses (e.g., the bank takeovers and Government Motors).
His administration, while on record as opposing the Fairness Doctrine, is aggressively exploring a backdoor regulatory scheme that would have precisely the same practical effect as the Fairness Doctrine: it would impose government restrictions on content, rather than allowing the market (that means us, the consumers) to control content.
His FCC wants to control the internet, a humming beehive of free speech (much of it critical of Obama).
As his loud battles with Rush Limbaugh and Fox News illustrate, he desires a single-party press, not a free one.
He believes that now that he is in power, the opposition should shut up and "get out of the way," a notion that runs directly counter to the First Amendment.
Although he's mostly erased the record that once existed in cyberspace, his dream is to create a civilian national security force, subordinate to the administration, which would be larger than the American military. The military, please note, is controlled by the Constitution and has traditionally existed separate from, but subordinate to, the rest of the American government.
He wants to take away the right to bear arms. He'll pay lip service to supporting the Second Amendment, but his fundamental goal is to use government to remove arms from individuals.
In a stunning blow to the freedom of born alive infants, he is one of a handful of politicians nationwide who believes it is appropriate to leave such infants to die alone and untended. With few exceptions, even those whose politics are entirely colored by a pro-choice viewpoint couldn't swallow this approach.
Without money, people have no choices. The more money the government siphons to itself, the fewer choices we as individuals have. Although he dresses it as fairness (it's "fair" for the "lucky" to pay substantially more), Obama believes that it's government's role to "spread the wealth." That may be "fair," but it's not consistent with liberty, hard work, and individual choices.

Not to say other presidents were not of the same ideological family, but in this case, he's a compilation of all the center to hard left ideas we've ever seen, and then some. Thus, not in line with former Presidents.

Here is the first problem that I have with Obama waging war against the citizens of the US. The military does not like him, nor respect him for that matter. There is no way the soldiers of this country would gun down their own people. As a matter of fact, military personnel take an oath to protect the Constitution, protecting a President comes secondary. He's cut their funding, reneged on the missile defense for Poland and Czech Republic, and is waffling on the urgent request for 40,000 more troops in Afghanistan. So I wager he has very few friends in the military. Best option would be Marshall Law, and even then I'd bet the military would be hard pressed to shoot upon civilians.

Next is the huge network of Police Officers. Things would have been fine in this camp, except for that asinine comment a few months ago wherein he made a bad decision on labeling police office Crowley as "stupid" for having arrested Professor Gates. Now, if you know a police officer personally, you know it's one big extended family that protects their own. And I've heard plenty of dissension from them regarding Obama these days. Let's not forget the motto, "to serve and protect." After the "beer summit" at the White House, I don't expect many officers to accept any orders from the White house instructing them to do harm against society.

Lastly, the intelligence community of the CIA. The White house has sponsored a special committee to investigate the alleged abuses against terrorist with no rights under the Geneva convention, the Constitution, or even the UN (up to that point). Nevertheless, Attorney General Eric Holder has put together this investigation. Let's not forget Mr. Holder originates from the law firm that represents 18 Guantanamo detainees before being appointed Attorney General. But, again, it would appear that Obama has no friends in the CIA camp either.

So if Obama was going to subvert and "fundamentally change" this country, how is he going to do it with no military, no police, and no CIA/intelligence community willfully backing him up? Honestly, this is an open question, because from here on out, it is hypotheses and conjecture.

First on the list is the supposed personal military defense force that Obama reference to back in July of 2008 in Colorado. A link is provided above in case that doesn't ring a bell with you. Now, it would cost a lot (and we have no money for it) to have another force equivalent to our military, and I think we would have heard more about it since then. To date, nothing. But, this would be the first best option if you were going to undermine the entire social structure of the US, and rebuild it a la USSR in 1919 or China in 1949. Kill millions, re-educate the leftovers. There is a small plausibility of the GIVE Act passed in May as being a part of this force, but again, nothing from the watch dogs about it. Still, with most of our military deployed across seas in the middle east, Germany, South Korea, etc., these Obama para-militaries could get away with a lot, if they existed.

The second option is the more probable way of defeating the core fundamentals of the country. Remember that Obama ran as a centrist? Said he believed in the Second Amendment, etc., and people took him at his word. We're still a rather trusting nation, to a fault it would seem. Well, he isn't a centrist and he doesn't play bi-partisan politics either. He doesn't even like one news station, out of many, to be non-pro Obama. For the most part, Bush didn't have any news stations on his side. Still doesn't, actually!

Sales for guns and ammo are up, way up! Typically, in a given year, between 7-10 billion rounds of ammo are sold in the US. We'll pass 12 billion this year, a record. What is going on here? People are gearing up for something. And I were Obama, the polarising president bent on rebuilding a nation I loath, I'd give them something to build up for. You don't need the military on your side, the CIA, nor the local enforcement, all you need to do is put enough policies in place that undermine the Constitution and then finally someone says "Enough!" and the dominoes start to fall, non-violently at first such as protest (tea parties), but progressively more sinister, maybe even staged, and magnified by an agenda driven media. But, the economy can't be in a good place, because then dissent will be slightly muted. Not only that, but you need people to be edgy, in need of basic human sustenance such as food, water, shelter, money, or whatever. And once you have that, they will go from "enough" to "need to survive" and then they weed each other out, regardless of party affiliation. And after enough have suffered, start the rebuilding process.

I only took one anthropology class in college, and in hindsight, I wish I had taken more. It was about China, and the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution they went through. The two books I read were excellent yet highly demoralizing as I read story after story about massive suffering and indignities. I still remember one story about a child finding a half eaten carrot on the ground, and crying because he felt like the luckiest kid in the world for finding it. They starved because the government decided where the food went, and that is entirely plausible if dissidents raised up in this country. I believe you can find that in a book, called "The Spiral Road."

Then the question becomes; how far are we from that last option of self-elimination? We just had a few elections here yesterday. In the areas where Obama went and stumped for the candidates, they lost, by comfortable margins, to Republicans. We are one year from elections in 2010, where all the seats in the House of Representatives will be up for grabs. If we can last that long (due to the economy) and subsequent change is made, then reasonable heads should prevail.

However, before then, one should understand that the federal dollars attached to the "stimulus bill" will be flowing quickly (to date, less than 30% of the $787 billion has been handed out) which is an excellent way to buy votes for politicians. Basically, the more people that are unemployed now, the better come next July when stimulus monies flood into counties creating jobs, and since Republicans didn't support that bill, just say thanks by voting for the local democrat.

Also, watch for "immigration reform" to become a huge topic after January, as Obama seeks amnesty for millions of potential voters to help the politicians as well. This will still lead to the second option, though. How pissed would you be about 15 million new citizens that have done a good job turning parts of the US into mini-Mexicos and enlarging gang populations, drug smuggling, and even murder? Pissed? Gunna march on Washington? Not all of these immigrants are inherently bad, FYI. But they are illegal. I'm for legal residency for them, but not citizenship. And a "three strikes your out" policy too.

Lastly, I want you to pay attention more to people. Can you feel the tension mounting? The division between us citizens is getting stronger; us v. them. It feels like 1938, trouble is brewing but there is time to avoid the huge potential it has to be the worst human catastrophe ever. People are gearing up for something. Food storage sales are up as well. If you have not already done so, better safe than sorry.

So there is my opinion on if the democrats are, in fact, deliberately trying to destroy this country. Because we all can easily surmise that we will not gleefully turn to communism as a potential savior for this country -- at least not with the current population with over 50% claiming to be conservative. And if the last good cop in this world gets into a fight with himself, you can bet the whole world will be hard-pressed to stay inline. And that could be a year away. Election year, 2010!

All the Difference

2009-10-23T22:04:00.000-07:00

Hmm, no takers on that last post. I've either offended you (and it had to happen sometime) or, I was preaching to the choir.

I've been considering Robert Frost as of late, and perhaps his most famous poem, "The Road Not Taken." However, instead of personalizing it, I am looking at it from the perspective of our country, good ole' US of A.

At this point, our country is at a fork in the road, and there is a huge impetus to drive it left, while the majority are comfortable staying to the right.

For the past nary 200 years, we molded "progressive" ideology into the nation and more or less, have benefited from that. By more or less, I mean we've established national parks, liberated slaves, gave voting rights to women, civil rights to all, and so on and so forth. Progressive does not mean the modern day liberal we see around us. Yes, that is their new moniker, but back in the day, it meant for the betterment of society. I think we can all agree the above mentioned changes were for the better, and interestingly, it was the Republicans who gave us 3 of those 4.

Looking at another "progressive" standpoint -- the newer version -- we have a myriad of social programs that meant well, but are on the brink of failure. But, before we get into that, we need to look at a bigger picture.

I've spoken about it before, but the Democrats mean well. Or at least I hope they do. They want to help as many people as possible with as many government sponsored projects. That's why we have Social Security, MediCare & MediCaid, Welfare and so on and so forth. In a way, it is good to have these crutches to fall back on in the time of need, just as is unemployment insurance which is something that we pay into every month and then receive when the going gets rough.

The problem is that as Roosevelt set up Social Security, it was supposed to be a retirement plan for everyone that paid into it. On your checks, this is known as FICA, or Federal Insurance Contributions Act passed during the Great Depression. I've said before, and I'll say it again, it is the biggest Ponzi scheme in history. A Ponzi Scheme is when you take peoples money, say you'll invest it into stocks, bonds, whatever, and then you use the money for your own hedonistic purposes. When it comes time to pay the piper, you just take other potential investors' monies, and divvy them out. Bernie Madoff had a scheme of nearly $50 billion, but this is peanuts comparatively speaking. Coincidentally, insomuch as Roosevelt started Social Security, he was also the first politician to rob its coffers: $90 million to fund the Manhattan Project. (Some analyst believe Social Security is up to $100 trillion in the red after all governement IOUs are talibrated, but all agree that it is at least several trillion behind.) From their own report, in 2016, the FICA tax will be insufficient to meet recipients. Read this article for a better idea on the matter.

This can be fixed, but not easily. You can raise the age for retirement, make some people grumpy but stave off the inevitable topple. You could raise the taxable amount able to be 'donated' to FICA, currently $108,600 is the maximum the feds can take out -- meaning, there is a cap and eventually the tax does end. Or, just raise the FICA tax altogether. Or, go soylent green. Less people taking out benefits makes it easier. Wow, nice segue into the next social program.

Health care! Honestly, if you have government run health care, people die quicker. I thought this was an ironic thing the other day, but apparently Medicare denies more claims than all the private industries, percentage wise. I've heard arguments about how insurance companies don't offer good rates to the elderly. Well yeah, when the government is giving away insurance coverage, and Blue Cross/Blue Shield wants $300 a month, which would you choose? But, I've already discussed this topic, and as noted in my previous post, MediCare and MediCaid are going down in flames, financially speaking, and they want all of us to join in on that ride. They probably will pass some legislation, whether it be the Baucus bill or some aspect of it, something will be passed just to stroke the ego of The One. (P.S. Don't believe the price tag of this bill, they calculated it from 2010 - 2019, when the actual full coverage doesn't begin until 2015.)

Welfare benefits started with LBJ and his "Great Society" and subsequent "War on Poverty" back in the mid-sixties. Sounds nice, but how about a study from the Heritage Foundation which recently calculated that since Welfare's inception, we've doled out $15.9 trillion dollars in "benefits," which is more than double all of our wars and conflicts combined in price, and adjusted for inflation. And yet, the poor are still among us. You could say we are still at war with poverty, and from the looks of it, reinforcements are headed their way. Does this mean I am against helping the poor? No, I've been there. I lived in a tent for 3 months in a field with cows. I kid you not.

All these programs are/were a step towards a liberal utopia, where everyone has equality. Obviously, with the legislation on the docket these days, we're pushing once again for that utopia. The problem is that they are pushing it. Compelling citizens to accept this dream world fantasy will never work, because it conflicts with our current utopia, i.e., the way of life we've come to accept.

I read an interesting blurb about Arnold Schwartzneggar the other day. I've always been a fan of his -- even wrote a fan letter once (he didn't reply). We also starred in the same movie together, Kindergarten Cop, though I am a mushy background extra.

Anyway, a few days after arriving here from Austria (a German speaking country...), he was watching a debate on television between Nixon and Humphrey. His friend spoke German and English, translated the exchanges for him. As he related the story, he said that Humphrey was repeating socialistic rhetoric, and Arnold having left Eastern Europe, wanted nothing to do with it. Then he heard Nixon talk about free enterprise, lower taxes, and so forth. He asked his friend what party Nixon was, to which he replied, "Republican," and then Arnold stated, "Then I am a republican."

Not to say Republicans are perfect, nor, for that matter, Arnold, but the world has already seen the lackluster performance of socialized countries, and the devastation of communistic ones. These are not utopias, yet it is clear that this is the path 'the Left' is taking us. This is evident with the supposed health care reform, the cap-n-trade law, immigration reform (amnesty for illegals), the Respect for Marriage Act which will repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, and probably a litany of others that escape me after mid-night.

So here we are, at cross-roads, one leading down a path that Frost described as "fair [a]nd having perhaps the better claim," and another path so well described as "I doubted if I should ever come back." And that's the point if the US becomes even more socialistic. If the Leftist policies that are being put into motion are not stopped, then I think the end of this poem captures the possibility that we should be alarmed about: "I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference." Remember, Frost doesn't say it was the right decision, but merely, a choice that "has made all the difference," regardless of whether it was a good idea. Yet, in this case, we even know where that road leads; just ask Arnold.

The Unachievement Award

2009-10-10T19:05:00.000-07:00

Friday mornings are typically pretty good. It's the last work day of the week; the weekend, regardless of plans, is a welcoming event from the usual mundane train we ride week after week. This last Friday was even better -- I didn't have to work due to flexing of hours. I was planning to sleep in.

Then at 7:48 in the morning, I get a text message from a good friend that said, "Obama wins Noble Peace prize -- ROFLOLOLOLOLOLOL!" Sounded like a joke to me, so I tried to sleep some more, but that just doesn't happen with 2 kids. Oh well. And then the news finally does validate itself; Oslo has awarded Barak Obama the Nobel Peace Prize. I still think it is a joke.

Now, in all honesty, I haven't taken the Nobel Peace prize seriously since I started tracking it. And that disappointment stems all the way back to the 1940s, when Mahatma Gandhi was denied the prize 5 different times between 1937 and 1948, even in his year of assassination, the Nobel administrators came out and said there would be no award winners because there were "no suitable" valid candidates. Gandhi, the king of non-violence who inspired MLK, Mandela, even Barak Obama & the Lama, didn't get the award, yet they all did.

Others that would have been meaningful recipients would have been Eleanor Roosevelt, Cesar Chavez, Ronald Reagan and Pope John Paul II. All passed over, and others such as Al Gore, Jimmy Carter & Yassir Arafat have gotten it. Maybe next year Michael Moore could win? Or Polanski! So, thus you see why I don't particularly care who wins it anymore. Oh, but I do care, because others put stock into it.

Let's just look at what it takes to win an award, any award, in "normal life" perspective. You have to do something beyond expectations, or meet a measurable criteria, and just be better than average. For the rest of us, we get that annoying green ribbon that states we were a participant -- the "everybody is a winner" badge. Boy don't those just pump you up!

For the Nobel Peace prize, put forth by Swedish dynamite and smokeless powder inventor Alfred Nobel, the premise to such award is, "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses." And from the front page of the Nobel prize website regarding Obama's win, "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples."

Not only this, but in order to be considered for the award, you have to be nominated before February 1st of the same year, with the award being handed out in October of the same year. You cannot self -nominate and, unfortunately for the rest of us, the names of the nominees will not be released for 50 years. So we do not even get to know the competition for a half decade, which in this case, was over 200 nominations. But, there is a handful of deserving individuals we could come up with and assume they were part of the peace prize nomination. Wouldn't make a difference at this point, however.

Nonetheless, the point is that 11 days into Barak's Presidency (after the inauguration) someone nominated him for the Nobel Peace prize. Presumptuous? Nah, destined for greatness as we all know which shone forth 11 days into his reign and got him nominated.

Anyway, going with the above explanation for awards and this award in particular, the question becomes: how on earth did Obama win this "prestigious" award?

The Nobel administrators say "for his extraordinary efforts," I take issue with that immediately. Why? Because, how many times have we said to each other, "you get an 'E' for effort" when someone tries but fails? This is exactly the same as the green participation ribbon! Good attempt, so close, you'll be okay, better luck next time. We're all recipients of those platitudes. So the fact that Obama has made "efforts" but hasn't received any results, how does that qualify him for this award over anyone else? We're all making efforts here, why should one failure get an award over the rest of us?

"[T]o strengthen international diplomacy" is the next supposed qualifier, and I'm having a hard time finding where he was successful there. Tensions are increasing in the middle east, not getting better. North Korea is still "rogue" and Iran is gearing up to produce a nuclear bomb. Maybe Obama going around apologizing for everything is what they mean, but how is that good for diplomacy? I don't remember who said it, but, "Weakness is provocative." When you see a weakness, you exploit it. And far be it for me to assume that many other nations don't perceive this. Name one major foreign policy win this man has negotiated?

The last part is "cooperation between peoples." It's part of the above paragraph, but what, exactly, is Obama doing for that? Sure, he suggested we be a nuclear bomb free world, but he's not the first to say that, and frankly, we still have nukes, and as do all the other countries, and then some that are trying to get them. Honestly, looking around, would you want the US to be without nukes right now? Through he did cancel our missile defense shield, much to the chagrin of Poland, et al. I guess we'll just accept whatever nukes fly overhead towards us. Not to mention running two wars of our own, and one that apparently needs 40,000 more troops... Oh the irony of this award, especially after that SNL skit!

Some people have opined that this is the "thanks for not being Bush" award. In that case, anyone that replaced Bush would have won this award, and that makes it even more worthless. I've read others lauding his "vision," but again, that's not complete (whatever that is) and thus, not applicable to the winners' circle. Others have said this is a consolation prize for being hugely snubbed on the Olympic bid. Could be a hundred reasons, even political aggrandizement, but we have to take the official explanation at face value.

Here's what Obama said regarding the honor,“I will accept this award as a call to action, a call for all nations to confront the challenges of the 21st century." So he believes he still needs to earn this award. He also said, “To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformational figures who have been honored by this prize." I agree.

But, I can't blame Obama personally. You can't self-nominate, and the committee in Oslo decided he was the winner. But if I were in his inner circle, I would cordially admonish him to respectfully decline the offer. He does not deserve it. At this point, he is a talking head with no accomplishments aside from ascending to the office of US President. And there is still plenty of time for things to go awry, nationally to globally. This award, like all others, is one that you are supposed to earn. Plus, by accepting it, you're just amping up the pathological narcissism and cult of personality that is becoming all to apparent. Declining this would be therapeutically beneficial.

Looking at it from the Nobel Prize committee perspective -- what exactly are they trying to do here? Perhaps this is their means to help him push his agenda? I feel there is more going on behind the scenes than we know about. Clear partisan politics, except, not so clear. But otherwise, why choose someone with such a short resume on actual peace progress? Yeah, a little bit of a conspiracy theory there. Bah, what is politics without conspiracy? They are being criticized immensely, and it's funny!

I don't think I have much more on the matter, except, that, once again, the US won the Nobel Prize for Medicine. In the last 30 awards given for medicine, the US has won 19 of them. Who needs socialized medicine, again?

The Final Closure

2009-09-23T22:20:00.000-07:00

Skipping politics oh so briefly, I felt compelled to go with this story because it literally hits close to home.

In February of 2004, we packed up and left my wife's home town and place of my collegial career. I had a new job that I had been commuting to and from since December, and to cut back on the hour long drive, we moved closer to work and coincidentally, closer to my wife's future work. Usual story for folks just out of college.

Three months later, an attractive, young college student was abducted not far from our previous residence. It was a huge surprise. Sure, it is a college town, but in many regards, a sleepy college town compared to other universities, especially the more infamous red-headed step-sister college 50 miles south and on the wrong side of the tracks. Filthy beast it is.

Anyway, a kidnapping that took the community by surprise and for over five years, hung over the head of this town like an ever present haze. Collectively, we all knew she was dead. After all, she was a pious person, and not prone to such shenanigans of taking off and showing up months later with a new tatoo and grizzled boy friend while sharing wild tales of Vegas and cops. Those of you not in the know, I am speaking of Brooke Wilberger.

For years, here in my town, there was a billboard in the north end of town citing a "reward" for any information on her whereabouts. I hated looking at it, because again, I knew where she wasn't: alive and well. And when I worked for the state, I drove by it every day. Such a pretty girl, but such a loss too.

Now, I don't mean to say that ugly girls are not such a loss either. But this was a good girl, insofar as I've heard and read. And honestly, let's be honest here, those types of girls are a rarity in today's age.

And then, less than a week ago, it finally comes out: Joel Courtney confesses to posing as a FedEx delivery man, pitting himself between her and a wall, then coursing her by knife point into his green minivan. There, she was bound, and after getting himself high, getting hungry, and traveling out deep into the forest, kept her for 24 hours in which he raped, sodomized and eventually bludgeoned her head in because she "fought too much."

It is a terrible, but all too often, a repeated story these days.

I seem to imagine myself in the woods there too. In one vision, I am a hunter and thus, a hero thereafter because of unloading a full magazine into Mr. Courtney. But the pragmatic person in me says that it was May, and therefore, not hunting season unless I was a poacher and thus, not the hero, but a criminal thrust into a situation of fight or flee.

The other visual I have is one of mercy. I'm there, but in spirit, and she's already in the final grasps of life, and I just want to be there on the other side waiting for her to return, to ease the pain, to tell her it'll be okay, justice will be served, and everything will be made whole once again. I just didn't want her to die alone, in the middle of no where, after all that transpired. Least of all die with just the perpetrator standing nearby.

Now granted, I will not pretend to know the grand scheme of things, and maybe there were angels on hand to welcome her back, but for my sake, I do need a sense of closure. Which is what brings me to the crux of this post.

This whole story concluded because a certain coward, fearing for his own life, cut a deal with the Wilberger family and the District Attorney. In exchange for not seeking the death penalty, he would let them know where she was laid to rest (and that doesn't seem like the right words for this). The family, interested in having a final closure, coupled with a proper burial, agreed. Ergo, Mr. Coward will live out the rest of his days in New Mexico (rape charges there) and Oregon, with no chance of parole. But is that good enough... for me?

In many regards, I am old school notion: eye for an eye. Yeah, I've read the nifty left-leaning bumper stickers that purport; "An eye for an eye and the whole world is blind." But, that's missing the point and assuming that everyone is a willful law-breaking jerk. Let's break it down so we can get back to the story.

What many incompetent bumper stickering fools fail to realize is that 'an eye for an eye' is the first notable attempt at juris prudence for man. What that means is, a law of equivalency for the people. An eye for an eye means that you cannot over punish someone for a crime -- if they steal an apple, you cannot cut off their hand. That is too harsh a penalty for such a crime. If you steal an apple, then it is required of you to repay the debt to equal terms. So, willfully killing someone should mean that you are killed, unless suitable recompense can be met. But what could replace a life? Nothing in my book.

Looking at Joel Courtney, however, instead of having to feel remorse for his crimes, he gets to plea-bargian his way out, and not worry about much of anything for the rest of his life. But, we need to look at this another way. We're a third party looking in, and that's a shallow aspect. We'll skip Mr. Courtney's perspective -- I'm not psychologist so I could only assume his position. So, that leaves us with the Wilbergers.

Unfortunately, this does not seem too out of context for me to presume, but if my daughter was kidnapped and missing for over 5 years, and one day the DA calls and says, "He'll tell you where you can find the remains of your daughter if you agree to not seek the death penalty..." my response is ... I just don't know. The "justice is served" part of me says that I drop a litany of swear words and let him hang. But then, my daughter is out there somewhere, in a shallow, unmarked grave. No place to mourn her. And further, perhaps no true sense of closure, either.

I know there are lessons in forgiveness, but this country is too soft on crime already. And letting one more get off the hook of true justice just emboldens another to copy him.

I have friends who actively went out searching for Brooke, and no doubt if a similar situation arouse with my daughters, they'd all do it all over again. Brooke was one of our own, from a town in my state, abducted not far from my previous home -- a place I knew, no less! And so, I feel a bit of kinship and even responsibility on the matter. True, it was entirely out of my control, but the feeling is still there.

In my mostly vague attempts to be more empathetic, I need to come to a conclusion on this matter. Now, I figure my wife would want full closure, but I want full justice. The quick end to this argument is that my wife would win. That seems like a cheap way out of this debate, but it is the most truthful as well. But I'll add this; after the guilty confession, burial, and proper mourning, said criminal would be dead. Stabbed to death, in the shower, for however amount of cigarettes it would take to achieve such solutions. I can live with that.

The sad part is, I want some sort of epiphany in this. I don't want this death to have been in vain. Something has to be learned here! And yet, I can't figure it out. Why not? I know vengeance is suppose to be in God's hands, but let's look at his time frame: it sucks! It's like he's part of the government or something. "Uh, yeah, I'll have to get back to you on that..." I know, begging for a lightening bolt here. Meh, nothing new in that regard, no?

Maybe I've posted too soon on this issue, but I also felt compelled to say something. Anyway, perhaps my shower wish will come true. But until then, there is no end to this story for me.

***

Just some additional notes; 75% of criminals are repeat offenders and Courtney was one of them having already spent time in prison for attempting to rape his own sister. This tells me that jail is not an effective means of changing behavior. Maybe it's too easy in there these days.

Last May, I attended the Child Abuse Summit. It was awesome, information wise. Child porn has risen 1480%* in a decade. 30 years ago, when there was an abduction, local police and FBI would wait for a ransom note and go from there. Now, only 10% are for ransom, the rest of kidnappings are used for self-gratification. Clinically proven, there are no differences between your brain, and those of pedophiles or people with sexual fetishes. This means that it is a learned behavior, which may start as early as 3 years of age. They are not born with it ingrained into their heads.

So now you know. Be on the look-out and implant a GPS into your kid.

*You're going to have to take my word on this percentage -- I heard it from a presenter who works for Interpol on child trafficking. I tried to google for this statistic, but google pretty much shuts down when you type "child porn" into the search engine -- and I was just looking for statistics. Bet I just showed up on some government radar... whoops.

Change I could believe in

2009-09-10T22:30:00.000-07:00

I appreciate the nice comments from a couple of you about spreading the, or rather, my word, out to more people. Well, this isn't a private blog so anyone that wishes to see my ranting can give it a look-see whenever they want. However, I already feel guilty when I fail to update this blog for the scant 4 of you that frequent here. Imagine how I'd feel if that doubled overnight? Yeah, a bit overwhelmed. So, feel free to tell anyone about this dusty place, but I don't have the time to put in real journalistic standards and as you know, there is a bit much opinion laced in every post.

So, what brings me here today? Same thing as you. Ha! Yeah, I guess we get bored often, eh?

Okay, moving on here...

I read a lot. Used to be books I read. I like books; tangible goods that I can carry around and just look smart because I am holding a book. I wish I had to wear glasses more often just to finish off that presumption.

But these days, I read a lot online. As most of you know, I spend a bit of time at conservative websites such as AmericanThinker, AIM.org, Drudgereport, wnd, and then other places such as CNN, Reuters, politico, factcheck and so on and so forth (I look for the meta-story within the "news"). And after reading so much over the course of the summer, I've come to the conclusion that I no longer care about political parties. That's it. I'm done. Sure, by default I am conservative and as such, align with the republicans because they espouse the closest ideals to the conservative agenda and are able to wield influence because of their power. According to wiki, I am actually a conservative libertarian. But that party will never make it off the ground, especially with the two parties choking anything that even dares to rear it's head towards power.

The problem I have with democrats is that about 40 years ago, they were high-jacked. It happened under the banner of "liberalism" which is now called progressivism. Both are lies. The real agenda is called socialism, communism, even fascism and pretends to be a method of social justice.

Hold on, before we move forward, we need to discuss government ideology before we get to my conclusion about political parties.

For the most part, people tend to agree that the political spectrum is a circle. Or maybe you have heard of the Nolan Chart? Kinda the same... meh, maybe. Anyway, on one end of the cycle you have freedom, and on the other is tyranny or often called its softer form, totalatarianism. Tyranny is utter control by the government. In the vapid sense, you can say anarchy proceeds freedom as anarchy would be completely free of any laws whatsoever. I remember talking in high school about how cool it would be to live in anarchy. Of course, had that happened then, I am sure I would have been subjugated by someone with more power and guns. Quickly. Thus, I have come to appreciate laws and law abiding citizenry as a manner of self preservation.

I said it was typically thought of as a circle because once the house of oppressive cards falls (fascism, communism), anarchy ensues and then, at least in the case of the US, a great nation is formed on the basis of conservative beliefs and values. It was liberating! It took liberal thinkers based on God-given conservative foundations to make it happen. But like I said, the liberals of old are not related to today's people of the same name.

Side note: some often state that socialism/communism is on the left whereas fascism is on the right. That doesn't really make sense, however. The spectrum is based on freedom, and fascism offers about as much freedom as communism. And both employ the ideology that the state knows best, or rather, that the state in its infinite wisdom is infallible.Ergo, in this topic, such things are on the same end of the spectrum.

So here we have today's liberals/progressives/socialist/closet communists all claiming to be Democrats when in fact, they are wolves in sheep's clothing. I've already shown in a previous post that Obama ran on the Socialist Democrat ticket ["New Party"] in Chicago for the state senate. And this past Sunday, Van Jones the "Green Czar", a communist, 9/11 truther (i.e., someone who believes the US government was behind the 9/11 attacks), resigned after a myriad of outings and blunders. Do you know who originally outed him? Trevor Loudon of New Zealand back in April! Then WND picked up the story and Glenn Beck ran with it over the summer. You would think the White House would know the history of birds they flock with, right? Oh yes, they do. And the White House didn't ask for his resignation either, which tells you a lot about the people they want to associate with. Interesting to note that the main stream media didn't mention a flippin' thing about it until Jones resigned Sunday morning. Then it was news...

So the democrats are not the good party they used to be.

As Obama would say, "on the other hand" we have the republicans. Used to be a good group of people. Had their morals, their financial position, and our trust. They emancipated the slaves and sponsored the Civil Rights Act (which Al Gore's father, a democrat, vehemently refused to pass as a Senator). But, in the last 20 years, something happened between "read my lips: no new taxes" and John McCain's liberal republican policies. They are called "RINO's" now, or, "Republican In Name Only" and there are a few of them in Congress, saying one thing and voting another. Sen. Collins, Snow, McCain, and former RINO now (D) Specter to list a few. It has come to a point where I cannot trust any of them at all regardless of the letter following their name, (R) or (D).

So this is where you come into play. Yeah, that's right, I need your help to get me into power. We'll start with the US and then the world. One of you needs to be called "pinky" just for nostalgia sake.

I used to think I would start a third political party and gain influence that way, but lately, I think I've come up with a better idea. I am going to abolish all political parties. Forever. Let's face it, they run on a ticket of being a democrat or republican, and this immediately conjures up beliefs in those parties; pro-abortion, anti-gun, fiscally responsible, national health care advocate, anti-cap-n-trade, immigration reform, etc. And then they get into office and we get screwed because they aren't exactly what we anticipated nor towing a party line.

Look at it this way, I just want candidates to say exactly what they believe in on every issue. No glossing over or ambiguity. Just honest to goodness truth from every one of them. And then we all go home, support the one we like, and then vote on it. That way there is no confusion on what we get. It's all on the table or s/he will lose votes. And if they lie about it, we'll all know.

And there's a bonus! By doing this, we abolish the electoral college! How about that!? We, the people, finally get to elect the president that we voted for, and not these silly redrawn voting districts that cater to voting blocks instead of the masses. It'll also remove the voting blocks for congressmen as well, because once there are no drawn districts, it'll be a crap-shoot for them on guessing where they are likely to get votes from since they'll have to be honest about their personal policies henceforth.

Seriously though, looking at the past few decades, a lot of politics has been self-service rhetoric that has undermined this country. Look at AIG, also known as "too big to fail." Yet Lehman Brothers was allowed to fail. So why did we pump $170 billion into one and not the other? Because Federal Pensions aren't carried by Lehman Brothers, but AIG does. And who knows the amount of suffering these poor politicians would endure if they had to go through what the rest of us already have. Same goes for healthcare. You think the politicians will be on the "public option" they are pushing for the rest of us? Think again. You're not special. Makes you wonder about it if they have no faith in being treated on that plan.

Obama says he's going to "fundamentally transform" this country. That tells me he plans to destroy the foundation this country was built upon -- life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. With Obamacare, there goes the 'life' aspect. With cap-n-trade, immigration reform, hate laws, etc. takes out 'liberty' and the 'pursuit of happiness' could be all that and more, such as higher taxation or lower standards of living.

It isn't too much of a shock to us, after all, we've been in this pot of heated frogs for a while, but will we jump when it starts to boil? There should have been something preventing this from happening all along, which is why I propose the abolishment of the parties now. Too many have hid under a cloak without scrutiny. They served their purpose back in the day, but they have grown fat and useless, spineless, and worse, corrupted by the very enemy we helped defeat 20 years ago. Correlation? Why not...

Granted, there are no promises with my plan, and parties are bound to evolve once again. Still, an honest fresh start would be a welcomed event. I could make parties illegal...

Vote for me! I offer hope and cha-- erm, challenges! All I want is more truthiness, followed by cow bell!

In Failing Health

2009-08-30T21:54:00.000-07:00

Summer supposedly is officially over 3 weeks into September, but let's be honest, internally we all consider September 1st as the real end of summer, and Labor Day as the last good day to relax, which is odd considering its name.

Coming in September, Congress will reconvene after the mandatory month long vacation. It's actually a nice reprieve to have Congress cease to sell-off our rights one month a year.

With Congress back in action, we have the newly named KennedyCare on the docket, formerly ObamaCare, formerly ClintonCare, et cetera. Of course, we already have MediCare and Medicaid, which marginally address the health issues for the elderly and those who are too poor to have their own insurance.

Well, let's start with the new suggested name, KennedyCare, named after the "Lion of the Senate," which I did not look up as to why he was called that -- I was happier assuming it meant he pounced unsuspecting innocent victims.

Teddy Kennedy, recently portrayed as some sort of hero despite a long history of events that are, at least to me, the antithesis of being a hero. Hmm, looking at the wiki page on him, it says he was kicked out of Harvard for cheating on his Spanish test, let back in after being a good person, wound up killing a girl named Mary Jo Kopechne but only faced a 2 month suspension for doing so, lived a hedonistic life, worked with the KGB against Reagan, helped his nephew get acquitted of rape in 1991, co-sponsored No Child Left Behind (NCLB), and The Freedom of Information Act. I approve of that last one, and by default, I have to despise NCBL because my wife teaches.

Because of a small plane accident in the 1960s, Kennedy has had back pains ever since then (err, up until August 25th that is) and as such, has been a strong proponent of nationalized health care. So now that he is gone, many politicians are calling for it to be called KennedyCare in an effort to put an emotional emphasis on passing it. Win one for the gipper, I suppose.

Good luck. And I mean that as insincerely as possible.

Let's look at Nationalized health care. I briefly talked about this a few months ago when I was rallying against socialism as a whole. Honestly, we've been steadily cruising that way since Woodrow Wilson made the Federal Reserve in 19... uhm, 1917? Meh, go back and read it if the date is that important to you. We're just missing a few more pieces before we're totally socialized: 1st amendment, 2 amendment and nationalized health care. It ultimately about controlling your populace.

House Bill 3200 has been the main focus thus far. There has been ample information and misinformation about it. So much so, that the White House asked people to narc on those spreading "disinformation" that seemed "fishy." Disinformation is deliberate wrong information -- happens all too often in campaigns. However, what the White House asked was illegal by the Privacy Act of 1974, and they are now being sued for it.

Let's look at the merits of passing health care reform. As claimed, there are 47 million people in the US without health care coverage, or roughly 18% of "Americans." This number includes several million illegal aliens (9.73 million), people who are able to afford health care but opt not to (9.1 million), people in-between health care coverages, people who are in college, and a myriad of other individuals. In short, it actually isn't as high as reported above (and that website debunks the 47 million claim anyway, which Obama cited).

Next, how much clamoring did you hear from the US citizens begging for Health care reform anyway? None? I worked at the Oregon Health Plan for a bit, and believe you me, just about anyone can get health care coverage. Not only that, it is illegal for hospitals to turn people away and Ted Kennedy also passed the COBRA laws to protect uninsured you. Now then, the US government, on the the other hand, isn't fairing too well with Medicare and Medicaid. They plan to go broke soon. Here's the quote from the top of that link: "The federal budget is on an unsustainable path, primarily because of the rising cost of health care." So the federal government is in financial trouble for the health care it already provides, and now they want to cover more people as well. Yeah, that sounds like a swell idea...

Meanwhile, of the 1300 health insurance companies in the US, the top 10 posted a combined $13 billion dollar profit last year overall. Excessive? Well, maybe. But at least they aren't running in the red like the multi-trillion dollar government. This is one element that we need to be wary of with the government -- they aren't making money on taking over health care, they're just creating new debt for us and our children (and their children) to assume at a later date. Here's what I mean: The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has stated that to cover 16 million people for ten years, it'll cost over $1 trillion dollars. Uh, we don't have that laying around anywhere...

Above all, there are the political by-words of "single payer system" and what does that mean, really? It means one option. No shopping around between BlueCross/BlueShield, Providence, Kaiser, or what have you. It is a one stop health care coverage and no Slurpee-for-you station. And we specifically do not want that. Americans like options. We're a picky folk and we like it that way. If it takes 1 trillion to cover 16 million over ten years and the US earns 14 trillion a year in GDP, how much would it cost us to cover everyone for that same time. Meh, too late to do math. Of course, some one could just pony up more money to cover us all. "Single payer system" rhetoric has been dropped since the first month it was mentioned.

Going back to why this is necessary. Is it? I mean, this is a really bad recession, and we've already spent too much money on the economy trying to mitigate the effects of a recession. Shouldn't this sort of idea come up when the economy is doing well, and we have a surplus to pay for such benefits? Or maybe we should fix the bankrupt Medicare/caid and Social Security (which is the biggest ponzi scheme in the world). I just do not get the need to rush this through, regardless of who dies in the Senate.

Let's discuss just how bad (or good) or medical coverage is. First, no other country in the world matches our superior care or innovation in medicine. It is a business and we drive it forward. I've heard made mention that US citizens actually do have the longest life spans in the world, but because we drive fast and play war, it shortens the overall life span. But, regardless of that, the average life span is rising in the US anyway.

Remember how long you waited at the ER last time? 2 hours? Yeah, you were furious, but here's Canada's average: + 20 hours. How many of us can stay up that long? Here's the most recent famous claim that over 4,000 UK women had given birth in hallways because there weren't enough beds. You stay classy, England!

Logistically speaking, however, we do not have enough doctors, hospitals, nurses, etc., to help the supposed 47 million uninsured or even half that. Also, the government would determine the pay rate for visits, surgeries, therapies, and I believe there would be a professional revolt to that. Plus, the government is chronically slow on payment as well.

So, what to do... Well, if we had to do something just to save what programs the government already runs in health care, here is an idea that really needs to be addressed: tort reform. Just a snobby lawyer way of saying curbing medical malpractice law suits. Texas recently did it, and their results are astounding! This was on the ballot a couple of years ago here in Oregon, and I voted it down, but this was due to one story (oh boy, here we go -- side tangent) about a guy who had testicular cancer in the lefty, and the doctor accidentally removed the righty, and ultimately he was left with a scholarship to eunuch school. In all honesty, you couldn't offer me the annual US GDP for my boys. Yeah, that's right, they are priceless! So there'd have to be an asterisks for me to approve of Texas' system, but the results are undeniable there.

What we do need is health insurance reform. [Read that link written by a doctor here in Oregon -- it will give you the best insight.] I don't want to regulate it any more like the power companies who's profits are capped by legislation. And I certainly do not want the government coming in, under-cutting the competition, and forcing employers to abandon private coverage which would dump people into the government care. If I were an employer, I would. After all, you'll be paying higher taxes for this public option to exist, so why bother paying private insurance premiums as well?

So in my opinion, we don't need a federal government oversight health care option. What we do need is tort reform with a "save the nads" clause for people who have that concern. Deregulation would be nice, because people who pay for insurance in middle-America pay less than those on the east coast, yet they cannot (by law) get the same coverage in other regions.

But realistically, in one of those links above, 9.1 million people chose not to have health care and earn over $75,000 a year. They don't want it! If we're going to expand government health care, let's do it for those under a set amount of income that do want it, and they can pay a subsidized premium for it. If they sign up for it, they agree to caps on potential law suits, and have mandatory health screenings for preventative measures -- medical, dental and vision. The premuims have to be comparable to other companies so people don't flock to it and overwhelm the system.

And no, illegals do not get this option. Call it racism if you must, but I call it 'the law.'

And lastly, it should be a state matter. There's nothing in the constitution that says the government should have a role in health care. It might even be illegal -- you're health records in a data base controlled by government bureaucrats. Super. Well, at least they could verify that FAFSA form for my Eunuch University application.

You'll note that I haven't talked about, "death panels," "assisted suicide," "paid abortions," "free sex changes," "coverage for illegals," and a litany of other topics. Truth is, the bill isn't finalized as lots of things could change before it gets voted on. I'll probably have to revisit this topic once again. Hopefully it will not be so scatter-brained as this post. I've been working on this for too long, and I am anxious to move on. Not the lack of links in the latter half?

And yes, I will miss Michael Jackson more than Ted Kennedy.

Skeptically intrigued

2009-08-18T00:43:00.001-07:00

Heavens to Betsy! It's been 3 weeks since I posted last. And how on Earth did Betsy get Heavens? Doesn't seem fair in a socialized world... Someone ought to create a government department to regulate that Betsy gal and spread the wealth. Hmm, may need some more taxes to fund said department. Not it!

Bah! What to talk about today...

So, a couple of weeks ago the "mainstream media" reported on the whole "birther" movement, a moniker that they so aptly applied to those that have questions about whether or not the current President of the United States (POTUS) has an actual long form birth certificate. The term "birther" is meant to ridicule those that espouse this notion. It is much easier to ridicule than come up with solid, factual answers. I do it all the time, add humor, and the issue becomes a moot point.

Well, let's dive in and see what we can find, shall we?

First and foremost, the Certification of Live Birth was released to the intertubes. It is not a COLB form, which is an actual birth certificate that states all the details; the doctor, the hospital, etc. Also of note, it is a 2007 reprint, not issued back in August 4, 1961 when Barak Obama was born. The problem with this form is that it lists his race as "African" when in 1961, the Department of Health and Human Services mandated that all colored people were lised as "Negro." Odd, but maybe Hawaii was pro-active. Secondly, the above data (doctor, hospital) are missing. Thirdly, getting a Hawaiian birth certificate like the one above wasn't too hard to do as the government of Hawaii was engaged in amping up their population count to cook the books for more funding for Welfare, and representation in Congress. So, there are some fishy things about the scanned internet version, let alone that Hawaii's own Department of Health will not comment on the authenticity of that document (but say they've seen the original).

Okay, these two issues do not overlap well. We have documentation that when Barak was born, a couple of announcements were made in the local paper about the birth. Both list his residence as 6085 Kalanieloae Hwy. Interesting to note, they never lived there (instead, Waikiki, same city as the University they attended). This residence belonged to Prof. Orland Lefforge who taught at the University of Hawaii who had bought the house in the 1950s and died there in 1973. Not only that, there are 4 people who say they saw Barak being born, all 4 of which live in Kenya and are under a gag order by the Kenyan Government which is controlled by Prime Minister Odinga, Obama's cousin. But you can hear his grandma speak about it on YouTube. So, notices in the local papers with wrong address, witnesses in Kenya under gag order. Take your pick.

One thing the media did with their label was pin the argument down on one specific point, when in fact, the "birther" movement encompasses a lot more than that. After birth, Barak's mom "Stanley" married Lolo Soetoro from Indonesia, and they moved there as a family. At that time in Indonesia, just as today, you cannot have dual citizenship and go to school, and you have to be adopted. We have "Barry Soetoro's" grade school report from Indonesia, so we know he attended -- aside from the fact he mentions it in his book "Dreams of my Father". So, in order to do that, he would have had to declare himself a citizen of Indonesia, probably through adoption. This would make him, according to law, ineligible for POTUS. Remember, not my rules, but those of our country.

Let's look at the stipulations for being president: must be 35 years of age, natural born citizen, and have resided in the US for the last 14 years. He definitely has 2 of the 3.

He comes back to Hawaii after the marriage dissolves. He attends Occidental College in California, Columbia, and then Harvard. You know, we have all of Bushes and Kerry's college records -- it's public knowledge. Obama attended 3 schools of higher education. Do you know how many grades we have? None. Furthermore, his roommates were all Muslim foreign exchange students. Why? Was he purporting to be an exchange student too? Getting government grants to get the money to do so? And then there's that 1981 trip to Pakistan during a US ban to travel there because the country was under Marshall law. How did he do that on a US passport? How about his State Senate record? All locked and sealed with the supposed COLB form.

Not to mention the blatant forgery of Barak's Selective Service card. Read it all, there is no way around the intention there -- a 1990's form with a 2008 seal with a 1970's stamp when he should have done it on his 18th birthday in 1979. Forgery, fruad, whatever.

So that is the "birther" movement in a nutshell. And quite frankly, people have a right to know that their current president is legally and lawfully able to serve in that capacity -- it's in the Constitution and we're obligated to uphold it, lest we be criminals ourselves. Perhaps these are the negative rights Obama referred to in the Constitution -- it bars outsiders from serving in the Presidency. Rightfully so, we don't want foreign policy on our soil.

But here's the kicker, if Obama isn't born in the US, then what? He steps down and we get Biden? Ugg. Or worse, Pelosi? And what if Obama says he's not stepping down? Tyranny? After all, the majority did elect him... And even if 10% are willing to fight/be violent to keep him in office, that's millions of people willing to lay down their lives for this hope and change.

With that in mind, color me skeptical of the whole thing because if it ever does come to a head, I'll be waiting for a major shake-up to occur; either the issue will be dead and proven that he is an American citizen, and we can finally get over this mess, or we'll see something we've never even considered before. And that is more scary than anything to me.

The officiators at the Department of Health for Hawaii say they have seen the real long form birth certificate. Release the damn thing already! Otherwise, why is Obama spending $1.4 million in legal fees trying to stop the courts from making a decision on his Birth Certificate? One soldier has already gotten out of serving in Iraq by bringing up a lawsuit against the legitimacy of Obama.

Oh, and then this shows up: Barak Obama Facebook says he's 52, not 48! Sure, maybe it was hacked, or not his "official" official page, or just riling up the masses again. Ridiculous at any rate. If he were 52, then the 2007 birth reprint is a fake, Hawaii was still a territory, his mom was 14, and we have even more issues to discuss. Most likely a typo. Better be anyway...

And if this still hasn't piqued your interest, perhaps this article will. Short and sweet, so it'll take you less than 5 minutes to read. Note the amount of comments.

You have a right to be skeptical, this is your country and it works because we follow laws, even if they are 232 years old. I'd prefer that Obama be a real US citizen, but I would like to have that proven beyond doubt, and currently, there is too much doubt. I shall remain skeptical on the matter, hoping that it's just another conspiracy theory like so many others; Roswell, JFK, moon landing, big foot, 9/11, and so on and so forth. The proof is in the pudding, so give us the pudding.

Foot in Mouth syndrome

2009-07-25T17:07:00.001-07:00

It's interesting to see Pres. Obama back-peddling so quickly on the Sgt. Crowley v. Prof. Gates issue. Let's be honest here; Obama made a jack ass of himself by jumping into a small local issue, not knowing the facts, rendering an opinion on the matter -- that the cops "acted stupidly" -- and thinking he would be safe in his position.

You can read the police report for yourself if that helps, but I'll also provide a gracious synopsis since we all know that clicking and reading would be too time consuming for most of us.

So, a nice neighbor of Professor Henry Louis Gates of Harvard called in a possible robbery in progress, also known as "breaking-and-entering" as she noted two men busting down the front door of her neighbor's house. Upon reaching the residence, Sgt. Crowley of the Cambridge Police Department (CPD) was intercepted by Lucia, the neighbor who called in the report, and she told him she saw two black men trying to enter the residence.

Sgt. Crowley then went to the residence, noted then Prof. Gates, and asked for ID to see if there was a correlation to the man in the house and the supposed owner of the place. (Remember, Crowley doesn't know who the owner looks like.) From there, race baiting begins immediately as Gates responds, "Why? Because I'm a black man in America?" He goes on to inform Sgt. Crowley that he "has no idea who [he's] messing with!"

When Crowley asked him to step outside to speak with him, Gates replied, "I'll speak with your mama outside..." Becoming louder and more angry, Sgt. Crowley eventually places Prof. Gates under arrest for disorderly conduct. The charges are quickly dropped, but the media's meat hooks are already deeply in.

Tell me, if you were in a similar circumstance, what would your response had been? If the officer was white, black, brown, or heliotrope? Let's put this into perspective even more: the door to your house is apparently jammed shut. You enlist someone else to help you bust it down. You make a lot of noise, maybe even swear because the friggin' thing won't open, but you finally smash it open. Suddenly, the cops are on the scene because someone reported a possible break-in. And an officer asks you for ID, and you say... Well at least you would be pleasant, right? I mean, it's the cops, with guns, tazers, handcuffs and the ability to haul your butt off to jail where fair beautiful people like me are traded for cheap commodities such as two half-smoked cigarette butts. *shudders*

Why Obama decided to get involved at all is perplexing to me -- it really could have been just a small footnote to an otherwise long day. But, Obama does have reasons to hate the Cambridge police department. While attending Harvard Law, Obama got 17 parking tickets in his 3 years there. He paid only two of them in 1990. He paid, or rather, the state of Illinois paid the remaining 15 a couple of years ago when Obama announced his bid for US President.

But let's get back to the real issue here, and that is one about racism. Prof. Gates had the uncanny luck of running into the police officer in charge of racial training for Cambridge. Not only that, a supporting officer at the scene, who is black, said Gates was acting strangely and that he supports the arrest 100%.

The point is that our president, adrift without facts, made an unnecessary judgment in favor of an apparent racist on an otherwise minor incident and in so doing, made himself out to be a fool now that many of the facts have come to light. Why would someone of paramount example to our nation do such a brash thing? Birds of a feather, perhaps? At first, Prof. Gates said he was going to sue the CPD for racial profiling. Since then, the CPD has come out and said they have the entire arrest on audio file, and not surprisingly, Prof. Gates now isn't so sure about his lawsuit. Not to worry, Prof. Gates, Sgt. Crowley is considering it for defamation.

And despite all this, Obama still hasn't properly back-tracked yet. Instead, he said that both parties may have "over-reacted" to the situation. The CPD says everything was done "by the book" so what more (or less) could have the police have done? Sure, Obama called Sgt. Crowley and invited him and Gates to the White House "for a beer," but this is way too drawn out. A simple, "my bad" would have sufficed -- end of story. And what I find truly odd is that Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson didn't jump on this. Maybe Obama usurped them. I dunno.

You can read an article that holds back no punches on the issue here, that delineates Obama to Gates and ultimately, racism. Worth a glance, if you are looking for a more in depth perspective.

Getting to the real news

2009-07-08T00:24:00.000-07:00

Will it ever end?! Seriously, I gave my tribute to Michael Jackson and the whole world should have taken note of my lead and ended it there. But no! Here we are, still going over every tidbit of his life as if we hadn't already lived it over the past +30 years. Let the dead bury the dead.

A few things have been happening in the world that were not covered enough. First and foremost, the US House of Representatives passed the Cap and Trade bill on June 26th. It now heads to the Senate to be voted on in September, and who are currently drafting their own version. What is this bill? Who really knows because it's +1300 pages long, with the last 300 pages added between 12am and 3am that Friday before they voted on it. No one has read the entire bill in Congress! Just like the stimulus bill which was quickly passed which no one had time to read, this bill is in that same boat. I'll tell you what I do know; the Cap-n-Trade is a taxing policy that allows companies to trade carbon credits if they go over their government mandated allowance of CO2. For example, if a certain manufacturer doesn't use up all the carbon credits allocated to them, they can trade them for money (or whatever -- favors?) to, say, a coal burning electric company who would obviously go over their amount. Basically, this would translate to higher electric costs for you, me and every building in this country.

It's a lot more than that as well. Actually, if you want the skinny on it, read this article for a huge enlightenment on this idiotic bill. Do me a favor, at least read the second paragraph of the above reference article. Warren Buffett, the second richest man in the world [worth ~40 billion dollars], who owns Hathaway Berkshire, stated that if this bill passes the Senate, there will be no economic recovery in the US. None. How scary is that? Obama has already promised to sign it into law, but make no mistake, this bill is about control and power-grabbing. Hopefully people will come to their senses before September, but now that Stuart Smalley - or Al Franken - gives the 60th vote in the Senate, there may be little we can do to stop it. Some estimates of the impact it'll have on the people is as little as $175 a year per family of four, and up to $1600 a year for a family of four. Here's my deal: either is bad during a prolonged recession! How is this going to help move the economy along? Obama stumped the day before that this is a "jobs bill" because alternative energy jobs will sky-rocket. Really? Well how many will lose jobs because of "trickle down" taxation? Idiots!

The next thing that happened was a "coup d'etat" in Honduras. The media has deliberately downplayed the real story here, and it is a story about people standing up for democracy. President Jose Manuel Zelaya was serving in his legally elected office when he decided the State Constitution didn't suit him anymore. He wanted to be elected into a 3rd term which is specifically illegal and immutable. The Supreme Court told him as much, as did their congress, and even then, the President does not have the authority to change the Constitution. But, he went ahead and tried to get new ballots printed up with his option. No one in the country would do it, but dictator for life Hugo Chavez of Venezuela was willing and did so, sent the newly minted ballots to Honduras. The Honduran Military got ahold of the shipment and held it captive. The President broke into the warehouse to get them. He then dismissed the head General of the military and started handing out the ballots. It was then that he was removed from office, put on a plane in his pajamas, and sent to Costa Rica. After that, the military immediately handed the officiating powers back to the people and elected officials. Not exactly a real coup d'etat in the strictest sense.

What happened then? The whole world denounced Honduras for standing up to a soon-to-be tyrant, and we [Obama and Sec. of State Clinton] sided with Castro and Chavez that President Zelaya should be reinstated. Ridiculous! The US, the bastion of freedom, chiding a country for upholding their near-identical Constitution to ours, because they over-threw a wannabe tyrant. What's the matter, Obama, afraid we're taking notes from our brave neighbors to the south?

Well, considering it is after 1:30 in the morning (I got up late and then took a nap...) I should probably be heading to bed. I did want to say that this week, gas prices actually went down. Somewhat good news, though the influx of extra money still hasn't flooding in yet either. Sure, that drop was .03 cents around here, and the Oregon congress just passed a bill increasing gas tax by .06 cents, so we'll lose that small perk anyway. Still, good news, and again, hopefully things will turn around so I can stop being an alarmist and go back to criticizing The Little Mermaid, which I saw again today, not surprisingly. Yes, I still hate that little hedonistic redhead. Meanwhile, my daughter adores her.

A missing piece of culture

2009-06-26T01:42:00.000-07:00

Well, you and the rest of the world should be informed by now that Michael Jackson, the World popstar and "King of Pop" died Thursday afternoon from cardiac arrest. He was 50 years old.

Few people are global icons. It takes a tremendous amount of talent, or power, to become a global icon, especially to the status attained by MJ, who really was talented in both catchy music and dancing abilities.

Lets be honest here, though, the last 15 years haven't been very good for him in terms of legalities and popularity. Twice he was hit with law suits alleging misconduct with underage boys, and he even admitted a few things that just weren't right, such as sleeping in a bed with young boys. Though never convicted, he was permanently tainted because of these issues. I'm not going to opine on whether he was a pedophile or not. But I will say that the US as a whole just lost a valid piece of Americana. Culturally we died a little today with MJ. It kinda feels like we can't have cheese burgers any more. Or maybe a tall glass of Coca-Cola. Gone. No more.

I guess what I am saying is that although he was weird, got caught up in lawsuits, was mostly plastic, and had more nose jobs than Mr. Potatohead, he was, in essence, an extension of the American Dream or Story -- going from relatively nothing, to proving his abilities, and then rising to the highest eschelon in human achievement by becoming a global super star. And even though I do not listen to his music (any more) nor have I ever bought any of his records, I do feel a sense of loss just because of his artistic abilities and the paramount that he achieved. Maybe it's calling to my artistic bones. I dunno. But for a moment, when I read the headline on CNN, it became a surreal moment for me, something I hadn't felt since 9/11. Maybe I just need to sleep on the matter.

Still, odd week no doubt. Ed McMahon, Farrah Fawcett, and then MJ. Deadpool, anyone?

New look and revamp

2009-06-18T19:42:00.000-07:00

I really did not like the standard greenery offered, even though I started this blog nearly a year ago. I guess that just goes to show you how engaged I am in this whole blogging business. Not even that, I said I'd change the blog name altogether, and I've thought about it at length, and at best came up with "Socks and Birkenstocks" since that seems like a prevalent theme up here in the Northwest, however, it is anathema to my position (i.e., socks and sandals do not mix). Still, cute name, n'est pas?

Now I don't have an issue with green -- after all, who could argue with a color that has such a rich history in camouflage? Not I. But this cleaner look seems to suit me better. Plus, a little blue here and there is soothing, and the older look was an eye sore. I admit that.

Not to make this post only about revamping the blog, but I did want to add that I did have another one of those dreams the other day. Hard to imagine with my sleeping routine in shambles.

---

In this dream, I was sitting next to two children; an adolescent of maybe 13 years, African American, and a younger boy, Caucasian of maybe 7 or 8 years of age. I was trying to carry on a conversation with both of them, but every few seconds, a new evil spirit would jump into the body of one of these two kids, and disrupt the flow of things. It was really annoying, to put it mildly, but the worst part was that I was rather immune to the whole plight. Instead of rebuking the demons, I would just point and order the evil spirit to be gone. Surprisingly, it was sorta working. Sorta.

Ever read the Sons of Sceva in the New Testament? I love this story. You can read it in Acts 19:13-16. I'll cite it below from the King James version:

13 Then certain of the vagabond Jews, exorcists, took upon them to call over them which had evil spirits the name of the Lord Jesus, saying, We adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth.
14 And there were seven sons of one Sceva, a Jew, and chief of the priest, which did so.
15 And the evil spirit answered and said, Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are ye?
16 And the man in whom the evil spirit was leaped on them, and overcame them, and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded.

This is pretty much what happened to me in the dream. These seven sons of Sceva saw Paul exorcise a demon in the name of Jesus Christ, and they thought that was pretty neat. So they found a possessed individual, and then had the audacity to say, "We adjure (command) you by Jesus as Paul did!" And that smart-aleck demon says, "Gee, I know Jesus, and I know Paul too. But who the hell are you?" And then he beat the crap out of them. Seven brothers versus one demon-stricken man, and they still lost. That gives you a sense of how much power the dark side has.

So here I am, lazily telling these demons to be gone by my own authority, and they playfully obey, but when I got upset that I couldn't carry a common conversation with these two youth, my supposed power back-fired, and just like in the scriptures, they leaped upon me, and as usual, went for my neck so I couldn't utter anything in my defense. These kids were strong, I couldn't make them move at all. Once again, I wake up gasping for air, wondering what the heck is going on around here. I immediately realized my folly -- arrogance and ego -- thinking I have control over something I clearly do not. And I find it odd because, usually, I know what to do. But this time, I felt somewhat entitled and I am not sure why.

At least I have an opportunity to reflect on the matter. And yes, when I'm lazy I do wear socks with sandals. Classy!

How it goes down

2009-06-17T10:40:00.001-07:00

Been a while, no? Well, my apologies. Though I am now unemployed, I still find ample opportunity to not have time to post here. How do I do it? Simple, really. First, my new daughter keeps me from sleeping soundly, then my other daughter keeps me busy during the day, then my allergies keep me from breathing, but then my doctor gives me new allergy medicine but doesn't tell me the major side effect is indigestion followed with abrupt diarrhea. In a way, it makes an unfortunate inharmonious lifestyle that I have yet to master.

Moving on.

Yes, I am still on a political kick, though it has subsided somewhat. Still, since that is my current modus operandi, let's continue along that path, shall we?

I've posted some rather doomsday-ish fodder for the USA in previous posts, but one has to ask what the final catalyst for the ending will be. So henceforth, I'll go into my opinion as to what will happen. Mind you, it is speculation at best so let's not be quick with the "crazy nut job" name calling.

What is the most likely cause of death for us? If you look at statistics, then heart disease would be the most prevalent human killer, at least in the US. Followed by cancer, and then a myriad of other medical complications such as diabetes, liver disease, etc. All of these illnesses come from within your body. They are not extrinsic such as car accidents or homicide, both of which are very low on the likely cause of death scenario.

Such is the case for the US. Our problem is from within. Great nations are not killed, they commit suicide. Since the turn of the 20th century, when the Federal government made the first income tax, up to the present, the founding principles have been eroded away on one law after another, extensively through the New Deal and the Great Society, and of course, right now. And for the most part, good people stood by and watched. Meanwhile, the populous as a whole became complacent and even worse, entitled. This wouldn't be so bad except that we couldn't really afford it as a country. This is evidenced today as we topped 10 trillion in national debt last year, and by some estimates, will be over 14 trillion before the end of Obama's first term.

But the national debt doesn't matter, right? We owe it to ourselves! Well, sorta. Here's what we do know; every year there is a Federal deficit, typically several hundred billion. We sell treasure bonds to offset this difference. Because as a country we have a AAA rating, that means anyone can buy our bonds and be repaid in the future. So, we hold a bake sale, and the lowest percentage bidder gets top priority. Countries, corporations/banks, and private individuals get a chance at these bonds. China has about a trillion dollars of our debt. Japan and England have about half a billion each, and the rest we own, mostly. This deficit is also offset by robbing from Medicare/caid. See, we are overtaxed just a bit on that program, so the government writes an IOU to Medicare for the rest and uses that money for the deficit first, then goes to the bonds.

So what happens when you have a deficit that is 1.7 trillion dollars and during a recession? Well, the potential buyers are fewer, and not only that, the amount of risk is higher too. This is what is happening right now. No one is buying our substantial debt. So what do you do to pay the bills? You make more money. In this case, literally, print off more. This causes inflation, obviously, and we're seeing it start now. Gas prices always go up in the summer because of demand. But this year, demand will be a lot lower because less people are working and, thus, going on trips -- we have lost +600,000 jobs every month since September except for May, which lost only 350,000 jobs. Gas has gone up almost $1.20 since the beginning of this year, and the major reason is to offset the diminished value of the dollar. It is only a matter of time before everything else catches up, if based solely on rising gas costs alone.

So here it comes. The cost of everything will slowly creep up, then quickly creep up as manufacturers try to mitigate the cost of production while maintaining a profit. So imagine working a job that pays $2,000 a month, only to have the price of milk at the beginning of the month be $2, and at the end of the month $3.50, then the following month $4, and so on and so forth. In a word, this is called hyper-inflation, and it is not out of the question.

Next comes rejection of taxes. After all, why pay taxes if they are just going to squander it on another failed program and make life even more miserable. Ever wonder why the president thinks we need national health care RIGHT NOW, in the middle of a recession? Another program that will require $1.6 trillion dollars to fund? How about we balance the budget, find a way to pay for it, then implement it after we know our funding? The people will revolt from paying taxes.

But that's just a side order to the real problem. In the trenches, people will be starving because the cost to live will be outrageous, coupled with possible food rationing and food riots. And since we've turned some fields into bio fuel production, it means we have just a little bit less for everyone (not to mention we feed people throughout the world with our superior farming techniques). Self-sufficiency will be paramount, but little good will that do you with all the armed armadas searching for food for their families. Maybe this is where that Corp that Obama wanted will come into play. This Corp was part of the GIVE Act that recently passed.

Let's go back to those Treasury bonds. Imagine if you were China and now hyper-inflation has surpassed your locked-in annual percentage rate. Every day that trillion dollar investment is worth less and less. Fortunately for the US, the bonds are only back by the dollar, a fiat system, and not the land or other resources. But if I were China, and I was losing trillion dollars, and my 35 million man army was bored, you could bet your bottom bond note that something would happen to make good on that investment. Besides, 1.4 billion people should be allowed to expand somewhere, and since the US would be broke... I should clarify that China does not have 35 million men in the military -- but it does have 35 million more men than women by population statistics. It does, however, have the largest military in the world, regardless.

If China, or some other country did attack the US, it would be a real boon for Obama, because then we are literally looking at a WWII situation here -- a national unifier to pull us all together against a common enemy, revamp our manufacturing base, and get us out of the recession. China has nothing to lose because they could easily take Taiwan back, maybe a few other places (perhaps even get parts of Japan or help North Korea gain access over South Korea) and then expend several million men if not for the sole reason of getting rid of extra mouths to feed.

At this point, I'd like to remind everyone (all 4 of you) that this is just speculation. And yes, I did have to run to the bathroom during an emergency encounter with my last meal moments ago. But I feel better, and I think I can jump higher now too. Less weight to deal with.

Part of the reason I see this all happening (and that last bit about China is not what I expect to happen -- just put it in there to scare ya a little) is that even if this recession ends, say, tomorrow, there is still the problem with the Federal government printing up over a trillion dollars worth of inflation. Worse is the probability that this deficit will not being funded next year either, with national health care costs added on top. Goods are going to cost more. This will either push the above mentioned scenario, or, potentially set up a global backed currency. Most likely both as the government will tell us it is the only way to get out of this recession, kinda like what happened with the stimulus bills, eh?

Lots of experts and economists are telling investors to buy gold, which is $930 an ounce as of yesterday. I'd sooner tell those of us who earn less than several hundred thousand a year to buy food and a way to defend yourself. Gold is expensive, and heavy, and not edible. Buy rice and Top Ramen -- just add heat and water and you have a decent meal. Plus, it is cheap to buy right now.

Well, I am sure this is enough doomsday shenanigans for today. Be mindful, watch for the clues, and also, prepare yourself just in case. Better safe than sorry, even if I am just babbling -- you know you still like Top Ramen anyway...

Paved with good intentions

2009-05-21T23:36:00.001-07:00

So I've discussed my thoughts on why socialism is not a good thing. Fair enough. Now lets look at the people themselves who uphold it.

In my opinion, they fall into two categories; 1) are those with clear intentions that socialism is the answer, and 2) those that are "sheeple," a new term conjunctive of sheep + people. These are the ones that "drink the Kool-Aide." More on this latter.

On the first category, we have people that have a penchant for Marxism and an envious eye towards supposedly successful socialized states, such as France, Germany, etc. They are not typically active Christian faith, but they do have a faith -- a faith that the government can fix mans problems; poverty, health care, education, war, etc. Every time a socialist government arises, somehow the perpetrators think that "this time, we will be successful because we are smarter, wiser, and gosh darnit, sheeple like us!" But, people are not perfect (heh, we killed the only perfect one!), and with that imperfection comes imperfect government -- every single time. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

And thus, the situation never improves.

So, looking at those "improved" programs... when capitalism is in full swing, unemployment hovers around 5%. Do you know what the medium unemployment rate is for socialised countries? 10%. What's that? Yes, it creats more poverty instead of curing it. Why not? Unemployment benefits are extended, so why bother working if you get a long hand-out. The Stimulus bill extended unemployment benefits in the US, how cool is that? I'll be drawing it in a week. Guess I can't complain too much.

How about that glorious state driven health care? Many countries in Europe are actually pushing for more privatized health care because it has been a castastrophy. Ever wonder why Canadians come to the US for surgeries? Because it takes too long to get it done up North. We go to them for perscriptions, they come to us for treatment. Kind of a fair trade, I assume. We already nag about waiting 3 hours in an ER room, yet Britain just celebrated the fact that they got the wait to under 18 hours recently. Here's Canada's average, 20 hours 48 minutes.

Here's the real deal: instead of your doctor making the choices, he'll have to remand it to the state, which will be inundated with requests, which will bog the system down, and then some accountant will be doing cost analysis on your request. Finally, a decision will come back and if it was a mastectomy and this took more than 2 months for the turnaround (which is fast for socialized medicine, FYI), well, might as well be a death sentence. That cancer has probably moved on to other organs by now.

I'm not going to talk about all those programs I first highlighted above, but the point is, there are people who have studied and promote socialism despite all the ills it brings to the table. As a matter of fact, we call these people liberals which is a huge misnomer for them. Liberal, from the same cognate as Liberty, meaning, freedom. Make no mistake, it does not free you from anything except responsibility. They now go by "progressives", but they are Statists -- people who support government as the ultimate elixir -- the cure-all for mans ills. These people are educated at some of the finest institutes in the country. They deny truth and facts, and go on good feelings. Well, Hitler made people feel good too, and we all know where that got us.

The Statist has good intentions, and I mean that. They want to help the poor, impoverished, unhealthy, uneducated, and so forth, but they mean to do so at someone else's expense, punishing the actual people that keep the country running and the government in power. This is where the second teer of statists come in. They go to a "democrat" rally and feel energized that he or she can actually do something to help with these world wide problems, and all they really have to do is vote for such a candidate who has an agenda to fix it all. This is called 'drinking the Kool-Aide,' because all you have to do is agree and not think -- that's been done for you. They agree on upping the taxation to be "fair," even though 40% don't actually pay taxes at all. Isn't it fair when we all participate? And that's where the Statist falls off. They don't think beyond the feelings. They do not find the truth of the matter, even though they may be college educated. But let's look at college education these days.

What do you really learn in college these days? Analytical skills? Not so much, unless you go to law, and even then you're not expounding beyond the set plays of the instructor, unless you enjoy jeorpodizing your grades. I was told by a professor that we "needed to be careful who we voted for this election," because " they were talking about bringing back the draft." Which caused audible 'gasps.' Who would do such a thing? I found out it was two democrats who were drafting the bill. This teacher was a liberal, but withheld information in an attempt to sway ideas. I looked it up. Did anyone else in the class? Doubtful. Sure, just one instance of a few, but you aren't taught to think, but just regurgitate "facts" onto a multiple choice test with answers that align with the professor's beliefs. Then you flush it out of your brain and make room for the next class. Seriously, that's what we do.

Moving on.

I've been reflecting upon a quote recently, and it is a great quote. You know it all to well. It is based upon the American Dream in some regards. To quote isn't actually his -- he got it from a school master during his youth, but that doesn't matter. He immortalized it. And he was a democrat back when they were not socialists, but the other side of the coin in an honorable society:

"Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country!"
-Pres. John F. Kennnedy

Beautiful. Name one democrat that espouses that ideology today? This is a democrat making an anti-Statist statement. Unless, expanding the government is what you think you can do for your country, but let's talk about that.

The Constitution does not grant the US Government to right to set up programs; it deliberately defers that right to the states themselves, as outlined in the Bill of Rights (e.g., Amendments #9 & #10). This means that Social Security (bankrupt), Medicare/caid (bankrupt), Education (always cutbacks), and soon Healthcare, are all unconstitutional. We're being taxed for things that are not even supported by our founding fathers in the Constitution. And the Statists are pushing for even more.

Okay, lets leave the side tangents for a bit and get back to the topic; "The road to hell is paved with good intentions." It certainly is. The Statist has good intentions for the most part as noted above. Then are some, as cited in the new Batman movie, when Alfred is talking to Bruce about the character of men, and, "some of them just like to see the world burn." Socialism is certainly a segue to that. Remember, when you've perfected socialsim, you have communism. And what stopped communism from taking over Europe? Capitalism -- the US. It's what got us into Vietnam, trying to stop the flow of evil ideology. And it is evil because people are evil. Imagine what'll happen once we're binded with socialism. Think of all the places in the world where the US has stopped aggression; Korea, Tawain, Israel, and I know that the US threatened Nicaragua from invading the military-less Costa Rica back in the 1950s. I bet there are lots of similar circumstances.

Socialized Europe looks promising, but it is rotting away. Their cultures are eroding from within, because they cannot sustain growth, and I mean that both economically and citizenry. They are burdened with too many programs, and not enough producers (i.e., taxable citizens). The natural birth rate is 1.38. In order to sustain itself, a country needs 2.11. The US is 2.11 with illegal immigration. No country has survived from 1.3 birth rate. The German Federal Statistical Office recently stated that by 2050, Islam will be the majority in their state (oh, Islam has an 8.1 birth rate in Europe). Do you know why they stated that? It's too late for Germany. It's too late for Russia as well. Illegals in the US have similar statistics.

This is what happens to socialized countries. They lose borders, they lose their health, they lose their wealth, they lose the will to produce because after a while, we all feel the need for entitlement. We cease to have absolute truths and everything becomes "relative." Not your place to judge between rights and wrong. Not only that, we cease to have a religious following.

Socialism basically started in the US in 1932, when FDR took office and vastly expanded the government. It was reitereated with LBJ's "Great Society" and Carter's push with CRA and controlling money loaning. Clinton tried a few things, but was a centrist and failed at health care, but did push harder with the CRA ordeal. Bush gave the government more power with the Patriot Act, which was a honest idea until it was used against citizens as the recent DHS report demonstrated. And now we have a true Statist disciple in power, taking advantage of a crisis, knowing full well of his intentions, and seeking to reface the US. Most likely it'll be a bloodless coup, because the drinks of apathy are aplenty, besides, who's willing to die for a cause anymore? Again, entitlement already -- I have so much more to lose than those forefathers 230 years ago.

And I'd miss my shows... among other things.

I apologize for the randomness of this post. Upon reflection, it is an atrocity. But, it is late, I have work tomorrow, and I'm just going to skip editing altogether. Fish through it as you like.

So what's the problem here?

2009-05-02T17:30:00.000-07:00

Ya know, I'm sorry my recent posts have not been the light-hearted diatribes from yesteryear. And I'll try to get back on that track as soon as possible. But, while this nation is heading off track, I figured it was time we did some critical thinking about socialism, and why it isn't a good idea. After all, many nations do subscribe to socialism, and we don't hear much issue with that, right?

Recognizing that 53% of the populace voted to put Obama into power, one has to wonder whether they actually knew what they were asking for.

So, socialism, if we could make it a simplistic explanation, it is government owned corporations and industry. Or, in other words, the government owning, say, GM, or the banks, or Amtrak... not that unimaginable, eh? Communism, on the other hand, is the government basically owning everything, including your daily routine. (Although I heard a quote, "Once you've perfected socialism, you have communism.")

I probably do not need to tell you what capitalism is, save for the example the US is and has become the most successful nation in the history of the world based on its model.

Let's go back, way back before we remember. To do this, we need to admit there is a God. Yes, we're getting preachy now. Get some popcorn and enjoy the ride.

There either is or is not a Divine Being. For the sake of this post, there is. In Jeremiah 1:9, God tells him he knew him before he was in the womb. In Revelations 12 we read that the Devil warred with the angels in heaven and was cast out with 1/3 of the hosts of heaven. What were they fighting over? Ideology. Specifically, how things we going to be run here on earth. Let's assume that there are two plans for the future inhabitants on the new Earth; one person says he'll save everyone by controlling them, and the other says he will die so everyone is saved if they choose to accept God. Nevertheless, they can choose whatever they want, but the option to return to God is through his sacrifice.

Hard to choose, would you not agree? One guy, Lucifer (son of the morning light) wants everyone to live in his utopia-esque world, and the other angel named Emanuel (God is with him) offers free will. Either could be the plan of salvation, but only one can be selected. So what's a campaigner to do? Convince as many as possible to accept your plan over the other, thus a war ensued. Maybe it was just a propaganda war, politics as usual, but suffice it to say, one was selected, and my guess is the other party was a sore loser, and was thus cast out.

Let's look at the one that was chosen; Christ's plan. It is obvious we have free will, as no one is dictating to you what you should be doing -- you have that option to select between right and wrong. Coincidentally, all humans are born with the ability to make moral decisions, if it were not so, our sense of reasoning would be on par with common animals. But we know we shouldn't steal, lie, rape or kill. We can desensitize ourselves to it, however, and make it a pleasure as well, but the inherent bad feeling strikes us all universally. From there, you form yourself, or character. (Uhm, side tangent there...)

So, I think we can agree that Christ won, the redemption plan went into effect and Lucifer became Satan, that mighty Devil leading a 1/3 host of heaven on Earth against us. I see it as a loser mentality and heavily influenced by "misery loves company" but also integrating an alternative plan; if enough of the people fail Christ's plan, maybe we'll get another chance at our plan. It doesn't matter really, the point is we're in the first accepted plan and whatever comes afterwards isn't part of this discussion.

If we opine on Lucifer's plan, it was, in essence, the foundation for Communism. We can assume that his plan was the opposite of the winner's plan; freedom to chose. So in my conclusion, Lucifer proposed a communist pseudo-utopia society where everyone was mandated to obey laws that guaranteed a path back to God. Oh, and by default that would have made him the Christ. Still, no one could not chose eternal life -- there is no deviating from the law. You do not choose anything, the government would determine what was best for you and the utopia to salvation.

Let's get back to our world and the facts we do know. You can get to communism without socialism, but it takes massive blood letting of the people. Take, for example, Russia in 1918, or China late 1940's. In China, they were still rejecting communism until the "Cultural Revolution" wherein 20 million people perished and the long traditions of China were erased. [read: Spiral Road]

And here we have the Great USA. If you've been a part of the USA, then you know it is a blessed country, despite the current inhabitants. Looking at the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights, there is no leap of faith to determine that this country was based on Judeo-Christian beliefs. Sure, people have tried to split hairs on certain points, but the fundamental premise is there; thank God for helping us make this great country. Not only that, but the government was set up to be a limited entity that protected the rights of its people. Why would they do that? Because they knew that men are free to make their own decisions and that the more laws you make, the more indentured the citizens become to their governments. And looking at the tenth amendment, seems they wanted to keep the federal government limited indefinitely.

The problem with socialism is that it is the stepping stone to Lucifer's original plan -- to enslave the masses with laws upon laws. America is different, we started out free and used that to build up a great nation because we understood our respective responsibilities and accountability. But ever so slowly, more and more laws keep piling up, and if we wanted, we could say that it is because the nucleus of a successful nation is falling apart; the family. We'll save that topic for another time.

Still, with our new president in power, the process of implementing socialism is speeding up quickly as I cited above; the government is seeping into many industries in the country such as housing, auto, banking, credit, charities, and so forth. Now I am not saying Obama is Lucifer or the anti-Christ, because then anyone with a penchant for big controlling government is an anti-Christ and some people just aren't that smart. (he, he!) But what I can tell you is that socialism is not a functioning, thriving government that will benefit any country because it continues to suck away the rights of free men (and women).

Then, what is so appealing about socialism? It is a narcissist dream come true. You don't have to do anything because someone else is doing that for you. Bum on the street? No problem, they have a program for relief. Behind on bills? The government has someone to step in to help. Losing your job? The government will have a program to fix that, either through a union or unemployment. Health care? The government will get you what you need. And so on and so forth. What are you accountable for? What's your responsibility? You don't have to worry about that, someone will be assigned in lieu of you. Of course, you will be taxed for all these defunct programs laden with corruption, and that, too, will minimize your freedom.

Of course, people look for the easiest route to travel. And socialism is certainly that fork in the road more easily traveled. You can claim that Europe has been successfully using socialism for years, but none of them are older than our successful capitalism. Sure, the countries have been around since before the USA, but their respective governments have changed ample times since the end of the 18th century. And, their hands are tied. They do not have the ability the US does to produce wealth and enrich lives because of their government.

And that brings me to perhaps my last point, the death of the American Dream. Obama seems to think that he only needs to tap the top 5% of Americans to make his USA into a socialistic utopia, and this is deceitful. In order for it to work, we all have to give up bits and pieces of freedom -- not all at once -- just small amounts here and there. Because socialism isn't just about money, it's more about control. Money just happens to bring control, but if you have control, then comes even more money.

So there you pretty much have my thoughts on socialism -- it is the end of progress and more succinctly, the end of the productive USA and the freedoms paid for in blood by our forefathers, blessed with divine insight to set up the best country in this world based on a plan founded before the world was inhabited. And it is hard to fathom how this country should end; the same as its inception, or with a slow, pathetic whimper... It could be the sad end note to a great book either way you look at it.

Food and bullets, my friends, food and bullets. Put your faith in God and keep your powder dry.

Nice hand basket! Where are we going?

2009-04-20T20:37:00.001-07:00

I have so much to comment on, yet, with that most recent Department of Homeland Security brief that was published onto the web one day before the national Tea Parties, I have become more reticent to post anything online. After all, I am now a Right Wing Extremist. That report neatly lumped me into groups such as Neo-Nazis, WASP, and all those other radicals I detest. How quaint.

I have come to a conclusion about Obama. I know, I was going to give him a chance, as stated in a previous post, and I did. We've seen almost 100 days of him parading around, and to put it mildly, he's vigorously disgusted me. Yes, that makes me a racist now, too.

Ask yourself this; how much do you actually know about the current president? If you're like 90% of the rest of the population, then your response should be "little to nothing." Does that concern you, a bit? It should. First, it tells you that the news agencies probably didn't do a good job with their investigative journalism. Based on my own research, which may not be accurate because of the lacking details (i.e., no facts to base information on) I believe that Obama is a Muslim Communist. Yeah, I know, sounds completely loony. I understand that. I was aghast with my conclusion as well. So let's see what we do have, and you can make your own judgment call...

I'm not even going to go over whether he was actually born in the US. Although if you are curious about that issue, there is currently a case going to the Supreme Court with that argument in mind. 120 soldiers have attached their name to this case because they question his right to be president. Coincidently, 4 people say they saw his birth -- they all live in Kenya and are under a gag order by the government which is controlled by... Obama's cousin.

Obama was born to Stanley Ann Dunham (yes, that's her real name) who was the daughter of well known communists who originally resided in the mid-west until moving to Seattle, and finally, Hawaii. Obama's father is proportedly Barak Hussien Obama, Sr., a Muslim on an exchange program from Kenya, which at this point is a British controlled providence. Both Stanley Ann and Obama Sr. go to the same university and I think we can guess what happens thereafter.

Obama's mother leaves him to be raised by her parents as she goes off to pursue college back in Washington and she occasionally sees him during his younger years. Eventually, she marries Lolo Soetoro, a man from Indonesia who adopts Barak and he attends a Wahhabi Muslim school funded by Saudi Arabia. One of the few things we have on Obama is a report card from that school which lists his religion as "Islam." Subsequently, the curriculum includes studying the Koran and learning Arabic, which he does well.

The marriage breaks apart, Barak returns to Hawaii and once again lives with his grandparents, plays basketball and does a lot of drugs, seriously. He graduates from high school and heads to Occidental college. One thing that really bothers me, especially for someone who promised "transparency and openness" is the overt lack of documentation from Obama. Or in other words, we have no transcripts from Occidental, Comumbia or Harvard Law on this guy, which are the colleges he attended. But there is an underlying recurrance; in all three colleges, his roommates were Muslim exchange students. So what is he hiding here?

When the media attacked Bush in 2004 as 'not being an intellectual', in the process, they found out that Kerry got worse grades than Bush at their respective Ivy League schools. Similarly, they have said that Obama is smart and articulate, yet, no records to verify this at all...

Before Obama heads to Harvard Law, he works in Chicago as a "community organizer" and work in conjunction with ACORN. This is also where he mets Bill Ayers for the first time. Bill Ayers being the communist heading the Weather Underground movement, culpable for bombing several places throughout the US and thus spent time in hiding for several years. Perhaps Bill convinced him to go into law, but somehow, Obama gets into Harvard Law, which requires a 98% on the LSAT and a 3.8 GPA, plus, lots of money. After a $20 million dollar donation by the Saudi Government to Harvard, Obama ... gets in.

After Harvard, Obama joins a local law firm in Chicago, but apparently spends most of his time writing his book, Dreams of my Father -- never sets foot into a court room, never really litigates a case at all. But he does get involved with politics. As a matter of fact, he tries for the State Senate seat on the "New Party" ticket. That new party was in fact, a social democratic party. Sounds nice, but it's just another way for saying "communist." Now why would he run on that party? Birds of the feather, flock together.

He runs on the New Party ticket twice, with all other candidates either being removed on technicalities, or, they decide not to run any more. Strange? Sure, especially since it happened two times in a row. The next time he's running as a democrat. Why the change? Greener pastures, I presume. But what did he do in the Senate? How about this; he proposed November 1st as Muslim Community Day for Illinois. How about supporting a law requiring food manufacturers to prepare food according to [Muslim] Shariah law? And then a long list of bills that are pro-abortion, gun control, the usual suspects.

From the State Senate, as we all know, he goes into the US Senate and is voted one of the top liberal Senators on the floor. Then, somehow, this junior senator with little experience but a golden smile (and I do like his smile), defeats all these veterans of politics and is now the most powerful man in the world, giving out apologies like Halloween candy, and bowing to the King of a nation that funded his early childhood education. Now, what does it mean when you bow and it is not recipricated? Even King Abdullah said in 2005 that only his slaves and harems bow to him. What message was Obama giving to the King...

Anyway, there is so much more on this guy that you will not believe your eyes. If you have the time, and are seriously interested in the future of this nation, then read this. It is very long, but the future is written in history, and he has a lot to answer for already.

My 4 loyal readers, I am serious when I say that I am hesitant to write any more online. Conservative Americans are the next target because we pose the biggest threat to his presidency -- not outside foes that he's been placating over the past 2 months. You're going to see more "change" in this country over the next 52 weeks than we've seen in 52 years. Obama is a charlatan, and his colors of tyranny will shine through.

I said he was a Muslim Communist, but those two ideologies cannot coexist. So my belief is that Obama's true goal is to undermine the US either using one or the other. Once the US world police ceases to exist, you can probably say good bye to South Korea, Taiwan, Israel, the Baltic States, and any other country that's been waiting for the boy scouts to disappear. I believe Obama is that man who will deliver that kind of "hope and change."

Sorry if I sound like a right wing extremist. But do your home work, and tell me what you find. Convince me otherwise, I dare you.

"Nobody died when Clinton lied"

2009-04-04T14:22:00.000-07:00

I love bumper stickers. True, I am too much of a perfectionist to slap one on my car -- it just makes the car look less nice -- but I certainly enjoy reading other people's ugly car decals. I saw one today that said, "Stop global whining!" I thought it was well delivered.

The one that I'd like to comment on is found in the title of this post. It comes from the W. presidency and relates to the Iraq war, and that Bush supposedly lied to get us into war. Now, there are a plethora of arguments regarding that assumption, and I've briefly lit upon them before in a previous post, but you can find even more reasons here. However, that's not the reason I am making this post. In fact, I intend to prove that people did die due to Clinton's lie, albeit in a roundabout sort of way.

Al Qaeda (i.e., meaning, 'the base') have been officially around since 1988, causing problems for lots of people in many countries. Sadly, we helped support the mujaheddin fighters in Afghanistan to defeat the Russians who afterwards would then build the foundation for the Al Qaeda network. Osama bin Ladin took issue with the US once we laid foot in Saudi Arabi in an effort to defeat Iraq the first time. The "land of two mosques" (Medina and Mecca) was defiled by infidels when we sought to help Kuwait. Yeah, I know, it's just a bunch of sand.

Anyway, in the 1990s, under President Clinton's 2 consecutive terms in office, the Al Qaeda network attacked us several times. The first major attack is one we rarely hear about any more; the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. According to some, the tactic they used (a cubetruck full of explosives) was a CIA style idea which, again, we taught them. It killed 6 people, injured over a thousand and caused +$300 million in damages. The intent was to force one tower to collapse into another and potentially kill hundreds of thousands of people. Thankfully, it didn't happen.

Look at it this way; a group of 200-300 operatives, in less than 4 years, was able to get into the US, buy nearly a ton of explosives, and execute a decent plan of attack. Did we retaliate? Well, we prosecuted those involved, and deported some (one of which was acquited in Jordan and released), but where is the Special Forces group going into the terrorist training camp and eliminating subjects? Right, we wouldn't hear about that. Still, in 1998, Al Qaeda has the gall to bomb us again, twice. So if we did punish them at all, it certainly didn't bat an eye for them.

Two US Embassys in Tanzania and Kenya are blown to smithereens in 1998, and 300 people die in that process. We did respond with cruise missiles, but we managed to bomb a pharmacuetical facility which made 50% of the medicine for Sudan. After an investigation, it was determined that our intelligence was "faulty." An after report stated our efforts did not deter the Al Qaeda network. If anything, blowing up a country's medical supplies may have bolstered recruits.

But in 1998, the US is busy with allegations towards President Clinton and a certain intern. Words like "impeachment" and "what the definition of 'is,' is?" were floating around. Suspected cigars and stained dresses is the focus of the media of the Lewinski scandal (also of note, Jennifer Flowers and Paula Jones). Here's my main crux; Senator John Glenn was the first American in space back in the 1960s. Later he gets into politics and becomes a US Senator from Ohio in 1974. He also happens to be heading the Senate Committee in charge of the investigations against the president. Remember what happens then? At 77 years old, NASA decides to send him back into space. Why? Even gets a standing ovation during a State of the Union address by Bill Clinton for being the "oldest person going into space." And Bill Clinton retains his position despite perjury and (obviously) tarnishing the office of the presidency. Sure, sure, Nixon, Andrew Johnson, etc. But Nixon had the dignity to resign! (And the law used against Andrew Johnson was deemed unconstitutional later.)

Yemen, July of 2000 we have a Navy ship, the USS Cole refueling at a local port. Then, 2 suicide bombers ram into the side of the ship, causing a 40 x 60 foot hole and killing 17 sailors in the process, wounding even more. Here's what Bill Clinton said, "If, as it now appears, this was an act of terrorism, it was a despicable and cowardly act. We will find out who was responsible and hold them accountable". But nothing happened. Actually, it wasn't until President Bush's start that they even definitively said that it was actually Al Qaeda, even though Al Qaeda claimed it.

A little over a year later, the twin towers actually do come down, as Al Qaeda had planned back in 1993. In 1996, there was a bombing of the Khobar tower in Saudi Arabia that killed 19 servicemen from the US. Images of Osama bin Laden being congratulated were circulating around shortly thereafter, so the connection leading up to 9/11 would have been, at least from my perspective, a little obvious. Is it so obvious now that we've been in Afghanistan and Iraq? No, we've really put a beating on them. However, after reading Mark Steyn's book America Alone, maybe not.

Nonetheless, if perhaps had John Glenn not been bought out, and had he and others done their jobs, we could have moved on quicker from the impeachment and focused on pending issues such as the growing strength of the Al Qaeda. Maybe if Clinton hadn't cut the Department of Defense to 3% of the GDP, we would have been more astute. And a hundred more maybe's and if's as well. The point is that because of the long and drawn out political scandal, if Clinton hadn't lied about every little detail before the truth was finally brought forth, maybe we could have saved lives, maybe even a war or two, and could have been in a different place altogether. This is, of course, just conjecture. But it would be nice to know...

In passing remarks...

2009-03-19T18:52:00.000-07:00

Sadly, today I do not have anything thought provoking to share with you all. Yeah, sometimes life is a little more simpler than other days. That is not to say I didn't engage in deep thought --no, I've got some things mulling over in the back of my mind (still).

However, I would like to give a shout out to the malevolent flock of birds, who were deservedly cursed with a chronic case of dysentery. For reasons unbeknownst to me, they altered their bombing run to graciously intersect with my poor, poor car. I am sure there are some yucki-yucks in NYC that would call it art, or maybe even PETA would harold it as animals getting even. But seriously, what on earth did these friggin' birds eat, poo?! Which led to this conclusion; it was a stork carrying a new born whose diaper had fallen off mid-flight. And that filthy little baby browned-out over my car. It could happen!

I am open to other theories on the matter.

Makes me thankful that pigs do not, in fact, fly, as has been mentioned many times... Or did the cow [pie] jump over the moon?

Have a good Spring Break!

Lacking Character of a King

2009-03-07T13:01:00.000-08:00

I've had ample things to write about lately, but I just couldn't formulate one into an actual post here. I know, I know, many of you go without sleep between my random postings, and I am sorry for your chronic insomnia. I shall try to be as weekly as possible.

Lately I've been on this political kick, as a few of my previous posts have dictated. I'll change gears ever so slightly today.

Today, I'd like to opine on race. *gasp!*

A few of weeks ago, the New York Post printed a cartoon that I thought was pretty funny. You may have seen it; two cops in the caption have just gunned down a chimpanzee, and one of them says, "Uh oh, who's gunna write the stimulus bill now?" I am paraphrasing a little, could have been worded differently, but I liked it! Why? Because, that same week a chimp named Travis was shot to death by Connecticut police officers after the primate literally tore the face off a lady. Coincidentally, that same week, Pelosi, Reid and a host of democrat-only participants finalized a $787 billion dollar stimulus plan, which ultimately was a democrat sponsored wet-dream, laden with thousands of earmarks, including a $30 million dollar grant for preserving the white marsh mouse, located just north of Pelosi's home town of San Francisco. Not to mention Reid's $8 billion dollar light rail from LA to LV.

Anyway, though I didn't recognize it, thankfully Al Sharpton and other racist seekers found it, boosted it throughout the media, and held protests in front of the NY Post building. Despite receiving an apology, Sharpton has asked the FCC to conduct investigations into The Post, my guess is for other supposed racist remarks? I don't know, investigate what, exactly?

Now, allow me to pontificate from my perch that I am not a racist in the overt sense that we hear alleged all too often these days. Actually, I don't believe you can dissent from Obama without being labeled a racist, which neatly keeps us in line. Still, I think that just about everyone has some form of racism within themselves, but not in a disparaging sort of way -- more like a concern of not knowing the culture, a fear of strangers, etc.

But here's my main point, specifically aimed at Al Sharpton and his ilk -- I'm not afraid of the color of his skin, I am afraid of the content of his character. I, like many others, didn't see racism in the cartoon, but he saw a dead monkey and considered it racism. So who is the racist here? The cartoon implies that the stimulus could be written by monkeys, perhaps a million monkeys typing, but now we're one short (not to worry, Pelosi, Reid, et al. made up the difference). A monkey had been killed that went feral and attacked a human. Obama didn't write one stupid page of that 1,100 "stimulus" bill, he ultimately signed it, but that came after the cartoon was printed. To draw parallels to racism is a huge leap from the actual facts on hand, and invokes old racist stereotypes to persist.

Moreover, go ahead and type into The Google 'George Bush + monkey' and you will get about 1 million hits, and on the front page you should see the face of Bush merged into the head of a monkey. Furthermore, there are plenty of racist remarks towards Condi Rice that were never addressed by Shaprton and crew. And right now, the Jews are getting hammered because of this recent Gaza incident. Meanwhile, the Mexicans are on the back-burner as well as the Arabs.

Perhaps it is wrong of me to conclude, but I kinda feel like the African American race card is being pulled to keep us in check, make us hyper-vigilant, refill Sharpton's coffers and provide more political sway. I mean, seriously, Obama is president with nearly 53% of the vote, Oprah is the richest woman in the world, and the majority of our sport stars are black. And I have no qualms with that (well, aside from Obama driving us towards socialism...). But seriously, Colin Powell was my write-in for President. Or was it me? Or that old guy? Again, goes back to content of character. And this fear mongering puts me at odds, especially when no race issue was there to begin with. The "Reverend" Sharpton is the antithesis to what Dr. King preached over 40 years ago, and that concerns me greatly.

History repeating itself

2009-02-17T18:56:00.000-08:00

As some of you know, I have a penchant for history, probably one of the main reasons I keep a journal, a journal for my daughter, a blog, and poop nonsense. Hey, it's all gotta go somewhere.

Imagine my delighted surprise when parallels where delineated between Plato's The Republic and our current steady demise. I'll put in the bulk of the matter, and the rest you all can read at the appropriate website.

***

On the surface, and to most reviewers of Plato's writings, the Republic is a dialogue on justice and on what constitutes the just society. But to careful readers the deeper theme of the Republic is the nature of education and the relationship between education and the survival of the state. In fact, the Republic is essentially the story of how a man (Socrates) condemned to death for "corrupting" the youth of Athens gives to posterity the most precious gift of all: the love of wisdom.

In the Republic, two young men, Glaucon and Adeimantus, accompany the much older Socrates on a journey of discovery into the nature of the individual soul and its connection to the harmony of the state. During the course of their adventure, as the two disciples demonstrate greater maturity and self-control, they are gradually exposed to deeper and more complex teachings regarding the relationship between virtue, self-sufficiency, and happiness. In short, the boys begin to realize that justice and happiness in a community rests upon the moral condition of its citizens. This is what Socrates meant when he said: "The state is man writ large."

Near the end of the Republic Socrates decides to drive this point home by showing Adeimantus what happens to a regime when its parents and educators neglect the proper moral education of its children. In the course of this chilling illustration Adeimantus comes to discover a dark and ominous secret: without proper moral conditioning a regime's "defining principle" will be the source of its ultimate destruction. For democracy, that defining principle is freedom. According to Socrates, freedom makes a democracy but freedom also eventually breaks a democracy.

For Socrates, democracy's "insatiable desire for freedom and neglect of other things" end up putting it "in need of a dictatorship." The short version of his theory is that the combination of freedom and poor education in a democracy render the citizens incapable of mastering their impulses and deferring gratification. The reckless pursuit of freedom leads the citizens to raze moral barriers, deny traditional authority, and abandon established methods of education. Eventually, this uninhibited quest for personal freedom forces the public to welcome the tyrant. Says Socrates: "Extreme freedom can't be expected to lead to anything but a change to extreme slavery, whether for a private individual or for a city."

Adeimantus wants Socrates to explain what kind of man resembles the democratic city. In other words, he wants to know how "democratic man" comes to be and what happens to make this freedom loving man eventually beg for a tyrant. Socrates clarifies that the democratic man starts out as the son of an "oligarchic" father -- a father who is thrifty and self-disciplined. The father's generation is more concerned with wealth than freedom. This first generation saves, invests, and rarely goes in for conspicuous consumption.[i]

The father's pursuit of wealth leaves him unwilling and unable to give attention to his son's moral development. The father focuses on business and finance and ignores the business of family. The son then begins to associate with "wild and dangerous creatures who can provide every variety of multicolored pleasure in every sort of way." These Athenian precursors of the hippies begin to transform the son's oligarchic nature into a democratic one. Because the young man has had no moral guidance, his excessive desire for "unnecessary pleasures" undermines "the citadel" of his soul. Because the "guardians" of the son's inner citadel -- truth, restraint, wisdom -- are absent, there is nothing within him to defend against the "false and boastful words and beliefs that rush up and occupy this part of him."

A 1960s revolution in the son's soul purges the last remaining guardians of moderation and supplants new meanings to old virtues: "anarchy" replaces freedom, "extravagance" replaces magnificence, and "shamelessness" replaces courage. The young man surrenders rule over himself "to whichever desire comes along, as if it were chosen by lot." Here Socrates notes the essential problem when a free society becomes detached from any notions of moral virtue or truth: desires are chosen by "lot" instead of by "merit" or "priority."

For the son the democratic revolution in his soul is complete. In this stage "there is neither order nor necessity in his life, but he calls it pleasant, free, blessedly happy, and he follows it for as long as he lives." Socrates gives a brief illustration of the young man's new democratic life:

Sometimes he drinks heavily while listening to the flute; at other times he drinks only water and is on a diet; sometimes he goes in for physical training; at other times, he's idle and neglects everything; and sometimes he even occupies himself with what he takes to be philosophy. He often engages in politics, leaping up from his seat and saying and doing whatever comes into his mind. If he happens to admire soldiers, he's carried in that direction, if money-makers, in that one.

In short, the young man has no anchor, no set of guiding principles or convictions other than his thirst for freedom. His life is aimless, superficial, and gratuitous. The spoiled lotus-eaters of his generation have defined themselves simply by mocking all forms of propriety and prudence. What's worse, as these Athenian baby-boomers exercise their right to vote, they elect "bad cupbearers" as their leaders. The new cupbearers want to stay in office so they give the voters whatever they desire. The public, according to Socrates, "gets drunk by drinking more than it should of the unmixed wine of freedom." Conservative politicians who attempt to mix the wine of freedom with calls for self-restraint "are punished by the city and accused of being accursed oligarchs."

As conservative politicians court suspicion so do conservative teachers and academics who stubbornly hold on to objective measurements of performance: "A teacher in such a community is afraid of his students and flatters them, while the students despise their teachers or tutors." Conservatism becomes unpopular just about everywhere, to a point at which even the elderly "stoop to the level of the young and are full of play and pleasantry, imitating the young for fear of appearing disagreeable and authoritarian."

The explosion of boundaries and limits extends even to national identity itself, so that resident aliens and foreigners "are made equal to a citizen."

The citizens' souls become so infected with freedom that they become excessively paranoid about any hint of slavery. But slavery comes to mean being under any kind of master or limit including the law itself. Says Socrates: "They take no notice of the laws, whether written or unwritten, in order to avoid having any master at all." That is, any kind of "hierarchy" in a democracy is rejected as "authoritarian." But this extreme freedom, according to Socrates, eventually enslaves democracy.

As the progressive politicians and intellectuals come to dominate the democratic city, its "fiercest members do all the talking and acting, while the rest settle near the speakers platform and buzz and refuse to tolerate the opposition of another speaker." There are "impeachments, judgments and trials on both sides." The politicians heat up the crowds by vilifying business and wealth and by promising to spread the wealth around. The people then "set up one man as their special champion" and begin "nurturing him and making him great."

The people's "special champion" however transforms from leader to tyrant. He "drops hints about the cancellation of debts and the redistribution of land" and continues to "stir up civil wars against the rich." All who have reached this stage, says Socrates, "soon discover the famous request of a tyrant, namely, that the people give him a bodyguard to keep their defender safe for them." The people give him this new security force, "because they are afraid for his safety but aren't worried at all about their own."

Socrates describes the early weeks of the new leader's reign:

"Won't he smile in welcome at anyone he meets, saying that he's no tyrant, making all sorts of promises both in public and in private, freeing the people from debt, redistributing land to them, and to his followers, and pretending to be gracious and gentle to all?"

After a series of unpopular actions, including stirring up a war in order to generate popular support, the leader begins to alienate some of his closest and most ardent advisers who begin to voice their misgivings in private. Following a purge of these advisors the tyrant attracts some of the worst elements of the city to help him rule. As the citizens grow weary of his tenure the tyrant chooses to attract foreigners to resupply his dwindling national bodyguard. The citizens finally decide they've had enough and begin to discuss rebellion.

At this point in the dialogue Adeimantus asks Socrates incredulously: "What do you mean? Will the tyrant dare to use violence against [the people] or to hit [them] if [they] don't obey? Socrates answers:

"Yes - once he's taken away [the people's] weapons."

***

Here is the full article for your review, it is worth your time:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/02/how_democracies_become_tyranni.html

And here you can read the entire text from Plato:

http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/republic.html

Fascinating, no? 2300 years ago Plato had already seen this outcome. Interestingly enough, the Romans would see it happening again, with Julius Caesar. Caesar being the man who turned the Roman Republic into the Roman Empire, caused a civil war which he won, and thus dominated the people. Caesar in Latin is Kaisar, which we have also seen manifested. Maybe Kaiser means community organizer in Americanese? I mean, he did suggest a "security force" for the US already. Google it, Obama + security force. The dominos are set. Nobody sneeze.

Come what may

2009-02-04T12:28:00.001-08:00

I admit that I did not take the appropriate classes in college to actually know what the total current economic problem is. Yes, that adversely affects my ego. Don't worry, I'll just make fun of someone and be back on par shortly.

But here's what I have figured out without said education: if we're just slowing down the problem of a recession and still haven't hit rock-bottom, then why are we doing that? We've already been through two "stimulus projects;" the $150 billion return from last spring which netted my family a $1500 check ($600 + $600 + $300) which was spent on... something? I don't remember. I didn't earn* the money so I didn't track its expenditure. Then came the other bailout stimulus last fall that was over $700 billion. And that failed too.

As of today, I noted that the proposed new bailout stimulus is over $900 billion and counting. All for what? I mean, ACORN apparently gets a few billion out of that, and $250 million goes to Hollywood for movie productions. But, what is the point? We've already dumped billions and the economy is still sinking! It isn't saving any jobs, houses are still foreclosing at record levels, and Congresses approval rating isn't going any higher.

I'm looking at this with the band aid approach: take it off quickly. And that's how I see the economy at this point. Let it hit rock bottom faster, so we can start the rebuilding process quickly. If that means a Depression, sobeit. At least we'll hit the bottom and can start working our way up instead of our current method of moving slowly down to the bottom.

Now I don't mean that a Depression is a good thing. I remember my grandma talking about how hard it was back them, and then when given an orange, she mistook it for a ball, as she had never had an orange before. She was about 10. At the same time, it did produce "The Greatest Generation" and ended with the greatest war in history in terms of sheer violence and death. I'd like to avoid that aspect, obviously.

Here's my point: last year the US Government paid $416 billion in interest on the Federal Deficit. Supposedly we 'owe' this money to ourselves, and yet we pay interest on it, which doesn't make much sense to me unless someone is financing this pending domino debaucle. So if we're going to continue dumping money into a failing economy, then pay interest on that with the increased bailout amounts, there will come a point when we're paying over a trillion dollars in interest per year. Our GNP is around $13.8 trillion per year. Our Federal Deficit is climbing over 10 trillion right now. So we're paying close to 5% interest on our national debt. I hate to say it, but I think we need a depression to bring us back to reality on a national level. We've lived beyond our means for too long. We're going bankrupt as a nation, just like Iceland is going through right now.

There are other alternatives such as balancing the budget, but with Obama in office, it just isn't likely with a National Healthcare agenda. I know, Clinton had a budget surplus for his last year in office, but it wasn't put towards the national debt and it was spent. Republicans used to have the right mentality of cutting spending and big government, but they lost their foundation a while ago.

Let's look at this another way: if we don't do this now, guess what will happen when we truly are nationally bankrupt? That's when no one will finance us because our international credit rating is bunk. We'll possibly be 20 or 30 trillion in debt by then, and nothing will bail us out. Not only that, but our currency will be valued less than the paper it is printed on. It'll be like Germany after WWI. A barrel full of money for a loaf of bread. They got out of by gearing up for war.

So again, my economic expertise doesn't expand much further than my checkbook, but looking at our national situation, and the growing issue of debt, I think that we need to get things fixed sooner, rather than later because the fallout from the national debt will make The Great Depression look like speed bump comparatively speaking.

*Technically I did earn the money, as the government actually has no money itself; but rather, our taxed money. Still, I pay taxes because I support this country and this stimulus was just an additional tax return.

Changing of the Guard

2009-01-22T19:40:00.000-08:00

In case you missed it due to some lucky coma (and even then your excuse is pretty weak), earlier this week there was a momentous power exchange between the quixotic political parties: the Presidency. The poster boy for the Democrats took office, floundering over the oath a little, but still official. Mr Obama is everywhere in my news. We're just one bored journalist's dilemma from knowing Mr Obama's routine bowel movements, if he has any.

I don't have anything in particular against Mr Obama per se. Originally, I thought he was a decent fellow, but clearly a long-shot from getting into the white house based upon the fact he was a one-term junior senator with practically no political experience. And we didn't really know him very well. I lumped him into the same category as Fred Thompson, the actor who ran on the Republican ticket.

Yet somehow, this no-name low-on-the-totem pole senator picked up momentum and defeated Hillary Clinton, which is impossible. And I mean that. Even when Clinton lead Obama by double digits in state polls, he still beat her, sometimes handily. It is highly questionable to me, but thankfully the media swept by those issues and fueled the mania. That mania banked on "Change" even though there was no real difference between Hillary's and Barak's change -- it actually came down to a popularity contest in the end. In this case, always bet on black.

Questions aside, I do recognize that even the best republican would have lost the election. It wasn't that Bush buried all hope for republicans; it was the media. Bush did what he thought was morally right for the country. Same thing Lincoln did, coincidentally. Sure, there is the black mark of Iraq - but let's face it: we all bought into it. We were in the wake of 9/11, the CIA comes out with a report that says WMDs in Iraq, other countries agree, and Sadam had ousted the UN inspectors several months before they were supposed to leave. In short, our intelligence community let us down, but the media pegged one fall guy specifically. Unless, of course, Iraq did have some WMDs and shipped them out. Meh, wasteful thinking.

The other sorta black mark is Hurricane Katrina, which is not Bush's fault unless he does control the weather. But, New Orleans was aware of the dangers. In a poll taken 3 months prior, 37% of citizens said they wouldn't abandon New Orleans if a hurrican ever came. Lo and behold, guess what happened? People suffered. Bush believed FEMA could handle it. They failed. Not him. He came a few days late, but what could he do? His FEMA organization was in shambles.

I'm not here to wipe Bush's slate clean, but he was unfairly targeted, villianized, crucified, and finally, called the "worst president ever" which is crap.

So now we have Obama, and my premilinary judgment is muddled. I want to think that he will be able to fix the economy (again, a problem brewing since Carter's era) and make things all nice and peachy. He presumptuously aligns himself with Lincoln, the media eat it up, and I hear about it nearly 24/7. Let me put it this way; he is not Lincoln by any means. And history will judge Obama accordingly. Lincoln was extremely unpopular during his day -- after all, he presided over our bloodiest moments.

If I were the draw parallels for Mr Obama, I'd say he's closer to Franklin D. Roosevelt. A decent president who saved the economy by going into war. Seriously, stock market crashed in October in 1929, he was elected in 1932, and we remained in a depression for almost 10 years until WWII. See, Mr Obama is already proposing what FDR did, more taxes and stimulus options. How does that help consumer confidence? More taxes, great. Sure, it'll make way for more government jobs, I understand. At my cost, though.

Anyway, here's what I'll do. I admit that I do not trust Mr Obama. He came out of no-where, I don't know his policies (aside from overt liberal agenda), and I fear that his long-term fixes. In short (heh, hardly), the old adage that the constitution will hang by a thread is now well on it's way to being true. The American Way, coupled with the American Dream, will become a nice piece of history. Well, it'll be re-written to look selfish. We are working towards socialism now. Gah! Side tangent -- this whole freakin' post is side-tangent upon side-tangent.

Okay, again, I'll respect the office of the president, which more than I can say for the rest of the country while Bush was in office. I'll give Obama the chance to succeed and try not to be cynical... yet. There have been good Democratic presidents as well as bad ones. But, I just feel that yellow journalism will forever slander any good republican candidate, and that this country is more one-sided than ever. Actually, I know for a fact: there are now 17 million more democrats than republicans. Super. Who needs bipartisan when you have a majority? Even Mickey Mouse is probably a democrat now. Filthy little rat.

This Gas Stinks!

2009-01-08T21:08:00.001-08:00

As some of you may have known, we spent 2 weeks snow-birding in Florida, specifically, Orlando and the Keys over the Christmas break. I can highly recommend the Keys to anyone, especially Key West if you're heterosexually challenged. If not, uhm, leave once the sun goes down unless you like mental scars.

Anyway, back to business.

So, gone for two weeks. I turned the water heater off, turned the heat down, closed up the house and left. Prior to that we burned wood to keep warm. Imagine my surprise today when I got the heating bill which was clocking in at $230. Sure, the weather was piss-poor (and I missed a white Christmas for Oregon in lieu of palm trees with lights -- not the same!). Still, I am highly miffed over this, and I did what any other reasonable man would do in the same circumstance. No, it didn't involve cleaning guns and mapping out exit routes at the nearest NW Natural Gas station although truthfully that did cross my mind. But, instead I went outside and chopped wood and built a fire. It is still burning brightly.

We had a similar issue like this last year, same time. We left for a week, turned stuff off, and came back to a $200 bill. We balked last year, they sent out a tech, he determined there wasn't a gas leak, and that prompted us to lower our "room temperature" to a unforgiving 63 degrees. My wife didn't like that, but money is apparently more important than heating. For this winter, we beefed it up to a sultry 64 degrees. It was cold. We do need to replace the 20 year old windows, but my wife has industrial duty curtains on them already. Plus, we're still paying off the roof, and, erm, vacation.

The interim plan is thus; we've replaced nearly all the old light bulbs with mercury-laden environmentally energy efficient versions in hopes to lower our electric bill so we can get a space heater! And build more fires. I wonder how much NW Natural gas would like a fire...

Taking one for the team

2008-12-25T09:49:00.000-08:00

We're in Florida for Christmas, and it surely does not feel like Christmas since the weather is overly pleasant for this time of year, although the humidity (currently 94%) is a deal breaker.

There are some times when the "dad" has to take hit for the team, and today would be one of those occasions. See, previously I would have not suspected that I would be making a blog post on Christmas day, yet here I am. I am here because my family is at DisneyWorld without me. The park was "filled to capacity" and so I didn't get in. But everyone else did. Meanwhile, I've done a couple loads of laundry, burnt an omelet, and have yearned for a nap, of which will probably not come. I'm just not big on naps; but this has slightly changed with my high-maintenance princess-in-training.

I suppose I cannot complain too much. After all, I've never been too keen on Disney anything. Buggs Bunny was more my style. Still, this is the day you're supposed to spend with family. And I know they plan to stay until the fireworks display. Maybe I'll take a dip in the pool, soak in the spa, and blame the water for those tears in my eye.

Aargh!

2008-12-17T15:45:00.000-08:00

So this is my punishment for making fun of King Triton and his slow swimmers. Super.

As you know, or will know shortly, we're expecting a girl instead of a boy now, which immediately sent my wife searching through names since before we were totally fixated on boy names. No more.

Clearly there is some correlation going on here. A few of my other manly man friends who grew up with me in the Pacific Northwest have also only spawned women-folk, and I am not sure why. Perhaps it is to even out the playing field -- after all, we are manly men. But on the other hand, it could be a curse or even a parting gift from our Order of the Arrow adviser, who, coincidentally, controlled the water for the region.

On the one hand, my daughter will have a sister. On the other, more proms, weddings and other girlie things such as drama. Oooo I can't wait. The good news is that my wife was gracious enough to say that I can buy more weapons now, which I fully intend to do so. But I'll probably have to turn one of my daughters into a tom-boy. Both will get some sort of self-defense class, perhaps Judo or Jujitsu. Of course, I'll inventory some mace/pepper-spray for them and the obligatory "all penises are evil" tattoo on their foreheads -- last thing I need to hear is "daddy I'm pregnant" before they graduate from high school.

*sigh* I'm sure I'll think of more stuff to fret over in the not-t00-distant future. Girls are so scary when you have no idea how to manage them. So far as I am concerned, you give them jewelry and shoes and things work out fine. Throw in a lame romantic vampire book and it's even better. But this ... this is on the verge of madness. Guess I'll have to watch more Little Mermaid, see how King Triton manages all his daughters ... and still have time to curse me. Wait, King Triton sucked at it, Ariel being the example therein. Crap. Ariel. Crap, crap, crap!

It's just rude

2008-12-05T22:29:00.001-08:00

As some of you know, I've been looking for work just like so many other folks these days. Well, a few weeks ago I had a job interview with HeadStart. Today I went in for a follow-up and basically, an offer to work there provided I pass a physical and urine analysis. I don't fear too much of the outcome, but my blood pressure was slightly elevated in the "normal" area.

Here's what I don't like, and maybe you can agree: I don't like dirty old doctors with cold hands man-handling my privates. And the fact that this guy had to do it thrice really irritates me because in the end, I had to pay for it! I mean, I vigorously coughed twice, but "just for good measure" we did it once more. Super! I don't know, maybe he considered it a date or something, but he could at least have a little common courtesy next time -- warm up the hands, and maybe fetch me a heavy shot of morphine. I'd rather not remember these sorts of things.

The worst part is that now I feel like I need a heavy dose of Viagra. I can still feel the coldness gripping the life out of ... uhm, me. But, as he told me with a solid smile, I don't have a hernia. Great, but I also don't have a libido either. I feel there is a coorelation. Maybe next time he can give me a ride in his red Corvette that was so prominently parked outside the clinic. But then, maybe I could charge him next time too. I mean, if I'm going to incur mental scars, I want to at least make a buck or two while doing it. It's the American way.

Disney movie in review

2008-11-25T20:00:00.000-08:00

I am not sure how to label it correctly, but I am becoming a Disney pro, at least with regards to their movies, uhm, specifically the girlie ones, sadly.

Yes, there are days wherein we watch Beauty and the Beast or Little Mermaid 3 times in one day. Good thing the themes aren't suicide in those movies. But, I am at odds with The Little Mermaid. What a terrible motive it drives; disobey your parent, make a deal with the witch in order to get yourself in a better position with a guy who doesn't have a problem with statutory issues (Ariel being 16 and all...). Not only that, but then mortgaging your dad's soul only to have your new boyfriend kill your enemy, and then have daddy grant your misguided wish in the end. Hate it.

As it was pointed out to me earlier this week, Disney certainly has issues with putting mothers in their movies. Please note that Ariel, Belle, Snow White, Jasmine, Lilo (and Stitch) and Cinderella do not have moms. Others would be Nemo and Bambi who have mom's that are voiolently killed. Pinocchio is, uh, I guess it doesn't matter -- Jiminy Cricket is his mom in a way. There are a few with moms, but they play very minor roles; Mulan, Sleeping Beauty (aka, Aurora, Briar Rose), thankfully the Incredibles have a mom that is prominent. There are a some movies where having a mother is not so important; Toy Story, WALL-E, and perhaps even Simba of the Lion King. (I need to watch this one again.)

I suppose in a way it is to have us connect more quickly with a sympathetic bond to the character, but overall, I mean, these stories could have been avoided with a good mother having NOT been killed off by malicious Disney writers. I mean, maybe Ariel would have made it to her 17th birthday unwed had she been reared by a caring mother. (Although she is a head-strong redhead -- hard to say.) At the same time, I could cite King Triton as culpable as he CLEARLY engaged in polygamy looking at all the closely aged daughters he has. And no son to speak of... slow swimmers I guess. Stay out of the hot tub buddy.

Belle has class and grace, so I imagine her mother died not too long ago since in the beginning Belle sings of having recently moved to this "provincial town." Creating a back story, I reckon her father moved out of the loving house he and his wife had built, to a place that didn't remind him of her. Coincidentally, I feel Gaston has a back story of knowing about the beast and the castle he lives in which he all-of-a-sudden mentions during his song. I've already put together a pretty good story for that.

Cinderella's mom died early on, as the beginning says as much. Of course, she gets that wicked step-mother who does not have much foresight. Look, your daughters get uglier with age, so bank on Cinderella making it big and taking care of the whole family later on. She really messed up, and if I had been Cinderella in a non-gay way, those step-family members would find their respective heads on chopping blocks.

Jasmine is probably the product of a drunken sultan and a full harem. Arabian nights for sure... nuff said. But that lack of mothering led her into the arms of a common thief. Sure, in the end he pretends to be a good guy, but I bet he turned to thievery because he didn't have a caring mom either.

I don't like Snow White. Any chick that digs living with 7 dwarves is NOT my kind of woman and should seek counseling for such fetishes. And those seven dwarves are idiots, not lovable as they obviously have no clue for managing finances. They work every day in a mine replete with gems and diamonds, and yet live in a one bedroom cottage. I don't buy it. They must be using that filthy lucre for other devious methods, such as crack-cocaine addiction or monthly membership dues to NAMBLA. A mother could have steered Snow White clear of such devises.

Lilo is set up to be an obvious match for a maniacal escape alien convict on the run. And because I like Stitch, I'll let this motherless duo slide. But, again, had a mother been involved, Stitch would have been booted out for reasons any human would; it's a friggin' alien!

So I wonder if the overall message from Disney is to show us just how important mothers really are. By giving us these motherless stories, they demonstrate just how bad it can be without a mom in the life of a child. Because clearly these father-only families are just not cutting it.

My regards to Nemo and Bambi, but I am sure your respective mothers were tasty. Actually, haven eaten a Bambi mother myself, I can vouch for that. And yes, I'd do it again even if it provoked another motherless Disney movie.

Sickening times

2008-11-18T12:59:00.000-08:00

Not too chipper these days, and it's not so much about being unemployed (still), but because of being sick altogether. Especially since I am on the 6th day of this "cold". I don't feel "cold" so I am not sure why it is called that. I feel miserable, and thus it should be called.

It is kinda hard getting over this; I've taken vitamins, pills, and tried to sleep more but the rambunctious 2 year old here, in all her overt loud ways, limits my naps to 15 minute increments at best.

I suppose I do not feel miserable as much, though. I mean, now I feel okay, but my nose is clogged and I have a cough, but I feel well enough to maybe do a push-up or maybe run to the mailbox. Even when I am not sick, those are pushing the normal limits. I just hate waking up with a plugged up nose, unable to breathe, and coughing up a storm. So I sound terrible, but feel okay.

As for the employment front, I finally applied for unemployment; the first time in my life. I was hoping to never use those benefits, but now I'll gain a new perspective on living life. One less point for me to make fun of poor people I guess. Don't worry, I'll think of something witty to replace it. In the meantime, I do have a job interview with HeadStart on Thursday, so I really need to get over this "miserable."

Not like the movies

2008-11-10T11:46:00.001-08:00

Last night when I went to bed, I noted that my band aid had come off my thumb.

Saturday evening, I went the easy route for cooking and baked a frozen pizza. Sure, I spruced it up by adding more pepperoni and olives, but frozen pizzas taste like frozen pizzas; I don't care what Digiorno's tells us in their commercials. Anyway, while reaching into the drawer to retrieve the pizza cutter, my right thumb grazed the potato peeler and efficiently grated a nice chunk out of the tip of my thumb. That potato peeler has never been so effective!

Well, it bleed quit a bit, so I had to get a band aid for it lest I add more sauce to the pizza than desired. Of course, they really do not make band aids for the tip of your thumb with a skin flap that just kinda dangles there. So I tailored a band aid to suit my needs. I do it all the time, actually. As a matter of fact, if there was a pageant for tailored band aids, I would be a band aid beauty quee ... uhm, nevermind.

Anyway, the point is that my haute couture band aid was missing when I went to bed last night. And I can't sleep with that errant flap of skin rubbing the wrong away against the blankets. It just feels wrong. And rather than sculpting a new band aid, I opted to do what I had heard of, and then recently seen in the new Incredible Hulk movie, which is to improvise with super glue. And lo and behold, I had just bought 2 tubes of it last week. It was destiny, obviously.

So, at about 1am or thereabouts, I decided it was time to McGyver my injuries. Well, I opened up a tube and I guess I was holding it wrong because a huge glob of glue emerged over the wound. Naturally, I tried to quickly spread it into the area and you'll never guess what happened. Yeah, all of a sudden my index finger was glued to my thumb, making the world's most perfect 'A-OK' sign. I would have won that pageant too. Not to mention some sort of Darwin award, although that usually entails death and I hadn't made it that far, yet.

Next step in this brave process was pulling out a steak knife and cutting the two fingers apart. It took way too long, and not surprisinly, the flap of skin was not secured. Another glob came out, an this time I got the flap of skin down, but also managed to get the bottle of super-glue stuck to my thumb as I was using that to secure the flap down. Ridiculous! Looked so much easier in the movies! But, I was able to get it off with some moderate pulling.

So this morning, I looked at my worthy self-made reparations. Behold! I now have a dead flap of skin stuck to my body. Yeah, apparently I should have just cut off the flap of skin an moved on with my life. Now I have to wait for the glue to wear off and let my body heal itself, without my meddling. So that means, of all the pageants I could have won, clearly the pageant of stupidity was my fortee. C'est la vie...

Upon reflection

2008-11-04T13:29:00.000-08:00

The other day my wife asked me if my boss had ever responded to my email, in which I responded that he had, technically, by replying that it "was a long email," and that he would have to "give it some consideration." At that point in our conversation, I had that epiphanical 'Ah-ha!' moment. Yes, I made up the word "epiphanical," we're still allowed to make up words so long as Bush is in office.

Anyway, migrating back to the original point at hand, I'll need to give you some background on working at the state, specifically for the Oregon Health Plan. First, my manager/boss had been there at the state 3 weeks less than myself. He had come out of the Marines as a Staff Sergeant, and was now within the cubicle bliss like the rest of us. I mostly liked him, well, up until last Friday. Still, I respect him for his service in Iraq, and so on and so forth.

Next, when I was hired, it was expected that a worker would process 10 claims per day, 200 per month. In so doing, we were getting 10,000 applications processed per month (in September). In August, we were about 800 applications behind schedule. When I left, it was up to 5,000. This was due to the weakening economy, so more families were defaulting to OHP for medical coverage. Plus, the Reservation List applications were coming in too (there was a lottery for adults to get on OHP). So, succinctly put, we were getting inundated with applications.

Thus, it was completely unexpected when a new policy was handed down that we now needed to keep applications alive longer, twice as long, as previously. Again, some background for you; If you were to request an application for OHP benefits today, your Date of Request (DOR) would be 11/4/08. You now have 45 days to get that application in to an OHP branch, otherwise, your DOR is null and a new DOR is set the day we finally get the new application. The point of the DOR is that we will back-track your OHP coverage to that day.

Okay, moving forward, now let's say you have benefits already, and it's now time for recertification (recert). We mail you an application and you HAVE to get it back the month your coverage ends. If you don't then we DD deny them. Kind of redundant terminology, DD stands for Date Denial, so saying DD Deny means you're repeating words. But, that's the jargon.

Okay, so let's say that November is your recert month, you get your application in today, and you don't provide all your proof of income for the past 3 months. So we'll "pend" you for more information, giving you 45 days to respond. 45 days from today, by my layman math, is 12/19/08. If a worker doesn't get it, by the old standard, then you sent out the DD paperwork and the case was closed. Not so now, let's say you actually do get the information, but it's a week late or more. Well now you have to repull the denied application, and let's just say it wasn't all the "pended" information either, you now have to give them an additional 45 days, thus pushing the time into February for response. And, the benefits are still retroactive to November.

So, we're already 5,000 applications behind schedule and rising, and now we're supposed to hold onto application an additional 45 days for up to 90 days total, thereby creating more work? Well, in that same week, we were told that we now have to process 12 applications a day, 250 a month. They changed it a little, before we were "pushed" 10 apps (applications) a day by our supervisors. Now they are only pushing 7, but it was up to us to get the additional 5 done.

A little more background to understand: OHP is paperless. We don't get the paper app that you would fill out. Instead, we get a scanned version sent to our desktop. And the denials we send out are never seen by us in the tangible sense. Before hand, when you were done with the 10 apps and felt like doing more, you would check the general program queue that would list out names, DOBs, Case #, SS#, and any other salient information for cases waiting to be processed. But, because we now had the option to pick at least 5, all information save for the client name, were blocked out. Accordingly, they didn't want us to discriminate on the details of cases.

I can somewhat understand this, however, there was one serious repercussion, it also blocked out the information on our already processed and pended cases. So if you had already requested information on a case, it was in your queue waiting to be finished. If a client called, you could look up their name in the pend queue, see the case number, and look up what you did. Not anymore. You would now have to do a person search, and if their name was John Smith or Jose Garcia, good luck finding them, 1 in 10,000 at least.

I hope this gives you a good enough foundation to understand all that was swirling about. We had a team "huddle" -- I guess meetings are so passe -- and discussed these changes. There were lots of dissents. We had an airing of grievances, but I was pretty quiet since I was the lowest man on the totem pole. Anyway, I told my boss that I would send him an email, and I summarized the above, and added in some things that I thought would be helpful.

In hindsight, however, I see that I challenged his authority on that matter. I told him that blocking out that information wasn't necessary because all cases would be worked anyway, so there was no discrimination since every day, he would be pushing apps to our queue. Plus, it added an extra step to our processing as well since we couldn't see the case numbers in our pend queue. Blocking out that information was his idea. I also commented on the new policy which ultimately gave the client more reason to be lazy, and more work for us, plus, cost the department more money because it gave benefits where they weren't deserved.

Yeah, I overstepped my boundaries. It's kind of obvious now. I made it as professional as I know how. My early retirement was perhaps a culmination of things, but honestly, I was just trying to make things more efficient -- I guess I was barking up the wrong, uhm, state. And clearly, had I gone along with the sexual harassment thing as cited in the other post, I'd probably be a manager myself by now. I mean, I am efficient...

This is your real award.

2008-10-31T21:36:00.000-07:00

"Let go." It's somewhere between being fired and laid off. Doesn't matter too much, for thus are the words I heard at the end of my work day. The same manager that gave me an award for my Halloween costume earlier in the day, would then hand me a letter advising me that they were letting me go during my 'trail period.' The best reason I was given, which was cited in the letter, was that my behavior was not inline with the core values of the department. I suspect it has to do with me advising a few co-workers and others about legal options for discrimination and workers' compensation issues. That would put me out of line with state business, or specifically, my job. In Oregon, employers do not actually have to give you a specific reason to be fired, or, as they told me, "let go."

I also have to wonder about the whole cougar incident. See, at one point my manager offered to put in a cubicle quad with other "seasoned" workers. Unfortunately, they wanted to put me in the same quad as the cougar. I quietly declined, and I was asked as to why not. I said that one of the women in there had come onto me, and that I just wanted to avoid any potential situation. Well that ballooned into a subsequent interrogation a few days later with HR reps, and words like "sexual harassment" were being dropped. If I had said 'yes' to the sexual harassment, and played ball, maybe I'd still be employed. The cougar was on probation anyway and apparently had been cited for relationships within the workplace before. I kinda feel like a martyr. I don't know if she was fired or not.

Instead, being the new guy and vehemently interested in self-preservation, I said that it was no big deal, I didn't want to make an issue of it, and that there was nothing further on the matter. Sadly, hindsight is 20/20, and perhaps my foresight wasn't working. And she never really gave up on pursuing me, but at the same time, other women we starting to drop hints too. Not all that unexpected when the workforce is close to 80% women, many of whom are unmarried.

Now I have two things to accomplish; find a new job as soon as possible, and remind myself of all the things I didn't like about that job. Not too hard, since I really did like the training, but being confined to an 8 x8 foot cubicle everyday (I was in my own) was hard. I really felt like an animal in a zoo cage. Still, this was supposed to be my launching point into a better state job, even though a 9 month hiring freeze was taking effect Nov. 1 through June. Or in other words, I don't know if I would have made it anyway. But at least I would have tried.

Stress and depression are merely a stone throw away. The financial burden will bear down quickly, so I suppose I had best get looking through those classified ads. Wish me luck, meanwhile, I'll be playing 'manny' with my daughter. And that's not so bad, but it isn't what I should be doing.

Liberally Free

2008-10-27T18:17:00.000-07:00

On Friday, one of my co-workers who is a union volunteer had the distinct privilege of going to a conference with Al Gore and getting something equivalent to a 'back-stage pass' after the conference. Needless to say that today she was still lost somewhere on cloud 9, wherever that is.

I take issue with lots of stuff, that's what primarily defines character, no? People who do not take a stand are typically boring as they don't know what to think, and never bother to look stuff up and thus remain in their awful state of ennui. Today I take issue with the term "liberal," as it clearly is a hypocritical title since it is applied to the wrong group of people.

The word is from Latin -- liberalis -- meaning; freedom, befitting of free, etc. Of course, it has a new meaning now: an entire political mindset that purports to be 'free', but in reality is readily waiting to enslave the masses into socialism or even better (I assume), communism. Looking at their agenda proves this; more taxes to pay for more government assistance. How does paying more taxes make you free? If anything, it makes you more dependent upon the hand that feeds.

Sure, universal healthcare is a neat idea -- no more haggling with HMO's over what is covered and at what cost [80% co-pays]. But will the quality of care increase? And what is the cost to the tax-payers as a whole? If I were a doctor, and all of a sudden I get the same flat rate, what would prompt me to give better care? If anything, I'd see more patient in less time. Sure, these are superficial arguments. Not to mention all the people out of work who were in the insurance industry.

I remember a saying, "[y]ou can take the man out of the slums, but you can't take the slums out of the man."In Spanish, they have a similar saying, "Aunque la mona se veste en ceda, la mona se queda." Or in other words, 'even though a monkey dresses in silk, it's still a monkey.' This is a truism that has been proven before. It's another reason why lottery winners often wind up broke and bankrupt. They didn't earn it, didn't know how to use it, and lost it all. That's one of the great things about earning your keep: you learn to respect what you've rightfully earned.

The main problem I have with Liberalism is they are way to eager to try and help people that, the whole point of accountability, responsibility, and basic self-respect are lost. I understand sometimes people need help, but people who need constant help do so because they know there is a perpetual obligation to help them. Instead of helping people up, it'll just keep everyone down on the same level without incentives to do better. Taxes will be 50% of your income, but at least we'll have universal health care, welfare programs, and Ben & Jerry's Ice cream made with real human milk. Damn you PETA, but I'll save that topic.

I've mentioned in other places, but the good ol' US of A is nearly a socialist country; we're just not taxed enough yet. But we have too many programs to pay for every year. That's why we're constantly over-budget and digging a deeper national dept. I know, I know, Bill Clinton balanced the budget years ago, and with a crippled military/nation defense because he drastically cut funding, that lead to a memorable September in 2001. Funny, Al Qeada had attacked the US at least 4 times prior to that during the Clinton years, and they never were punished for it. Til now. Whoops, side tanget.

So that is my marginal point today; despite the wrongfully named political mindset, how does being taxed 50% of your income make anyone free? You'll not be one lick happier with Liberals pushing for a socialistic approach to fix this country. You'll have less to be free with. And all your hard work will be for nothing save to pick up those that refuse to do so on their own. But at least our title will imply freedom; liberalis. Liberal US.

Mr Cloud, I presume.

2008-10-20T19:14:00.000-07:00

Oddly, it happened again. The whole purpose for this blog to exist, mandated by one of those dreams that I do not cherish in the least. Interestingly, there is a parallel to a dream many moons ago, over 2 decades hence. The details from last night emerge.

I am either in the future, or in one of those modern homes that could double as an art gallery; svelte lines, uncomfortable furniture, and bold, yet blase color scheme (blacks, browns, bamboo flooring and white walls with large windows). High vaulted ceiling with exposed dark beams lumber overhead. There is a congregation of maybe a dozen people, none of whom I recognize, but I don't have any problems associating with them. Ages range from perhaps 10 years of age (a bored looking lad with a blond bowl cut hair), up to just over my age, a married couple of sorts. Intermingling with other people whom I don't pay enough attention to to describe, but they are round-about doing things. Probably being pretentious.

Sitting down at the table, the couple offer to show me a trick about this house. They place a cup face down on one end of the table, and it begins to gingerly scoot across the table, picking up speed until saved from falling off the edge by the husband. It is a neat trick, and I'm not sure how it's done. Then the boy does the same thing with a small car on the floor, it moves by itself. I inspect it, but it's just a simple car, no mechanics about it, not much to be magnetized. "This is not all," they inform me, " watch this," and then the boy, sitting Indian-style, is moved across the floor.

And then that feeling starts to ride up in me. The point when I perceive an evil in the room. It's not like looking at a biker-dude, with his shaved head, tattoos, scars and grimace that is natures way of saying "stay away," it's an inner conscious that tells you there is a foundation of evil that predates everything. A cold and bitter feeling the pervades your senses, and they know you're in the room with them, and they don't like it.

Again, this is a new detail to add into the otherwise normal equation that I typically face; it is daylight. All dreams regarding this topic have been in obscure or dark areas. But there is light outside. Not direct sunlight, but clearly bright enough to see outside to a distance.

People begin to levitate around me. They don't seem to care how, and they even enjoy it or so it appears. I tell the home owner that he really needs to consider having his home blessed. And I try to hold some people down by their ankles, but I can feel the power pushing them up. I fall back onto rebuking the entities in the name of Christ, and everytime I rebuke one, another ascends up. They just keep rotating around me; I get one down, another goes up, and then the one I rebuked earlier goes up again.

Now just about every one is high above me and then at once, they all drop with the force of gravity. Crunching sounds as bone contacts with hard flooring, and the people are pinned down screaming with these narrowly perceivable forms dog piling them, scratching and making weird grinding noises. I command all spirits to leave, and then it goes quiet. In retrospect, I should have done that in the first place instead of taking one on one.

The weird part is that these entities were not blamed. I was. I must have angered these "playful" spirits. I told them these were not to be trifled with, that they would eventually destroy whomever they could. But I was told not to fret over it. "We all have our personal demons we like to keep," and theirs were literal.

I don't remember what woke me up, but I was still thrawting these forms when I did wake up because I was still trembling and sweating. It's always odd waking up from these because you, literally, are afraid of the dark at that point. And I make it a habit not to look at the darkest points of my room, as I don't want to see the twisted, gnarly faces of evil staring back at me. Sure, I battle them in dreams, now more often than before and I am not sure why, but in reality, where I know they lurk, I have to maintain a barrier between the real and subliminal. Of course, I said a lengthy prayer right after waking up.

***

1984, or close to it, I had two concurrent dreams of the same nature. It was at my grandma's old farmhouse, a place that is always in my dreams, for better or worse. On this occasion, for worse.

Mr. Cloud was exactly that; a small cloud about 4 feet across and 2 feet high, with colorful streamers dangling down maybe three feet. He floated at about 5 feet elevation, drifting from one corner of the house, greeted much like that blissful happy face in the Walmart commercials -- everyone loves to see him as he 'rolls back prices'. I was ambivalant towards Mr. Cloud at best. Of course, that position changed drastically.

I was playing with armymen around the fireplace as Mr. Cloud hovered above me. With his streamers he signaled me to look up at the fireplace. As I did, I saw the face of my cousin being burned alive in the fireplace, flailing about in the flames. And not just one, but one after another. As soon as one was perished, another was tossed in.

I'd run and tell my parents, uncles, aunts and grandparents, but they'd defend Mr. Cloud vehemently. Then I'd ask where this or that cousin was, and I'd get a "probably up in the orchard" or "in the barn" but never the initiative to find them was taken. Not that it mattered, I knew where they really were. And everytime I went back, another would go in. Yet I couldn't leave, because I needed to see the evidence. Then I'd run back to my parents, and the cycle would continue.

Over the course of two nights this dream transpired. Mr. Cloud eliminated 6 cousins or so, and I got to see them all burn, yelling at the top of their lungs, rolling in the coals, but I was powerless to stop it. Kinda reminds me, in a way, of last night's dream and how people defend their personal demons. Not that I am blameless, by no means, but you can't be saved if you aren't willing to save yourself.

I'll get you Mr. Cloud...

Uncultural diversity

2008-10-13T17:10:00.000-07:00

Today was mandatory cultural diversity competency day. Awesome.

I don't mind taking some training on cultural diversity. It certainly beats staring at a monitor everyday of the work week and watching myself go blind. Plus, I know the drill; accept everyone for everything and we'll all get a long just nicely. It's a pleasant way of censorship. If your culture supports eating other people, sobeit. If mutilating womens' reproductive organs is your bag? More power to you. If NAMBLA is your source of happiness, who am I to judge? The ACLU loves this kind of stuff.

Of course, for those of you that know me, I just don't fit that kind of mold. And to top it off, I start to get this antagonistic approach when forced to participate because I want to see how people react. I mean, these people aren't going to start "dialoguing" until provoked. That's a calling I can muster.

So we were separated into 4 "tribes", wherein we had to build our own cultures, traditions, greetings, power structure, and so on and so forth. I didn't want to be the leader because I needed someone else to take the heat for me. But, I quickly explained that we needed to build up our military because we could not trust these 3 other tribes around us. Instead, if we were to survive as a culture, we needed to pillage the other tribes, subjugate them to our wills, have them build up our empire so we could rule the world.

I then went into a history lesson about the Maori and Moriori tribes; islanders in the Pacific off New Zealand. Basically, the Maori were aggressive people, and the Moriori are a stark example of pacifism. Needless to say, the Moriori do not exist in the true sense of blood preservation, the last true Moriori having died in 1933. This, I stated, was why we needed to conquer these "other" tribes quickly and ruthlessly, lest the above history lesson becomes our current problem.

Well, it didn't go over as well as I had hoped. As a matter of fact, it was flatly rejected many times. And of the 40 people attending, about 10 were male, and in my group, that was 3 out of 10. So, I informed the ladies that it would probably be a necessity - for self preservation - that we institute polygamy. Somehow that didn't fly very well either, and as a matter of fact, some even suggested exiling the males altogther, to which I responded that it would be foolish to make another Isle of Lesbos, all things considered. Silence.

We were given some things to incorporate into our tribe; a deck of cards, some Costa Rican belt thing, a toy C3PO from Star Wars (his eyes lit up when manipulated), some red paper stars, a Disney toy car and that may have been it. I suggested that we make the chrome C3PO our loathing irrational false God of war and destruction. Any tribe that rejected this would be dealt with harshly. Again, perfectly good idea passed over. However, I did get the tribe to agree upon our greeting, which was an animated, "Hey-Yo!" And I sorted out the deck of cards as a form of currency.

Unfortunately, our physical form of greeting was touching fingers a la ET, and we had a revolving leadership which was exchanged via calls of "Marco" and the new leader responding in the obvious "Polo". When asked why, I told them that the famous Italian traveler discovered our greet society. The red paper cards were our form of friendship which we gave (or not) to the other tribes.

The mingling with other tribes was weird. One incorporated the chicken dance, which reminded me that perhaps we should have more seriously considered cannibalism, and that perhaps this tribe tasted like chicken -- there was no way to know without trying... However, for the most part every single tribe was a fun-loving quasi-hippy commune. If given the opportunity, I could have conquered them all single-handedly.

The interesting part, as I knew would come, was the airing of grievances after it was all over. Not surprisingly, I got put on the spot a few times. As a matter of fact, I think my tribe did almost all the talking, while I was busy defending. Naturally, I had history on my side and I based it under a historical social experience, while everyone else was busy trying to "co-exist". People had some issues with the Isle of Lesbos comment, but I explained it wasn't necessarily a reference to lesbians (although that's where the word comes from), but that it was an island exclusive to women, just as my tribe had suggested. The beauty of this is that the instructor took my side and stated that I was obviously "offended" with being excluded and made a natural "knee-jerk" reaction from being rejected. Why, yes, that's exactly it... even better, he had the class thank me collectively for bringing that issue up. This is great!

Interestingly, the British guy there, with classic British stereotypical teeth, was also offended by one of my comments about being an "Indian giver" for being "way off the reservation." Yeah, I got in two comments. Funny thing, someone else defended my statement in that it actually means giving to the Indians, and then taking it back. Not the other way around.

I should be honest in that as soon as the instructor stated he was from Costa Rica, I knew I couldn't do any evil. During the morning I let slip some slang that only a Costa Rican (or "tico") would get, and that prompted him to ask me questions which led to an immediate connection between us two.

I will say that he was an excellent instructor and I had a lot of fun, even if I was deliberately stirring the melting pot. Here's my position on the whole matter -- accept the culture of the country you live in. Do not expect the inhabitants to joyfully embrace yours if you live in their society. In my opinion, cultural diversity is a dividing wedge in society. It singles you out and quickly labels you as different and thus causes strife. Sure, we need to be accepting of other cultures, especially when in the midst of them, but don't expect me to accept it when you are parading down the streets of my nation, demanding citizenship, waving your national flag over mine. You left that country for a reason, now embrace the culture of your future.

Unfortunately, there are so many facets to this, that I don't want to bore you all (14) with my perceptions. But, I would like to say I did have a good time today. And not much was brought up that I had not already considered, that is, being the considerate folk that I am. In the end, magically, no one was offended about anything. We were all pacified like peaceful Moriori tribesmen. Meanwhile, I sharpened my weapons of war...

***Side tangent: Since I somewhat mentioned this, I'll just add that any one who gives you the argument that we should give back to Mexico the states we "stole", let's look at a little bit of history. Who originally owned Mexico? The Aztecs until 1520, then Spain owned it until 1821, then it belong to the country of Mexico, then the US fought for it in 1844-46. Break-down; Aztecs owned it for thousands of years, Spanish owned it for hundreds of years, Mexico owned it for 2 decades, and the US has ever since. I don't hear the Aztecs or Spanish asking for it back, and in my opinion, they certainly should be ahead of the line for it.

Pooring Over It

2008-10-08T20:38:00.000-07:00

I just finished reading a book called Nickel and Dimed; blah, blah, blah. It's written by Debra I'm-a-liberal-feminist-and-refuse-my-husband's last-name Ehrenreich. Someone's gotta keep 'the man' down. Of course, this is a New York Times best seller, like so many other misanthropic, cynical, atheistic, narcissistic, sardonic, pessimistic books out there.

Thankfully, in this book, the PhD educated author goes undercover to live amongst the poor and to be 'poor'. Now, being someone that has been on the poor side, I'll tell you right now she comes off a little haughty every now-and-then. Take this quote from page 8:

"To state the proposition in reverse, low-wage workers are no more homogeneous in personality or ability than people who write for a living, and no less likely to be funny or bright. Anyone in the educated classes who thinks otherwise ought to broaden their circle of friends."

Oh, so you mean low-wage workers are normal people too? Well, at least she figured that out at age 50. There are a few other times as well. Mostly the book comes off as seemingly negative, by my jaded review at least. It isn't until the last 20 pages that the book becomes decent, spitting out statistics here and there, and then the capstone - poor people will undoubtedly remain poor. Well, despite whatever truism there may be in that, things will certainly get worse considering the global market at this point. But, I've covered that before.

I've learned some things in my medium-aged tenure here on ol' blue-n-green. And it does have to do with being poor or not. It doesn't matter so much whether you are smart or not as to whether you will succeed. And in this case, success means not being within the reach of poverty. But I've seen smart people who are poor. No, smart, dumb, tall, short, fat, thin, poverty gets `em all. Except those with ambition and determination. In my opinion, this is the major reason why lots of people break from being poor. Reject the mentality.

Look at Les Schwab, the high school drop-out from Prineville who recently died on top of a $350 million dollar mountain. He once gave a speech at Prineville High to the graduating class of 1997. He openly criticized getting a high school diploma, because, "I didn't need one..." and obviously he was correct. But he did have ambition and determination to succeed. And thus he did. His name will forever be associated with tires and free beef in February.

Now this is not a call to drop out. Statistically speaking, you're welfare bound if you do. The military won't accept you now, even if you have a "Good Enough Degree" in lieu of a diploma. Still, my resounding point being that his author never gave herself an opportunity to succeed in the book. Most jobs she took lasted less than a month, none over 2 months.

She did cite definitive inequalities within some jobs, but also sided that without this, labor would be too expensive and may negatively impact everyone. She ends with saying that there may be anger and strikes, but we will all be better off in the end when there is equality. Probably a vieled call for socialism or communism. I am sure the 13 million illegal immigrants didn't help move this in the right direction (the fundamentals of this book taking place cica 2000, prior to the massive influx of "undocumented workers").

Anyway, back to education, at least with a diploma from high school, or better, you can make the first important steps off getting out of poverty. And let's face it, secondary education favors the poor with regards to funding. It still isn't a guarranty that you will succeed, but it certainly looks good on paper.

Putting aside this jumbled topic, I've since moved on to reading C.S. Lewis stuff. I find it more enlightening on many levels. I'll probably revisit this topic of poverty once I've mulled over the details a little longer. It still urks me, and probably because I've been there, and now I'm here, and I plan to go elsewhere. Or as I've heard before, "To the moon, Alice!" Maybe that's too far...

Messy Greed

2008-09-28T12:30:00.000-07:00

Because I feel the pressure of you all wanting more (and thus far, that would be all 14 of you that have, or had, visited my blog either intentionally or most likely not), I have culled together some more thoughts on the current predicament of our federal government.

I am disgusted because this whole mess is firmly founded on greed. The economy was up, and as such, people felt obligated to spend. And there were plenty of sharks in the water waiting for them in the form of lending for housing.

By definition, what is the American Dream? Well, it isn't really to earn lots of money and be really rich. It is the ability to buy home, settle down, and provide a better life for your family, better than anywhere else. And that's what so many Americans did. Except, they over-extended what they should have deserved. I'm a big proponent of you deserve what you earn. But, the sharks in the water convinced millions of people to take a bigger bite, and to hedge their bets that they could afford more since the economy was doing so well.

As we all know, these sub-prime loans are the primary reason we're in this mess. The financial back-bone of the US is in a crisis, so much so that Congress (the opposite of progress) is now putting together a $700 billion dollar bailout. The rodeo grandmas are already gone it is so bad. You can really blame both parties, as they are both guilty. Believe me, it goes back decades.

The main problem I see is how much it will effect all of us for many years, if not the rest of our years. 5.4% is the anticipated inflation for this year. I get a cost of living increase this year, of 3.2%. I'll get a step increase in June which may make up the difference, but the problem is that inflation is going to be even higher next year. And the federal deficit will eclipse 10 trillion with this bailout. Sure, it's money we mostly owe to ourselves, because we borrow it from the banks that are in need of a bailout right now. But we also owe lots to other countries as well. I've already discussed this before.

Here's where it'll hit us, the consumers who are not in default on our loans, mortgage or otherwise. Gas will go back up, because the dollar will be worth less. And whereas the politicians let the off-shore dirlling ban expire, that will not be a relief anytime soon. And even when that does come online, it'll stil be expensive by then. Oil goes up (already going back up) and goods become more expensive to ship around. Everything goes up in price, and your dollar doesn't stretch as far.

Here's what I don't like; it used to be a wife went to work to get you ahead in life. You were ridiculed for it, and perhaps your family life suffered from it. Then it became a kind of norm for the wife to work as well, thank you women's lib and the rights therein. Now your wife has to work so you can remain in middle-class. Soon, both of you will be working and probably not make any headway. I read an articule the other day that stated it was a "privilege" to say you have a 'stay-at-home' wife. A status symbole of sorts. Will I ever get to say that?

The next thing is that this government buy-out includes buying all these foreclosures at a extremely low option, I've heard as low as .10 on the dollar. Then the government sells these back to buyers at a higher cost, and will recoup their money. They did this during the last depression. But, if some of those houses are along your block, guess what just happened to the value of your home? Ours has dropped $1500 already, and we haven't been her that long. But it'll probably go down even more.

Americans already work too much, stress too much, and take as little as vacation as possible. This will not bode well on many levels. And the greedy live on.

Limivorous: Eating dirt like a worm

2008-09-18T18:51:00.000-07:00

I was engaged in an interesting conversation between a dentist and someone who had once spoken to a nurse. So the credibility took a nose dive on that last source, but hear me out nonetheless.

Clean freaks; to what benefit do they gain for all their overt OCD position? The dentist went on to explain the benefits of your saliva and how it improves from germs, which, in turn, help build your immune system. Naturally I brought up the necessity of swapping spit with ... people. Yeah, no one laughed then either. However, this provoked the conversation to the next level. Our society has become so anti-germ crazy, that we are actually raising a generation without a good immune system. We spend so much time and resources sanitizing our environment, that our immune systems are, in a word, bored.

There's a problem, however. Immune systems actually do not get bored, they get restless and either turn on each other, or worse, cease to be productive at an optimal level. Before I get any further into this, another point was brought up; when you use soaps that sanitize "99.9%" of all germs, that leaves that immune .1% to monopolize and create more problems than the 99.9% probable benign germs would have. That 99.9% was keeping the peace, in a manner of speaking.

Still, let's look at today's society. Lots of problems these days with regards health; more asthma, allergies, colds, and coincidently, unnatural phobia of germs. Our lazy under-worked immune system has its guard down because someone has already killed all the normal germs that our body battled on a daily basis. Everything is filtered, pre-washed, pre-cleaned, recleaned, and thoroughly sanitized.

I'm not against washing hands after going to the bathroom, or changing babies too. No need to throw caution to the wind, whatever that means. And perhaps I should consult a microbiologist or someone else in the necessary fields of study. But in the interim, I think it's time we started eating more dirt to make up for lost opportunity. Maybe my daughter does have a point, but at least she should try to find better quality dirt. Let's have some standards around here.

Hunted by a cougar

2008-09-08T20:35:00.000-07:00

I've trekked through lots of forests up and down the west coast, spanning from Alaska down to deserts in California and Mexico, but I've never been stalked by a cougar... until today.

Ask any moderately drunk individual, and they'll concede that I am a pretty decent looking fellow to behold. Without being imbibed, and I'm just better than marginal, despite telling myself overt pleasantries in the mirror every morning. Roar.

However, today, at my adequate State job, I was cornered rather quickly by an over-40 lady. She was really upfront about it, "I've been checking you out..." and, "I think we should get to know each other better..." and "what is your dating status?" It was kinda awkward, because, this is the first time a "cougar" has taken me on. I guess my musk smell needs to be amped up. Of course, my philosophy is, if you're checking someone out, the first thing you do it look at the left ring finger. That's kind of a tall-tell sign in my opinion. I should add, I really do not know this woman at all, I've been at this job for over 2 months, 6 weeks of which were training.

Over the seven years I've been married (7 years as of today), I've been approached, now, 4 times with extra-marital affair offers. I guess I am starting to look closer to my age if the cougars are coming out of the wood-work. In some regards, I'd rather face a real wild cat in the wilderness, as that would be a cool story, and there'd be no penalty for shooting them. Doesn't translate well into this circumstance, however.

In the end, she thanked me for being honest and faithful to my wife. She, on the other hand, had been married for well over a decade, and now divorced for just under a decade. Still, her parting words were, "look me up if your situation changes or if you're feeling weak." Bold, but not smooth. Maybe I'll cut out personal hygiene... or maybe I'll just start caring a gun.

Bad kitty!

Bad!

Sue the Federal Government

2008-08-31T13:33:00.000-07:00

My thoughts aren't totally clear on this matter, but I grow tiresome of our current government. No, it isn't Bush's fault. It's a conglomerate of all of them. Working together yet not accomplishing anything. I don't mean that by "working together" they are being bipartisan. No, I mean they're all scheming together and rubbing each others backs, while fighting face to face and drawing imaginary lines.

My whole point revolves around something in the Eighties. Back then, I remember talk of the federal deficit, then looming around 4 trillion dollars. It's more than twice that now. But the point is that back then, they were talking about how they needed to end it and not "pass it onto our children" - or something to that effect. Well, here I am, +20 years later, and we've mortgaged huge swaths of our land to other countries to pay our debts. That $150 billion dollar stimulus check we all got a part of a few months ago? From China. Which, as you've all heard, weakened our dollar substantially and caused inflation to surge. Sure, the dollar is recovering, but the trends aren't.

Ed McMahon is in the poor house right now, and Donald Trump is helping him pay his mortgage, or should I say, bought Ed's house and allows him to lease it now. It's a nice publicity for The Hair and Ed retains some dignity. From the reliable radio, I heard that Ed's wife was able to spend $300,000 in one month. Where is the fiscal responsibility? Well, I parry that question to our government. Which leads me to the title topic; We The People, need to sue our government.

Call it a divorce, or whatever. But the fact of the matter is this; these people in our government are not looking out for us, and in turn, have created a culture that unfortunately 90% of US citizens are partaking in: living beyond our means. I'm not blameless, I have debt beyond a mortgage and car payments, and it makes my right eye twitch whenever I dwell on it. But does it bother them at all? Have you heard much about the federal deficit this election year?

Some people are blind to this topic, even though this year we've hit an all-time high, around $700 billion (stimulus check included) in deficit to be added to the overall ~$9.6 trillion, which has been growing for several decades. Next year, thankfully, it'll be under $500 billion to be tacked on top of that by most estiamtes. Sure, the Iraq war is one cost, but it's about 15% of the yearly debt, if even. The real cost is a lack of self-sufficiency. It's an agenda, pushing towards socialism even though we're not. We have so many federal programs, that we don't tax enough to support them.

But, I'm not about to cause a civil war or instigate a revolution or rally for socialism. I think there is much to be salvaged, yet need not to shed our own blood over it. So I suggest the civilized and current American way of life; we sue. Everyone can relate to this method. When I worked at the law firm, a common fact tossed around is that every US citizen gets sued at least 4 times in their life. I've got two done, my wife has one, so we're not half-way there yet, unfortunately. Meh, side tangent. Sorry.

The point is this; we already have the Supreme court justices who have no qualms putting aside public majorities to make asinine laws. This lawsuit against our fiscally irresponsible legislators, even if dismissed, at least sends a message that we are tired of this facade of "all is well." Debtors will want money, and if not money, then our lands. Kinda parallels the whole oil subject, rely on others and their pricing, or drill our own and be self sufficient?

On the frank side of things, I am not sure what "winning" means. If it meant that those of us who agreed with the lawsuit could now abstain from paying federal taxes until fiscal responsibility was met, then I would be pleased (as I could pay off my own debt...). But if it meant we fired the current legislators, well, that may not be a bad thing either. Lord knows some of them need a good sense of humility since they're supposed to be "public" servants.

The fact that lawsuits are up is another good indicator of our times. We're desperate as individuals to make ends meet that we'll go to court over a paint-transfer on a bumper collision. Yet, that may be the means by which we absolve our international debts; "don't collect on this money or we'll annihilate your country. Yes, you technically own Montana and most of Mississippi, but my finger is on the big red scary button, and I've got a headache..."

Let's sue! Because the alternative is to do nothing, which hasn't worked thus far. And don't tell me Obama is the cure. He's rhetoric; they all are.

7 minutes to eternity

2008-08-31T12:54:00.000-07:00

I have heard numerous times, that after you officially drown, you live an additional 7 minutes before your brain shuts down. I can only imagine what goes on during those seven precious minutes. It is a long time, actually. Go ahead and sit there, 7 minutes, immobile, just you and your brain without interruptions.

What brings me to this is a chain of thoughts? This morning I had a dream that a large black shark bit off my left foot. It bleed a lot, but I was not panicky. Well, that is until some local told me the black shark was also poisonous, which, so far as my understanding of sharks, is not possible. Nonetheless, I became concerned at that point despite not feeling like I was poisoned. Since then I have recovered and please refer to me as "stumpy" from now on. Stupid dream.

I have a love-hate relationship with the sea. I love it. I love vast open water, sailing ships, naval vessels and eating fish. On the other side of the spectrum, it also killed my biological father and even swept me out to sea once. Not to mention all the times its beat the crap out of me while body surfing or boogie boarding. So my conclusion is that it hates me, hence the love-hate relationship.

Still, moving the chain of thought from shark bite, to seafaring, to drowned father, to final thoughts, I have to consider the following; what are those final thoughts. Does the proverbial "life flash before your eyes" transpire? Again, seven minutes is a long time, perhaps too long for a "flash", but then, you probably aren't going to live and tell about it either. Bearing in mind that your body has already given up the fight, now it's just your brain mentally tying up loose ends. You're probably sinking, or peacefully resting on the bed of a body of water. Technically, you already look dead.

I would like to think that perhaps my father's last seven minutes were, in part, reflected upon me and hoping for my posterity. In reality, it matters very little and could, on my part, seem selfish. But from my own perspective, that of a husband and father, my worries would be of great magnitude, and then remorse for a million little things that may be trivial or not. I'd be disappointed at the fact that I never conquered the world, metaphorical or literally, with emphasis on the latter. And then the eternal perspective, the great question answered - what happens after death?

It is interesting to note that a former employer of mine has a spouse who was swept out to sea. She was missing for about an hour before she washed up a mile down the beach just as an off-duty EMT was running along, found her, and promptly started CPR. The EMT sent someone to get help, who, by coincidence, flagged down an ambulance returning from a hospital. Everything was in play, and soon she was life-flighted to a hospital, and surprisingly, had a full recovery. Accordingly she holds some miraculous record for being revived after being drowned for an hour. I still talk to her every now-and-then.

Of course, your brain probably isn't as lucid as expected. It's shutting down too. All your motor-skills are gone already. Just you and your thoughts. 7 seven minutes to dwell upon whatever it is you held dear in your finite lifetime. Looking back, will there be a sense of dread - time wasted - as you lose everything. Hmm, on second thought, I'd like to not drown, please. I'll take my chances with the big, black, poison shark, who, unfortunately, has a nasty habit of ankle biting.

About this blog

2008-08-28T21:59:00.000-07:00

The title was not my first choice. Nor my second or third. Coincidently, not my fourteenth or twenty-second. I think it fell somewhere between 38th and 101st. It matterth not, quite frankly. But it is highly probable that I will think up something a little more cunning in the near future. Still, it took almost an hour before this title was found, and by then, I was perturbed just enough to accept it so I could write the first post at 3:30am.

As for my name, The Hero, well, naturally that has a story behind it. I'm not that presumptuous ... yet.

I think it was 1993 -- yeah, pretty sure of it. I'd actually have to check my journal for a more definitive date, but I don't know where it is and also, I am lazy. But, trusting upon my trusty brain, 1993 it is. It centers around two points of history, not far apart in time.

A good but long gone friend of mine, who was my Order of the Arrow adviser as well as excellent cook had some property where we would fire off various weapons. Having been influenced by Lethal Weapon movies and Die Hard mentalities, I attempted to do a roll-and-shoot. Basically, if I could imbue a sense of stupidity into any who reads; you go from a stand, to your belly, and then roll towards the right while firing the hand gun (in this case, an old .38 service revolver). Bullets where flying everywhere. It was immediately recognized as being "stupid" and as soon as I got up, I received quick criticism, with the last retort being, "... way to be the hero."

So, it started out as a rebuttal nickname, of sorts. However, as circumstances would have it, the same adviser would be on a rafting trip with us (which in and of itself is another story). As it turned out, said adviser would wind up getting pinned under water, drowning, and I was able to save him with the help of another scout. From that point, "Hero" changed definitions. I rarely hear this nickname anymore, save for those that were there, either day.

Anyway, there you have a basis of understanding for this blog. Concepts and Judgments was just another way to say "opinions" more or less. Opinions are based on your concept of things, and your judgment on the matter. Of course, some of us are more right than others, right? Sure...

Cheater Genius

2008-08-28T21:37:00.000-07:00

Call Mensa. I recently took this online IQ test, and I got a 147. To qualify for Mensa, the elite society of geniuses, you need a minimum of 145 so you can join the ranks of Stephen Hawkins or Lisa Simpson.

In the Spring Break of `97, a few of us were down in LA, walking around the Hollywood stars and happened upon an Ann Rynd store who were doing personality & IQ tests. At that point, my buddy Roy scored a 142, and I got a 132 or so. It was the low 130s. Good, but not Mensa quality. I wasn't too surprised from my score, I new I was some-what smart, but there was a reason. We opted not to buy the books they were selling there...

Going further back, in my high school, we had The Quiz Bowl. It was an annual event where the top 10 smartest kids in your class participated in a competitive smart-off or what have you. The first year I didn't make it. But last three years I did. I still have some T-shirts from those events. The point of the matter is this; all 4 years, they never changed their pre-qualification questions. Thus I was able to answer three years in a row, correctly, what a periorbital hematoma was (black eye). And if there is something unique about my brain, it feasts on random facts. Just put all that crap in my head, and I'll flush it into a safe place, using it later to impress those who don't flush often. Or something. (Metaphors and analogies aren't my forte.)

So, the next three years I made it onto the Quiz bowl team, then, placed in front of the school during a 2 hour assembly, we battled wits. Well, I didn't. I sat there, immutable, watching my team mates answer. I attempted one question only, "Kentucky is bordered by 7 seven states, name five of them." I missed it by adding North Carolina. Coincidently, I have since had a overt interest in maps and geography. Making up for that loss I suppose, even though we won overall.

Which brings me back to my supposed 147 IQ. Yeah, I've taken that same IQ test thrice over the past few years. I'm getting better every time. Is that cheating? Maybe. Or maybe they should change their material. Either way, doesn't hurt the ol' ego. And Lord knows I don't need any more maps. I probably don't need Mensa either.

Interestingly, as we were leaving the Ann Rynd store, I was told that my personality was best suited for acting. Funny, in that actors think their pretty smart too...

Excellence in Mediocrity

2008-08-18T21:52:00.000-07:00

I work for "The State" which means a lot of things to many people. Coincidently, there is a lot of truism in the maxim "good enough for government work" although it technically does not apply to my area as funding is highly associated with accuracy.

Nonetheless, I was obligated to attend an awards ceremony earlier. When you add food to the agenda, you don't even need to ask me to attend. I'll be there. Free food is a driving force in my life. Interestingly, so is diarrhea. There could be a correlation, but I refuse to acknowledge it.

As the awards moved on, there were some that I could endorse -- 30 years working for The State, etc. Towards the bottom of the barrel, the awards struggled to be good. Two categories that caught my attention were 'an award for having your computer turned on the most at 8am exactly; an award for taking the most punctual lunch break consecutively.' How do you applaud that sort of an award? Like this, the slow meaningful clap, nodding appropriately while holding a contrite face as if you narrowly lost it, but it couldn't have gone to a better contender.

Sure, these may be pet awards so that everyone is a winner. Or worse -- it could be what I am striving to achieve myself. I hope not, because I don't want them. If I ever did win it, then I'd consider myself a drone. And that leads into my next issue; a calm sea of blandness.

At The State, it seems that personality, character, or anything that would differentiate you from the cubicle sheep is a no-no, despite "celebrating diversity" (another issue for another day). No one stands out really. No one dares to and I am sure I'll learn why as well. Until then, it's to the assimilation blocks.

It should be noted that I do appreciate my job, but at the same time, I never feel like I should suggest much of anything because someone will feel you are usurping their position or even appearing like you could get a position they want. Someone complained when I stated the Nazi's were stupid. Apparently my opinion didn't fly with someone who didn't think the Nazi's were stupid. So now I am rather unassuming, blending neatly into an ocean of blandness. Some day I'll get the dream job within The State, but by then, I'll be gazing the same grass as my fellow peers. Happy, bland sheep in a sea of 5 foot cubicles.

The Recurring Nightmare

2008-08-11T02:46:00.000-07:00

I couldn't sleep. Not at first, anyway. And in retrospect, it was my fault because I took a nap earlier in the afternoon. I am totally against naps; for if I take one, then I know the consequences later on, the same one I faced this night when I tried to fall asleep.

Anyway, that's not the point.

I have a nightmare, and it isn't like normal ones people have. People dream of being chased or falling, or whatever. Those don't bother me. I have an acute ability to control many aspects of my dreams. I even have a journal specifically kept for recording dreams, although it isn't as up-to-date as I used to keep it. Still, it's there, detailed in many regards, and seemingly interesting to many people who happen to read it (it's not that personal to me). Yet this dream from an hour ago, is one of a few that I normally would not record. But, I think it is time I started.

I was at an old house, classic white paint on the outside, expected farm house decor inside. The interesting thing about this house is that it had a courtyard in the backyard, with these extending arms of the house encompassing the area. And it was large, very large, with the arms of the house coming together at a point that made a smaller building which I think was an old carriage or maybe laundry spot from older times. Maybe even a deluxe outhouse. The point is that you could walk on these covered wings around the courtyard and make a big circle.

Now, dreams by nature are very cloudy, so I have to be careful at times and not 'fill in the blanks' where no details really are. So, I cannot say why I was there, or why, in reflection, I opted to stay the night there, or specifically, why we decided to sleep in the courtyard save for the fact it was a bright starry night. As for the general setting, it was out in the countryside, but there were neighbors not too far off in the distance.

As for who was there, obviously me, some 6-7 year old little girl named "Kelli" and then another adult female who may or may not have been my wife. And again, we decided to sleep outside in the courtyard, although I remember not having a sleeping bag -- just a bunch of thing blankets and a pillow. Though, that didn't seem to bother me and we were giddy about the whole ordeal.

I should mention that this farm house is abandoned. Yeah, I know, that makes a huge difference. The paint is chipping, the wood is rotting, and we're sleeping next to an old fire pit that transients had created some time ago. We didn't light it, but naturally you gravitate towards such areas for camping. And the there are large swaths of dead grass areas around and near the fire pit.

Sleep comes, sorta. For the adult woman, she has no trouble sleeping and is out soon. But Kelli and I don't get to sleep. Actually, we feel weird. She and I are closest to each other while the other person is below next to our feet. (As a matter of reference, the woman is closer to the extra building and we're more towards the house.) This weirdness is something of uneasy feeling, kind of hard to describe, but eventually we hear words, slowly, a murmur, hoping it is something it is not, and then it is clear; "A woman was murdered here. Help me!"

Kelli and I are instantly whispering to each other. But it feels like we can't speak very loudly as we couldn't roust the other woman at all. Still, the same phrase keeps getting repeated and Kelli is in a state of shock, barely making audible noises. At least once I get up to survey the area -- just to make sure this isn't a hoax. But it isn't, and I knew it wasn't. I did, however, establish a point of origin. Next to the fire pit, closer to us two, is a dead patch of grass that looks as though oil had been spilled over it. Standing in that area caused me to be very nauseous and hear the words clearly, "...murdered and burnt here..."

At the same time, I felt very trapped when I got back into my bedding. Why did I get back into the bedding, I know not. But I was pinned in it. And I couldn't speak well. And so many other things occupying my mind, cluttering it from sensible thinking. I was still trying to communicate with Kelli, but felt powerless at the same time. But what else, the woman, or as I concluded, ghost, had ceased to speak, but some power was still over me.

The night ended, morning came, and camp was adjourned. Only Kelli and I had noticed (or experienced) the incident. Yet somehow, this tall guy whom I instantly distrusted with thinning hair and a shirt he was swimming in, somehow, talked us into staying another night, but not only that, staying outside. Was he going to do it? No. Just us three, and by that I mean us two since the woman adult would be asleep, probably. Maybe he was a Realtor, ya never know.

I kind of expedited that last paragraph, but the details for that part are seemingly non consequential. But here is what happened...

She fell asleep, immediately. No surprise there. And as the night edged on, the whispering leached from the ground. Inaudible at first, but slowly, carefully, repeated precisely the same message as before. Again Kelli and I confirmed our ears. Kelli hid under her blankets and wept quietly. I was looking all over for a glimpse or something. But she stopped speakingly suddenly. And for a second, my thoughts were collected, I could breathe and we were getting out of there.

Until the real issue of my nightmare began. These are the things that I dare not write before, but I know them to be accurate. It is at this time of my dream that real power takes control of my capacity. Real, unmitigated raw power. It ceased me by the neck, held me down and squeezed violently. I knew what it was.

My first experience of knowing there were unseeable evil forces out there was 10 years ago, while I was living in Monmouth. I was a hedonistic fellow of sorts, not having too much care in the world. Not sure where I was going one particular afternoon, but I happened to walk by a TV that was on in the living. No one else was home, but then, there were 3-6 guys living in the house at any given time. It was an big, old TV, connected to a satellite dish that got only 6 channels or so, still, it was free. One of them was MTV2, before MTV ruined it. Back then, all they did was play music videos and the only commercials were for the channel itself, "Watch MTV2!" Done deal.

On that after afternoon, I was walking by when the video of Aphex Twins, "Come to Daddy" played. I watched it because, I thought, it was intriguing. A bunch of sadistic little children, all wearing a quasi-demonic face, going around beating up old people. Then they all come running home to this demon with the exact same face who yells full force into this old lady's face. It was ... something else.

People talk about the "still, small voice" of the Holy Ghost/Spirit. I can't claim much of the same, but I can tell you this; when that music video came to an end, there was a voice, clear as bell ringing, which said, "That could be your power..." And I knew from that point that evil is very real. I wasn't sure what that power exactly was -- leading children astray, but I do know that I was alone, and those words were inches from my ear.

So I have dreams of people I know being possessed right before my eyes. It's Emily Rose all over the place. And the first thing I do is rebuke them in God's name. It used to work like lightening, but over the years, as I've learned to quickly recognize these in my dreams, something else has begun to happen: they immediately use their power to cease my throat and choke off my words before I can say it. I didn't even perceive it this time, however.

Thus my dream continues, with my airflow surrendered to an unseen force, pinned down in my blankets, with no one to aide me as my life gets pushed under. So as I lay there without options, one finally did occur; to pray. And as soon as that lucid thought entered my mind, I woke up. It was all gone. Just another epiphany to my testament of good versus evil. And it is scary. It's after 4am, I'm not sleepy. Concerned. That battle is up a notch and I've got to find a new tactic.

Of course, I prayed. Said a long one. Then I listened to the floorboards creep upstairs, and then some rabid raccoon gutted a squirrel next door. Thing sounded maniacal, greedily eviscerating the other animal midst painful screams. Didn't help at all. But I don't fear those sorts of things, that's why there are guns, if needed. But what do I do for something that has taken a more strategic tactic? I guess I pray...

In an attempt to understand my dream, I recognize the following; spirits yield to higher powers, so that ghost probably wanted attention, specifically, an acceptable ending to a traumatic end. But I suspect she was sacrificed and her body of evidence burned away. Still, she was also an invitation to something worse, which ceased upon me -- a first for me.

Oh, that video is on youtube, not that I'll watch it again, and not that you'll get the same experience, but for matter of reference you know where to go.