Big Frick's Blog

New Big Frick

2009-11-30T21:52:00.002-06:00

BigFrick.com is taking a new direction. We will be back with daily postings of the new and improved BigFrick.com starting December 7th.

The Modern Myth Part 3

2009-11-24T19:33:00.004-06:00

Our mythic fable continues.

As the sun rose on that fateful day over the now disassembling Mother Pangaea it was indeed a brave new world. For within the once-inorganic pools that Pangaea held within her bosom the first sign of life began to spring forth.

A single Mother cell, having been animated by the inanimate chemicals and elements of the newly formed earth, began to multiply and divide into more living cells. The unwritten law of natural progression which had forced a single electron to create more electrons was now being fulfilled once again in the creation of life itself. No longer would this barren, inhospitable planet house nothing more than rock and rain, element and gas. Slowly but surely, over perhaps hundreds of millennia the once dead pools of the dying Mother Pangaea began to teem with life.

Some of these life cells fell to the cold dark bottom of the pool while others remained afloat in the warm sunlit waters. Each cell, affected by its chosen environment, began to react in different ways. As the cells multiplied it was as if the spirits of the Alpha Electron, Mother Rock and Mother Pangaea dwelled within their very soul, coaxing and prodding, urging and calling in unison the natural law that had driven their very existence, “Become more” they said “You must become more.” It was this simple instruction that was the genesis of the DNA helix. Each cell needed to adapt to its surroundings, multiply and carry copies of this now-encoded law to further the process of evolution.

As these original life cells died their remains were used to nourish new forming cells. Their life and fate fulfilled their remains, once consumed, now served to further evolve the DNA strands creating yet more new life forms. Life fulfilled, death with purpose. The cells continued to multiply but their altered DNA instructed them to become more. No longer driven to separate they began to form simple multi-cell organisms. Much like Mother Rock had accumulated the atomic debris, these multi-celled organisms began to join together exponentially creating a multitude of life forms filling each pool of the now separating land masses.

Driven by their altered DNA strands some were destined to remain docile while others were driven to become aggressive. It had taken millions of years, but an actual order began to take shape in the primordial ooze of the life giving pools. The aggressive life forms feasted on their passive partners, growing stronger and continuing to evolve. The passive organisms found refuge in the cold dark depths of the pool, keeping them safe from the ravenous feeding frenzy occurring in the warmer waters. These passive life forms accumulated on the rocky bottom. They eventually evolved into plant life and grew to such great numbers that they began to expand up the side walls of the pool toward the water’s edge. Many were lost in the struggle but their population was so vast and the environment so fertile that enough survived to actually begin to populate the rocks above the waterline.

The aggressive organisms evolved as well becoming many forms of aquatic life. The expansion of plants into the sunlight caused some of the famished aquatics to follow, eventually adapting sufficiently that they too could live above water. Driven by the inner call to become more the plants developed wide leaves to catch sunlight and the now land based animals developed teeth to eat the leaves and eventually each other.

The newly created plant life spread through simple expansion, but the aquatics needed to further evolve, first to exchange their gills for oxygen breathing lungs and then to develop a strong skeletal frame to support their growing weight on land. At first they slithered in the mud but the drive to become more was too strong to ignore and eventually legs replaced fins, eyes grew sharp and tiny brains developed to control the movements. No longer tied to simply reflex the evolving animals became superior to the plants.

That superiority allowed the animals to flourish, no longer shackled to the boundaries of the water. As plant life expanded and grew taller, so too the hungry animal life adapted and grew taller along with it. It seemed as though nothing could stop this express train of evolution all driven by an unceasing inner calling to become more.

What had started as a simple static charge in the vast void of space had now turned into a crowded array of living plants, fish, reptiles and eventually mammals. It was as if the earth had been created as a kingdom in search of a king. Who would become the absolute ruler over all this bounty? It would be the species that best followed natures call to become more.

Thick skin, fur and feathers replaced scales and now able to survive the sun’s heat and the evening cool animals found refuge in every conceivable area. As small fur bearing tree dwellers gazed over the fertile plane it was as if they knew that those who could become more and control their own destiny would certainly be the supreme leaders of this evolving food chain. Though now filled with countless varieties of life, the canvas was once again blank waiting for a master painter who could use intellect to create a new picture.

The sun would continue to rise and set hundreds of millions of times, but one dawn was coming that would not be like any other.

For it would be the dawn of man.

Our myth continues tomorrow.

The Modern Myth Part 2

2009-11-23T17:01:00.002-06:00

Our mythic fable continues.

Our newborn earth was a far different place then the one we call home today. On a smaller scale, but similar to the emptiness of pre-atomic space, it was a canvas void of life, hope and god. The molten surface hissed with noxious gasses and ebbed and flowed at the will of the gravitational big brother sun. As it spun on it’s newly created axis it cooled creating a rocky crust, carrying the maternal resemblance given it by Mother Rock.

Gasses continued to be created and released by the still forming planet. Sulfur, nitrogen, hydrogen and oxygen were just some of the byproducts of this raging torrent struggling to survive in its earliest phase of planetary infancy. The heat of the still flowing magma and the cooling of the infant shell caused the hydrogen and oxygen molecules to join, almost as if in tribute to the ancestral electrons trillions of years earlier. Moisture developed in the newly established atmosphere and for the first time in all time water formed and fell on the still smoldering surface in the form of rain. It was as if tears of joy were flowing from the spirit of Mother Rock on her proud descendent planet earth. And flow they did.

Great rivers formed which fed even greater lakes. Lakes grew into oceans and after billions of years of constant torrents the oceans joined together, uniting until much of the young planet was covered with water. Only one rocky crag remained jutting out of the almost all-consuming master ocean known as Panthalassa. For a new mother had survived and risen above this ocean’s caustic waves. The earth had existed some 4 billion years but now witnessed the birth of the mother continent of Pangaea.

Mother Pangaea was stark and desolate, her only inhabitants were her self-made mountains which grew to great heights only to tumble into the sea and increase her rocky shore. While made of rock she remained as unstable as the chaos that created her. Huge scars formed across her barren landscape from massive quakes which broke her apart into movable plates floating on the earth’s molten core. Perhaps it was the hopeless desolation that caused Pangaea to nearly self destruct before she even had a chance to fulfill her destiny. Or perhaps it was the spirit of Mother Rock that dwelled deep within her; guiding her to the eternal truth that only through destruction can we create life.

As Mother Pangaea continued to shift and move pools of caustic rain formed in her deep scars. These pools were heated by the still-escaping gasses trapped deep in the earth’s core. The pools heated to steam and rained back down onto the rocky plane. The heat of day and cool of night caused changes in atmospheric pressure creating winds of mixing gasses. There were great storms and hurricanes which battered Mother Pangaea before they moved out to sea. The pools grew in size and as they did gasses and chemical elements mixed as if in a massive cauldron. But this was no ordinary brew.

Within the pools lay all the elements of life, waiting as if for a cue to reach the exact temperature and mixture to begin their most remarkable transformation. For Mother Pangaea was indeed doomed to the destruction of her moving plates. Soon she would die in childbirth like Mother Rock before her, and become but a memory as each of her offspring traveled in their own direction creating the firmaments we now know as continents.

But before her final quake she surrendered her very soul to the nurturing pools of primordial ooze held within her bosom. For it was her chemical elements and her loving heat that would incubate the inanimate into something other than just another new element. As her pools reached their ideal temperature and the winds of toxic gasses swirled into the atmosphere replaced by an air supply rich in oxygen the elements combined into a single cell. A cell so new, so unique, so infinitely hopeful that Mother Pangaea no longer rued her own demise.

Having faithfully fulfilled her destiny Mother Pangaea willfully drifted into pieces having not only created the seven great continents but also having created the Mother Cell of life itself.

Our modern myth continues tomorrow.

The Modern Myth - Part 1

2009-11-22T17:59:00.002-06:00

In a time of countless repeats and endless sequels who says we don’t have any good stories anymore?

Many consider the ancient Greeks to be the master myth makers, but I must disagree. The Greek mythic fables were designed and created as a form of upper class amusement and peasant pleasure. Ripe with imagery the moral underpinnings were clear even though the stories themselves were often like fantastic dreams. But if you are looking for the true masters of myth manufacture one need look no farther than modern man. For here the myths go beyond entertainment, beyond the boundaries of whimsical imagination and with ever-increasing sincerity are thrust into the public consciousness until they become accepted as truth.

Historically the most memorable myths usually follow a predictable and oft repeated plotline. The myths of modern man follow in those same well worn footprints. The victorious conquest of good over evil, life over death and karma over hopelessness. Add on a liberal dose of unexplainable magic and its all there. The makings of a great modern myth.

Our modern myth begins in space. Referring to space, as gene Roddenberry did, as the final frontier only served to bring it full circle as it was the original frontier as well.

In the dark void of endless space nothingness was surrounded by nothingness. No life, no joy, no hope, no gods, no Starbucks, just the cold emptiness of endless space. But within the blank canvas of everlasting emptiness developed a small static charge, perhaps as a result of nothing rubbing against nothing. From this charge came the infinitesimal power to create a single electron. As this lone electron dashed headlong through the void it created yet more static which not only created more electrons but forced each of them to bend into an ever-tightening tail-chasing concentric path. Each of these brave electrons raced aimlessly in their circular sojourns, eventually being drawn together into groups and, like the tiger that chased Little Sambo around the tree until he turned into butter, formed the nucleus of the first atomic particles. Free from all bondage and restrictions these first atoms grew in strength until they could no longer bear their own weight. It was then these genesis atoms imploded into themselves causing subatomic novas. As faint and infinitely small as they were, for the first time in all time there were flashes of light piercing the blackness as each imploded. And with the birth and death of these oracles of origin came the scattered debris of what had once existed. These spent atomic particles, having lived their lives to the fullest now served their final destiny. From the ashes of their remains rose the Phoenix that would over trillions of years accumulate to become the Mother Rock of our universe. Life fulfilled. Death with purpose.

As Mother Rock grew she too followed the same unwritten law of natural progression eventually becoming so dense that, like her atomic ancestors, she could no longer bear her own atomic weight and for the first time in all time the sound of a massive implosion broke the eternal silence of space. It was of course what we now call the Big Bang. For Mother Rock burst forth, not in death, but in life as her massive implosion caused a nuclear reaction igniting a colossal ball of heat and energy. From the Mother came the Sun. The implosion cast additional offspring populating the four corners of the endless void. The molten fragments of trillions of years of accumulated atomic remains decorated the darkness by reflecting the wondrous light being shown by the sun. The largest chunks formed the planets, several of which began to make orbital circles around this new blazing center-point, almost as if in reverent memory to their ancestral electrons. You see the newly created Sun had developed a strong attracting force that kept eight of its closest brothers and sisters in perpetual concentricity. While each of these siblings were dwarfed by their superior kin they all developed their own levels of force which today we call gravity. Almost as if in an act of juvenile jealousy these subservient siblings held their own smaller underlings in their gravitational grip. We know these today to be the moons.

Each of the eight continued to tumble and spin, becoming rounder and denser as they cooled. Each took their own course around their now radiant brother, never to leave his side again.

And as the dust settled the sky began to lighten, for the first day had dawned on planet earth.

Our myth continues tomorrow.

A Dog's Tale

2009-11-18T15:31:00.002-06:00

Ahhhh, the joy of being a dog.

Did you ever try to point at something you wanted your dog to look at? If your dog is anything like mine what they end up looking at is your pointing hand (at least mine does on those rare occasions when she actually takes a break from her nap and has her eyes open). To the dog your hand is not a symbol for something else or an instructive tool to direct their attention elsewhere. It’s the hand that feeds them, the hand that pets them and in hopefully rare occasions the hand that reprimands them. You put your hand out so they figure you must want them to look at the hand. It’s a pretty simple way to approach life.

We, on the other hand (pun intended), spend so much time looking for hidden meanings and explanations that we often miss the obvious in search of the obscure. We argue and debate just about every issue until every minuscule detail becomes a quantum physics project where all true meaning is lost in the endless theory of the ultimate possibility.

Where Pavlov trained his dog’s subconscious to cause it to salivate at the sound of a bell, Americans have been trained to accept that everything resides in a gray area, where there is no real truth and no distinction between right and wrong. Our lives are controlled by market tested catch phrases and slogans designed to make us feel a certain way regardless of how plausible the reality of the premise. The shibboleths of Hope and Change are a perfect example of how easily we can be misled in a desire to find inner meaning while ignoring the obvious.

Hope and Change can mean just about anything to anybody, for as each person considers its meaning they shade it with their own life experience and innermost wishes. These two catch words bring with them the infinite possibility of happiness and security in the future. It’s kind of like buying a lottery ticket. With each dollar spent comes the hope of a mega-million dollar payday and the change that will have on our lives and those we care about. But while buying a lottery ticket may give us a temporary dream of opulent living it is not a sound long-term financial plan. If you have a dollar to spend on the lottery by all means go for it, but if you are looking to cash in what is left in your 401K and increase your chances by buying as many tickets as that will pay for you will likely be sorely disappointed unless you don’t mind the long line at the soup kitchen.

That ill-conceived draining of already diminished financial resources is exactly what the Senate is considering with the renewed push to pass the ObamaCare healthcare package. We have been programmed by the political left wing and their partners in the major news media to look at the word healthcare as a symbol for something else rather than taking it at face value. When we hear the word healthcare on the six o’clock news it is now inexorably tied in our psyche to the faceless millions that liberals claim are somehow not capable of participating in it. We have lost the simplistic common sense shown by man’s best friend to simply look at healthcare for what it is, healthcare.

We are heading down the dangerous path where every aspect of our lives needs to be tied to some symbol of serving the greater good. As it relates to healthcare, diminishing services to everyone will be to no one’s benefit. The recent government sponsored report recommending a reduction in cancer screening is a perfect example of this. It’s time we started taking things at face value rather than looking for theoretical advancements through reduced expectations.

The success of any good magician in getting his audience to look where he’s pointing and not at his hand. In magic it’s called misdirection; in politics it’s called Hope and Change.

Fearing Sarah

2009-11-17T16:17:00.003-06:00

The fear is palpable.

Having followed politics for many years I can honestly say that I have never witnessed an individual with absolutely no political power that strikes the level of abject terror into the hearts of liberals like Sarah Palin.

Ronald Reagan made liberals jittery so they tried to portray him as a tottering old war monger. But Jimmy Carter had succeeded in running the country’s economy into the ground, had his brother drinking beer and peeing on the flowers in the White House rose garden and made America a laughing stock around the world with his handling of the Russian invasion of Afghanistan and the Iran hostage debacle, so much so that by the end of his first term even Attila the Hun would have been seen as an acceptable alternative.

George W Bush certainly raised panic in the liberal community with his successful tax cuts and his firm handling of one of America’s greatest tragedies on 9-11. Every effort was made to detract from his accomplishments through deception and fabrication, all of which was gleefully disseminated by a liberal press anxious to oust him. Try as they might Americans still preferred him to the cardboard John Kerry, which allowed the liberals another four years of Bush is Hitler comparisons.

But these were conservative men wielding great power. Sarah Palin holds no political office. She has no power outside of her own personal comments. She can pass no laws nor can she create any bills. Her only claim to fame is as the ex-Governor of Alaska and as a failed candidate for Vice President. Why then does this political has-been still evoke such a strong sense of terror and trepidation with the mere mention of her name?

As Palin’s book “Going Rouge” makes its way onto store shelves it already holds a place on the New York Times Bestsellers List. Sarah has something to say and Americans are eager to hear it. But it is more than that. You can fact check what Sarah Palin says by the way she lives. Palin is a liberal’s worst nightmare, an honest conservative woman that not only talks the talk but walks the walk. If you want to fact check her dedication to getting rid of corrupt politics, just look at her record and the long list of enemies she made cleaning up politics in Alaska. If you want to fact check her views on conservative financial reform, just look at her record of reform in Alaska and more importantly look at her lifestyle. If you want to fact check her sincerity on her beliefs in the Right to Life you need look no farther than the Downs Syndrome baby in her arms.

Liberals are so desperate to find something, anything, to throw at Sarah Palin that Newsweek’s latest issue cover photo uses an old picture taken for an issue of Runner’s World magazine as an attempt to create a demeaning sexist cheesecake pinup. The Huffington Post is so desperate to slam Palin’s new book that they published a critical review by someone that admits they haven’t even read the book.

If Sarah ever had any hope of garnering even a smattering of support from the liberal feminist sisterhood she has long since abandoned those hopes. Sarah Palin is successful because she is everything the feminists are not and more importantly she is not what they propose women to be. Sarah Palin is not a victim.

That in a nutshell is why Sarah Palin strikes such terror into the beating liberal heart. She does not claim to be a victim and she fights victimization. Her book is part political memoir and part personal autobiography. She does not claim to be a victim of deprived birth by being raised in the wilds of Alaska; in fact she makes it clear she views that as making her stronger. She does not claim to be a victim of genetic defect with the birth of her handicapped son, but rather uses it to show the true meaning of love. Even in the chapters that deal with her frustrations in the handling of the McCain Palin campaign she does not claim to be a victim but rather a fighter that stood up for what she believed, win or lose.

Never in the history of presidential politics has the vice-presidential candidate had so much blame heaped on them for the failure of the ticket. Even ex-vice-presidents that later ran and lost a presidential bid did not receive such glaring culpability. But Palin came through it wiser and stronger. Will she run for office in 2012? Who knows?

But what has liberals worried is not what she does in 2012. It’s what she does between now and then.

Chinese Take-Out

2009-11-16T20:10:00.003-06:00

To say the least, Obama does not have it “Made in China”.

The current trip of Barack Obama to meet with the leaders of China is a perfect illustration of what happens when a man who depends solely on style over substance meets a culture that is not impressed by his panache.

China is the very archetype of the change Barack Obama spent years promising to America. While the change has occurred over the past few decades, the redefinition of China from a minor trading partner to a burgeoning world super power has been sure and steady. And when you consider the size of the country and population and where they are now versus where they were in 1988 the remarkable transformation has actually occurred at near light speed.

In many ways the Chi-Coms and Obama have a lot in common. The changes made in China were imposed by a dictating party that simply refused to allow anything, including human life, to get in the way of its relentless pursuit of change. It wasn’t that the people of China decided they would rather move off their rural farms and become industrial workers living in congested cities. The government came in and told the masses it was what they wanted. There was no concern for individual rights or freedoms. In China you are free to do what the government tells you to do and have the right to agree with their authority. All dissenters meet with a fate almost as bad as a pissed off Nancy Pelosi.

But while the governing communist party has some admiration for the way Obama has shotgunned his socialist agenda through the Halls of Congress, they are far less impressed with him as it relates to their own interest.

The old Obama duende that served him so well in the United States and Europe has failed to woo the Chinese. While Obama came prepared with a steamer trunk full of well honed phrases and ghost written speeches the Chinese were more interested in getting clarification to the rhetoric. As has been the case for his entire political career, all of Barack Obama’s duplicitous though eloquent parol can be stymied by asking the simple question “What does that mean”, for which of course he has no answer.

Instead of finding a submissive partner Barack Obama is now confronted with a force of will that he has not experienced before. Along with holding sizable stakes in other world markets China enjoys a veritable oligopoly in the world market for US Treasury bonds. They do not view the United States so much as a partner as they do an investment and they don’t like what they are seeing in the way this president and his faithful minions in congress are handling their less than hard earned Yuan.

George Bush used every available resource to avoid instituting tariffs and trade restrictions with China, not because he was unaware of some of their unfair trade practices but because he understood that any trade restrictions would be met with equal countermeasures from China on our products. Manufacturing in the United States was kept afloat in the face of the early economic downturn by the increase in exports into Chinese markets. The complete inexperience of Barack Obama in global trade issues coupled with a world view that was bought and paid for by American labor unions leads this community activist president to be clueless as to the ramifications of his misguided actions. He is getting a crash course in it now by a less than friendly audience.

Obama will spend the next few days in China and he will be treated with all the respect due an American president, but make no mistake about it, the Chinese know a patsy when they see one. It will be interesting to see what happens as the old Obama magic fails to bring the tears of joy and hyperventilation so common in other venues.

Barack Obama could end up looking like Kanye West opening for Larry the Cable Guy at a VFW convention.

You gotta know your crowd.

The Audacity of Political Correctness

2009-11-15T18:21:00.004-06:00

By definition, to be frank means to be:
1: marked by free, forthright, and sincere expression or explanation

By definition to be Barney Frank means to be: 1. absolutely none of the above.

Congressman Barney Frank made the news again this past week when it was revealed that he was present at his homosexual lover’s home when police arrived and arrested James Ready for cultivation and possession of marijuana as well as possession of drug paraphernalia. Mr. Ready was not suffering from the adverse side effects of chemotherapy nor does he have glaucoma so his apparent use of the drug was strictly recreational. Congressman Frank admitted he was “surprised and disappointed” by what police found at his intimate friend’s house, which included some sizable pot plants growing in the yard. He also claimed he had no idea his friend was using illegal drugs.

When asked by the local news media how he could claim to have no knowledge when the drugs were being cultivated and grown at the house Barney did what he always does when confronted with indisputable evidence, he went on the offensive and played on the blind faith stupidity of his constituents.

After chiding the inquiring reporter for questioning his sincerity Frank said he is “not a great outdoorsman” and “wouldn’t recognize most plants”.

Really Barney? Are you really expecting Americans to believe that an adult who has served in the United States Congress since 1981 doesn’t know what a pot plant looks like? Most second graders in this country could identify a pot plant.

But Barney Frank learned years ago with the Stephen Gobie incident that the key to defending yourself in situations where you are obviously guilty is to deny, deny, deny. And if the questioning persists, simply claim you are a victim of circumstance and a target because you are homosexual.

In the Gobie scandal Congressman Frank was found to have paid the male prostitute Gobie $80.00 for a sex act. I’m not sure what that act was, but it must have tickled Big Barney’s fancy as he then hired Gobie as an aide and paid him $20,000 in unreported income from his taxpayer supported congressional expense budget. He also gave Gobie use of his car and falsified statements written on his official congressional stationary to fix 33 parking tickets Gobie received using the congressman car. I can only imagine that whatever Gobie did for $80.00, he did a lot more of it for a tax free 20 grand and a free car. The coup de grace for the Gobie affair was when it was discovered that while serving as Frank’s aide Gobie was also running a male whorehouse out of the congressman’s home. Once again Congressman Frank denied all knowledge. I guess he’s not much of an indoorsman either.

The bottom line is that Barney Frank’s complete disregard for the law in associating with people growing drugs and operating a homosexual prostitution ring makes him somebody I wouldn’t want living on my street much less holding the chairmanship to the incredibly powerful House Financial Services Committee. This committee oversees the entire financial services industry, which includes the securities, insurance, banking, and housing industries. Remember it was through this committee that Fannie May and Freddie Mac were congressionally mandated to loan mortgage money to people who had no ability to pay it back, which in turn nearly collapsed the entire world's credit markets.

So how does a recidivist, licentious degenerate like Barney Frank stay in office and more importantly gain power? Through the unbridled use of the same political correctness that allowed a Muslim extremist to remain on post, walk into an Army Soldier Readiness Center and gun down 13 unarmed victims. When confronted Barney Frank will always claim to be a victim of discrimination by homophobes. No Democrat is willing to stand up and take action for fear of being accused of homophobic behavior just like no military officer was willing to risk being called intolerant of a Muslim.

If the people of the Massachusetts 4th Congressional District wish to have Barney Frank as their representative, so be it. But the rest of the country has a say in who controls the US House and Senate and therefore who sits in the chairmanships of this nation’s most important governing committees.

Political correctness will kill this country. Reality always wins.

A Fish Story

2009-11-11T16:19:00.005-06:00

Give a man a fish and he’ll eat for a day. But give a man a 33% stake in a major American automaker and he’ll eat really well for a very long time.

Quietly, almost imperceptibly, the news hit the wires that two more United Auto Workers locals overwhelmingly rejected proposed changes to their labor contracts with Ford. The reports which came out late in October were shuffled way down the priority list of the major news organizations in favor of stories pertaining to the ObamaCare bill making its way through Congress.

The stories of the nationalized healthcare plan have dominated the headlines, but this story of the autoworkers union rejecting needed concessions with the one “Big Three” carmaker that refused to sell its soul to the government is a perfect example of how government intrusion into the workings of private industry can destroy the industry it purports to be saving.

Ford has been seeking to bring its labor contract into parity with the revised labor contracts of its major competitors, the now nationalized General Motors and Chrysler corporations. On October 29th the Associated Press reported a 75 percent no vote by the UAW members at Ford’s Saline, Michigan parts plant and a 90% no vote by its members at Ford’s Dearborn, Michigan research and engineering facility. Ford currently employs 41,000 UAW members in the United States. The votes in Michigan have been mostly negative while votes in other parts of the country, like the Louisville facility, have been much closer. Overall the concessions requested by Ford have been voted down by almost a two to one margin.

The concessions Ford is requesting would freeze entry level wages and require some higher skilled workers to perform more than one job. The union would also have to agree to a no-strike clause on issues relating to wages and benefits but would still be able to strike for other issues. In return Ford has agreed to give each member a $1000.00 bonus if the concessions are approved and guarantees of future work with new product commitments at several facilities. Even the union president has stated that the concessions would save some 7000 union jobs. But the rank and file has been quick to reject any compromise.

And why should they?

When General Motors and Chrysler finally succumb under the weight of years of unrealistic labor contracts the government stepped in and took over. In an unprecedented act of unconstitutional power, Barack Obama fired General Motors CEO Rick Wagoner and developed a settlement that allowed the government to take control of these longtime American icon companies, giving a 33% ownership stake to the unions. Ford CEO Allan Mulally who was all too familiar with government intrusion from his 37 years with Boeing chose to reject government support and saved Ford from a similar fate.

In order to remain competitive Ford must now bring their cost structure in line with its major competitors. But where is the incentive for union workers to come to a realistic agreement if they know that failure to do so will simply allow the government to step in and give them the same stock incentives as GM and Chrysler workers?

With the continued death spiral of new car sales after the completion of the Cash for Clunkers program it doesn’t take a degree in economics to see the peril American carmakers are in. Barack Obama and his incredibly shortsighted and unrealistic view of American business and organized labor has guaranteed failure, first with future union negotiations and finally with the companies themselves.

This scenario of nationalizing industry and redistributing its wealth to the workers may have sounded reasonable coming from a community activist but will prove to be fatal to American business coming from a president with no concept of business or a world marketplace.

Equal Justice

2009-11-10T23:49:00.001-06:00

John Allen Mohammed has been executed and quite frankly I don’t feel any safer.

At the Greensville Correction Facility just outside Richmond Virginia the DC Sniper breathed his last. He was executed after having been convicted of the murder of Dean Meyers, one of the victims in this madman’s killing spree that took ten lives in total. Some of the victim’s family members who witnessed the execution called it surreal, while others claimed it gave them closure.

I have the deepest sympathy for the families that lost their loved ones to this homicidal maniac who rigged his car so he could enter the trunk through the back seat where he laid in wait for his victim and shot through a hole in the trunk. I hope they do indeed find peace and closure in this eye for an eye retribution. But tomorrow morning the sun will rise and each will have to face yet another day without their loved one.

I am not ashamed to admit that I am a conservative who opposes the death penalty. I oppose it for several reasons including the possibility of killing an innocent person as well as the additional expense of executing someone versus simply locking them up for the rest of their life with no possibility for parole and none of the constitutionally mandated appeals that come with a capital punishment sentence. In this case the guilt of Mohammed was unquestionably clear. And while I can’t help but feel we are overstepping our bounds when, in the name of justice, we commit state sanctioned homicide, I do accept that execution is the law of the land and is approved by a wide margin of the population. I also accept that if we are to have such a punishment the brutal murder of ten innocent victims certainly meets the requirements for using it.

At the same time that John Allen Mohammed was being prepared for his final walk in Virginia, President Barack Obama was addressing the grief-stricken families of the 13 victims killed by Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan in Texas. President Obama told the families they could be assured that “...for what he has done, we know that the killer will be met with justice, in this world, and the next." Obama stopped short of calling this heinous mass murder an act of terrorism, but he did say "It may be hard to comprehend the twisted logic that led to this tragedy. But this much we do know: no faith justifies these murderous and craven acts.”

That’s a pretty strong condemnation and equally strong promise coming from the President regarding this mass murder carried out on the grounds of this Texas military base. I am not sure if this crime will be tried by a federal court as an act of terrorism or by a US Army military court. But either way the death penalty is certainly a possibility and seems to me to be the only reasonable sentence if Hasan is found guilty.

If execution was considered justice for the DC Sniper and his ten victims then it most certainly should be the same justice promised to the victim’s families by the President for this killer of thirteen. It will however be interesting to see if equal justice prevails when the guilty party is a practicing Muslim or if that fact will be this Islamic extremists "Get Out Of Death Free" card.

It will also be interesting to see how much political pressure is placed in the court during both the trial and sentencing. If Nidal Malik Hasan is given a life sentence rather than a death sentence simply because he is Muslim, then the death sentence should be abolished for everyone else as well.

Justice in this world and the next? Let’s see if President Obama meant what he said and is willing to send this Islamic jihadist to meet his Ultimate Judge.

Liberal Theory vs. Real Enemies

2009-11-08T10:54:00.003-06:00

It’s the exception that proves the rule.

Lord knows how many times I have heard that idiom. It is used today in almost every imaginable context. Historians credit the Roman philosopher and political theorist/ lawyer Cicero with inventing the proposition. What it was originally meant to infer was that the fact that special exceptions were being made proved a rule existed. We have long since lost that simple definition and in its place installed the belief that somehow exceptions are the rule. Or to put it more clearly, there can be no actual rule because there are always exceptions.

We have lost the ability to draw reasonable conclusions because we are now far too politically correct to use our own eyes and ears and more importantly our own common sense. All the proof in the world makes no difference anymore. We are told we must look beyond the undeniable proof and embrace the liberal dream of exception to every fundamental fact.

A perfect example of this factual mumbo jumbo is occurring in the wake of the despicable deadly acts carried out at Fort Hood by yet another Muslim terrorist.

While shouting the Muslim mantra “God is great” in Arabic, US Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan proceeded to slaughter 13 unarmed American military members and wound another 30 using weapons he had purchased off base probably for this premeditated purpose. Pundits and media members are examining every conceivable aspect as to why this American born lifelong Muslim would turn against his fellow Army enlistees. Theories abound as to why this man who received his college and medical degrees thanks to an Army education program that not only allowed him to earn his doctorate but paid him while he was doing so, would turn against the country that gave him everything he had. Why this seemingly pacifist psychiatrist, who didn’t want to be put in a combat situation, would wantonly murder unarmed, unsuspecting, and in one case pregnant, human beings.

I will leave the politically correct proselytizing and motivational theorizing to the talking heads the media always seems to have on call for just such an occurrence. I, on the other hand, will look at the facts to draw my conclusions.

Major Nidal Malik Hasan perpetrated this despicable act solely because he is a Muslim. Was this a terrorist attack? Absolutely. Hasan was successful at carrying out an attack similar to ones planned by other Muslims. Where others planned to shoot military personnel as they exited the base and fortunately were discovered and failed, Hasan had the distinct advantage of having a military ID allowing him on the base. He took full advantage of the benefits the Army had to offer, but when it came to fulfilling his end of the deal he chose the cowards way out. It was a well planned terrorist attack designed to inflict physical, mental and emotional damage on the US military. His goal was to inflict not only harm but terror and last time I checked that is the textbook definition of a terrorist. Hasan said on more than one occasion he is a Muslim first and an American second. If this had been about his objection to being deployed overseas and he was willing to die rather than serve in Iraq or Afghanistan against his Muslim brethren he only needed one bullet and didn’t even have to leave his apartment. Instead this terrorist came prepared with multiple clips and fired over a hundred rounds. While he knew this would likely be a suicide mission he never even attempted to use a round on himself, but as a psychiatrist I am certain Hasan is familiar with suicide by police. The debate as to his motives or possible stress disorders is moot. This was another terrorist act carried out against the United States by a Muslim.

As it relates to all Muslims Hasan may be the exception. But while all Muslims are not the enemy of the United States, all of the major enemies of the United States are Muslim.

We simply can no longer ignore that fact. As politically incorrect or presidentially inconvenient as it may be.

Old News

2009-11-05T15:39:00.003-06:00

Welcome to Washington where everything old is new again.

I was more than a little surprised to see the headlines of an Associated Press report that President Obama had gained support of two critical organizations for his ObamaCare nationalized healthcare bill. I quickly read the story to see who was now throwing their support his way only to find it was AARP and the AMA. My first thought was, had the Associated Press been asleep for the last several months or is this a case of déjà vu all over again.

Reading on a little farther it became clear that neither one of those assessments was correct. It was, in fact, simply a story of a president so desperate for support that he is rekindling old wood.

The “news” that AARP and the AMA have given their support to ObamaCare is not news; it’s actually “olds”. AARP has been a staunch supporter of the Democrat ideals of taxpayer supported healthcare for as long as there has been an AARP. This organization is actually nothing more than a special interest lobbying group that garners support from the aging public by offering a chance for reduced rates on hotel rooms and no medical exam life insurance. They supported the election of candidate Obama and threw their support behind his nationalized healthcare plan before there was even an official plan to support.

The AMA announced their support for ObamaCare over 2 months ago. Since then they have received numerous resignations from the 30% of American doctors who are actual members and are now in the midst of an in-house fight with several members of the board of directors. The immediate past president of the AMA has taken to calling for the resignation or removal of the current president and board on the grounds that the AMA charter forbids this organization from supporting government interference in healthcare or the price fixing that ObamaCare would create for both the medical care and the healthcare insurance.

Nothing the president said was new so why was he so pleased to announce what he was already pleased to announce months ago? The answer is to deflect attention from the Republican gains in the gubernatorial elections held in the Virginia and New Jersey this past week and the surprisingly strong showing of the conservative candidate in New York’s 23rd District special election.

Democrats got a rude wake-up call this past week. While the White House was predictable and quick in distancing the Republican gains as being local issues and having nothing to do with the president, those Democrats dependent on conservative and independent voters in the 2010 midterm elections are anything but satisfied with that assessment.

The reason for the race to a vote on this trillion dollar debacle is that the president can see his magic dwindling before his very eyes and knows that the longer this bill is delayed the less chance he has of wrangling enough support to pass it.

Nancy Pelosi may be able to pull a rabbit out of her hat and get some form of ObamaCare passed in the House within the next few weeks but that passage will be strictly symbolic. Every House member that votes for the bill knows that passage of the Senate’s version, according to Senate leader Harry Reid, will not take place this year. That means that Democrat House members can stay out of Pelosi’s crosshairs and still run for reelection without an ObamaCare package in place. Even if the Senate passes their bill early next year the House will have the opportunity to reject the Senate provisions at least until after the election.

This whole restatement of the previous endorsements is nothing more than Democrat politics as usual with the mainstream lapdog media playing right along. And what hangs in the balance? Only a trillion dollars of taxpayer money and the future of American healthcare and freedom of choice.

The game is the same, but the stakes have gotten substantially higher.

Let's Pretend

2009-11-04T16:16:00.000-06:00

Indulge me for a moment of you will.

Let’s pretend that George W Bush is president and in the first year of his term in office he was visited by the head of the NRA 12 times. Do you think the press would make an issue of exactly what the NRA was doing with such access to the president?

Or let’s say that during the first year of his second term while the war in Iraq was in full swing the president of Halliburton was at the White House 10 times. Do you think the press would try to connect the dots as to what this major supplier to the military was doing so many times meeting with the president?

I don’t know your answer, but I think that major news media organizations would have focused on little else. Their stories and alleged reports would have been jammed with innuendos and suppositions as to what these groups were up to and why they had such unlimited access to the seat of American governmental power.

Now let’s stop pretending and switch to the here and now with the Anointed One, Barack Hussein Obama in the oval office.

The White House released the visitors list recording those who were allowed past the gates at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in the first 10 months of the Obama administration. There were representatives from a number of special interest groups and just as many major celebrities on this official record. But the number one name on the list with the most visits inside the White House was the president of the Service Employees International Union, Andy Stern. You don’t get into the White House without first getting some pretty high level clearance. Records show that Mr. Stern was granted access to the White House 22 times in the first 10 months of Obama’s presidency. That is more than twice a month or just about every other week for Obama’s term thus far. And do the major media outlets raise the question as to what in the world this union boss is doing so many times in the White House? Nope. Nary a word. Only a scant few lines simply reporting the fact. With 22 visits in 10 months Andy Stern may well have been in the oval office more than the first lady, but the major press organizations choose to focus instead on the fact that the Michael Jordon and the Jeremiah Wright shown on the list are not the famous ones but instead others with those same names.

The SEIU is the fastest growing organized labor union in the country. They made their claim to fame as the Building Service Employees Union founded in Chicago in the 1920’s representing janitors, elevator operators and window washers and heading the Justice for Janitors campaign. But now as the SEIU their focus is on the healthcare industry attempting to organize nurses, hospital workers, home healthcare workers and nursing home employees.

SEIU was one of the leading supporters to candidate Barack Obama and it is apparent that the old Chicago style quid pro quo is now in full swing. You see along with nationalizing health insurance and healthcare the ObamaCare bills currently being crafted in the halls of both the Senate and the House requires a large portion of healthcare workers to become, you guessed it, union employees. And what union would these tens if not hundreds of thousands of employees join? Why the SEIU of course.

With the stroke of a presidential pen Barack Hussein Obama could effectively double the size of the SEIU currently estimated to be 1.8 million strong. No wonder it was the SEIU that sent hired thugs to beat up and intimidate attendees at local tea party gatherings and ObamaCare protest rallies.

An organized labor union with a penchant for assault and battery carrying out a plan to forcibly stifle free speech and political activism with seemingly unlimited access to the White House and the president they helped put in place. And the major media outlets are too intimidated or too blinded by the liberal charisma of this bought and paid for president to say a word about it.

Be afraid America. This isn’t pretend anymore.

The Real Nightmare

2009-11-03T15:14:00.001-06:00

night·mare
Pronunciation: \ˈnīt-ˌmer\
Function: noun
1 : an evil spirit formerly thought to oppress people during sleep
2 : a frightening dream that usually awakens the sleeper
3 : something (as an experience, situation, or object) having the monstrous character of a nightmare or producing a feeling of anxiety or terror

There it was in black and white. A “report” from the Politico news service claiming anxiety or terror on the part of Republican leaders. The opening line read “In what could be a nightmare scenario for Republican officials, conservative activists are gearing up challenge leading GOP candidates in more than a dozen key House and Senate races in 2010.” A nightmare you say?

To be sure there will be some elected Republicans that might have a few restless nights. My guess is that many of them will already be working on how to spin the actions they took while in office to look less like the spend-crazy Democrat pacifiers they have been. As I have told every Republican organization fundraiser that has called my home for the past few years “when the Republicans quit acting like Democrats, I’ll start supporting them again.”

The nightmare is not in what is happening but in what has happened. The Republican Party is unrecognizable to many of us conservative voters. The media would have us believe that if Republicans are to be successful they must adopt a “big tent” mentality. The reality is that the party I supported for lo those many years folded up their tent long ago and simply annexed onto the Democrats. Oh sure there was talk of conservative principles during the congressional campaigns but after the votes were counted you couldn’t tell a D from an R without a program.

Many have pointed to the rapid decline in conservative principles in the national Republican Party as a reason to form a third party. I disagree. We don’t need a third party, we need to return the Republican Party back to what it once was when results mattered more than rhetoric and principles mattered more than appeasement. A recent poll confirmed that by a margin of over two to one Americans consider themselves conservative over liberal. This includes many who claim to be Democrats. If the Republican Party can align itself with the conservative principles that founded this country and allowed it to become the greatest nation on earth there would be no need to look for another political option.

Much has been made of the recent withdrawal of Republican candidate Dede Scozzafava in the upstate New York Congressional election. Liberals point to this as proof that Republicans cannot elect a moderate. But Dede was anything but moderate and her blatant liberalism was in full view when she endorsed the Democrat over the Conservative Party candidate for the position.

The nightmare is not in conservatives taking back control of the government but in what has happened since conservatism has become a dirty word and conservative voters became silent. The nightmare is a President that plays politics while tens of thousands of brave military men and women battle terrorists in Afghanistan desperate for additional support. The nightmare is in a national debt that has tripled in under 10 months with absolutely no sign of abating in the largest spending spree in the history of mankind. The nightmare is in a deficit that is forecasted to be in excess of 10 trillion dollars in the next ten years. The nightmare is in the government control of our healthcare choices and in the government control of our health insurance. The nightmare is in the government nationalization of the banking industry and allowing the same economic morons that created the problem to cause even greater harm to the recovery. The nightmare is in a President that feels he has the power to dictate what Americans should be paid by private industry. The nightmare is in a President whose number one visitor in the White House, logging 22 visits in just under 10 months, is the president of the SEIU union that sends hired thugs to beat up Americans attending tea party rallies.

There are plenty of nightmares to go around.

Conservatism isn’t one of them.

Just Trying To Help

2009-10-29T15:52:00.005-05:00

Thanks to the Democrats the recession is officially over!

Barack Obama could not have been more pleased to announce the “welcome news” that the latest report from the Commerce Department showed a respectable 3.5% growth in the countries third quarter GDP. Obama gleefully reported that this growth is “an affirmation that this recession is abating and the steps we’ve taken have made a difference.”

To be sure, 3.5% growth, the first growth since the second quarter of 2008, is a welcome change from the previous declines and under most circumstances would be cause for celebration. But a closer look at the numbers reveals just how cooked these books really are.

The GDP gain was mainly driven by an increase in consumer spending. Just about two thirds of the overall growth is attributable to the 3.4% rise in consumer spending versus the nearly 1% drop in the previous quarter. Most of that additional spending is related to the temporary increase in new car sales driven by the Cash for Clunkers program. The core inflation index slid from 2.0% in the previous quarter down to 1.4% indicating otherwise lackluster spending causing downward pricing pressure.

As Cash for Clunkers was a onetime program that added no new jobs and only stimulated a short burst of new spending the celebration currently being enjoyed by Obama and his minions in Congress will be short-lived indeed. That is of course unless the spend-happy Democrats are able to find some other suitable programs to artificially inflate the numbers.

As I am known far and wide as being a helpful kinda guy I have taken it upon myself to come up with some suggestions for the Democrats to consider. How about:

Dollars for Dog Fighting – As Rush Limbaugh will not be allowed to be even a minority owner of an NFL football team because of his conservative views, and as Michael Vick was welcomed back into the NFL after having been convicted of feloniously supporting a hideously cruel dog fighting ring, one can only draw the conclusion that dog fighting is a more acceptable past time than being conservative. As such, the government could get in on the new burgeoning market of allowing two dogs, which have been brutally abused since birth, to fight to the death by supporting the development of new and improved dog fighting techniques.

Funds for Felons – Forget about spending all that money on law enforcement trying to catch criminals after the fact by sending those who are considering major crimes a check before they break the law. Most offenders will be sated, at least until the money runs out, and therefore crime figures will be decreased allowing cities and towns to reduce their police forces. I am certain that this program could be easily sold to the public by showing how it will pay for itself in reduced police expense, overtime for all that nasty paperwork and court costs.

Denaros for Deadbeat Dads – Here is an opportunity to help one of the most misunderstood poverty groups in America. It is obvious that these poor runaway fathers don’t have the funds to support their children. Otherwise they would send their child support checks, right? This money will also help to stimulate the liquor and cheap hotel markets.

Money for Marijuana and Meth – Let’s be honest. No matter what, folks are going to do dope. Just ask any high school guidance counselor. This program, along with Funds for Felons, will help to further reduce crime by giving pot heads the necessary funds to not only buy their dope but also Twinkies, Oreos and in the case of the meth users, much needed dental implants.

Bucks for Big Screens – Seeing as the government obviously views watching television as an inalienable right through the free digital converter box program, would it not also be a right to view it on a big honking plasma screen TV. What’s the sense of having digital transmission if you have to watch it on a little screen? This will not only be a benefit to the big box appliance stores but will also be a direct benefit to Barack Obama as his voting base will be able to see him more clearly during his near-daily infomercials.

Currency for Coffee – Hey, at 4 bucks plus a cup if the government doesn’t step in soon with some support some of the 15 to 20 million barista’s currently pouring coffee in America could be forced to look for new careers.

Tender for Toddlers – No this isn’t a program where people actually sell their babies (although that may become an amendment at some point down the line). This would be a program where the government would begin sending welfare checks to people from the moment they are born. Why wait until they drop out of school and begin to have kids of their own. This way those who are hopelessly trapped in the liberal slavery of welfare can get used to waiting for the mailman for their support as soon as they are able to see out the window.

Cash for Condoms – This program speaks for itself. It is the very definition of a “stimulus” program and will certainly help see us through the hard times.

Well, those are just a few of my ideas. I hope they help.

The Times They Are A'Changing

2009-10-28T16:25:00.002-05:00

My oh my, how times have changed.

It seems like only yesterday that the Democrats and their faithful lapdog counterparts in the news media were lambasting President Bush for inciting the Taliban and Al Qaeda to violence. Almost every move the president made and every word the president uttered was dissected and analyzed for its negative impact on America’s enemies.

If Bush said “Bring it on”, he was described as a cowboy who put our troops on the battlefield in even greater peril by stirring an already very dangerous pot. If he suggested inclusion of former members of Al Qaeda who had not committed violent acts against our troops he was damned for being passive and putting our troops in danger by inciting our enemy through weakness. Democrats stood on the sidelines and played Monday morning quarterback after each and every press conference or directive. The now infamous position John Kerry took during the presidential debates of being against something before he was for it before he was against it became the order of the day for the entire Democrat Party.

It was a much simpler time to be a Democrat when all you had to do was oppose. It was also a much simpler time for the blatantly liberal news media when the only tool they needed to deal with then President Bush was a hammer and the only reporting they needed to provide on Barack Obama was the worldwide Hope and Change he would bring. Flash forward to today and it gets much more complicated.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was noticeable by her absence at the latest summit meeting with Afghan President Hamid Karzai regarding the recent Afghan elections with its alleged claims of vote fraud and corruption. In her place was US Senator John Kerry representing the United States. Constitutionally a US senator has no authority to represent the entire country in matters of foreign affairs, that is the constitutional task of the Secretary of State under the direction of the president. Barack Obama said he had nothing to do with it. But there stood Kerry with no sign of Clinton. You figure it out.

Now just three hours after Clinton arrives in Pakistan the Taliban blows up over a hundred innocent people. Clinton’s immediate reaction is to call them “cowardly”. A woman who is also an official of the US government, calling Muslim terrorists cowards and the press makes no mention of possible incitement.

October has been the deadliest month in years for our brave troops in Afghanistan. It also just happens to be the month Barack Obama has made a spectacle of his inability to give our troops the desperately needed support requested by General McChrystal. The press remains mum on that point too.

Barack Obama addresses airman at a military base in Florida making a solemn pledge to not send them into harms way without a firm strategy in place. The press gleefully reports on the speech but fails to mention that we already have tens of thousands of America’s finest in harms way who are just waiting for some backup.

At the same time car bombs planted by Al Qaeda in Iraq kill hundreds of innocent shoppers. Does the press even ask if this could have anything to do with the weakness shown by a president more interested in political damage than military of civilian lives? Nope, not a word.

The sad truth is that if the Taliban and Al Qaeda want to get this pacifist president to take action they will have to go to work for Fox News.

Maybe then the mainstream media will give it some coverage.

Stupid Is As Stupid Does

2009-10-27T14:55:00.001-05:00

Sometimes it’s better to just let them do my talking for me.

I can talk until I’m blue in the face about the Democrat’s desire to keep their base dependent, and how they truly believe that the voting public is incapable of cognitive thought. I can draw examples and comparisons showing conclusively how the liberal Democrats currently in control of both Houses of Congress and the White House are blatantly driving the country toward socialism and away from the very principles upon which America was founded. But all my efforts, as well prepared and convincing as they may be, pale by comparison to a short news conference with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.

Speaker Pelosi made it clear that she and her Democrat counterparts are convinced that Americans are so stupid that she can even tell us how they plan to deceive us and we still won’t be able to figure it out.

While making one of the few public statements regarding the closed door Democrat ramrod healthcare proposals Speaker Pelosi said that American families “shouldn’t be left on their own ‘to negotiate with insurance companies”. The only solution for this problem of limited personal mental ability is the inclusion of the “public option” government run health insurance into the ObamaCare healthcare package. However, because the public option is so publicly unpopular Speaker Pelosi said it should be renamed. Not refined, re-explained or reversed, simply renamed. She went on to suggest it now be called the “consumer option”. Well, that certainly clears things up for me. As long as it’s a consumer program and not a public program I’m on board. NOT!

It is important to understand exactly what the Speaker is saying.

First, Americans are incapable of handling their own private family affairs. We are too stupid to make a decision as important as which company we will choose to carry our health insurance and what we are willing to, and more importantly, capable of paying for it. We are not qualified to figure out which plan best suits our needs or which coverage options we should buy for ourselves and our families. We simply cannot be left on our own and therefore we need to become dependent on the government to tell us what we want.

Secondly, because many of us understand the nightmare that government run health insurance would bring and vehemently oppose losing our rights to make our own healthcare choices Democrats are prepared to simply trick us into support by calling the untenable plan by a different name. Plus, Speaker Pelosi made it clear that they think we are so stupid that even after they tell us how they plan to trick us we will still want to go along.

The arrogance of this Speaker to tell Americans that they cannot be left alone to make their own healthcare choices is so profound as to be almost unbelievable. In fact, had this piece of the socialist pie been leaked from one of the many closed door meetings it surely would have been denied.

But thanks to Speaker Pelosi’s pubic admission of her adamant belief in and reliance upon American stupidity no such denial will be plausible. That is not to say that it won’t be tried. Already Democrats fearful of being handed their walking papers in the mid-term elections are trying to spin the Speakers comments into something less offensive. Their success in this endeavor is entirely dependent on whether or not Speaker Pelosi is correct.

Are we in fact really that stupid?

The Fabricated Flu Frenzy

2009-10-26T15:53:00.001-05:00

Welcome to a political opportunity of, well, pandemic proportions.

For those of us lucky enough to have dodged the bullet of “bird flu” a couple of years ago we are now faced with an even bigger plague of national destruction; the H1N1 media flu, I mean the H1N1 swine flu. This runny nosed nuisance is almost custom made for a political party in peril.

Just days after taking the oval office Barack Obama earmarked a billion dollars to fight the onset of what was gleefully forecasted by the media as an illness so profound that it could end life as we know it on the planet. Ten months later we are just beginning to receive the life saving serum specifically designed to thwart the disease.

News outlets are relentless in their daily updates of new case reports and the rising death toll attributed to the epidemic. At last count 1000 deaths have been attributed to the H1N1 virus in America so far this year. That certainly sounds ominous, right?

While the number of deaths may in fact be true, there are some other factoids that have been conveniently omitted from the reports. Like the fact that in that same time period 30,000 people have died of flu that was not the H1N1 strain. And by historic comparatives, those numbers mean we are experiencing a perfectly normal flu season.

What the media is failing to report is that every year in America 40,000 people die of generic influenza. Normally those who succumb to the flu are those particularly vulnerable like the very young, the very old and those with already diminished health. But historic statistics show that every year not all who die from the flu are in those most susceptible categories. Some are perfectly healthy who get the flu so serve that for any number of reasons they die. Tragic, yes. Unusual, unfortunately no.

During the “bird flu” scare a few years ago the country was told by the media medical talking heads to brace for a devastating flu season. Much blame was heaped on then President Bush for not being prepared to deal with this oncoming pandemic. We were told that while we had flu shots, the serum was for the wrong kind of flu strain and would likely not be effective against this budding bird borne blight. Some way, somehow we survived. And without even so much as a blip in the normal flu season mortality rate.

Bush was lax in any attempt to make political hay from this forecasted endemic disaster; Obama will not allow this opportunity to pass him likewise.

More than the billions of dollars in worldwide spending on appropriate antibodies, there is plenty of political capital to be made by averting the forecasted doom. The H1N1 flu has been a political tetherball since it first hit the newswires. Originally called the Mexican Swine Flu the name was changed to just Swine Flu once the Mexican government complained. Further complaints from pork producer’s associations had the named once again politically corrected to the scientific Nam de Plume H1N1.

Much like Nancy Pelosi’s ridiculous supposition that the non-stimulating stimulus passed by Congress is keeping the recession from being worse, the same approach will be taken with this media mania regarding H1N1. The fact that 30 times as many people have died from non-H1N1 related influenza, even before the proper antibodies hit the market, will likely never be mentioned. Only that the Messiah has saved the country a much worse fate than would have otherwise befallen us. There is, of course, no way to prove or disprove the hypothesis of Obamian intervention so it will be ladled out for mass consumption like momma’s chicken soup. The fact that most who do get the H1N1 brand of flu will recover with no extraordinary medical intervention will also be glaringly apparent by its omission from the discussion.

When it comes to the campaign happy Obama administration no opportunity is too small to take credit. Especially when everything else they have done has only made the situation worse.

It really is enough to make you sick.

The Ying And Yang Of Gang

2009-10-25T18:05:00.000-05:00

It’s a tale of two cities.

Well, actually it’s just one city with two examples of what seems to be an unsolvable problem.

In one case, parents of students at the now infamous Fenger High School are planning to boycott the school by keeping their children home to protest what they see as a lack of security against gang violence. In the other, 6 black college students from St. Louis are threatening action against a locally famous bar for refusing to allow them entry because of what they claim is racial discrimination.

At Fenger parents are claiming the Chicago Public School Board and the Chicago Police are not doing enough to keep their children safe. It was outside Fenger that honor roll student Derrion Albert was brutally beaten to death by gang members wielding 2 X 4’s. The fatal beating was caught on video by one of the many witnesses who stood by and watched. A number of Fenger students have been charged with the murder and police are continuing their investigation. This past week 5 more students were arrested for fighting inside Fenger. The brawls are part of the “turf war” between local gang members and those from a nearby housing project.

Chicago’s black community is rife with gang activity. Parents of students who just want an education have every right to be fearful, but what they hope to accomplish by this proposed boycott is unclear. The problem is with the gang bangers not the school. The only possible solution from a police standpoint is to have armed police officers roaming the hallways of the school. This would pull them off their duties outside the high school and would only serve to increase tensions and crime rates on the street. It would also most certainly cause local community activists to portray the police in school as an abuse of power and a violation of the student’s constitutional rights of free assembly. Chicago has already tried to institute action against groups of 2 or more gang members gathering on the street only to have it struck down as unconstitutional by the courts.

The incident at Mother’s bar in Chicago’s Gold Coast neighborhood involved 6 black college students who were not allowed inside by security because of their gang related attire. The 6 wore baggy pants and had their caps on backwards. While this is seen in the suburbs as a fashion statement it is understood in urban areas as a sign of gang affiliation. The manager of the bar was inclined to allow them inside until the 6 backed him into a corner with aggressive behavior and shouting. At that point any hope for resolution was lost and the students were forced to leave. They claim that they traded clothes with some white friends who were allowed entry and are making that their basis for claims of racial discrimination.

So police and private security can do nothing if you associate with gang bangers, dress like a gang banger and even admit to being one. But let gang bangers do what they do and then these same security and police forces are at fault for not doing enough to stop him. How do you win that?

Police can arrest the perpetrators of violence after the fact, but they are legally limited in how much they can proactively do to prevent it. The bulk of that responsibility for action lies within the black community. The community, led by their vocalists (they are far more vocal than active), is quick to complain about too much or too little action being taken, but the only action that will make a meaningful difference must come from within the community.

The greatest threat to a member of the black community is from another member of the black community. Not the police, not security guards and not racism.

Change the attitude in the community, or change the law so police have legal authority to be proactive, or get used to it.

Don't Ask Don't Think

2009-10-21T11:40:00.004-05:00

Before we begin the deluge of e mails accusing me of being a homophobe let me assure you I have no fear, either conscious or subconscious, of homosexuals.

What I fear is a Commander in Chief who believes it is a good idea to increase the ranks of our all volunteer military with homosexual enlistees and to allow those already inducted to display their deviant sexuality publicly.

There have probably been homosexual military patriots in the US military for as long as the US has had a military. Many have served with honor and many have made the ultimate sacrifice for our country. I salute every single man and woman, regardless of their sexuality, who has served our country in the military and given of themselves for the greater good of the nation.

The very reason homosexuals have been able to serve and succeed in the rigorous life of the military is in large part because it has not been acceptable for them to publicly display their homosexuality. Not that all would want to. My guess is that even with this proposed presidential game-changer many homosexual’s in the military will continue to remain in the security of leaving their private life private.

But in the spirit of political correctness this community activist qua Supreme Commander has announced his intentions to end the current military policy of “don’t ask, don’t tell”. This misguided idea of equality will likely have a profound impact on the future of our nation’s security forces.

It was no secret that for years the female forces in the military were largely made up of more manly women than feminine flowers. That balance has shifted a bit with the push for female equality and certainly not all women in uniform were attracted to other women. But to deny the sizable portion that were would be to reject the obvious history of our female forces. Most males who have served can also attest to the fact that there were always a few brothers in arms that may have had questionable sexual preference. I’m certain other homosexual’s knew, but as long as acceptance of their, what is absurdly called “alternative lifestyle”, was not forced onto the military population at large it remained for the most part a non-issue.

That is all about to change with the stroke of a presidential pen, when once again Barack Obama inflicts his idea of Change without giving proper weight to the negative effects.

Military service requires sacrifice and dedication, of which both homosexual and heterosexual military personnel are equally capable of giving. But it also requires a close sense of fellowship with those who serve with you. Having openly homosexual members in a military unit will destroy that close bond so necessary for success under the most grueling and dangerous conditions. The long honored celebration of a military homecoming with families gathered to welcome their heroes’ home would be forever changed when you consider the possibility of allowing openly homosexual displays of affection. And what of the families living in base housing units? Shipping off for a tour overseas is hard enough without having to leave your family in base housing with openly homosexual couples. While many homosexual members would not participate in the over the top exhibitions so common at every gay rights rally or gay pride parade, the fact that there would be no way to stop it means that there would be those who would, if for no other reason than to prove they can. Forcing military families to live with openly homosexual couples will do nothing to increase tolerance and if anything cause a rebellious backlash. While the president claims the need to keep qualified homosexuals in the military, this mandate for acceptance of this deviant sexual lifestyle would cause many more heterosexuals to leave.

When it comes to giving our troops on the battlefield In Afghanistan the necessary forces to save lives and succeed at their mission we have a president that can’t make a decision. But when it comes to forcing what for many is an unacceptable breach to their personal and religious moral code we have a president that is all too eager to do so at any cost.

Our military deserves better and so do their families.

Understanding Change

2009-10-19T14:53:00.002-05:00

It’s all just a matter of understanding……or is it?

I have been told on more than one occasion that the reason I am so firm in my conservative beliefs is that I just don’t understand. If I would merely approach things with an open mind I would see the sense in what I currently view as senseless and understand that which now leaves me scratching my head.

I freely admit that there are certainly more things on this planet that I do not understand than things I do. Many of them I enjoy in my daily life without much consternation as to the how and why. For instance, I don’t know how they get a movie onto a DVD or how the player reads it and puts the picture on my TV, or how computer code flies through the air and allows my computer to hook into the World Wide Web without wires, which is not surprising seeing as I didn’t understand how it did it with the wires and that crazy beeping noise either. Even mundane issues like how they get the toilet paper so neatly onto the roll escape me. But my lack of understanding of those and countless other subjects do not keep me awake at night.

There are however, some issues that do.

I don’t understand how only those who get their hands dirty are considered to have worked for a living. Or, according to the Obama administration, how union members are entitled to be given ownership shares of the automaker they work for, with no financial investment and a bank president who has worked the entire year, through the toughest conditions since the 1940’s, is informed that he is entitled to nothing at all for 2009.

I don’t understand how those who found, own or run a business are viewed as just lucky and worthy targets of intensified government scrutiny and penalization through increased taxation, while those who work for them, who have a job solely because somebody else worked to create the business, are somehow victims.

I don’t understand how a Commander in Chief could be so concerned about the rights of our sworn enemies that he signed a decree closing the Guantanamo Bay Detention facility within days of taking office without a clue as to what would be done with the detainees, but when it comes to reinforcing our military people already on the battlefield in Afghanistan it takes weeks and possibly months of politically focused meetings for him to make a decision. This even after his handpicked advisor laid out the military strategies for him and the ramifications of inaction.

I don’t understand how we can spend our way out of debt or how sending senior citizen’s checks for $250 when the cost of living went down is fair to those who will eventually have to foot the bill.

I don’t understand how it could be a good idea to legalize marijuana but yet it remains a criminal offense to sell food cooked in trans fats. Am I to believe that the carcinogenic smoke and mind altering THC in pot is less dangerous than a McDonald’s French fry?

I don’t understand how we continue to claim the need for new oppressive taxes in every conceivable area to institute economic recovery when Asia is leading the world’s economies in recovery with 9% annual growth, without doing the same.

I don’t understand how increasing health insurance costs or burying healthcare providers under reams of government paperwork while reducing their payments will improve healthcare. Nor do I understand how we will get a handle on unrealistic malpractice settlements by removing them from the court system but creating government installed panels in their place.

As I said, I freely admit that there are many things I don’t understand. But I fear that in order for me to understand these illustrations and many more like it from the Obama administration I would have to adapt the Jack Nicholson line from “As Good As It Gets”.

First I think like I do now, then I take away all reason and accountability.

Absence Of Evidence

2009-10-18T10:31:00.003-05:00

And now, Heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrrre’s Ricky!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I can hear Doc Severinsen and the boys in the band striking up that familiar theme song now.

Hurricane Rick is stalking off the coast of Mexico and climatologists are dusting off their hurricane preparedness pamphlets for what will likely turn out to be yet another dud. To be sure old Rick is kicking up some serious surf right now as a category 5 hurricane, the strongest storm to hit the Pacific in ten years. But it is also predicted to be a nothing more than a soaking rain storm by the time it reaches the Baja Peninsula area later this week.

As I read the news reports about Hurricane Rick it gave me pause. It seems as this year’s hurricane season draws to a close we have once again missed the destructive doom forecast by the global warming crowd. If the near obliteration of mankind that was so ominously predicted 5 years ago is going to take place in the 10 years it was envisioned, it had better get its devastating butt in gear.

The only real change that has transpired in this countdown to doomsday is a subtle but important name change. What started out as manmade global warming and later simply became global warming is now referred to in the more politically correct phraseology of climate change.

The problem with the whole manmade global warming aka climate change theory took shape as institutes of higher learning began to battle each other for the most portentous forecast of catastrophic destruction in an attempt to garner a greater share of the government grant pie. There was no money to be made in an honest appraisal or in investigating other possibilities for what will continue to be proven as temporary anomalies. Corporations were quickly incorporated and savvy politicians like Al Gore invested huge amounts of face time as well as sizable amounts of their own personal wealth to exploit what would become the greatest hoax since Nero blamed the Christians for the great fire of Rome.

Any scientist who dared to challenge the less than scientific science that was predicting these worrisome results were ostracized from the brotherhood and branded as a tool of big business. The same fate awaited any politician or even private citizen who questioned the veracity of the results. It was of course to the benefit of the big business being set up to capitalize on the global warming scare to make sure that no reasonable facts were ever introduced that would muddy the swirling tempest they were creating. And with the news media soundly in their side, that is exactly what they did.

The reason the urgency for proposed immediate action was so intense was so that legislation could be passed and huge sums of money could be set aside before the lack of death and destruction became an issue. Make no mistake about it; had the billions that were proposed been spent 5 years ago, the lack of devastating hurricanes again this year would have been credited to that spending. Not unlike Nancy Pelosi claiming the near trillion dollar non-stimulating stimulus spending has had an enormously positive impact on an economy that is in much worse shape than the climate.

Climate data for the last 10 years shows conclusively that global warming is not global. Extended data from a longer time period shows that climate change is in fact normal and for the most part cyclical.

As congress begins to wrap up its legislation on the non-crisis in healthcare and take up the non-crisis of global warming with Obama’s cap and tax legislation I wonder just how bad the economy has to get before folks start getting a little more rebellious about their representatives focus.

As for me, I’ll be donning the heavy winter parka I have had to wear since the beginning of October because of near freezing temperatures as I go to stand in the bread line.

$250 Per Vote

2009-10-15T13:32:00.002-05:00

I keep waiting for someone to say “April Fools”.

Unfortunately the fools perpetrating this virulent assault on common sense are not confining themselves to a single month. No, this complete disregard for reality has marched steadily through the halls of Congress for the past 9 months and from all appearances will continue its disastrous trek unabated with guiding support of a president who obviously has no grasp of economic reality.

The latest attempt at redefining ridiculous is the Obama administration’s call for Congress to approve a special $250 payment to all seniors on Social Security. $250 may seem like a paltry sum to get upset about, but when you multiply this 2010 midterm election vote incentive by 50 million Social Security recipients it becomes a much more ominous total at just shy of $13 billion. The insanity driving this madness is so profound that I fear some form of medication may be in order.

By the rules that govern Social Security payments seniors will not be entitled to a cost of living increase this year. AARP CEO A. Barry Rand said, "For nearly 35 years, millions of Americans have counted on an annual increase in their monthly Social Security checks to make ends meet." With idiotic statements like that I can only assume what the A. stands for.

The problem with A. Barry’s statement is that in 2008 seniors received the largest percentage increase in their Social Security COLA since 1982. That 5.8% increase was driven largely by skyrocketing energy prices. Inflation figures this year have turned negative thanks to the equally dramatic reduction in energy costs. By law Social Security payments cannot be decreased, but taking last year’s increase versus this year’s negative inflation into consideration seniors are already money ahead.

Sure it’s nice to get free money and there will be a plethora of camera hungry Democrats and their supporters like AARP’s A. Barry Reid to say that seniors “deserve” this money to help offset other expenses. But the money isn’t free and it isn’t being given to help offset anything but negative poll numbers for the 2010 election.

Democrats know they are in hot water for the $1.4 trillion national debt they have amassed thus far with absolutely no positive impact on the economy. They also know that Republicans will resist this attempt at bestowing yet another stipend of Obama Money and further increasing the already untenable deficit. What better way to attempt to get back into the good graces of 50 million senior citizen voters than to send them more “free money”.

Seniors, for the most part, are only looking at their entitlement and will not look at the overall impact this senseless spending will have. Very few will even attempt to understand the ever tightening choke hold this exponentially expanding debt will place on their grandchildren and great grandchildren and beyond.

This use of the national checkbook to garner favorable results in the midterm elections borders on a criminal abuse of power. While it may prove to be a defining moment, Republicans must expose this sham for what it is and oppose it at all costs.

While the country languishes in the abyss of a near economic depression, NASA spends millions to hit the moon with rocket ships. While the streets of our major cities are strewn with the lifeless victims of gang warfare our government sends hundreds of millions to countries like Ireland to help keep the peace in their streets. And while millions of able bodied Americans continue to struggle to find employment in an economy that is forecast to remain inhospitable for at least the next 12 months our Democrat led Congress and community activist President wants to add even more to the debt by sending bribes to the elderly.

Social Security is scheduled to pay out more this year and next then they will be taking in thanks to the huge increase in unemployment. If the President and Congress truly want to help seniors they need to focus on that issue rather than continuing to inflate the debt and delay the recovery.

I would say that the Democrats are spending like drunken sailors, but drunken sailors spend their own money.

CNBC - Buy The Book

2009-10-14T15:19:00.000-05:00

Just in time for holiday gift giving, a new and improved history.

As someone who tracks the financial markets I have been a fairly faithful watcher of CNBC. While I wouldn’t trust the parent company NBC for the correct time, I have found that CNBC has a pretty good group of correspondents that keep abreast of breaking news. They also have some pretty talented traders and hedge fund managers that can spot trends and make recommendations.

To be sure, most of these learned market gurus missed the credit collapse and the devastating impact it had on all things financial. But when looking at the recent past, everyone, including the Icon from Omaha, Warren Buffet missed the signs of impending doom. CNBC’s madman commentator Jim Cramer unjustly took it in the chin from Barack Obama to the Daily Show’s Jon Stewart and all points in between.

The sad fact is that almost everybody missed the warning signs because the collapse of the worldwide financial markets was as a result of a new set of rules. Congress changed the credit markets when it mandated home mortgages be given to folks who could not pay them back. Wall Street jumped on board with both feet looking to do what Wall Street does, make a buck. But reality has a way of trumping even the best of intentions and trillions of dollars of wealth were lost in a rapid decline of the market and an equally rapid disintegration of available credit.

CNBC’s David Faber was one of the first to publish a book about the collapse in his detailed account of Wall Street’s failings titled “And Then the Roof Caved In”. Faber’s book gives a detailed explanation of the various financial and investment tools developed and used to make money during the galactic expansion of the residential mortgage market. He explains the packaging and repackaging of mortgage backed securities and the devastating impact felt by investors worldwide when their AAA rated securities turned into junk bonds. He was however, extremely careful to absolve the US Congress and then President Bill Clinton of any blame for the genesis of this financial hysteria. I can begrudgingly overlook the blatant partisanship of Faber’s book out of appreciation for the worthy information contained about the financial packages. But history was at least tampered with in his non-factual assessment of responsibility.

But now CNBC’s Charlie Gasparino comes out with his new book “The Sellout”. It’s not new for Gasparino to come out with additional income earning books, this one being his third. But much like Faber, Gasparino’s political leanings are in full view in his less than impartial reasoning. It is also not that I mind CG writing any kind of book he wants and making a few extra bucks, but his liberal leaning is becoming more apparent during his on air discussions in what I can only surmise is an attempt to increase book sales.

During an on air interview Gasparino lit into the upcoming quarterly report of Goldman Sachs. Goldman is expected to announce a hugely profitable quarter and therefore some very hefty bonuses for those responsible for making it happen. Gasparino repeatedly damned the success and planned bonuses at Goldman fallaciously claiming they had just been bailed out by the taxpayers. “I don’t care what anybody says. They got bailed out” he said.

The facts are that Goldman neither wanted nor needed the $10 billion given to them in TARP funds. They resisted at every level until Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke made it clear that everyone had to participate so as not to draw undue attention to those that actually needed the money. He also made it clear that this was NOT a voluntary program. Goldman took the money, held it and returned it as soon as the government would allow them to do so. Those are the facts.

Gasparino began to get into areas like the benefit Goldman experienced from the AIG bailout, which while true, was not done for the purpose of benefitting Goldman but rather to save the few trillion in pension funds AIG managed.

Goldman suggested they may give a portion of their earnings to a charitable organization, but even that was not enough to placate Gasparino. It was remarkably apparent that Charlie was looking to make a point and equally apparent he was looking to sell a few books and rewrite history.

This is an extremely dangerous precedent being set and plays directly into the hands of those that are looking to rewrite history and have us believe that everything Wall Street is evil and we are the poor victims of unbridled greed. I watch CNBC for news and informed commentary, not a political talking point and an infomercial about a new book.

At least I did.

Fox News Business Channel is getting a lot more of my attention.

PS – As I write this Goldman Sachs stock is hitting a new 52 week high. Nice try Charlie.

Rama Jama Limbaugh

2009-10-13T11:34:00.002-05:00

“He has made his wealth appealing to the fears of whites”

With that comment and a bevy of other incendiary statements the good Reverend Jesse Jackson has thrown down the gauntlet in his battle to keep Rush Limbaugh from ownership of an NFL franchise. Jackson is joined in his efforts by the Tweedledum to his Tweedledee, the right Reverend Al Sharpton.

Limbaugh is looking to partner with the St. Louis Blues owner Dave Checkettes to buy the hapless St. Louis Rams football team. Limbaugh has the dough and Checkettes involvement in St. Louis sports should boost fan support by reducing (but certainly not eliminating) the possibility of moving the franchise to another city. Limbaugh is a Missouri native growing up a hundred miles down the road from St. Louis in Cape Girardeau, Missouri. He is also a football fanatic and a remarkably successful businessman. Checkettes is a major league sports veteran having been the youngest chief executive in the history of the NBA after he was named president and general manager of the Utah Jazz at the age of 28. Checkettes has served in numerous sports related positions including CEO of Madison Square Garden and owns Sports Capital Worldwide a consulting and investment firm for sports franchises.

Successful businessmen with a passion for sports. Sounds like a great pair of professionals for NFL team ownership, right? Well, not in this seedy world of political correctness at all costs.

Jackson and Sharpton are desperate to regain at least a modicum of significance in the age of Barack Obama. Both of these veteran pot stirrers have been neutered in their efforts to remain in the headlines and, more importantly, in the heads of the black community. Every grab these two publicity hounds have made for front page coverage have fizzled thanks to the historic inauguration of a black president. They don’t matter, and they don’t like it.

Limbaugh steps into this catfight with some baggage of his own, not the least of which is his remark as commentator on ESPN that Philadelphia Eagles QB Donovan McNabb was overrated and the only reason he received so much attention was that the press was desperate for a black quarterback to succeed. ESPN disavowed any concurrence with that opinion and Limbaugh resigned rather than retract. There was much discussion and accusations of racism after the comment but nobody dared address if it was true. Was it provocative? Yes. Was it true? Absolutely!

But this campaign to thwart Limbaugh’s efforts is not about racism. It’s about giving two tired old show ponies a chance to strut their stuff in front of an audience again instead of shipping them off the glue factory. Limbaugh is outspoken and sometimes brash in his conservative message. But he is never, I repeat, never racist. If anybody has made a living, and a pretty good living at that, by being divisive and pitting one racial group against another it has been the pandemic duo of Jackson and Sharpton. It is their only claim to fame. A fame they both desperately want to rekindle.

The J&A team have been supposedly joined in their efforts by NFL Player Association Executive Director DeMaurice Smith. Smith delivered a prepared statement last Sunday, but as is the case with many lawyer’s statements it’s tough to make out exactly what he’s trying to say. "I have asked our players to embrace their roles not only in the game of football but also as players and partners in the business of the NFL," Smith said. "They risk everything to play this game, they understand that risk and they live with that risk and its consequences for the rest of their life. We also know that there is an ugly part of history and we will not risk going backwards, giving up giving in or lying down to it."

I’m not sure I understand what point Mr. Smith is trying to make, but I’m pretty sure Rush Limbaugh would not increase the risk NFL player’s face in the field. And if the NFL Players Association truly want to be partners in the business of football maybe they should ante up the capital to buy the Rams.

As for the ugly part of history, if Mr. Smith is talking about slavery, it was abolished by the Emancipation Proclamation.

And once again by free agency.

Face It Or Not

2009-10-12T17:03:00.002-05:00

Another example of – I got it but I don’t get it. But then again, maybe I do.

After much chiding and prodding I signed up for an account with Facebook. After having this account for several months I can honestly say I still don’t get it.

It’s not that I don’t understand all the features, like loading photo albums or movie clips, which I don’t, but should go without saying for a techno-challenged paper and pencil guy like me. It’s not that I don’t see some value in being able to keep tabs with old friends or family members who may have moved away (most of whom do know how to do all that stuff). It’s that most of what I see posted by folks who have invited me to be on their list of friends is either complaints about issues in their life that I would probably not want to share with a blanket broadcast or is information exchanged by folks that seem to have the need to share their most mundane tasks. “Good Morning FB”, “Goodnight FB”, “I’m going to work now”, “I going to wash the dishes now”, “I’m going to check to see of the mail is here yet”. Is this really what Al Gore invented the internet for?

My favorite author C.S. Lewis is quoted as saying “I begin to suspect the world is divided not only into the happy and unhappy, but into those who like happiness and those who, odd as it seems, really don’t.”

I take some comfort from the fact that my spiritual guide was able to see this trait in people some 50 or 60 years ago as it lets me know this is not a recent phenomenon. I also could not agree more with his insightful appraisal.

There are those who have included me into their Facebook world that have good news to announce and pictures or videos of happy moments. I enjoy sharing in their happiness in a vicarious voyeuristic sort of way. But it seems that many more are folks who, for whatever reason, feel the need to share the most dismal details of heartbreak and trouble. It’s not that I cannot or do not have compassion and empathy for these folks, but my biggest sorrow is that the issues they so freely announce to their entire Facebook buddy list need far more personal attention than they could hope to get through this venue.

It’s one thing to share the heartwarming pictures of your two young sons after they discovered the unparalleled joy of creating and then playing in mud as one friend did, but it is something else to share the sordid details of a nasty legal battle in divorce court as another did. Once again, it’s not that I don’t care that they are hurting. It’s just that if they are looking for some help with a problem maybe something a little more personal and private with a close and trusted friend rather than an entire list of friends, acquaintances and those include in the “friends list” so as to not hurt their feelings, may lead to a better solution.

I don’t know if we have completely lost the ability for personal interaction or if it is a glaring example of what C.S. Lewis suggested; that there are simply some folks that do not want resolution because for whatever reason they don’t like to be happy and would just rather complain.

Nonspecific interaction in the most private and personal matters in our life without any human personal contact. And they call it technological advancement.

Maybe I do get it. I just don’t want it.

11 Days Of Glory

2009-10-09T16:20:00.002-05:00

And you are surprised why?

The Nobel committee announced their decision regarding Barack Hussein Obama as their choice for the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize. Even though the Messiah had only been in office for 11 days prior to the deadline for name submission the committee insists that their unanimous decision is based on his accomplishments and not what he may do in the future.

Worldwide the news seemed to catch many by surprise and actually seemed to anger a few previous recipients. My guess is because this decision exposes the sham this once noble award has become.

If the goal of the voting committee was to make the 2007 recipient Al Gore look more worthy they picked just about the only guy that could do that. The only problem is that in order to make this year’s recipient look more worthy they may actually have to give the 2010 award to Kim Jong-il.

The award came as absolutely no surprise to me or anyone else familiar with Chicago style voting practices. If in fact the president’s chief political advisor David Axelrod and Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel had anything to do with this selection the vote probably came in with 30 or 40 now deceased committee members voting in unison for Obama. The way it works in Chicago is you decide the vote total you want at the start and then “count” the votes to make it happen. It is also possible that ACORN was responsible for registering the proper number of voting committee members to insure the predetermined outcome.

All that aside, picking Obama was the only choice these learned committee members, both dead and alive, could make.

First off they haven’t picked a black to receive the prize since Kenyan environmental and political activist Wangari Maathai in 2004. In this time of politically correct and socially mandated diversity, picking another non-black could have been seen as racist. While the International Olympic Committee has a lock on black participation in their sporting events and therefore black support for their existence the Nobel committee is not afforded that same luxury. Secondly it has been 7 years since the committee bestowed the award on a staunch anti-Semite and completely feckless US president, having given it to Jimmy Carter way back in 2002. You had to figure it was time. Finally, they certainly could have given a second Peace Prize posthumously to 1994 recipient Yasser Arafat. After all, look at the lasting peace recipients Arafat and Carter were able to broker in the Middle East. But they probably saw the picture of Obama in his native head-covering and figured “hey, he’ll do”.

The award may be called the Peace Prize, but I believe the committee looked beyond that narrow designation and felt compelled to make up for the recent snub Obama was dealt, not by the IOC’s decision to go to Rio instead of Chicago in 2016, but by noted peace activist Osama Bin Laden in his latest version of the Oprah Book Club.

Bin Laden released a list of must read literature to his band of merry jihadists which included two of past Peace Prize recipient’s Jimmy Carter’s books. Sadly neither of Obama’s million selling tomes made this prestigious list. I’m guessing that receiving this prize will give him the much needed push to get the thumbs up for next year’s Bin Laden Book Club list.

All in all it is quite an honor for Obama to be named the 2009 Peace Prize recipient. Well, at least for Obama. Not so much for the previous recipients who actually did something.

Keep an eye on E Bay. I think the Dalai Lama, Lech Walesa and Elie Wiesel may have theirs listed there soon.

A McCrystal Clear Strategy

2009-10-08T16:05:00.002-05:00

Okay, follow me on this one.

You’re walking through the jungle and all of a sudden a lion jumps out from behind a bush and takes a mighty swing at you with his paw. Being quick on your feet you are able to elude the lion’s swipe and end up with just the smallest of nicks on your hand where the lion’s claw punctured the skin. Looking down you think “Wow, look at this. It’s just a little lion prick.”

Speaking of which, did you happen to see Democrat Senate Leader Harry Reid leaving the White House yesterday?

The diminutive Mr. Peepers look-a-like was so blatantly dishonest that even his Democrat counterpart from the House of Representatives couldn’t hide her dismay. As news cameras rolled to catch another in the long string of historic moments of the Obama administration, Reid put his arm around Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and said that everyone will support whatever decision the President makes regarding strategy for the war in Afghanistan.

With that, in full view of the news teams assembled, speaker Pelosi rolled her eyes and seemed to recoil from the friendly embrace of Reid’s arm. Reid went on with his none too subtle prevarication and said what is important is “strategy before resources”.

In every aspect of Reid’s impromptu comments lies the deceit and misdirection of this latest chapter of America’s presidential on the job training.

First of all, we already have committed incredible resources to this most important military operation. The United States has been engaged in Afghanistan for 8 years and has tens of thousands of troops on the ground waiting for the new game plan. We regularly receive the sad news that more of America’s finest have lost their lives having been outnumbered by invading terrorist jihadists.

For two years the community activist now residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue said that winning this war by defeating Al Qaeda and the Taliban was a top priority. As recently as last March Obama made it clear that he intended to act like a real commander and chief, installing General Stanley McCrystal into the top position for Afghan strategy. McCrystal, one of the few Obama appointees that did not have tax troubles, had spent four years in charge of the military’s intelligence and covert operations in Afghanistan. There is nobody more in tune with what needs to be done than he.

But when McCrystal came back with his well thought out strategy of adding 40,000 additional troops to stage a similar surge to the one that was so completely successful in Iraq, well that’s when the commander and chief turned back into a community activist and began his protracted strategy debate.

While our brave volunteer military are actively involved in fighting a war against entrenched and treacherous Muslim fanatics, our less than brave Democrat politicians are debating, not war strategy, but political strategy. General McCrystal made clear the military strategy and even clarified further by stating publicly that anything less than his suggestion would mean defeat. That little press quote earned the general a trip to the presidential woodshed where he was summarily dressed down for speaking truth in a time when others are looking for excuses.

The delay in sending our military what they need when they need is criminal. This is not a new war with unknown adversaries in unfamiliar terrain. We have learned much over the past 8 years. But now the same brilliant minds that created the credit crisis and collapse of much of the world’s economy by insisting on giving loans to people who could not pay them back are trying to direct military operations in a politically expedient way.

Nancy Pelosi’s immediate reaction and the comments from her and others afterward make it McCrystal clear that she and her Democrat faithful will not support what needs to be done to win. It is impossible to not draw parallels to the political mismanagement of the Vietnam War and the tragic outcome of the political strategy of containment rather than the military victory that was eminently achievable.

But Reid, Pelosi and the other Democrats are not looking for ultimate victory in Afghanistan. They are only concerned with victory in the 2010 midterm elections regardless of the cost.

A cost that hopefully only these fallacious politicians will pay dearly.

The Pants Of Power

2009-10-06T20:09:00.001-05:00

There is no need for you Bible scholars to check.

I am fairly certain that my name is not mentioned in the Bible. But I am just as certain that if it was it would be in the final chapter Revelations. It would be included as an ominous warning of the impending end of times and as a sign of the arrival of the four horsemen of the apocalypse. It would read something like “Verily I say unto thee that when Big Frick becomes the moral compass for a great nation you can kisseth your taileth goodbyeth.”

I am not a prude and I am certainly not a saint. I understand that there are situations and circumstances that lead people to do things that are not within the socially acceptable norm. But this whole David Letterman thing has me confused and perhaps even more than that concerned.

Letterman got caught dipping his pen in the company ink well having had sex with a number of his employees. I don’t know the details nor do I care to learn them. I don’t know if they occurred before or after he got married or both. I didn’t watch his show because quite frankly he has become an incredible bore, but from what I have read about his less than remorseful admission and apology I can only assume it was the latter.

Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger nailed it when he said “Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac”. That’s what this all comes down to. Letterman had the power and he used it his advantage over those he had power over. I’m not saying that the women he had the affairs with were innocent bystanders. But when you head up a major corporation like Letterman’s World Wide Pants, and are paid hundreds of millions of dollars to not only entertain but run that company, you are going to be held to a higher standard.

Letterman is human and is certainly entitled to the compassion of forgiveness for human mistakes. But that is not what I am seeing. Instead what I am seeing is a complete disregard of any guilt and instead the framing of Letterman as the victim.

There is no one coming out and saying that what Letterman did was even distasteful. It is as if this is the new standard. When asked for a comment Dick Cavett replied in writing saying "To me, it seems Dave Letterman's handling of this is impeccable. Brave, direct, and — dare I say it? — manly. He has set a real example here of exactly how to behave when assaulted in such a sleazy operation."

Impeccable, brave, direct and manly in the face of an assault. Wow!

If it was just the Letterman incident that received such a yawn from feminist women’s groups like NOW and the public in general I would be disappointed with the obvious degeneration of moral standards in this country. But when you couple Letterman’s love fest with the overwhelming support of Roman Polanski in his battle to avoid sentencing for drugging and having sex with a 13 year old, the complete disregard conservatives paid to Bill O’Reily when he paid millions to an employee he had been sexually harassing, the seeming total forgiveness of the sleazeball Woody Allen who had a sexual relationship with his adopted daughter before marrying her, and the liberal disregard for a President of the United States who carried on a perverse sexual relationship in the oval office with a cherubic intern I have to say that we may indeed be seeing the beginning of the end of a great nation.

There is definitely something wrong when the vast majority of the population is comfortable with nothing being considered wrong. Every great civilization collapsed under the weight of its own moral failures long before they were defeated by invading outsiders.

If you want to say that Letterman should be forgiven and allowed the opportunity to learn from his sordid past, I’m on board. If you want to say that this is a private matter and should be left to Letterman and his wife to sort out, I’m good with that too. But if you want me to believe that this is somehow acceptable behavior and that it doesn’t matter, well, that’s where I get off the bus.

Letterman has some explaining to do at home and to the other members of his World Wide Pants family. It would be far better for all concerned if he kept them pulled up in the future.

School Daze

2009-10-04T17:58:00.004-05:00

I am one fortunate guy.

I can only attribute the good fortune of living in the Greater Chicago area to the divine providence of the ACLU and liberals everywhere.

Chicago is a great city. We have the beautiful lakeshore, the Magnificent Mile, the incredible downtown area known as the Loop and some of the finest restaurants in the country. But we also have the great fortune of having a city completely run by Democrats in a county completely run by Democrats. We have a mayor and city council that understand the problems on the streets are caused by guns not people and that personal responsibility is no substitute for good old fashioned political rhetoric.

Oh sure we have some problems that don’t involve guns. Like the brutal gang beating that ended the young life of 16 year old Fenger High School honor roll student Derrion Albert last week or the skull fracture that put a young 14 year old Mather High School freshman into intensive care a day later. These two young students were not attacked with guns but rather were beaten in the head with two by fours and metal pipes.

While that may sound distasteful to some, the city of Chicago can raise its head up high and say that while these students were beaten in the head with lumber and pipes the one thing you never have to worry about in Chicago is that students will be beaten over the head with the Bible messages. The same cannot be said for some of the more backward areas of the country like Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia. Well at least it couldn’t be said until last week.

It seems the radical hayseeds at Lakeview-Fort Oglethorpe High School had been carrying on a years old tradition of having their football team make their grand entrance onto the field by running through banners emblazoned with (insert ominous descending tritonic musical scale here) Bible verses.

The banners were held by cheerleaders and after their entrance the team would all take a knee to say a pre-game prayer. The banners would have such subversive messages as “Commit to the Lord, whatever you do, and your plans will succeed”.

The tradition was instituted at the suggestion of the students after the 9-11 terrorist attacks. The principle of the school enthusiastically supported the practice as did the 900 member student body. Fortunately these blatantly unconstitutional slogans were ceased last week by the Catoosa County Superintendent of Schools when she received a complaint from a single parent. Superintendent Denia Reese said the schools attorney advised that the signs violated federal law because they were held by cheerleaders at a school-sponsored function.

The ACLU and the Anti-Defamation League sent letters congratulating the Superintendent’s decision, saving them the time and effort of filing a lawsuit. Bill Nigut, the southeast director of the Anti-Defamation League said “There are legal ways for students to have religious observations in the school context and there are illegal ways…..” What a bright guy Bill is huh? Of course the only way for students to express their religious beliefs in the school context legally is to do so individually and in silence.

The poor students at this Georgia high school have obviously been so brainwashed by living in this buckle of the Bible Belt that they actually are protesting this decision. The poor kids don’t even know that they are being protected for their own good from the ever-present danger of religious belief and expression.

That’s why I say I am so fortunate to be living in the far more progressive Midwest.

Students in Chicago may have to worry about being beaten over the head with two by fours and metal pipes but at least they don’t have to worry about being beaten over the head with John 3:16.

The IOC Racist Snub

2009-10-02T12:38:00.001-05:00

There can be but one answer to Chicago’s unsuccessful attempt in being granted the 2016 Olympic Games.

Racism!

Oh sure, Mayor Daley is white and Chicago has a majority of white residents. But the fact that Chicago was represented by America’s historic first black President and black First Lady can only mean that the International Olympic Committee is racist in their snubbing of the Windy City. The voting committee was probably sitting back in their council room taking the vote while wearing white robes and hoods.

Barack and Michelle are from Chicago so it is no wonder that they would chose to spend tens of millions of taxpayer dollars to fly the President, his extensive entourage and security detail to Copenhagen. And look at who else made the trip. Oprah Winfrey, well known celebrity, Chicago resident and lifelong black person. And who did Chicago use to make the Olympic pitch from an athlete’s perspective? Michael Jordon. Recent Basketball Hall of Fame inductee, 6 time world champion with the Chicago Bulls, business entrepreneur and black guy about town.

Granted, the people who stood to make hundreds of millions of dollars selling their dilapidated slum tenements to the city for demolition in the building of the Olympic Village are mostly white. Folks like David Axelrod, the president’s chief political advisor and his business associates at AKPD who have been the lead group in Chicago’s Olympic publicity campaign and paid tens of millions of dollars already. Valerie Jarrett, senior advisor to the president who “divested” her Chicago real estate holdings to her close business associates at the Habitat Company who still hold them. And Patrick Ryan, chairman of Obama’s inauguration committee and CEO of Aon, the corrupt insurance giant recently hit with a $190 million corruption settlement and tapped to carry huge policies on the Olympic reconstruction.

Oh sure, most of those people are white. But the people who would be thrown out of those dilapidated buildings and given new housing elsewhere (in equally dilapidated conditions) are mostly black, so that should count for something.

No, there can be no doubt about it. This refusal to allow Chicago taxpayers to lose hundreds of millions of tax dollars hosting the 2016 Olympics while allowing the Democrat supporters and employees of our first black president to make huge profits can only be seen as blatant racism at its worst.

Pay no mind to the fact that Rio de Janeiro, who was granted the games, has many dark skinned people. As the president’s Chief of Staff and equally well connected Chicago politician Rahm Emanuel said, Chicago is just different. As Emanuel said in an interview with ABC (THE All Barack Channel) News, “The world will feel comfortable given the diversity of Chicago.”

Well, there you have it in a nutshell. The IOC is obviously not comfortable with diversity and therefore must be racist.

Chicago did everything they could to put its best foot forward spending millions of tax dollars in the worst economic conditions in nearly a century for the opportunity to spend hundreds of millions more tax dollars, but to no avail. The city was well represented by a black president, a black first lady, a black mega-millionaire celebrity and a black mega-millionaire athlete, all in an attempt to convince a group of middle Europeans of the city’s diversity. But diversity is not what these racists wanted.

Instead they gave the games to Rio, in a country with a white president, a city with a white mayor that has a huge white statue of a white Jesus overlooking it.

I think the reasoning here is pretty obvious, don’t you?

Economic Reality

2009-10-01T15:31:00.000-05:00

If you don’t know where you’re going any road will take you there.

So it says in the title line of the George Harrison song and so it is with the economic recovery plans, or lack thereof, in Congress and the Obama White House. The economy continues to falter and the unfortunate truth is that those in charge of turning it around are completely clueless as to what to do next.

The massive, debt laden economic stimulus package was passed 9 months ago and as expected by anybody who can add 2 plus 2, has had absolutely no stimulating effect on the economy. Nearly one trillion dollars was spent or soon will be on everything from the habitat reclamation of California field mice to gang banger tattoo removal machines. None of this blatant partisan spending spree ever had a chance of actually improving the nation’s economy, but the Democrat leadership in both the House and the Senate were bound and determined to get their pet projects funded while the country was still euphorically celebrating the coronation of the new Messiah.

The biggest problem is that not only does the ruling Democrat Party not have a workable plan; they don’t even have a workable premise on which to base a plan.

As stated by John F Kennedy “The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.” Democrats have been persistent in developing the myth that the poor and middle class suffered greatly under the Bush tax cuts. Obama’s claim of the need for increased taxes on the rich has been proven time and again to be the exact wrong policy. The facts as shown by the governments own Congressional Budget Office shows clearly that the greatest increase in income and wealth over the course of the Bush tax cuts was the bottom 20% of earners. A subsequent study by the Treasury Department found the exact same thing. The data from these and other studies caused Nobel Prize winning economist Robert Fogel to write “In every measure that we have bearing on the standard of living the gains of the lower classes have been far greater than those experienced by the population as a whole.”

The myth of the repression of the poor through tax cuts that will benefit only the wealthy may be a popular mantra to run a political campaign, but the economy is not based on political rhetoric. The economy is based in the reality of numbers and when it comes to reality the Democrats numbers just don’t add up.

In manufacturing where countless workers are currently laid off or working reduced hours the much-hyped stimulus package has done nothing to curtail the industrial death spiral. At the recent national Infrastructure and Steel Conference the president of the American Institute of Steel Construction said that the Democrats alleged stimulus package should be called “The case of the vanishing billions.”

The overall manufacturing output received a temporary bump thanks to the Cash for Clunkers program in August, receiving its best showing of expansion since June of 2008. But the September report showed not only a slowing in the expansion but a rapid return to a contraction In manufacturing as the short lived rebuild of cars quickly catches up with the now depleted demand.

My ever faithful web monkey sent me a report from CNN that claims 47% of households will pay no federal income tax. That equates to roughly 71 million people. Yet according to the governments own studies each of these 71 million folks saw a greater increase in their incomes than the top 5% or earners who already pay 60% of all the taxes.

When it comes to developing a plan that will work to actually stimulate the economy and reduce the economic pain and suffering of all Americans, the Democrat leadership in power must first look at the real numbers and drop the charade of victimhood. Otherwise we will simply get more of the same and the deficit, which is already forecasted to exceed $11 trillion in the next 10 years, will bury us and our way of life under a debt load that is not only unmanageable but perhaps fatal.

And where is our president during this time of economic national emergency? Why he’s in Copenhagen trying to ensure the Olympic Games coming to Chicago which will pay huge personal financial rewards to some of his most ardent supporters.

More on that tomorrow.

Fenger Pointing

2009-09-30T16:02:00.000-05:00

Don’t go away, it’s time to play……….THE BLAME GAME!!!!!

Charges are beginning to fly of police neglect in the brutal beating death of Chicago Fenger High School honor student Derrion Albert. Folks in the embattled neighborhood are once again looking for someone, anyone, to blame for the senseless, savage beating that snuffed out the promising young life of the 16 year old innocent bystander. Anyone but the members of the community that is. Parents of other Fenger students are now blaming the tried and true scapegoat Chicago Police Department as being culpable for this gangland beat down. Others are blaming the Board of Education for changing teachers at the school.

The fatal beating occurred after school on Thursday. That same morning before classes commenced a Fenger student fired a shot at another student. Parents are claiming that because of that incident police should have known that there would be trouble after school. On the surface their reasoning seems sound. The only problem is that shots are fired on a regular basis in the neighborhood and gang fights are even more common between kids from the Altgeld Garden housing project and kids from the small area of the Chicago Roseland neighborhood known as the Ville where Fenger High School is located.

The Altgeld Garden kids are viewed as the outsiders and are frequent targets of neighborhood gang violence. It is the class A typical street gang mentality of protecting their turf against the dreaded foreign invaders from Altgeld. It is also class A stupid.

While community activists begin their campaign of news conferences to complain about the police, Chicago police detectives continue to be frustrated by the neighborhoods “Code of Silence” in their efforts to arrest all those responsible for the homicide. Four teenaged gangbangers have been arrested and charged with murder having been identified by a video of the beating from a cell phone of one of the more than 20 witnesses that stood by and watched. Police have made several appeals through the press and going door to door for additional information, but to no avail. They are currently working with the FBI to enhance the poor quality video in an attempt to identify more of those involved.

Switching blame to the police has become the standard operating procedure in these all too common and all too tragic gang related murders. The police have once again stated their commitment to uphold the peace, what little of it there is, but the community has to be a partner in that effort.

The gang activity in these neighborhoods is not only tolerated but in many ways celebrated. Gang membership has become a rite of passage and is all too often passed down from parent to child. Parental involvement has to begin long before the teary eyed news conference asking for information about a poor kid’s death. In the case of Derrion Albert, his parents led him away from gang activity and onto the honor roll at school. Unfortunately other parents did not do the same with their children.

Like the young teenager who fired a shot that morning at school. He didn’t buy that gun on his way to school. It came with him from home. And the young gang members responsible for Derrion’s death. They didn’t join a violent street gang that day. This violence has been going in this neighborhood for years. When police step up patrols and arrests the community lashes out with claims of racism and profiling. Good, promising young kids like Derrion die because the community accepts the violence as a way of life.

The Chicago Board of Education targeted Fenger this year as a “turnaround” school, firing ineffective teachers and increasing resources. The Chicago Police joined in with increased patrols and made the area a high priority for gang crime enforcement. But without an equal partner in the community all the money and all the increased patrols are for naught.

Instead of holding news conferences community activists need to get active in the community breaking the never ending cycle of gang violence and community apathy. It’s time to step up and start taking responsibility.

It will start with coming forward and identifying those responsible for Derrion’s murder.

Better Living Through Capitalism

2009-09-29T16:13:00.001-05:00

It’s not that important to know how a drug works. It is far more important to know how drug companies work.

I had a conversation last week with a fellow I consider to be a fairly bright guy. He commented on the absurdity of the proposed ObamaCare package. He seemed to have a pretty good grasp on how government intervention into the medical system would negatively affect his ability to make his own medical choices and had no problem understanding the disastrous impact an additional trillion dollars in government spending would have on our already shaky economy. But then when all was said and done he made a most puzzling comment. He said “But the government really needs to do something about the cost of medicine.” When I asked him to explain he said “Well, medicine is too expensive and the government needs to do something about the cost.”

How very strange I thought. Here is a guy who is in business. He understands how businesses work. The last thing he would want is for the government to control or mandate what he was allowed to make on his products and services. Why, when it comes to drug companies, does he think it works any different?

We live in a remarkable time of unparalleled advances in just about every area of our lives. Advancements in technology have brought about remarkable breakthroughs in medicine and medical treatment. In the past decade alone we have witnessed the introduction of life-altering drugs for just about every disease known to man. The question one needs to ask is, were the pharmaceutical companies motivated to develop these new wonder-drugs for the purpose of being altruistic or were they motivated by the potential financial returns? The answer seems clear to me. We enjoy the lifesaving and life-improving qualities of these innovative medications because somebody took the risk of a huge capital investment in the hope of a successful outcome and making a buck in the end. Drug makers are publicly traded companies and have the same fiduciary responsibilities to their share holders as any other. They take great risk for the opportunity at great reward. The system that drives companies to make these new discoveries is capitalism at its finest.

Instead of looking at these corporate profits as a bad thing we should be applauding their success. Every dollar they make equates to lives saved or improved and enhances their ability to reinvest in further advancements. It is perhaps the routine success of new drug therapies that has jaded the American public into believing that we are somehow now deserving of the benefits garnered by years of trials and billions of dollars R & D. What once was viewed with gratitude has become an expectation.

We have lost our sense of astonishment and developed an attitude of self-entitlement. Medical treatments that would have been unthinkable only a few years ago are not only possible today but commonplace. So much so that we forget it not only requires enormous amounts of capital to get a new drug onto the market but that it takes just as much to have a new drug fail the trials and go nowhere. Billions of dollars are spent in developing and testing new drugs before anybody knows if the investment will pay off. The only possible motivation for such risky investments is the opportunity to recoup the investment on the failed drug trials with the profits from the successful ones. Unlike government drug companies use their own money and also unlike government deficits have to be repaid.

A drug company is only as good as their next success and to limit their return on investment would do nothing but stifle research and bring the almost daily breakthroughs of mind-boggling medical advancements to a screeching halt. As I told my friend during that recent conversation “If you think the price is too high, don’t take the pill.”

I’ve seen what the government can do when it gets involved in business. The last thing I want is a “Cash for Cardiac’s” program or a “Dollars for Diarrhea” rebate plan.

And just how do these wonder-drugs work?

They work just fine.

More Lynching's

2009-09-28T11:03:00.001-05:00

There were several lynching’s in Chicago this weekend.

Well they may as well have been lynching’s as far as the poor victims are concerned. They’re just as dead.

It was another vivid example of what young blacks face in this country. These lynching’s were carried out without the use of rope or a tree, not by an angry group of white supremacists. They were committed by other young blacks, most of them in their teens. It was a rampage of violence carried out up close and personal. In the first there were no guns, no knives, just hands, feet and two by fours. In the end 16 year old Darrion Albert lie dead on the ground, having been savagely beaten. A beating that will likely be gracing the web site You Tube soon as it was caught on the video recorder of a witness’s cell phone, a common practice these days amongst black teens at gang fights. The beating occurred just outside Fenger High School where young Darrion was an honor roll student. It was part of a larger gang related melee between two rival gangs. Darrion just happened to be in the wrong place at the time as he was not a gang member.

Several other young black teens will not get to see their next birthday either, due to black on black gang violence. Some of the victims were in gangs but several more were not. One was a college student who had just returned home to pick up some additional clothes. As he stood on his front steps talking with a neighborhood friend a teenage gang banger walked up and shot both of them to death. There will be those that will foolishly focus on the gun rather than the hand that carried it, pointed it and pulled the trigger.

Once again just being young and black is enough to get you killed in the hood.

There were small rallies and 10 or 15 person marches protesting the senseless violence. News cameras recorded the tear filled faces of friends and families of the dead with local church pastors and neighbors trying to console them. But in Chicago, just like every other major city and smaller community nationwide, black on black crime is so commonplace that these tragic stories of death and family destruction will not garner a second day of newsprint. Not that they’re not important. It’s just that tomorrow there will be a whole new list of young blacks lynched without ropes by other young blacks.

But what do we hear from the black politicians? We hear that the problem in America is all about white racism. Newsweek’s recent cover story focused on the premise that white babies are actually racist. Blacks and liberal whites in Congress and the pundits that follow them claim that every dissenting vote against Barack Obama and every problem in the black community is caused by white racism. But the fear that grips the black community is not of racist white people. The fear that grips the black community is of the black community.

If whites had carried out these heinous killings the streets of the crime scenes would be jammed with news trucks and satellite dishes. The good Reverend JJ and his counterpart Jheri Curl Al would be ranting about how this was an example of the years of racist oppression. But Sharpton and Jackson didn’t attend the small rallies. Maybe their schedules were already filled or maybe they feared for their own safety on these mean streets. Or maybe their attendance at a rally against black on black violence wouldn’t support their rhetoric or lifestyle.

It’s a lot easier to blame white racism, especially when whites are willing to go along with the idea. But this constant drumbeat of racism does nothing to solve the real problem. In fact it just makes it worse.

16 year old Darrion Albert and the others from this past weekend are dead just because they were young and black. There were no ropes, no trees, no white hoods, no burning crosses, no swastikas, no discussion of hate crimes, no shaved heads, not a white face in the bunch except for the police trying to solve the crime.

No Racism. Just dead black kids and weeping black parents.

Nuts

2009-09-24T16:27:00.001-05:00

Some events are just a complete waste of clean underwear.

Such is the case most days in the hallowed hall of peace and freedom known as the United Nations, but never was it more apparent to even a casual observer than the session held on Wednesday of this week.

To comprehend all of the money spent and time and attention paid to carry on the insultingly inane soap box rants of this completely feckless organization is to understand how utterly clueless we have become in the area of international diplomacy. Billions upon billions of dollars are spent on and channeled through this corrupt collection of professional speechmakers every year under the guise of world peace and international harmony, when in fact the only function this august body serves is to offer a prominent podium to deceitful third world dictators to vent their often psychotic and eminently paranoid view of the evil United States of America.

What may well have started off as a means to fulfill the dream of international unity has been denigrated into a hopeless parade of despotic autocrats who rage in a singular voice of the malevolent character of the United States while shaking their tin cup in hopes of garnering increased financial support for their junta dictatorships.

The only practical purpose served by this organization is to caste the harsh light of reality on just how useless it is to even attempt to carry out any form of meaningful negotiation with these ruthless mental midgets. The U.N. provides a forum of implied legitimacy for accusations so outrageous as to be completely beyond comprehension to the point that if the accusers were standing on the street professing similar manifesto’s they would likely be whisked away to a secure mental ward for psychiatric observation.

It is the U.N. podium where Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez said he could still smell the sulfur of hell a day after President Bush addressed the assembly. It was the U.N. podium where Iran’s puppet president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad repeatedly denied the occurrence of the World War II holocaust and basically told the world to kiss his nuclear missile toting ass. It is the U.N. podium where a clearly insane Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, who in keeping with the circus atmosphere arrived in New York with his own big top tent, almost incoherently rambled for over 90 minutes on the evils of the United States, Israel, the planet as a whole and the assassination of John F. Kennedy, while defending the rights of the felonious pirates off the coast of Somalia claiming “These men are not pirates. We are the pirates. We are all pirates”. The only thing missing was an eye patch and a parrot and he would have been ready for October 31st.

The concept of international diplomacy may sound like a venerable idea, but when you realize that the person you are trying to negotiate with is nuttier than a jar of Jif you quickly come to understand that you may as well be talking to your shoe.

These are the leaders that Barack Obama said he would meet with without any preconditions. These are the sick minds that are desperate for something, anything, to give them at least the feigned appearance of legitimacy. These are the inmates that are running the asylum. And we are the ones who get to foot the bill for the lion’s share of it.

Whoever came up with the expression “Talk is cheap” has never seen the United Nations. It is beyond saving. There is no hope of ever turning this dysfunctional diplomatic cabal into anything altruistic or even meaningful. Any major issues will always be deadlocked by the self-interest of the major power players and the minor issues will remain eternally unresolved but continuously funded by the U.S. taxpayer. Breakthrough agreements are measured in how much the US will concede. Enforcement for the other parties of those agreements is nonexistent except as the topic for the next round of rambling speeches. It serves no useful purpose for the United States to even be a member of this asinine assembly much less play host and caretaker. The U.S. needs to resign and the U.N. needs to move to a more suitable location.

Maybe Libya. The U.N. has the clowns. Gadhafi has the tent.

The Good War

2009-09-23T19:19:00.001-05:00

Where did all the good wars go?

Not all war is good. Some are nothing more than a sad and tragic waste of blood and treasure. But to say no war is good is to completely ignore human history. And to say a war, any war, is unwinnable by the greatest fighting forces known to man is to be completely ignorant of the true purpose of war.

Allow me to explain to those unclear on the concept. The purpose of waging war is to win and you win by inflicting more damage than you receive. It is absolutely no more complicated than that. As General George S. Patton so eloquently said “No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country.” Patton understood that the object of waging war is not to simply wage war. The object is victory. A master military tactician General Patton put it most simply when he said “I am a soldier, I fight where I am told, and I win where I fight.”

Barack Hussein Obama campaigned for 2 years under the banner of redirecting American forces toward the good war in Afghanistan. Time and again he decried the war in Iraq as useless and unwinnable, but said the war in Afghanistan against Taliban fighters was of the utmost importance to America’s safety. He repeatedly stated that the war in Iraq had nothing to do with the 9-11 attacks, but victory in Afghanistan was essential to our national security. But now as Commander and Chief of the greatest fighting force in the world, well, he’s just not sure. If the commander has lost the will to win those who he commands are doomed to defeat.

Obama came into power with this war already underway. He handpicked his own guy in General Stanley McChrystal to reevaluate our strategy and report back with what is needed to win. McChrystal did exactly what he was requested to do and prepared a report clearly showing the need for more troops. Now Obama, in typical neophyte fashion, wants to reevaluate the reevaluation.

Along with being a military historian and master tactician General Patton understood the importance of removing the enemy’s will to fight. Obama’s vacillation does nothing but embolden our enemies. He spent years claiming just about every move the Bush administration made was being used as an enlistment tool for the Taliban and Al Qaida. From holding prisoners at Guantanamo Bay to increased night raids on terrorist houses in Iraq to the increased troop surge which eventually brought victory, each was described by this community activist qua terrorism expert as empowering our enemies. But the truth is that nothing, absolutely nothing, emboldens our enemies more than having the Commander and Chief of the greatest fighting force on the planet looking weak and confused.

The United States did not declare this war. It was declared upon us. We either decide to fight it now or it will be brought to us later. The truly sad conclusion is that Obama’s re-re-re-reevaluation is nothing more than partisan politics. War is seldom popular but is sometimes necessary. Aggression will always trump nonaggression. The comparisons of Afghanistan to Vietnam are flying and perhaps with good cause. A complete military victory in Vietnam was not only possible but was being achieved until the weak knees of a pacifist partisan Congress snatched defeat from the jaws of victory by removing both the funding and the will to win. Tens of thousands of South Vietnamese were killed after the American withdrawal and tens of thousands more fled for their lives. The numbers in Afghanistan will dwarf those in Vietnam and this enemy will not be satisfied with remaining within their own borders.

The stakes for America in Afghanistan are great. Our national security depends on our ultimate victory. To retreat without a decisive victory is to simply delay the inevitable. The Taliban and Al Qaida will not go away and emboldened by the defeat of America will become a force the likes of which they can only now dream of. Afghanistan is indeed ruled by tribal warlords who know only peace through strength. If America shows vulnerability or indecision we will be swept away by Taliban fighters and their supporters that abhor weakness.

Victory will not be easy, but it is mandatory.

Curious George

2009-09-22T15:08:00.004-05:00

Before the loyal liberal readers of BigFrick.com get there undies in a big bundle and start sending hate mail, the title of this piece refers to George Stephanopoulos.

Why? What did you think?

I just completed a 6 day solo sojourn of a few thousand miles cross country in my environmentally friendly, planet saving Prius.

Actually, if I wanted to ride in a Prius I would have to lie down and allow them to build it around me, so I drove my far less socially acceptable but remarkably more comfortable “Big Black Cadillac” (so named by my grandson for his favorite mode of transport). I can’t even imagine making a trip any farther than the end of my driveway in one of those new internal combustion roller-skates, but that’s a story for another day.

I spent most of my driving time listening to the satellite radio where the political pundits on both sides of the spectrum both chided and bemoaned the recent appearances of the Messiah on the Sunday morning talk shows promoting yet another new sales pitch for ObamaCare. Obama made the circuit of 5 network talk shows omitting Fox News as the only one not worthy of his presence.

Most of the appearances went according to the script with the adoring hosts obligingly lobbing softball questions and Obama answering with equally soft-boiled replies. The one standout in this presidential media love-fest was his appearance on ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos”. George was curious indeed and asked the President some fairly pointed questions about the proposed surtax to be assessed on anyone that doesn’t buy private insurance under ObamaCare and what Obama thought of Congress pulling federal financial support from the Obama administrations BFF’s at ACORN.

Liberal pundits are howling that in treating Obama to such pointed and negative questions George Stephanopoulos has lost his card-carrying liberal mind. Conservative pundits, like Rush Limbaugh, are passing the heated exchange off as nothing more than a ratings grab in an attempt to differentiate “This Week” from the other gaggle of talk shows Obama appeared on.

Obama’s replies to Stephanopoulos were terse and abrupt. Morphing himself into victim mode, Obama attempted to accuse the host of misusing the term tax as it related to the money the government would be charging taxpayers. When a well prepared Stephanopoulos pulled out a collegiate dictionary and read the definition of tax Obama amazingly tried to use that as his defense, claiming that the fact that GS was prepared with the definition meant he knew it wasn’t true. He went on with his blatant prevarication in professing he hadn’t even paid attention to the ACORN debacle as it was of little or no importance to him.

All of Obama’s replies sounded eerily like a previous Democrat President who attempted to debate what the definition of is is and asserted with equal adjuration the fact that Monica Lewinski was just a low level intern of no particular import.

While historically it has been proven to be unwise to disagree with the El Rushbo, I view Obama’s answers to be the reason for George’s harsh approach rather than a mere play at a ratings boon.

George Stephanopoulos was a senior political advisor and later Communications Director for then President Bill Clinton. In his book entitled “All Too Human, A Political Education” Stephanopoulos discusses how he poured his heart and soul into the campaign and defense of a man he truly believed in only to be let down. I think GS is adroit enough to see many of the same disingenuous qualities in Obama that he became so painfully aware of in Clinton.

Obama’s performance on ABC’s This Week, as well as the other Sunday network talk-a-thons, was filled with the same jackleg hyperbole as the contraband Cuban cigar smoking, blue dress staining, land deal swindler Stephanopoulos used to work for. It's obvious the scars of that soul-shaking disappointment run too deep to be soon forgotten. It doesn’t mean that Stephanopoulos is any less a liberal than his past would dictate, only that he has walked down that primrose path before and knows what the fertilizer smells like.

He’s also learned to avoid stepping in it.

America's Intervention

2009-09-17T17:17:00.000-05:00

America, we’ve gathered your friends and family here to help with this intervention. It’s time you come to terms with the fact that……well……..you have a drinking problem.

No, I’m not talking about slamming back a few brewskies with the boys at the bar or guzzling down a box of cheap wine by imitation candlelight with some Ritz crackers and a can of aerosol cheese. I’m not even talking about enjoying the company of our old pals Johnny Walker, Jim Beam or Jack Daniels. What I’m talking about is why, we as a nation, have become incapable of carrying out our most mundane daily tasks without an overpriced cup of coffee or a three dollar bottle of water on our persistently parched person. It has become almost comical.

I can remember not long ago, if you got thirsty you went to the water fountain (or bubbler as we used to call them) and slurped down a few mouthfuls of semi-cool H2O and went about your day. Not anymore. Now folks are filling up their “hydration bottles” with pure filtered water so they can survive the 6 block car ride to Starbucks.

Even at the peak of the gasoline price hikes last summer people would complain about paying just under $5.00 per gallon for gas while they were sucking down a bottle of lightly lemon flavored water that cost the equivalent of $10.00 per gallon.

When did we get so thirsty, and why?

It wasn’t long ago that folks would invest a buck to drink a fancy bottle of Perrier sparkling French drinking water in a green glass bottle with a metal screw top cap. It was mostly for show as the stuff inside the bottle tasted like watered down soda water. But nowadays folks think nothing of coughing up 2 bucks plus for a bottle of plain drinking water in a paper-thin plastic bottle just so they don’t have to face the next 10 minutes without some form of rehydration. Oh sure the label on the bottle says it’s pure mountain spring water but the reality is the water came down from that mountain 100 years ago, was eventually siphoned through miles of pipeline into a bottling plant where it came out of the same water main that feeds your garden hose.

Everywhere I look I see people with some form of beverage in their hand. Driving the car, shopping for groceries, in the mall, riding a bike, walking down the street, at work, in school, even at church. There are Bedouin spice traders that travel hundreds of miles of sand dunes on camelback that carry less potable liquid than most Americans on their way to the store.

My local grocery store has an entire aisle dedicated to various forms of drinking water. It also has a Starbucks right in the store so shoppers can sip their latte whilst choosing their bottle of water. I watched as a family of 5 strolled the aisle trying to come to a consensus on what water everybody preferred. Mom had her Starbucks, Dad had a reusable drinking bottle and the 3 kids each had a juice box. Am I missing something here? Was there some sort of nuclear attack and nobody told me?

I salute the marketing geniuses that were able to convince Americans to buy tap water for $10 per gallon and spend the better part of their day either drinking it or waiting in line for the restroom. I wonder if they worked for a water company or the American Urologist Association.

No wonder the Depends take up the next full aisle.

Hall Of Shame

2009-09-15T22:52:00.001-05:00

Talk about a change in tune.

It wasn’t that long ago that most of the country was singing along with the snappy jingle in the Gatorade commercial “Like Mike, if I could be like Mike”. I am certain there are still a few die-hard fans that will hold that same reverence for unquestionably one of the greatest basketball players of all time. But I am equally certain that Michael Jordan’s induction speech into the Basketball Hall of Fame has even more switching their tune.

During his playing days Jordan was the embodiment of God-given gifts, well honed skill and interminable desire. He led the Chicago Bulls to a handful plus one of championship rings and held the citizenry of the Windy City in the palm of his ball-clinching hand. Sports fans from around the world knew his name and Chicago Bulls hats and number 23 jerseys were a fashion staple in places that had never seen a basketball prior to Jordan’s reign. I remember on numerous occasions seeing pictures of natural disaster victims from tiny little hamlets in third world countries waiting in line for Red Cross relief packages wearing Chicago Bulls baseball caps. His impact on sports around the world was immense; his impact on sports marketing was even greater.

That has been the key to success for Michael Jordan. He has made far more money off the court than he did on it. Even after losing the record amount of $168 million in a different kind of court, this one of the divorce variety, and having lost millions gambling and tens of millions in unsuccessful real estate deals, Jordan remains one of the wealthiest men in sports history. His marketing of the Michael Jordan name has been pure gold and continues to rake in cash through his endorsements of everything from golf equipment to underpants. Michael Jeffery Jordan was a winner and continues to be one almost everywhere but a casino or a golf course. So how is it that after all this triumph and adulation he chooses to be as petty and vindictive as he was successful?

Jordan’s acceptance speech into the Hall of Fame was so filled with cheap, narcissistic vitriol that it made this six foot six inch MVP millionaire look small. By the time he had finished it was apparent that even enshrining him into basketball immortality was not enough to soothe this savage ego. The only thing missing from his acceptance was a request to build a separate Hall of Fame just for him.

He demeaned players and team owners alike and made it clear that as far as he was concerned, he was the only thing that concerned him. He slammed Bulls GM Jerry Krause and Bulls owner Jerry Reinsdorf even though they treated him like royalty and arranged for his two year stint in minor league baseball for what I am still convinced was a secret gambling suspension. He slammed just about every player of note he ever played against and commended almost no one. He even went so far as to fly in his old high school teammate Leroy Smith to introduce him to the podium. This honor was not offered out of friendship for Smith but rather as a final slam to his old high school basketball coach Pop Herring, who kept Smith on the varsity squad over Jordan during his sophomore year. He admonished his coach and aired this nearly 30 year old resentment saying “I just wanted to make sure you understood: You made a mistake, dude.”

Some reporters have stated that the rambling bitch session was done mostly in good natured fun. They were either blinded by Jordan’s celebrity or by one too many pre-ceremonial cocktails. There was nothing good natured or funny about Jordan’s performance. Instead it was actually very sad.

Of course Jordan does not have to worry about his comments or the public reaction to them. He has enough money and fame to carry him through for the rest of his days. But it is depressing to see what happens to man when everything is just not enough.

Perhaps Jordan could sign on to do commercials for Avis. Maybe have him running through an airport, leaping over chairs to catch his flight while adoring fans chant “Go MJ Go”. Avis used to have another celebrity making those commercials but he also had a problem that having everything was just not enough.

He’s not with them anymore.

The Pot And The Kettle

2009-09-14T15:40:00.000-05:00

I am really tempted to use the old “Pot calling the kettle black” analogy, but that would only elicit more hate mail accusing me of racism.

There has, however, never been a more fitting illustration of exactly what that well worn phrase describes than Barack Obama’s warning Wall Street executives about economic risk and ruin. I have to admit, if nothing else, this guy has orbs like pumpkins.

There he stood, the leader of the free world and chief architect of a liberal agenda slated to sink the United States into a catastrophic debt level totaling $9 trillion, putting Wall Street on notice that their irresponsible economic policies would no longer be tolerated. “Hear my words” he said, “we will not go back to the days of reckless behavior and unchecked excess at the heart of this crisis where too many were motivated by quick kills and bloated bonuses.”

To be sure, Wall Street cannot be held harmless in the collapse of all things financial. Their financial ingenuity at packaging and repackaging and re-repackaging mortgage backed securities and the credit default swaps attached to those securities certainly played a major part in the complexity of the economic meltdown that unraveled countless 401K’s, shuttered several historic Wall Street firms and imperiled the economies of countries large and small all over the world. But laying the entire blame on Wall Street is like blaming the gas station where you buy your cigarettes for your lung cancer.

It was Democrats in Congress that came up with the idea of creating an entity that would pump capital into the mortgage markets to increase the number of home owners. It was Democrats in Congress that created Fannie Mae and later Freddie Mac to serve that purpose. It was Democrats in Congress that appointed the political hacks to run those entities who lied about their balance sheets to garner the bloated bonuses of which Obama spoke. It was Democrats in Congress under the direction of Bill Clinton that then changed the focus of Fannie and Freddie to include borrowers that had no business getting a mortgage because they had no ability to pay the money back. Wall Street certainly jumped on the bandwagon, but it was Congress and the Democrat leadership that was pulling the wagon down Wall Street hollering “All aboard’.

Obama warned Wall Street that he would not tolerate their shortsighted behavior and that they could not count on him for any further bailouts. This little trip to the woodshed would have been far more appropriate for a UAW union hall in Detroit than the Federal Hall in the heart of Wall Street as the bailout money given to most of these major banks has brought the government coffers some much needed additional revenue in the form of repaid principle with interest.

Obama chose the one year anniversary of the collapse of Lehman Brothers to deliver his dire warning. But rather than using Lehman as an example of how things were broken I view Lehman as an example of how things worked exactly as they were supposed to. When you make bad business decisions you don’t stay in business no matter how big you are. Certainly government can take measures to protect the overall economy but businesses have the right to take risks and if they are on the wrong side of the bet they have the right to fail. That’s how business works.

To think this community activist qua inept economist and his band of Congressional drunken sailors can direct the world’s financial leaders is like thinking Amelia Earhart would make a good air traffic controller. Obama’s economic policies since taking office and plans for additional spending are nothing short of pandemic. He credits the near $1 trillion in supposed stimulus spending for turning the economy around yet unemployment figures and real economic data show his assessment to be far more pipedream than mainstream.

The question is not if the federal government will bailout Wall Street but who will bailout a federal government saddled with a debt load three times the size of their annual budget.

It is the pot calling the kettle black.

That’s not racist. It’s just reality.

Back To Basics

2009-09-13T18:30:00.001-05:00

I think it’s time we get down to the basics.

The President stood before the joint Houses of Congress and caste a stern, accusatory glare at the Republican side of the aisle, warning them that he and his administration will expose and do battle with any or all of them that spread what he deems to be “lies, plain and simple” about his nationalized healthcare plan.

Democrats in attendance nodded approvingly and showed their solidarity through applause.

Republicans sneered at the challenge and rolled their eyes in recalcitrant rebellion, waving printed copies of counter proposals and at one point vocally accusing the accuser of misdirection and prevarication himself.

It all made for some action packed television viewing, but when it was over we were no closer to a solution then we were before it started. For all the sanctimony of Democrats and all the insurrection of the Republicans, the basic question of how the hell we are going to pay for this or any other healthcare plan remains in the realm of magic money.

Never mind the “death panels”. Never mind if illegal aliens will only get the same level of free healthcare that they now enjoy and take full advantage of. Never mind the overwhelming deluge of paperwork that would be required by governmental intervention into healthcare. Never mind the dramatically increased costs to healthcare providers by the never-ending barrage of bureaucratic bungling historically evident anytime the government gets involved. Never mind the reduced payments to healthcare providers and reduced services those diminished payments will mandate. Never mind having most of your healthcare decisions made for you by an actuarial pivot table of synthesized cost versus life expectancy. Never mind that not a single person in attendance at the speech will be forced into coverage of this healthcare debacle like the rest if the country will.

Even if we were able to surmount these insurmountable obstacles, we still have absolutely no clue as to how we are going to pay for it.

We as a nation are projected to be heading into an abyss of a $9 trillion debt. Barack Obama spent two years on the campaign trail decrying the eminent collapse of our economy because of the Bush budget deficit forecasted at $410 billion. He constantly reminded voters that the Bush deficit was close to the historic high water mark set in 2004 of $413 billion. The entire Bush 2009 budget unveiled in February 2008 totaled $3.1 trillion in spending. That included $515 billion in defense spending on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. There was an additional $70 billion proposed for defense that raised the entire spending package to $3.17 trillion. That means that the entire spending package for the United States in 2009, including the war, was one third of the currently projected budget deficit of 2019. And that is before you add in this new $1 trillion in ObamaCare spending.

Because of the weakening economy George Bush froze almost all domestic spending programs in his 2009 budget. The fact that we are even engaged in conversation about a new $1 trillion spending package with the already looming economic catastrophe of a $9 trillion debt would be laughable of it weren’t so nauseating.

Obama spent a great deal of time detailing what he would or would not accept in this package of vitiate socialized medical temerity. But when it came to how it was going to be paid for he switched back into magician mode and brought out the smoke and mirrors.

Claiming to be able to pay for new spending through cost savings is the oldest political trick in the book. It means that the proposer has no idea how things will actually get paid. The President promised that this new program would not add a dime to the national debt. But when it came to detailing the math, well I guess that’s where the Hope he campaigned on comes in.

The discussion needs to stop. We’re broke. Hell, we’re worse than broke. Period. End of story.

It is a shame the rumors of those death panels are supposedly untrue. With a $9 trillion budget deficit we could use them to review the American way of life.

The Messiah Versus Captain Obvious

2009-09-10T16:11:00.000-05:00

Hey, Captain Obvious!!!! Thanks, but no thanks!!!!

Republican Representative Joe Wilson from South Carolina made a fool of himself and degraded his position by shouting “You Lie” at the President during his speech on ObamaCare to the joint Houses of Congress.

Unless the Congressman has turrets, it was a completely unacceptable outburst. It did nothing to bolster the Republicans opposition of this nationalization of healthcare and only served as fodder for all the liberals desperately seeking something to be offended by. Poor Nancy Pelosi even had a flashback to just about every George Bush speech delivered to Congress where Democrats hissed and booed like poltergeist snakes.

But the Democrats past boorish behavior is still no excuse for denigrating the office of the President by publicly shouting what most of those watching already knew.

Of course Obama was lying. He lied throughout most of the speech. He lied about healthcare coverage for illegal aliens (the point that made Wilson lose his mind and dignity), he lied about the cost, he lied about not having a penny go toward the already catastrophic national debt, he lied about cutting over $560 billion from Medicare without reducing service, he lied about Republicans not having any alternative plans and he lied about not wanting this to be a partisan healthcare package.

The purpose of this speech was not to make nice with Republicans. Obama made that clear in his threat to call out and expose any Republican that supposedly lies about what ObamaCare covers. He used the “death panels” as an example of what he called a “lie, plain and simple”. But in the ever changing sphere of Obama-speak it’s tough to tell if he was saying that there would absolutely not be anything like a death panel or if he was saying they would not necessarily be called by that name.

Obama made this speech for one reason and one reason only. Not to increase bipartisan participation but to rally his Democrats and put them back on the offensive. But while the speech was a rallying cry for the left wing of the Party I can’t see how it did much to bolster support from the few centrist Democrats left serving.

Obama said the plan he is considering would now only cost $900 billion over ten years versus the original plan of $1 trillion. Quite frankly at this level of spending cutting it back to $900 billion is like the grocery store charging $1.99 instead of 2 bucks.

For the first time Obama tried to garner support from doctors by claiming he is open to removing malpractice lawsuits from the courts and instituting panels that would resolve disputes. The obvious problem with that is who installs the members of the panel and that if they do not have any mandated direction as to settlements they will be no more likely to reduce costs then the existing system.

In what was initially reported as a step away from organized labor Obama is now willing to look at instituting a tax on higher end insurance plans. The AFL-CIO was quick to voice concern that this tax might harm the premium insurance plans their members now enjoyed.

But the truth is that this obstacle could be easily overcome with a separate law outside the healthcare bill forcing employers to absorb the additional cost. The report also doesn’t take into account the great number of new union healthcare workers ObamaCare mandates.

Oh, did Barack Obama fail to mention the union stipulations in his program? Imagine that.

The Senate version implements the same forced unionization plans endorsed by now dethroned Governor Rod Blagojevich. It reclassifies home healthcare workers as government employees thereby forcing them to join the very powerful and very political Service Employees Union International or SEUI. Perhaps you’ve heard of the SEUI but can’t remember where. It was in all the news stories about SEIU union thugs beating and harassing vocal opponents of ObamaCare at town hall meetings. Make sense now?

The House version (HR3200) goes even further requiring compulsory union dues for most healthcare workers including doctors. This requirement would immediately increase union dues paying members by the hundreds of thousands.

Congressman Wilson was wrong for what he did. But of course Barack Obama was lying.

His lips were moving.

What's The Word

2009-09-09T16:15:00.001-05:00

Going from “four score and seven years ago” to “87 years ago” may improve my understanding of the exact time reference described but that does not make it what the writer intended.

If Lincoln had wanted to say 87 years he certainly was capable of doing so. He chose the four score and seven phrase carefully, and changing it changes the reverence of the piece and the draw to the words that follow.

There is a certain lyrical cadence to a literary piece that is well written. Reading books written years ago is not necessarily easy, but overcoming outdated grammatical obstacles is not all that difficult either. As long as I have a desire to learn and understand what the text is purporting, I have the ability to seek further explanation of those words or phrases I do not understand.

The difference between the original text of classic writings and modernized versions can often mean the difference between what the writer originally intended and what the interpreter thinks that intent was.

I have seen modernized versions of some of Shakespeare’s classic works and quite frankly they are usually as hollow as they are boring and disjointed. Something is always lost in translation, either in the lyrical quality or in the actual meaning. When “Romeo, Oh Romeo. Where fore art thou Romero” becomes “Romeo, my man. Where you at” we lose all but the most base meaning of the quote. A deep and moving lovelorn lament becomes a peppy “wasssssup” that may as well have Juliet text messaging it as speaking off her balcony.

The same holds true for the most classic of all written word, the Holy Bible.

A Colorado Springs based company named Biblica holds the copyright to the NIV or New International Version of the Bible. The NIV version is the Bible of choice for most conservative evangelicals. The NIV was first published in 1978 and has more than 300 million Bibles in print worldwide. The text of this version was last updated 25 years ago, and Biblica has decided that due to changes in English language usage and supposed advancements in Biblical scholarship, they will be undertaking another grammatical update to be completed by 2011.

The CEO of Biblica, Ken Danby stated “We want to reach English speakers across the globe with a Bible that is accurate, accessible and that speaks to its readers in a language they can understand.” While I salute Mr. Danby in his quest for increased distribution I question the validity of his reasoning. I, like many others, have grave misgivings about the extent to which this holy text needs to be modernized.

There are currently 87 (four score and seven) English language versions of the Bible in distribution. That would indicate that these words are being delivered in just about every imaginable way. Some of these versions are religion specific like the Roman Catholic or Greek Orthodox versions, but the NIV is the leader of modern English non-religion specific versions. Updates to this version could have far reaching impact.

If Biblica updates the NIV to reflect advancements in translations of the original Greek or Aramaic text they will be doing all of us who read their version a great service. But if they decide to modernize the sacred text by incorporating political correctness they will very likely be faced with a revolt on a scale of biblical proportions.

It has been suggested by some that the NIV should be edited to expunge any gender specific verbiage such as changing the term “all men” to “people” and “sons of God” to “children of God”.
Such changes would completely change the intent and more importantly the historical value of the text.

The fact that American culture has changed does not mean that God has changed. If anything, the changes in modern culture have mostly served to move us farther away from God. It is not the function of biblical scholars to keep God hip enough to keep up with us.

I will reserve final judgment until after the revisions are complete. But in the end the Word is the Word.

And the Word is good.

The Audacity of Fear

2009-09-08T10:45:00.000-05:00

It is a sad day.

That’s what my son-in-law called it. A high school teacher himself, he said “It is a sad day when teachers have to get permission from parents to show students our presidents' speech about civic responsibility.”

While I love my son-in-law dearly, he and I are rarely in agreement when it comes to anything political. But in this case, I must admit, I agree with him. It is a sad day indeed. Having said that, defining the rationale for our sadness is where he and I will again part company.

After only 8 months in office Barack Obama and his shortsighted idea of Change has not only divided the country along philosophical and political lines but has evoked a deep sense of fear throughout the entire political spectrum including many of his one-time supporters.

Obama’s address to students was proposed to help to kick off this new school year. That, in and of itself, seems innocent enough. The immediate and deep-seated fear that he would use this as an opportunity to further his political agenda was brought about by his rhetoric to date. Having already espoused the virtues of a very unpopular budget-busting nationalized healthcare system, his willingness to negotiate with known terrorist nations and dictators, his uninformed and apologetic attitude for America’s past foreign policy decisions, his profoundly distorted view of America’s history and his dangerously misguided economic policies that will burden these same young students under the yolk of almost insurmountable debt has triggered real fear, forcing some parents to react by fervently objecting to this presidential proclamation.

I never had a problem with the President giving a “Welcome Back” address to school kids. If there had been any inkling on his part, or the part if his political advisors, to include some partisan political rhetoric it was quashed long ago by the negative public reaction. An advanced copy of the speech was released late Monday, in part to allay that public fear of partisanship. The speech is nothing more than fatherly pep talk, but the speech itself is not the issue. The fear it caused and the reaction to that fear is.

Obama’s approval ratings continue to drop like a school boy’s pencil in a room full of miniskirts. The latest Zogby poll shows him at a 42% approval rating. That is a massive decline for a man who, only months ago, was being hailed amongst the pillars of a faux Greek temple as the new Messiah. The most noticeable decline is beginning to come from the black community where he once held an almost 100% approval rating having now dropped to 74%. Independents, a key support group in his presidential victory, are now at only a 37% approval rating and the elderly who foolishly thought he would be good for their healthcare are now rebelling with a drop in approval of over 10 points in the past 2 months. The concern of war and the impact of foreign policy have been completely wiped out by a palpable fear of lost medical choice and total economic collapse brought on by an ever increasing national debt now reaching intergalactic levels.

Americans are no longer willing to accept the vague promise of Hope and Change and have begun meticulously reviewing the fine print to every Obama promise. We have seen the Change and the one thing it does not inspire is Hope.

But it’s still early in the game and this trial by fire, on the job training Obama is garnering could help him to refocus his efforts onto more mundane tasks such as saving the economy rather than the world. It would be a big demotion going from a god to a president but unless he is willing to do so his chances of success are as fleeting as his approval rating.

The fear is real and it is not only spreading throughout the American public, it is spreading throughout the Halls of Congress as well. And rightfully so. They have an election coming in 2010 and Barack Obama could prove to be the greatest Messiah the Republicans could have hoped for.

September could be a defining month in this President’s legacy.

Sound familiar?

The Subliminal Culture Clash

2009-09-06T17:37:00.004-05:00

Do you remember going (POPCORN) to the movies when they would (SODA POP) flash subliminal messages during the film to get you to go to the snack bar?

For those too young to remember, movie theaters actually used to flash a frame or two of a word or an image during the movie that would instill the urge for a trip to the snack bar. You would be watching the movie quite content and all of a sudden, for some unknown reason, you had an overwhelming desire for a big tub of popcorn or a soft drink. The use of this subliminal mind control was effective because your brain recognized the message before you were even aware of what your eyes had seen. But the practice was also pretty devious and eventually laws were passed to prohibit its use, at least as it related to subliminally influencing unsuspecting movie goers.

Today the advertising practice of subliminal influence is still alive and well and living right in your living room, or whatever room your TV set is in. Case in point: “A good honest beer at a tasty price.”

I don’t drink beer. But the new series of Miller Beer commercials makes me wish I did, if only to buy some other beer besides Miller High Life as my own little personal boycott. My aversion has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of their product but rather with the corporately approved message subliminally displayed in their ad campaign.

This several months old Miller Beer campaign must be fairly effective as the commercials are being broadcast repeatedly on just about every channel and time slot. A jocular black beer truck driver goes from place to place snatching away cases of Miller Beer from people that apparently do not deserve to enjoy the bubbly brew and then he redistributes it the thirsty masses. These numerous beernappings take place at various posh locations like the VIP section of a night club, the sky boxes at a baseball game, the owner’s area at a racetrack and from opulent hotel suite mini-bars. The common denominator in all these ads is that the product is removed from places where most folks will never get a chance to socialize.

The subliminal message is that the wealthy do not deserve this “good honest beer” because they are neither good nor honest. Rich, white ‘fat cats” are the enemy of the common man and this jovial black man, with his pithy comments and promise of awakening “common sense” is on an altruistic mission of property redistribution.

If you think I am exaggerating or just being paranoid let’s take a minute to examine the ads.

In each of these commercials the target of this rotund Robin Hood are all wealthy white people. The only blacks in the scene are employees or friendly hangers-on positioned well in the background. The “common sense” black man scolds the white people, not about their choice in beer, but rather about their lifestyle as he takes back what they, simply by being rich and white, do not deserve. In each situation the beer is then joyfully redistributed to the less prosperous, racially integrated masses. If race and culture is not the intended message in these commercials then let’s see Miller try it with a white beer driver taking beer away from a predominantly black crowd whilst scolding them for their lifestyle choices. Would you like to bet on how far that would fly?

The catch-phrase of these commercials is “A good, honest beer at a tasty price.” Is Miller really trying to suggest that their beer is honest? Of course not. The message is clear. Rich white people are not honest and that is why the beer is being taken. Miller has chosen to take advantage of the culture war perpetuated by Barack Obama and his socialist policies. They are subliminally tapping into the public sentiment that wealthy white people are the enemy and deserve to have the fruits of their wealth taken away and redistributed.

These commercials are far more about propagating the Obama driven culture clash than a festivities driven beer bash.

Enjoy your Labor Day.

Diet Coke anyone?

Big Frick Gets Sick

2009-09-04T10:51:00.001-05:00

I hate to admit it.

Maybe Obama is correct. Maybe our healthcare system is broken and in need of an immediate overhaul from top to bottom. Maybe all those greedy, rotten drug companies are just in it for the money and need to be brought under government control. Maybe ObamaCare is the only answer.

I had my own experience in dealing with our current broken healthcare system over the past few days. I will not bore you with all the gory details but suffice it to say that what was a minor annoyance became a full-fledged medical emergency for me this week.

I am not one to go to the doctor for every ache and pain. I take a daily barrage of prescription drugs for existing conditions and get the usually prescribed series of tests to monitor my overall health and well being. But for Big Frick to see the doctor for something other than routine maintenance it’s got to be something pretty serious. Maybe it’s my Bohemian heritage; take a couple of aspirin or Tylenol and let it run its course. Maybe it’s my false sense of machismo. Or maybe it’s because the cure is often worse than the disease and involves me actually having to make changes in my lifestyle. At any rate the situation that presented itself this week was not one that could be ignored.

It broke down like this: After spending a few days in discomfort it became eminently apparent that I needed to seek medical attention. I called my doctor’s office when they opened at 8:30 AM. My doctor had a full schedule of patients for that day so seeing him wasn’t possible. The receptionist connected me to his nurse and after a brief discussion explaining the problem, she arranged for me to see one of his associates in the practice at 11:00AM. That’s a two and a half our delay in getting treatment. I can certainly see how one could draw the conclusion that our healthcare system is broken.

I arrived at my doctor’s new, very high tech office at the agreed time and was immediately taken in for some tests. All the tests necessary were conducted right there and the results were ready within 20 minutes. 20 minutes! Can you imagine having to wait 20 minutes! Broken, broken, broken.

I have a great relationship with my doctor. He is remarkably bright and has a personality that fosters the deep trust I have placed in him since he finished his residency and opened his general practice years ago. His associate was equally personable and articulate. Even though my doc had a full schedule he took some time to check in on me and had a brief consult with his associate regarding my condition and treatment. With healthcare like that I can see why Barack Obama would want to completely revamp the system.

The doctor treating me called in a few prescriptions directly to my pharmacy so they would be ready when I got there. He then went through in detail all the things I needed to do and what to do if I’m not significantly better in a few days. I have a follow-up appointment in two weeks. Wow, talk about broken, huh?

I began taking the drugs the doctor prescribed that afternoon. These drugs were developed and manufactured by one of those big drug companies that Obama says must be stopped. The pills made by the money hungry, profit driven, uncaring drug company began to work within 4 hours and by that evening, about 12 hours after I originally called my doctor’s office, my condition was greatly improved. More treatment may be necessary, but I have doctors that I trust to handle all that.

I sure can see why we desperately need to completely abandon this broken and ineffective healthcare system. I can see why drug companies and healthcare need to be put under the direction of Congress, who did such a stunning job with the comparatively miniscule Cash for Clunkers Program. I can see why doctors need to be reined in and their fees need to be governmentally mandated. I can also see that under ObamaCare I can go back to my old Bohemian remedy of take two aspirins and ride it out.

No wonder ObamaCare includes end of life counseling.

Changing The Change

2009-09-02T21:43:00.000-05:00

Brace yourself for Change and Hope Part 4 (or is it 5 or 6? I have lost track).

Posters and banners proclaimed it. A young inexperienced community activist promised it. Crowds of jubilant supporters chanted it. An entire nation became mesmerized by it.

Change and Hope were the mantra-like rallying cry of the masses. Nobody asked for a definition. None was needed. Change was coming and bringing with it Hope to the weary downtrodden voters who had been convinced that all their troubles could be cured by these two diaphanous, yet somehow proselyte verbs.

To his credit Barack Obama is about to once again deliver on his promise. Change is indeed coming, but not necessarily in the core issue.

The Change and Hope Obama will deliver is in the words he uses not in his intent. It’s what he does. It’s how he got to be where he is. He Changes the words and Hopes that nobody notices what he is saying is the exactly what he said before but with a new ring to it.

Hell, he even explained it when he gave the commencement speech at Notre Dame. Obama told the huddled masses of this far more political than Christian institution that while campaigning for the presidency he received an angry letter from a doctor complaining about his position on abortion as described on the official Obama for President web site. Obama, being a man of infinite vocabulary, took heed of the doctor’s complaint and changed the wording on the web site. Job done!

How very simple.

He did not change his position on the issue. He still supports abortion at any time including late term abortions and deplores anybody that would infringe on a “woman’s right” to kill her unborn baby. His views about abortion and Right to Life supporters remained exactly the same. He simply changed the words and hoped that folks would view that as him being amenable. And now, according to his chief political strategist and advisor, Chicago’s own David Axelrod, he’s about to try it again.

So far his various approaches to sell ObamaCare haven’t caught on the way he had hoped. He started by talking about the uninsured but got no positive response. He switched his direction toward the insured and only made matters worse. Folks who currently receive pretty good healthcare became vocally outraged at getting more than a rectal thermometer shoved up the old ying-yang. So now he’s going to flip through his well worn thesaurus and see if he can’t find a whole new way to say the same thing.

There are no advanced copies or drafts of the President’s proposed speech but I figure it will go something like this:

Republicans are unwilling to negotiate in good faith.
The current system of healthcare in this country is broken.
Did I mention that this is the Republicans fault too and they are not willing to negotiate?
Everything that you have heard so far is untrue. And even the stuff you haven’t heard is untrue.
The Republicans are spreading these lies because they are not willing to negotiate.
Nothing in the new plan will forbid you from seeing your own doctor.
It’s the Republicans who will make it impossible to see your old doctor because they are not willing to negotiate to fix the broken healthcare system.
None of the billions of dollars cut from Medicare will reduce the care you receive. I even know some old people.
Republicans don’t know any old people and they are the ones that won’t negotiate.
ObamaCare will not take away your decisions for end of life care.
But if the Republicans don’t negotiate we’re all going to die anyway.

It is tremendously unlikely that he will mention that he doesn’t need a single Republican vote to pass ObamaCare through either house of Congress.

The speech is tentatively scheduled for early September. I am certain that ABC and NBC are already clearing their schedules to make room for it. It will be interesting to see if they even allow a Republican rebuttal afterward.

Change is coming, but remember: If it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, it’s probably an Anatidae.

The Exodus of Hope

2009-09-01T19:38:00.001-05:00

So, how’s that whole Hopey Changey thing workin’ out for you?

Barack Obama recently complained that Americans were being unfair in their criticism of his fiscal policies and his vision for the future. He said folks are mad at him for not eliminating the national deficit he inherited within the first six months of his presidency. But when you inherit a debt in the billions and within six months raise that deficit level to a projected $9 trillion there may be more than a little disingenuous, butt-covering, deflection in that assessment. At least I hope so. If Obama truly believes Americans are upset because of what he hasn’t done rather than by what he has done, or at least is trying to do, we are all in for a long three years.

With his approval rating dropping faster than Barney Frank’s pants at a Fire Island barbeque, Obama finds himself in completely unfamiliar territory. This personable community activist qua ghost written autobiographer qua political rock star has never had to face even feigning disapproval much less outright rebellion. Mostly because he has been carefully schooled in the fine art of duplicitous political rhetoric over real accomplishments and the exploitation of his almost unparalleled duende.

Mainstream media outlets like ABC, NBC, CNN and the New York Times are going to great lengths to prop up Obama’s policies, with ABC and NBC going so far as refusing to air conservative backed commercials criticizing it. Their goal is to convince Americans that it is recalcitrant Republicans creating the public tempest. But as usual these supposed barometers of national sentiment are completely missing the point. The days of Bill and Hillary claiming a right wing conspiracy are long gone. Obama is in the enviable position of not needing a single Republican vote to change his vision into law. It is Congressional Democrats, fearful of having to find a real job in 2010, that are now the biggest roadblocks to this caravan to nationalized medicine and socialized government.

While it has become apparent that mathematics was never one of Barack Obama’s best subjects, many House and Senate Democrats are working the numbers and they don’t like how they are adding up.

Americans voted for change, what they got was more of the same Democrat tax and spend. The nearly one trillion dollars passed under the banner of stimulus has done nothing but increase the country’s need for foreign investment to buy our ever growing debt. Even the Cash for Clunkers program, which actually stimulated new car sales, was so poorly run that it only increased the light of reality caste on government operational inefficiencies. If the government has a meltdown trying to handle a simple car rebate program how are they going to handle the entire nation’s healthcare?

This complete ineptitude has caused our consumer driven economy to languish in a quagmire of fear, causing discretionary spending to be reduced to all time lows and sending tax revenues into a downward death spiral. While Obama’s approval rating has dropped significantly it is still being artificially supported in the high 40% area by an almost 100% approval rating in the black community. As the reality of dramatically diminished tax receipts cripples the budgets of state, county, city and local governing bodies, deep cuts in the tax supported welfare programs within the minority communities will quickly erode Obama’s manic support. Once support begins to waver in the black community there will be a mass defection that will surpass even that of a stained blue dress and the definition of sexual relations.

Democrats had been banking on the historic cycle of recession and recovery to cover for their trillion dollar spend-a-thon. But their spending only helped to fuel a longer and deeper recession ending any hope of a normal recovery. The only answer this White House has for the prolonged spending-induced pain is more spending. Americans aren’t buying it and fearful Democrats in Congress aren’t willing to take a bullet for it.

So how will we know when the tide of black support has truly begun to ebb? Simple, when you begin to hear blacks referring to Obama by the most insulting, derogatory term they can use.

No not that one.

They will start calling him white.

Da Mayor, Da Prez And Da Press

2009-08-31T18:35:00.005-05:00

Ahhhh, the good old days.

I remember when the current Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley, son of the late “Da Mayor” Richard J. Daley, was just a young whippersnapper trying to earn fame and fortune in the insurance business. The press got wind that a very lucrative multimillion dollar insurance contract for the city of Chicago was pulled from the long time carrier and given to the company the young Daley represented. During a press conference they asked ”Da Mayor” if he had any influence in the awarding of the insurance contract to his son’s company.

“Da Mayor’s” response was classic Chicago politics. He said “Of course I did. He’s my son. What, a father shouldn’t try to help his own son? What father isn’t going to do what he can to help his son?” The reporters laughed. First because of the complete honesty in the response and second because they couldn’t think of a reason why a father shouldn’t.

Things were a bit more open back then. The press knew better than to cross one of the most influential politicians in the country. A King Maker to whom President John F Kennedy may well have owed his electoral victory in 1960. Everybody in Chicago knew how the game was played. The Democrat machine created by the late Mayor Richard J. Daley and continued by his son Mayor Richard M Daley held every aspect of the city in their grip from fixing $20 traffic tickets to fixing million dollar insurance contracts. But Chicago was and remains the “City That Works” and as long as the garbage was picked up and the streets were plowed nobody dared question how it was getting done. As former Speaker of the House Tip O’Neil said “All politics is local”.

Is it any wonder why a savvy community activist from Chicago like Barack Hussein Obama would hire two of the most accomplished bare knuckle Chicago politics heavyweights to help direct his campaign and then become his lead political advisors/hit men? With Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod working behind the scenes is it any wonder that the national press corps would end up even deeper in Obama’s hip pocket then they were during the campaign?

It is more than just their fawning adoration that Obama uses to his advantage. It is more than just having free access to America’s living rooms to sell your proposals like ObamaCare without having to worry about a debate where that pesky truth gets in the way. It's Obama’s complete control of not only what gets covered, but what does not as well.

The press recently gave full coverage to First Lady Michelle Obama’s vegetable garden. Along with pictures and videos of Michelle and some school children tending the garden were giddy reports that some of the seedlings planted were from the ancestral home of President Thomas Jefferson. Big news, huh? While it was not in the initial report I am certain that at some point before it’s over someone will wax poetically of the irony of the first black First Lady harvesting crops from the seeds of a President that supposedly had numerous dalliances with his female black slaves.

What the press will not cover are stories like from way back in 2002 when Michelle Obama was hired by the politically connected University of Chicago Medical Center to run “programs for community relations, neighborhood outreach, volunteer recruitment, staff diversity and minority contracting”. The job paid a healthy salary of $120,000 per year. But in 2005 when her husband became a US Senator Michelle’s salary magically was raised to a whopping $317,000 per year. Coincidence you say? Well is it also coincidence that one of Barack Obama’s first acts as Senator was to garner a $1 million earmark for the UC medical Center?

This $317,000 job went almost completely unreported by the press. It also seems incredible that this $317,000 per year was for a PART TIME JOB! This massive salary was for a 20 hour per week job. A $317,000 per year job so essential and critical to the success of the UC Medical Center that they decided not to fill it once Michelle left for Washington DC. I wonder if the press might have picked up the story if Laura Bush or Lynn Cheney had been the employee.

Chicago politics is alive and well in Chicago and now in the White House as well. ABC and NBC have gleefully jumped on board with both feet. Most of the rest of the Washington press corps is on board as well but have decided to be at least a little less obvious.

Da Mayor Richard J Daley would be so proud. While his sons never made it to the White House his other baby, the Chicago political machine, sure did.

ABC + NBC = Zero Integrity

2009-08-30T18:59:00.000-05:00

Integrity or the lack thereof is an inside job.

For years conservatives in this country have been complaining about the unashamed liberal partisanship on full display at the big three “major” networks. Under the guise of the rights of a free press the news departments at ABC, NBC and CBS have repeatedly gone to great and sometimes dangerous lengths to prop up the political views and goals of the liberal left while intentionally demeaning and or slandering the character of conservatives and their message.

Any time a network like Fox News or a truly independent media watchdog group would bring to light specific instances of partisanship these supposed defenders of the public’s right to know would trot out a report created by some recently created media front group, funded by some left wing core constituency, to countermand the original report in a further subversion of the truth.

It almost became a game for these well established networks in which the ultimate losers were their trusting viewing audience. They intentionally played free and loose with the truth while they hid behind their carefully crafted public persona so as to at least appear to comply with their manufactured image as bastions of apodictic trustworthiness, as laughably ersatz as it was.

But no more.

ABC and NBC have decided to, as they say in the world of No Limit Texas Hold Em’ Poker, go all in for Barack Obama and his misguided socialist nationalization of the country’s healthcare and health insurance system. ABC and NBC have taken the unprecedented move of refusing to sell airtime for commercials presenting opposing viewpoints to the President’s less than truthful or accurate rhetoric.

CBS, either because of some semblance of fairness (he wrote with a sarcastic grin) or because their commercial cash flow has been so deteriorated by their liberal missteps in the past (can you say Dan Rather), has decided so far not to join in this manifest embargo on truth.

The President himself has called for an honest debate on the nation’s healthcare system. But it has become blatantly apparent to even a casual observer that what the President and these two lapdog networks consider an honest debate is nothing short of strong-arm suppression of anything even remotely resembling an open exchange of the facts or ideas.

During the Bush administration the press constantly beat the drum of his supposed repression of rights. Yet these two major networks along with their Chicago politics President have now decided to engage in what can only be described as a complete abandoning of human rights not to mention Constitutional protections.

The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights states “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference, and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers".

It cannot be any plainer than that.

NBC has decided to take the doubletalking position that they did not reject the ad but rather have simply told the media agency looking to run it that it will have to edit out what the network considers non-factual claims. Basically what this means is if they change the ad to agree with NBC’s partisan position they will run it, if they don’t they won’t. If that’s not a refusal I don’t know what one is.

ABC stated their network “has long-standing policy that we do not sell time for advertising that presents a partisan position on a controversial issue”. I guess that explains why they didn’t charge the DNC for the multi-hour infomercial they ran in favor of ObamaCare, complete with the President himself hawking its benefits like the Sham-Wow guy.

Anybody with even a modicum of integrity will view this overt attempt to silence free speech with bone chilling fear as to just how far these networks and this administration will go. The resolution to this may end up in civil court or it may even have to go before the UN Council on Human Rights, but it cannot be allowed to go unchallenged.

This just in; Constitutional protections abandoned. More on this along with sports and the weather when we return.

Playing The Well Worn Race Card......Again

2009-08-27T16:07:00.001-05:00

Here we go again!

How many misrepresentations? How many instances? How many unqualified and unsubstantiated stories? How many times can this stupid racism card get played before someone has the stones to say “ENOUGH”!

The latest in what has become the never ending parade of poor black men suffering under the cruel yoke of racism comes from an area particularly close to my heart, my beloved Chicago Cubs.

The obviously emotionally unstable and equally mentally challenged 30 million dollar man Milton Bradley is giving the local press all they could ask for and more by turning his all too common vilipend tirades toward Cub fans, claiming he is the victim of their racist heckling. Of course when questioned for details or specific instances Mr. Bradley has none. He intentionally dodges questions as to why he has never asked for security to remove an unruly or racially abusive fan. He pouts like a 4 year old and blames the media for even asking the questions and claims they are well aware of both the answer and the instances.

Chicago Cubs security has confirmed that Bradley has never contacted them about any instance of racial slurs or over-the-top fan behavior.

Are there fans in the stands that make racial slurs towards players? In all the times that I have been at Wrigley Field over the past 55 years I cannot recall one instance of racial intimidation. But still, I’m guessing it happens. Any time you have adult males, alcohol and sports you will have some nitwit that wants to show off for his buddies by doing something completely stupid. I watched with shame and anger a few weeks ago as someone in a Cubs cap threw a full glass of beer of an opposing player as he attempted to catch a fly ball near the left/centerfield wall. It was a despicable act carried out by an obviously drunken clod. Security was on the scene immediately to eject the beer-filled bozo and I had hoped he might receive a little Chicago-style tune-up on the way out the gate or at least a free ride in a police car and a night in the drunk tank where he could spend a romantic evening with some other equally IQ challenged revelers.

My beloved Cubs are falling apart at the seams. Only weeks ago they were in first place and now they will need a miracle to get into the wild card playoff spot. It’s not that they lack talent. It’s that they lack stability and heart.

Players like Milton Bradley are like a cancer for a team. They are carriers of bad vibes. It doesn’t even matter that they have great ability and limitless potential. They drain the very lifeblood from the team like a vampire so they can steal as much personal time in the spotlight as possible.

Bradley complained about being in a restaurant and hearing the waitress make disparaging remarks about him at another table. Hey Milton, welcome to the big leagues! Countless people are going to be jealous of a guy that makes more every year than they could hope to win in the lottery. Plus, performance on and off the field matters a lot more than your color, especially here in Chicago.

Mr. Bradley, I suggest next time you take the field if you can pull your head out of wherever you have been keeping it you might want to glance up at the flags of retired numbers of Cub heroes. Number 14 Ernie Banks, Number 26 Billy Williams, Number 31 Ferguson Jenkins. There isn’t a Cub fan worth his salt that wouldn’t trade his first born for a chance to associate with these great Cub players who also just happen to be black.

Your shtick is getting old Milton. And if you think you can claim racism just because it will get you some extra attention or maybe deflect criticism from your lackluster play you picked the wrong ball park to do it in.

Take your money, go away and have a nice life.

Kennedy Karma

2009-08-26T16:24:00.000-05:00

If there truly is a thing called karma I envision the following scene:

The scene opens with the bright and radiant light of the pearly gates of heaven. Ted Kennedy approaches Saint Peter who is sitting behind a tall lectern.

“Name?” says St. Pete.

“Aaaaaaa, Ted Kennedy” comes the sheepish reply.

Saint Peter says “Okay Ted let me just check what it says here in the book. Now where did I put that thing? Oh yes, excuse me Ted, my secretary is just making some last minute entries.” Saint Peter turns and shouts “Oh Mary Jo, could you please bring me the book.”

We are about to enter that stomach-turning phase in American politics where each Washington DC elected official and countless lesser-known politicos from around the country take a moment to get in front of news cameras and microphones to canonize the now late Senator Ted Kennedy. Democrats will wail and tear their cloaks as they memorialize their fallen liberal hero. Republicans will put partisanship aside and give glowing accolades of his service to the country and all will tearfully reminisce of the time they spent together. It will all be very somber and very moving. But most of all it will be very fake.

While I know it is considered to be in poor taste to speak disparagingly of the dead I simply cannot bring myself to join the chorus of those who have looked past the glaring personal defects, deceit and hypocrisy of this disingenuous defender of truth and justice.

Ted Kennedy was known as the Lion in the Senate. A name he got quite by chance through a misinterpretation heard by a group of all too eager reporters. Kennedy was to give a news conference and was, as usual, late. When reporters asked a frazzled aide for the umpteenth time where the Senator was at the aide truthfully replied “He’s passed out drunk and lyin’ in the Senate.” Having no other story to go with they called their editors with the new moniker Lion in the Senate and it stuck.

Okay, so I made that up. But truth be told, with the actual life Kennedy lived the story is not so farfetched as to be completely unbelievable.

Kennedy had drinking problem. That is not groundbreaking news, nor is it a reason to dislike him. Some of my best friends are drunks. It is not that Kennedy was a drunk, it is that he never took responsibility for his woeful actions and his family’s money and political power made sure he was never forced to do so.

Kennedy is man whose drunken lifestyle caused the death of a young, pregnant secretary and campaign worker Mary Jo Kopechne. Kennedy fled the scene and only turned himself into police the following day after he sobered up and hired some fairly high priced legal defense. He is no different than any other drunk driver who goes out and takes a life except that his name and family legacy allowed him to not only walk free but to be publically forgiven.

One would think that after that level of homicidal irresponsibility he would seek the necessary help to turn his personal life around. But Ted Kennedy did no such thing. His drunken debauchery continued until his advanced years and ailing health toned down his activities.

He is, and will continue to be, lauded for his “tireless defense of the poor and less fortunate” but yet he personally remained an incredibly wealthy monarch, who when supporting the poor used other people’s money to do so. I’ve got a news flash for you, anybody can be generous when they are writing checks from someone else’s checkbook.

Kennedy was praised for his support of the first black American President when in fact that was nothing more than a shrewd political gamble. Kennedy knew he had a much better chance of controlling a socialist political lightweight like the freshman Senator from Illinois rather than a veteran of the political trenches like Hillary Clinton. This was a perfect example of Kennedy abandoning long time allies for his own personal political gain.

What is equally troubling for me is that I foresee Kennedy’s name being used to rally the troops in an effort to garner support for the trillion dollar mistake known as ObamaCare. Kennedy was an ardent supporter of this socialist nationalization of healthcare. Mark my words, Democrats will not be beneath trying to resurrect this debacle by trying to insist it will be part of his legacy.

And as for that legacy? I will let the pundits and political scholars have their day in sun as they wax poetically about all the good this flawed criminal brought through his Senate career, ignoring the lives he cost and destroyed. As for me, well, I can only pray that he was able to find something greater than the Kennedy name, wealth and political muscle to put his faith in before he died.

Darwin's Appendix Attack

2009-08-25T20:24:00.001-05:00

A little organ makes for a big problem.

“We're not saying that Darwin’s idea of evolution is wrong — that would be absurd, as we're using his ideas on evolution to do this work, it's just that Darwin simply didn't have the information we have now."

That is a very important quote from William Parker, a researcher at Duke University Medical Center in Durham, NC. It’s important for a couple of reasons; chief among them is that Dr. Parker is making sure his research and the results therein don’t cost him his job or Duke University their grant money. It is also important in that he is in fact saying Darwin’s idea of evolution is, if not unequivocally wrong, at least uninformed and outdated.

Never, allow me to repeat, NEVER EVER NEVER, in the history of scientific research has such a limited investigation based solely on the ideas of one non-impartial researcher taken on the scope and magnitude of Darwin’s Origin of Species.

Ben Stein recently released an excellent documentary movie titled “Expelled” which uncovers the seamier side of higher education and scientific research as it relates to evolution. In this fairly in-depth exposé Stein finds example after example of well trained, highly acclaimed and meticulous researchers who have lost their jobs and their good standing amongst their peers simply by suggesting, or even mentioning the possibility of, theories contrary to Darwin and the non-Darwinian Big Bang theory.

Many incorrectly believe that the data for Darwin’s book The Origin of Species was based on his lifelong quest to uncover mankind’s true genesis. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

Darwin spent only five years on his famous voyage on the “Beagle” to Africa and South America before writing his book. That five-year period, which began in 1831, included the lengthy travel by ship from England to Africa, on to South America and then home. To suggest today, when it takes twice that length of time to simply get a new drug for hay fever onto the market, that this was in any way a closely controlled scientific study worthy of the credit it is given is nothing less than laughable.

Furthermore, Darwin was not looking to discover new ideas but was actually looking for concurring data for an assumption of natural selection that he already believed, having been taught that theory by his grandfather.

Darwin’s research was based solely on observation and then taking what he saw and manipulating it to fit the overall hypothesis. The vast majority of his observation was on plants and flowers and then taking that which he had observed and extrapolating it over to animals and humans. A perfect example of this is Darwin’s proposal that a hummingbird’s bill has evolved into the shape it is from drinking nectar of flowers that have evolved into the shape they are in to accept the bill, thus showing some sort of cross-evolution between plant and animal. As they are both relatively the same shape Darwin concluded they must have evolved concurrently. There need be no further evidence required to prove the theory than that. Darwin was called a “romantic materialist” and this example of unproven theory based solely on observation is why.

So why, in this day and age of unparalleled scientific study, do we still cling to the eminently flawed theory of Darwinism? Because it places science above God.

While it was not Darwin’s intent to eliminate an ultimate Creator in his studies, his limited and romanticized works have been twisted and remolded to just that end.

Dr. Parker and his research group at Duke have come up with scientific proof that the tiny appendix is not a “vestigial” or functionless organ as Darwin stated. Darwin was quick to conclude that the appendix had once served a purpose when our ancient ancestors were eating mostly leaves. He included it along with the tail bone, male nipples and other puzzling parts of human anatomy as proof that man had in fact evolved from some sort of androgynous herbivore that long ago had use for these now vestigial body parts. The Duke research team has disproven that by finding this little organ does in fact serve an important function in modern man. Darwin claimed the appendix was proof of recent evolutions and was found in only a small handful of creatures. The Duke team has discovered that the appendix has been around for over 80 million years and is found in nearly 70 percent of all primate and rodent groups, many of them still dependent on it for digestion.

Over the years countless other Darwinian tenets have been proven completely incorrect. But yet to mention the flaws in the Darwin’s theory is to risk being driven from grace, and probably your job, in the scientific community. How sad that the scientific study of ultimate possibilities would rather cling to a theory repeatedly proven imperfect than to accept at least the possibility of a prefect Creator.

I guess there’s just no research money in God. And besides, we would have to let Him back into school.

An Honest Debate

2009-08-24T16:44:00.002-05:00

An open letter to President Barack Hussein Obama:

Mr. President,

You have requested that we as a country have an “honest debate” on healthcare. I completely concur, but must admit to some confusion as to what you consider an honest debate to be.

Is this to be an honest debate like the one on race relations that you and your Attorney General Eric Holder called for? That was of course just before Mr. Holder called us a nation of cowards and you immediately jumped to the defense of a black professor, demeaned the actions and abilities of the white police officers who were called to the scene, all the while admitting to not knowing any of the facts. I guess for one of the few times since taking office your immediate reaction was at least an honest look at how your mind works.

Or is this to be an honest debate like the one you have called for on abortion? An honest debate where you have said we should agree to disagree but still strive to find the middle ground between a living baby and one that is killed by means of dismemberment in the mother’s womb. An honest debate in which you have already admitted to changing your words in an effort to hide your true intent while maintaining your same position on the issue.

I hope you can understand my confusion.

The truth is we are already involved in an honest debate. The problem seems to be that you are not pleased with the positions being taken against you and the one trillion dollar government-run nationalized healthcare system you are proposing. It seems more than a little disingenuous for you to call for an honest debate when it is the honesty of the resistance that has you concerned.

The country is aware that you and your administration have requested that copies of e mails presenting opposing views be sent directly to the White House so you can try to stop the negative tide from rising. I have to believe you have seen at least some of the same e mails I have seen, probably even more. Like the ones that detail, line by line, what the current bill HR 3200 would mean to our healthcare choices of doctors and treatments. Like the line items that detail the reductions in care and the limiting of choice in both healthcare and health insurance. If you want an honest debate then take these detailed e mails and disprove them line by line. Address HR 3200 line by line:

Pg 22 of the HC Bill MANDATES the Govt. will audit books of ALL EMPLOYERS that self insure!!

Pg 30 Sec 123 of HC bill - THERE WILL BE A GOVT. COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get

Pg 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill - YOUR HEALTHCARE IS RATIONED!!! You can only get so much "care" per year

Pg 42 of HC Bill - The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your HC Benefits 4 you. You have no choice!

PG 50 Section 152 in HC bill - HC will be provided to ALL non US citizens, illegal or otherwise

Pg 58HC Bill - Govt will have real-time access to individs finances & a National ID Healthcard will be issued!

Pg 59 HC Bill lines 21-24 Govt will have direct access 2 your banks accts for elective funds transfer

PG 65 Sec 164 is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in Unions & community orgs (ACORN).

Pg 72 Lines 8-14 Govt is creating an HC Exchange to bring private HC plans under Govt control.

PG 84 Sec 203 HC bill - Govt mandates ALL benefit pkgs for private HC plans in the Exchange

PG 85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specs for Benefit Levels for Plans = The Govt will ration your Healthcare!
PG 91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill - Govt mandates linguistic appropriate services..... Example - Translation for illegal aliens

Pg 95 HC Bill Lines 8-18 The Govt will use groups i.e., ACORN & Americorps to sign up individually for Govt HC plan

PG 85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specs of Benefit Levels for Plans. #AARP members - your Health care WILL be rationed

PG 102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill - Medicaid Eligible Individuals will be automatically enrolled in Medicaid. No choice

Pg 124 lines 24-25 HC No company can sue GOVT on price fixing. No "judicial review" against Govt Monopoly

Pg 127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill - Doctors/ #AMA - The Govt will tell YOU what you can make.

Pg 145 Line 15-17 An Employer MUST auto enroll employees into public opt plan. NO CHOICE

Pg 126 Lines 22-25 Employers MUST pay for HC for part time employees AND their families.

Pg 149 Lines 16-24 ANY Employer w payroll 400k & above who does not prov. pub opt. pays 8% tax on all payroll

Pg 150 Lines 9-13 Biz w payroll between 251k & 400k who doesn't prov. pub. opt pays 2-6% tax on all payroll

Pg 167 Lines 18-23 ANY individual who doesn't have insurance will be taxed 2.5%

Pg 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes. (You and I will pay for them)

Pg 195 HC Bill Administrators & employees of HC Admin (GOVT) will have access to ALL financial/personal records

PG 203 Line 14-15 HC - "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax" Yes, it says that

Pg 239 Line 14-24 HC Bill Govt will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors, low income, poor will be very affected

Pg 241 Line 6-8 HC Bill - Doctors, doesn't matter what specialty you have, you'll all be paid the same

PG 253 Line 10-18 Govt sets value of DR's time, professional judgments, etc. Literally value of humans.

PG 265 Sec 1131Govt mandates & controls productivity for private HC industries

PG 268 Sec 1141 Fed Govt regulates rental & purchase of power driven wheelchairs

PG 272 SEC. 1145. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN CANCER HOSPITALS - Cancer patients - welcome to rationing!

PG 280 Sec 1151 The Govt will penalize hospitals for what Govt deems preventable readmissions.

Pg 317 L 13-20 PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. Govt tells Drs. what/how much they can own.

Pg 317-318 lines 21-25,1-3 PROHIBITION on expansion- Govt is mandating hospitals cannot expand

Pg 321 2-13 Hospitals have oppt to apply for exception BUT community input required. Can you say ACORN?!!

Pg 336-339 - Govt mandates estab. of outcome based measures. Rationing

Pg 341 Lines 3-9 Govt has authority to disqualify Medicare Adv Plans, HMOs, etc. Forcing all into Govt HC plan

Pg 354 Sec 1177 - Govt will RESTRICT enrollment of Special needs

Pg 379 Sec 1191 Govt creates more bureaucracy - Telehealth Advisory Cmtte.

PG 425 Lines 4-12 Govt mandates Advance Care Planning Consult.

Pg 425 Lines 17-19 Govt will instruct & consult regarding living wills, durable powers of atty.

PG 425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3 Govt provides approved list of end of life resources.

PG 427 Lines 15-24 Govt mandates program for orders for end of life. The Govt has a say in how your life ends

Pg 429 Lines 1-9 An "adv. care planning consult" will be used frequently as patients health deteriorates

PG 429 Lines 10-12 "adv. care consultation" may include an ORDER for end of life plans. AN ORDER from GOV

Pg 429 Lines 13-25 - The govt will specify which Doctors can write an end of life order.

PG 430 Lines 11-15 The Govt will decide what level of treatment you will have at end of life

Pg 469 - Community Based Home Medical Services=Non profit orgs. Hello, ACORN Medical Services here!!?

Page 472 Lines 14-17 PAYMENT TO COMMUNITY-BASED ORG. 1 monthly payment to a community-based org. Like ACORN?

PG 489 Sec 1308 The Govt will cover Marriage & Family therapy. Which means they will insert Govt into your marriage

Pg 494-498 Govt will cover Mental Health - including defining, creating, rationing those services

If you want an honest debate let’s start here.

Obama Meets Joe The Bummer

2009-08-21T15:05:00.000-05:00

Poor Joe.

He is not a happy little liberal. As a matter of fact he is bummed out big time.

In a further attempt to connect with the American voting public and re-re-re-rewrite his message on ObamaCare, this President of Hope and Change, Honesty and Openness held a call-in on a talk radio show. Surprisingly he didn’t choose to hold his forum on the number one talk radio show in the country, Rush Limbaugh. But with Obama’s aversion to anything even resembling the truth in this healthcare discussion it’s understandable why.

During one of the calls Obama spoke with Joe from Philadelphia. Joe is bumming big time over the perceived lack of leadership shown by this administration of action, affirmative and otherwise. He echoed the newfound mantra of confused Democrats as to why this discussion is continuing and why the ObamaCare plan is not being rammed through Congress and down the still healthy throats of an overwhelmingly disapproving public.

Joe said “I'm getting a little ticked off that it feels like the knees are buckling a little bit…You have an overwhelming majority in both the House and the Senate, and you own the whole shooting match. ... It's very frustrating to watch you try and compromise with a lot of these people who aren't willing to compromise with you."

The problem is that Joe, like so many others, has taken the Democrat’s bait, hook, line and sinker, and now he can’t figure out why it’s not making sense. The reason is simple. Obama isn’t looking for something he can get Republicans to vote for; he’s looking for something he can get his own minions to vote for.

Joe is of course absolutely correct. Obama and the Democrat controlled House and Senate could pass this socialist nationalized healthcare package without a single Republican vote. The problem for the Congressional Democrats is then what? Democrats have been wailing for years that if only they were in power they would know just what to do. Now that they have complete control over the legislative and executive branches it’s the last place they want to be. It’s a lot easier to say what you’re going to do than it is to actually do it. Plus all those silly little details and that damned reality always seem to get in the way of a good Democrat promise.

HR 3200 is one thousand plus pages of reduced healthcare payments, increased governmental intervention, increased restrictions, and decreased healthcare choices. After his radio show Obama went to a meeting and live webcast at the Democrat National Committee headquarters. (Just as a side note, I never recall President GW Bush venturing out to the Republican National Committee headquarters for a completely partisan discussion of his policies, do you?) During the webcast Obama attempted to rally support by saying "no matter what you've heard, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor under the reform proposals that we've put forward. If you like your private health insurance plan, you can keep it. If your employer provides you health insurance on the job, nobody is talking about messing with that." OOOOPS! Hey Baracchio, your nose is growing!

Immediately upon its passage 25% of current Medicare recipients would likely see a change in their provider networks due to ObamaCare cutting the subsidies Republicans gave the Medicare Advantage programs. Less immediate, but certainly no less impactful, will be the countless doctors and healthcare providers that are forced to trim their patient ranks of Medicare patients or risk being financially driven out of business. Hospitals will find themselves in the no-win position of not being able to keep Medicare patients in the hospital due to decreased hospital stay provisions, but not being able to release them due to the new non-payment clause for readmitted patients.

No Joe, Barack Obama is not trying to negotiate with the Republicans. Hell, the Republicans can’t even get in the room and any Democrat House Member caught discussing the plan with them faces the wrath of Nancy Pelosi.

Obama is desperately trying to negotiate with the Democrats who are facing an overwhelming majority of their constituents who are saying “Hell No” to the plan. And these Democrats are not about to be left standing alone when the ObamaCare bedpan hits the fan.

And as for seeing some knee buckling. Oh yeah!

The Ides Of Wal-Mart

2009-08-20T20:20:00.001-05:00

Beware the Ides of Wal-Mart.

And apparently 19 other major companies that according to the organizing web site have all agreed to pull advertising from the Glenn Beck Show on the Fox News Channel.

In their latest release ColorofChange.org claims they have received confirmation from 20 companies that they have contacted Fox News and requested their ads not be shown during the Beck Show. Best Buy and Travelocity along with Wal-Mart are the 3 latest additions to this supposed boycott.

This all began when Beck, commenting on Barack Obama’s uniformed defense of the black Harvard nutty professor over the stupidly acting white police, said that Obama was racist. Becks exact comment was: “This president, I think, has exposed himself as a guy, over and over again, who has a deep seated hatred for white people or the entire white culture. I don’t know what it is…” At that point when questioned about Obama having more white advisors than black, Beck said “I’m not saying he doesn’t like white people. I’m saying he has a problem. This guy, I believe is a racist.”

So is this what we have come to? Are we now so politically correct that if anyone points an accusatory finger at this President of Hope and Change, regardless of his actions, he will be shunned by corporate America like a pariah? Well not so fast Skippy. (not that Skippy was involved in the supposed boycott)

As it turns out not all the names listed by ColorofChange.org have actually pulled their ads from the Glenn Beck Show. Imagine that! A left wing political action web site publishing bold faced lies. Who would have thunk it? Okay, I mean other than Al Franken and his Air America scammers.

While a few advertisers have indeed pulled ads off the Beck show, like Sargento, they claim it was for reasons other than the racist portrayal of Barack Obama. And most of the advertisers that pulled their revenue enhancing commercial time off the Glenn Beck Show have also pulled their ads off competing liberal shows on CNN and MSNBC.

It seems that while ColorofChange.org would have us believe it was their efforts to silence conservative speech that succeeded, when in fact what actually happened was that corporate America got scared and decided to place their ads in less turbulent waters until they can at least tell which way the tide is rising.

It doesn’t matter whether you are a fan of Glenn Beck or not. The idea that a corporate board and their advertising gurus will decide what is proper or improper speech is more than a little scary. To think that these same companies have no problem advertising during some of the mind-numbing unadulterated crap that is broadcast nightly on each of the three major networks, but will fake some sort of corporate conscience in an effort to make a statement is beyond hypocritical.

It once again brings us back to the beauty of capitalism. If a corporation wants to flex its revenue muscle and decides to support a show or a channel that expresses a particular viewpoint I applaud their commitment and defend their right to spend their money as they see fit. However, if they should decide to support those views that I personally oppose, while I defend their right to do so, they will lose me as a customer. That goes for any company regardless of whether I like their products or not.

If Best Buy pulls their ads from a conservative show and leaves them on the likes of that drivel coming out of the mealy mouth of Keith Olbermann and the rest of the liberal ilk, I will not shop at Best Buy anymore. The same holds true for Wal-Mart, Con-Agra, CVS, Radio Shack, Geico, State Farm, Proctor & Gamble, Men’s Warehouse and the rest.

I have no problem switching stores, brands or insurance companies to keep the airwaves open to conservative viewpoints.

Capitalism is the most powerful force known to man.

Truth v. Tap Dancing

2009-08-19T19:37:00.000-05:00

Okay. Let’s try this.

Great white tap dancers: Fred Astaire, Gene Kelly, Donald O’Connor, Bob Fosse.

Great black tap dancers: Gregory Hines, Maurice Hines, Bill “Bojangles” Robinson, James “Jimmy Slyde” Godbolt, Barack Obama.

I’m guessing that there is probably no way to include tap dancing and this history-making first black president in the same sentence without being called a racist. Making a racist innuendo is absolutely not my intent but when it comes to tap dancing Obama ranks right up there with the best of em’.

The news wires are now filled with this latest ObamaCare step, shuffle, kick. And it is by no accident.

Nothing, nil, nada comes out of this administration of openness and honesty without first being contrived or at least approved by the infamous Obama Chicago Connection, David Axelrod and Rahm Emanuel.

These two political pros have spent years honing their skills in the fine art of Chicago pugilistic politics. They are masters at feigning the right only to land a roundhouse sucker punch with the left. Such was the case with the premeditated trial balloon sent up by Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. In her comments last week she said that Obama would be willing to abandon his proposal for the “public option” single payer portion of the ObamaCare bill to aid in its passage.

Immediately after Sebelius’s comments the Democrat left became unified in its opposition to the idea. Several leading Democrat House and Senate members raced to news microphones to announce their dismay at this proposition, each claiming they would not support ANY healthcare bill without this nationalized provision.

Phase one worked to perfection. It took the media spotlight off the public outrage, off the raucous town hall meetings, off the defensive back-peddling Democrats and gave them something to take the offense on. Even if it was to take the offense against proposals coming out of their own side.

Now comes phase two of the plan. Already the Associated Press and Reuters are coming out with “news” pieces that attempt to artificially prop up the perception of strength amongst the Democrats and downplay the overwhelming public disapproval.

The AP is leading with a story headlined “Analysis: Liberals tired of health care compromise”. Besides misspelling healthcare, the story goes on to quote numerous unnamed sources that are throwing down the gauntlet on giving any more concessions to Republicans. The only problem with the piece is that it is as blatantly contrived as it is factitious. Republicans have not only not received any concessions; they have been summarily shut out of the process entirely because Democrats can pass the ObamaCare nationalized disaster without a single Republican vote. This AP commentary is an attempt to portray the battle for ObamaCare as being between two political parties when in fact the crusade is to win the hearts and minds of the unsupportive American public.

The Reuters piece makes this clear with their headline “Views unchanged on Obama’s healthcare plans: poll”. At least Reuters can spell healthcare correctly. The opening line of the piece is a classic in political deception. It reads “Americans remain skeptical of President Obama’s healthcare reform drive, but their views have not changed much after weeks of sometimes angry protests at public meetings according to an NBC poll released Tuesday.” So basically what they’re saying is that Americans are firmly against this plan but they haven’t gotten more firmly against it, right?

It is only later in the article that one finds even that statement is fallacious. The poll shows overall support for the “public option” of the plan has dropped from 46 percent to 43 percent approval in the past month. That doesn’t sound unchanged to me.

Let’s take just a minute to imagine what the headlines would have read if George W was still President and promoting this plan. How about “After months of personal appeals President’s words fall on deaf ears”. Or possibly “American’s support for public option drops almost 10% to an all time low”.

I guess maybe Karl Rove was not the genius many thought he was. Bush should have gone with the boys from Chicago for his news media relations.

Perhaps Axelrod and Emanuel could float this as their next AP or Reuters headline:

“ObamaCare: Almost not everybody hates it”.

Woodstock Plus 40

2009-08-18T19:10:00.000-05:00

“By the time we got to Woodstock, we were half a million strong. And everywhere was a song and a celebration.” – Joni Mitchell

Well, I think I have sufficiently recovered from the deep despair that racked me near immobile when I learned that this past weekend was the 40th anniversary of Woodstock. How could it be? How could 40 years have gone by?

My first thought about the news coverage portraying this historic event and those who participated as promoters, workers, entertainers and attendees was “Please stop showing me all these old people” and “How did they get so old and I………….OH NO!”

Yes. Time has indeed marched on.

This anniversary was a time of reflection. A chance to reminisce about what now seems like a much simpler time but then seemed like a rocket ship entering into the great unknown at light speed. Woodstock was historic in its magnitude but more importantly in its message; “Three days of peace and music”.

We were different then. Maybe not better, but certainly different. There was a certain peace and harmony that existed in the 60’s that was on display during those three days in August, where a million mostly young people got together and braved bad weather along with even worse planning to share in this celebration of music and amity. There were great displays of caring and sharing that one would be hard pressed to find amongst young people today. There was personal communication, one person to another, that formed this group of long haired, short haired, hippie, straight, northern, southern, multicultural male and female individuals of disassociated backgrounds into a single family unit.

Certainly not all of the actions were of a completely altruistic nature. Particularly toward the promoters and investors who fronted the money for this first of its kind mega-concert. Of the million plus who attended only 186,000 had actually bought tickets. The ticket booths designed to sell additional tickets at the gate were closed before the first band hit the stage as the fences constructed to keep out freeloaders were breached almost immediately by tens of thousands of non-paying revelers. As one frantic promoter told another “You’ve just gone from the biggest concert in history to the biggest freebee in history.”

Nobody expected the turn out and nobody, from the promoters to the city fathers of Bethel, New York, were prepared for the overwhelming throng that arrived. But the 60’s held a different mentality and the promoters soon switched their attention from making a buck to making sure the attendees were cared for as best as possible. I doubt that would be the attitude today. NY Governor Nelson Rockefeller intended to send 10,000 National Guard troops when the magnitude of the event became apparent but was dissuaded by the promoters. My guess is today the promoters would be demanding them and more to protect their financial interests.

Woodstock is a snapshot in time. Not only of the music but of the culture of young people that existed then. The music presented was turbulent, raw, blemished, defiant, and apodictic. And it strained the boundaries of the best technology available at the time. The young people were exactly the same. The future was our domain and we knew that together we could make a difference. There was not a single cell phone call placed or text message sent at Woodstock but we were able to communicate as one through the music and harmony of sprit.

That turbulent defiance is the same in today’s youth but that spirit of oneness and harmony with each other has been lost. It’s sad to see. Attempts at reviving that communal spirit have failed miserably as shown by the stark contrast between the joy and celebration of the original Woodstock to the carnage and violence of the recent Woodstock spinoffs. If you want to know the change in attitude of today’s youth just listen to the changes in their music. The message has gone from peace to violence, love to sex, we to me.

We will never have another period in time like August, 1969. It was the end of the 60’s and the beginning of a new decade. It wasn’t all sunshine and rainbows, but we withstood the storms together and enjoyed the rainbow that followed. In the 60’s I spent most of my time searching for my bliss, now I spend it searching for my glasses and keys. Back then it was 1-2-3 what are we fighting for, now it’s 1-2-3 wait a minute, what number was I calling and what was I calling for. I no longer wear flowers in my hair. At least I don’t think Grecian Formula is a flower. But I’m still talkin’ bout my generation. Because the older I get the better we were.

By the way, the brown acid is not poison. It’s just manufactured poorly. So stay away from the brown acid. But hey, it’s your trip man.

Winning

2009-08-17T13:32:00.004-05:00

“Just Win Baby” – Al Davis – Oakland Raiders

“Winning isn’t everything, it’s the only thing” – Henry “Red” Sanders - UCLA

"I've got a lot on my plate, and it's very important for us to sequence these big initiatives in a way where they don't all just crash at the same time" – Barack Obama

I know I have said it before, but does anyone recall a President of the United States that consistently opened his statements regarding what needs to be done by complaining about his work load like this President of Hope and Change? This constant whining about all that he has to do has become a daily lament and his default answer to any question. It’s almost as if he is surprised that being President is a hard job.

It shows in stark detail just how completely unprepared this community activist turned ghost writing autobiographer turned leader of the free world is when it comes to being judged on accomplishments rather than patronizing partisan rhetoric and enigmatic promises.

It was Karl Rove who cautioned Obama prior to his taking office that being President is “Like drinking from a fire house 24 hours a day”. Obviously Rove’s words fell on deaf, even though remarkably impressive, ears.

Obama came into his reign in the White House with a whopping 515 promises of hope and change. He has won a few and he has lost a few, but according to PolitiFact.com, 7 months into his historic administration he has kept 34 promises, broken 7, compromised on 11, stalled 12, has 77 in the works and has taken no action on 374 of his ardent pledges.

But where he goes from here seems to be riding in large part on his success in passing ObamaCare, at least in some form. It has become far more about winning than it is about actually creating a health care reform program that is both affordable and actually beneficial.

Some of Obama’s victories have included such insignificant items as signing the UN Convention on rights for persons with disabilities and the installation of the nation’s first Chief Technology Officer. Yawn. Another victory or promise fulfilled is the supposed closing of Guantanamo Bay, but much like ObamaCare, here is a perfect example of victory at any cost with suspect benefit.

Even GW Bush stated that Guantanamo would one day need to be closed. But Obama continues to race forward, without a suitable plan as to where these dangerous killers will be housed, what will happen if they are brought onto American soil or how much it will cost. Most importantly the Obama administration has been completely incapable of showing any benefit to changing these detainees’ zip code from Guantanamo Bay to anywhere else.

It has become apparent with the Obama’s newfound willingness to drop the public option in his health care plan that he is willing to forgo this alleged insurance cost control for something to call a win at any price. The public option was an absolute cornerstone of this new socialist healthcare insurance system. While I am not the least bit sorry to see it being cut, in reality it was no more flawed than the rest of the unworkable and eminently dangerous ObamaCare plan.

The benefit to its removal is that, at least temporarily, citizens will be allowed to continue to pick their own health insurance plan. The downside is that it being removed will do nothing to reduce the untenable $1 trillion fiasco known as ObamaCare and the dramatic reduction in actual healthcare that will come with it.

Watch the coming negotiations closely regarding getting some kind of bill passed and you will see that this is not about providing the nation with better healthcare, not that it ever was, but is about winning something, anything. Democrats are desperate to overcome the public pushback knowing that if they fail to do so on this one it will likely be a long 3 years with a lame duck president.

Republicans have the ball in their court. If they can defeat Obama’s oneiric vision of socialized medicine, or at least make an impactful unified stand against it, they will have something to run on in 2010. If they don’t they will be as doomed as the sick and elderly depending on them.

“There is no comparison between that which is lost by not succeeding and that lost by not trying” – Sir Francis Bacon

Reality Bites

2009-08-13T18:50:00.000-05:00

Oh the wicked web we weave when first we practice to deceive.

The Democratic Party has got to be sitting back, eyes glazed and jaw agape, thinking “What the hell just happened here? One minute we’re filling Invseco Field with devoted, teary eyed pilgrims watching their Messiah of Hope and Change accept the presidential nomination amidst the columns of a Mount Olympus-like Greek temple, and the next these same once-devoted followers are carrying protest signs and screaming ‘Off with their heads’”.

It has got to be tough when reality takes a big bite out of your propitiate promise of enigmatic change.

Even the most inveterate public speakers amongst the Democrats have taken to mercurial tap dancing, querulous innuendo and outright deception when confronted by the overwhelming level of outrage shown by their once unshakable supporters.

Democrats are cancelling town hall meetings with their constituents faster than a Tom Arnold sitcom. They don’t know what to say to appease their angry voters and are getting absolutely no help or direction from their leader in the White House. So they have fallen back to the risible position of “just say anything”.

In several of the recent town hall meetings Democrats have emphatically stated that there is no health care bill yet. But right there on the government’s own web site is all 1017 pages of H.R. 3200, a gleaming, steaming omnibus pile of subpar nationalized health care and reduced or eliminated health care choices. For years politicians have acted as if there was no video or audio tape, denying that they said or did what was clearly shown and heard in the tapes. They acted as if Americans were both deaf and blind. In this latest attempt at subterfuge the Democrats are acting as if we are illiterate as well.

Barack Obama has all but abandoned his initial emphasis on ObamaCare providing health insurance to the currently uninsured and is now trying to convince those already insured that they will not lose anything with his $1 trillion package of onerous health care otiose. But because Americans have become accustomed to actually receiving health care when we are sick rather than 6 months after we’re dead, for the first time in this community activist’s political career voters aren’t buying what he’s selling. He has lost his ability to frame his words so as to hide his true meaning and besot the public at large with a wave of his hand.

Obama recently claimed that the public was unfairly faulting him for not eliminating the deficit he inherited from the Bush administration. But as he and his perfidious minions in Congress have tripled that inherited deficit in his first six months, this time the smoke and mirrors didn’t fool anybody.

Democrat Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Democrat Representative David Scott have tried to tie the swastika symbol to the ObamaCare protesters. Numerous Democrat House and Senate Members have called the protesters a mob of thugs and that the outrage was not real but rather “manufactured”. Recent Democrat Senator Arlen Specter was just quoted as saying the protesters “are not necessarily representative of America”. With all due respect to the esteemed Senator from Pennsylvania, if we are not representative of America then what are we? Allow me to suggest that perhaps it is the profligate nationalized health care plan contained in the 1017 pages of Obama’s fatuous socialist agenda known as ObamaCare that is not representative of America.

I really wonder if we rubbed Arlen Specter with Preparation H if he would get smaller and be less annoying.

Many predicted that it would take at least four years for Obama to lose his magic touch at winning the hearts and minds of his followers by saying nothing better than anybody else. I think the recent rebellion against his ObamaCare plan and other out of control tax and spend debacles have shown those predictions to be incorrect.

People are watching and listening. Some for the first time.

And oh, by the way, we’re reading too.

Racist...........Again

2009-08-12T19:17:00.000-05:00

I didn’t know how long it would take, but I knew we would get there.

According to Georgia Democrat Congressman David Scott, who is black, the resistance and rebellion against Barack Obama’s $1 trillion ObamaCare health insurance plan is being caused by………………wait for it………………..RACISITS!

WOW!

After Representative’s Scott’s fearless leader, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, intentionally and blatantly lied to the unquestioning press corps about protesters at ObamaCare town hall meetings carrying swastikas, suddenly one appears spray-painted on the sign bearing his name outside Representative Scott’s office. Does the name Morton Downey Jr. ring a bell?

The introduction of the swastika into the public forum is strictly a Democrat conceived ploy to downplay the deep outrage the American public is feeling toward this unworkable behemoth of nationalized health care. The only swastika shown in undoctored news photos carried by a town hall protester is in a circle with a line through it indicating the international symbol for “NO”.

Representative Scott said “We have got to make sure that the symbol of the swastika does not win, that the racial hatred that is bubbling up does not win this debate.” Scott also claims he has received threatening letters calling him a nigger and Barack Obama a Marxist.

Perhaps Representative Scott may wish to speak to Mr. Kenneth Gladney, an equally black man who was called a nigger amongst other epithets and then beaten by members of the Service Employees International Union at a recent town hall meeting in Gladney’s home town of St. Louis. Gladney, along with hundreds of other protesters showed up at the ObamaCare town hall meeting and was passing out flags with the “Don’t Tread On Me” symbol emblazoned on them. He was confronted by members of the SEIU who questioned why a black man was passing out these flags. He was verbally assaulted and then badly beaten by the union thugs requiring emergency treatment at a local hospital. Fortunately for Gladney he was treated prior to ObamaCare being enacted or he might have been sent home and told to return in 6 months when a doctor would be available to see him. Where is Representative Scott’s outrage at this beating? Where are Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton for this racially motivated assault? Where are Professor Gates, Reverend Wright, Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi’s condemnation for this “hate crime” carried out by their faithful union members?

Only seven months into the Obama presidency and the race card has already been worn to a frazzle. This debate is not racist in any way, shape or form. The more the Democrats try to incorporate the same old “white guilt” ploy that has worked so well for them in the past, the more transparent their subterfuge becomes. The black Congressman Scott was voted into office by the white constituents of his mostly white district. How is it these some voters are now considered racist for opposing the $1 trillion dollar ObamaCare debacle?

We are not racist, we’re mad as hell and rightfully so. We are told that the current system of health care, the system that is the envy of the rest of the world, doesn’t work. But we are told this by the likes of recently Democrat Senator Arlen Specter, who was questioned at his recent town hall meeting how it was possible that he, a man in his 70’s, was not only diagnosed but treated and cured of cancer under the current system that he claims doesn’t work.

We are told the current system doesn’t work by the likes of Senator Chris Dodd, who was recently diagnosed with prostate cancer, which under the current system diagnoses 250,000 cases of this cancer per year and has a 97% cure rate.

But most importantly we are being told that our current system of health care doesn’t work by a Democrat President, Democrat Senators and Democrat House Members who have absolutely no intention of abandoning the current system and signing themselves and their families up for the coverage offered by nationalized ObamaCare plan. Written right into the bill is an exemption for all these elected officials.

How is it racist to question the spending of another $1 trillion on top of the already unsustainable national deficit for a plan that has been proven, time and again all over the world, to be a poor second to the current American health care system? How is it racist to question the honesty of our elected officials when they say that no bill has been written when so many of us have seen the 1500 page bill approved and passed by three congressional committees so far? How is it racist to question our elected officials when we they tell us that ObamaCare will not take away our rights to make our own medical decisions when we have read in black and white that the intent of ObamaCare is to do exactly that? How is it racist to question why these elected officials who are so strong in their support are purposefully exempting themselves from coverage of this plan they are inflicting on the taxpaying public?

These constant exaggerated and in many cases falsified claims of racism are wearing remarkably thin. And so is America’s patience with this duplicitous administration and its loyal minions. Can we the people actually make our voices heard and choose the “Change” we will accept?

YES WE CAN!!!

Calling All Czars

2009-08-11T19:33:00.000-05:00

What in czar-nation is going on here?

To be fair, Barack Obama did not invent the “czar” position within the executive branch. But for a guy who was elected on the evanescent promise of “Change” he sure has come to like some of what his predecessors did. So much so that he has taken the czar idea to a whole new and eminently dangerous level.

Presidents in the past have appointed czars to head up several multifarious target groups of particular focus to their administrations. We’ve had Drug Czars, Energy Czars, Education Czars and Science Czars. The position of czar is solely appointed by the President with no input or approval from Congress. It has never been too big an issue as most of these czars simply gathered information on their particular issue of concern and reported back to the President with suggestions as to what actions could be taken to further the executive’s agenda.

Along with the previously established positions of czars, George W. Bush had several special focus czars that included a Katrina Czar, a Mine Safety Czar, Abstinence Czar, Bird Flu Czar, AIDS Czar, Manufacturing Czar and Copyright Czar. Not one of his czar positions were seen as particularly threatening to the American way of life, even by most Democrats. Except for an experienced community activist but inexperienced Senator from Illinois named Barack Hussein Obama, who whilst campaigning for the presidency said “The biggest problems that we’re facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all. And that’s what I intend to reverse when I’m President of the United States”. That was on March 31, 2008. Seven months into his presidency and seventeen months after this quote this President of Hope and Change has so far appointed 32 non-Congressionally approved czars. Far more than his belittled predecessor or any other president for that matter. So much so that even the very liberal and very Democrat Senator from West Virginia Robert Byrd sent a letter to Obama detailing his concerns with this administration’s possibly unconstitutional tactics of avoiding Congressional approval for some of these now very high level and very activist czar positions.

Obama has many of the usual czar positions and some of special interest like a Cyberspace Czar, Green Jobs Czar, Stimulus Accountability Czar and a Guantanamo Closure Czar. But he has also created a new czar position called the Compensation Czar. Obama recently appointed well known Washington DC attorney Kenneth Feinberg to fill this new czar position.

I have no intention of besmirching the character of Mr. Feinberg in any way. From all I have heard of him in the past and all that I have read about him, he is a fine attorney and a decent, caring man who has not only served at a high level in some landmark legal settlements but also has shown immeasurable compassion and the strong emotional stability necessary to serve as Special Master of the September 11 Victim Compensation Fund and as Chief Administrator of the Hokie Sprit Memorial Fund set up for the families of the Virginia Tech killings of April, 2007. Mr. Feinberg not only agreed to direct these funds and become closely involved with the grieving families but he did so pro bono, taking not one penny from the funds for his time and efforts.

Unfortunately, the fact that Mr. Feinberg is a class guy does not diminish the fact that he has now been placed in a position by Barack Obama that is not only extremely dangerous to the very core of American freedoms, but will likely also prove to be unconstitutional if challenged.

As Compensation Czar it will be Mr. Feinberg’s task to actually review and give governmental approval to what private businesses pay their executives. This is an absolutely unprecedented intrusion of government into the inner workings of not only business but private citizens. It is unparalleled in its scope and, if left unchallenged, could destroy American industry’s ability to compete in a world marketplace.

The justification for this incomprehensible misuse of power is that the seven companies this czar will initially focus his attention on have all received bailout funds from the Treasury. AIG, Citigroup, Bank of America, General Motors, Chrysler, Chrysler Financial and GMAC will all have their executive pay plans reviewed and possibly reconstructed by the federal government. Where is Daniel Webster when you need him?

Each of these companies received congressionally approved funding, not only to save the company, but to avert the potentially ominous impact any or all of their failures would have on both the American and global economy. While each of the companies involved understood they would be under increased scrutiny by federal regulators none agreed to have the rights of their board of directors or their investors usurped by an appointee of the President of the United States.

This presidential power grab goes back to the Obama mandated dismissing of GM CEO Rick Wagoner. Due to remarkable shortsightedness on their part, GM accepted this presidential intrusion to get the bailout money they needed immediately to avoid bankruptcy. Wagoner was unjustly forced to fall on a sword placed there by the UAW and GM ended up in bankruptcy anyway. The GM board should have refused to accept the President’s conditions or refused to accept Wagoner’s resignation. But they didn’t.

So now what? Well its time that these battered and bruised companies step up and defend themselves from what will otherwise be an ever increasing role government plays in the inner workings of their business. As qualified in compensation arbitration as Mr. Feinberg is, each of these companies needs to refuse to accept his imposed pay structures.

It is time to take the constitutionality of the President and his activist czar-nation to court. Nobody elected these czars and nobody but the President approved them. Congress never gave them the authority to act on its behalf in regulating businesses regardless of whether they got federal bailout money or not and the businesses never agreed to this level of federal intrusion by taking it.

If we ever hope to come out of this congressionally culpable recession with American businesses still intact and capable of conducting business, these corporate boards and the investors in those companies need to grow a pair, hearken back to the Reagan years and:

Just Say No.

Welcome To The Chicago Machine

2009-08-10T15:40:00.001-05:00

Welcome my friends, welcome to the machine.

With deference to Roger Waters for the slight edit, this opening line from the classic Pink Floyd tune seems perfectly suited to the exposition of Chicago machine politics coming out of the White House.

In one of THE most Orwellian acts yet to come from this administration of “Hope” and “Change” the White House has sent out a request that supporters of the President forward any e mails they receive critical of his ObamaCare nationalized health insurance directly to them. Furthermore, if any supporter hears anyone publicly speaking disparagingly about the President’s plan they should send that information including the discontent’s name and what they said directly to the boys in the back room at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

This unconscionable request is not a joke nor is it an exaggeration, although I truly wish it was. This is real. This President of the United States of America, a man who campaigned on a platform of openness and change, is requesting his minions turn over the names of all malcontents to the government.

I hated when liberals compared George W. Bush to Hitler. It was an absurd assessment with no basis in reality. It gave the unfortunate impression to those not familiar with history that Hitler was some unpopular politician. I find the recent defaming comparison of Barack Hussein Obama to Hitler equally shameful for the same reason. Anybody who uses Hitler as their point of reference for comparison to an American president truly has no clue as to the level of malevolent, inhuman, despotic brutality that permeated every fiber of his being. I was disgusted by the callous and ignorant comments of Illinois Democrat Senator Dick Durbin when he compared our American military men and women guarding the terrorists at Guantanamo Bay to Nazis. I am angered by the blatant misrepresentation of Democrat Speaker Nancy Pelosi when she fallaciously claims conservative protesters are brandishing swastikas at town hall meetings promoting ObamaCare. I understand the totality of what the Nazis did and how they did it. But it would be impossible for me to not draw some sort of mental comparison of this recent White House initiated “squeal on your neighbor” campaign to that of the Gestapo or any number of other totalitarian thought control police state initiatives.

This President has put his detractors on notice that any public resistance to his socialist policies and agenda will not go unnoticed or without possible retribution.

I simply cannot imagine the level of public outrage that would have been gleefully encouraged by the liberal mainstream media had George W. suggested the American public send him the names of those speaking out against his policies. But as tyrannical as the request is from this President of “Hope” and “Change”, the response by the bastions of truth, justice and free speech in the press has been muted at best by all but Fox News.

And exactly what is to be done with this information after it is received by the White House? That remains unclear. Will the names be turned over to other government agencies for further investigation, like the FBI, the CIA, the FCC or the IRS? Democrats are quick to say no. But nobody really knows for sure, and that in itself is part of the plans power, which is to limit public discourse through an unprecedented use of fear of reprisal.

While this level of partisan surveillance into the comments and writings of private citizens has not previously been publicly solicited by an acting President it is in fact right out of the old Chicago machine politics playbook. This plan to gather names and e mail addresses of detractors has the President’s Chief of Staff, Rahm Emmanuel’s name written all over it. It also was likely co-authored by the President’s chief political advisor David Axelrod.

Both Emmanuel and Axelrod are bare knuckle political brawlers with long Chicago machine politics pedigrees. They know how it works in the “City That Works” and they are looking to bring that same level of partisan control to this administration. In Chicago you go along or you go away.

I’m not suggesting that those who oppose ObamaCare and the over $1 trillion in additional costs it will tack onto the already unsustainable national debt will see any unexpected government interference in their life. But it would not surprise me if the IRS had to hire some additional auditors just in case there was an influx of new names whose tax forms might need to be checked and checked again for inconsistencies. Or if this obsessive desire to muzzle the free and open discussion of opposing views is not used to further the antithesis of fairness, called in Orwellian newspeak, the “Fairness Doctrine”.

And so it begins. First the George Orwell “1984” principle of “newspeak” was firmly established and now the principle of “doublethink” is being instituted.

How appropriate that the government in the prophetic Orwell tome is known as “Big Brother”.

Change In More Ways Than One

2009-08-09T14:23:00.003-05:00

Change.

With that one word an inexperienced community activist, schooled in the finer points of strong- arm Chicago politics, was placed in control of the most powerful nation on earth. The innocuous promise of something different was all it took. It mattered not to the country what that “something different” would be, having first been conditioned by the relentless drumbeat of an ever libelous and increasingly unrealistic Democrat controlled House and Senate that what we already had was not in fact what we wanted.

The country began to mindlessly accept the Democratic Party line that the security measures put in place that had kept us safe for 7 years were somehow more dangerous than the threat they protected us against.

That the war being fought on the home turf of the terrorists was an unwinnable quagmire and that even though the enemy had been in preparation for over 30 years it should have been decided in matter of months.

That the Guantanamo Bay detainees who were removed from the battlefield while trying to kill American and Allied forces were somehow being treated unfairly. Even though their treatment was far and away superior to that of about 80% of the world’s non-incarcerated population.

That diplomacy would keep us in the good graces of the rest of the world and win the hearts and minds of our enemies regardless of their overwhelming desire to kill us.

That the economic policy of lower taxes that had actually increased to record levels the revenues realized by the government was somehow unfair to those who were receiving the government aid those revenues paid for.

That the White House and the Executive branch of government was actually under the control of an evil Vice President and a group of shadowy political figures and corporate sponsors.

That the health care provided the elderly and infirmed in this country was subpar even though countless citizens from countries with nationalized health care programs were flocking to our clinics and hospitals to get it.

That temperature fluctuations in various parts of the globe were indicative of an ominous change in the entire earth’s suddenly fragile ecostructure and that the salvation of the human race and every plant and animal inhabiting this small blue planet could only be guaranteed by the creation of a new monopolistic currency shell game.

That the decline of American industry in the global marketplace was brought about by corporate greed and that the unrealistic wages and benefit packages demanded by organized labor was the solution rather than part of the problem.

That successful Americans who risked their own money and struggled countless hours to succeed in business were somehow unfair to those who chose not to invest their time and efforts to do the same.

That the basic laws of economics and the basic principles of mathematics were unfair and therefore needed to be disregarded. It was no longer necessary that 2 + 2 = 4 if we didn’t want it to.

What would these horrible inequities of the Bush administration change into and how would that change be effected? We didn’t know and more importantly we didn’t care. We only knew that without this magical verb being put into action immediately we, the country as a whole and likely the entire world would surely perish.

It was our unwillingness to ask what “CHANGE” meant prior to electing it that has led us to where we find ourselves today. It is the realization that the expression “From the frying pan into the fire” is the very definition of “CHANGE”. And that realization has caused a marker decline in the popularity of the ultimate “CHANGE MAKER”.

The approval rating for Barack Hussein Obama has plummeted from its lofty highs in the 70% area after the election to less than 50% only six month later. This approval rating under 50% is important because, as he carried 52% of the vote, it means that after only six months even those that voted for Obama are now disapproving.

It is also the reason that so many landmark legislative moves are now being rushed for a vote. The Democrat leadership knows that if they delay even a little there will likely be no chance to get bills such as the trillion dollar ObamaCare plan passed. Especially after Treasury Secretary Tim 1040 Geithner came out with is request to increase the national debt limit currently set at $12 trillion to who knows what stratospheric level. But Democrat House and Senate Members are also aware that if they vote for these fast-tracked tax and spend behemoths they will likely be looking for new work soon.

We’ll spend the next few days talking about some of these recent developments and how the Obama administration is falling back to good old fashioned Chicago-style politics to fight back.

Change is indeed upon us. But not the kind Obama and his supporters had planned on.

Can Barack Obama change from Messiah to Pariah in less than a year?

Apparently, Yes He Can.

Stastically Speaking 3

2009-08-06T20:32:00.000-05:00

OK. You want honest and open? Here we go.

Is there still a dividing attitude of racism in America? Yes, but it runs on both sides of the racial chasm. And while racism still exists, the perception or claims of racism is far greater than the actual occurrence.

You would be hard pressed to find a minority in this country that has not at some time experienced a situation that they considered racism. While each instance is different, I find many of the stories to be the same things white people have to deal with every day. White people get poor service in restaurants, inattentive and indifferent sales clerks in stores, we lose jobs, get passed over for promotions, get turned down for loans and credit cards, are made to feel insignificant by those with authority over us and have run-ins with police. But white folks rarely have the advantage of using racism as an excuse for our frustrations and disappointments. We are left to conclude that the person we are dealing with is an idiot or that our own actions may actually have played a part in the cards we are dealt.

Instead of focusing on the advancements made in race relations and minority opportunities available we focus our attention on insignificant annoyances that happen to everybody at some time. We have become so insanely politically correct on race that we have lost all concept of what racism is, where we have come from and where we are today.

When was the last reporting of a lynching in America? Do you suppose they still occur and the news media has decided not to cover them? Not likely. If there is a racial killing where whites kill blacks the news media is all over it with 24 hour non-stop coverage. If we had a lynching Jesse Jackson would be at the scene within hours looking for blood to smear on his shirt and Al Sharpton would be there claiming everything about white people is evil except their hair styles. The entire country would literally be turned on its ear and focused on little else for the next 6 months. It would be a shock to the entire country and rightfully so.

Golf Channel analyst Kelly Tilghman made an attempt at humor by saying other golfers would need to take Tiger Woods out back and lynch him if they wanted to win and almost lost her job. Tilghman was suspended for a month for the mere mention of the word. A garbage truck driver in Philadelphia was fired for hanging little a hangman’s nooses on his truck as a Halloween decoration because we, as a country, have become so politically correct and racially sensitive that we cannot discern between the image and the intent.

Lynchings were a dark page in our countries history. White thugs would gather up young black men who had committed some sort of inexcusable infraction like sitting in a whites only area or drinking from a whites only water fountain or looking at a white girl walk down the street and they would hang them from a tree as a sign of their brutal power and a warning to others of what happens to those that of cross them.

We have not had a lynching in this country for decades, but every single week across America 40 to 50 young black men are killed by other young black men. Each one of them is just as dead as the young men hung from trees. The reasons for these killings are usually equally inexcusable infractions like walking down the wrong street, selling dope on the wrong corner, flashing the wrong gang sign or having the wrong color bandana, disrespecting the shooter in any number of perceived ways or doing nothing at all but being in the wrong place.

Where are Jesse and Al at these killing? Where is the President, where is Reverend Wright, where is Professor Gates? Are they afraid to go into those neighborhoods? The carnage in the streets of black neighborhoods has become so commonplace that local news media outlets cover these killings simply as time fillers if there is no other news happening that day. There is no outrage. There is no call for a federal investigation. There is only tacit acceptance.

Most of these killings are carried out in full view of witnesses who are usually too afraid to give police any information out of fear of retribution. There is no difference between these killings and the lynching’s except the color of the attacker. We use ridiculous terms like “hate crime” to add some sort of delusional meaning to an act of violence, but the reality is the guy is just as dead whether the killer hated him or not, or whether the killer was white or black. Just imagine what would happen if the 40 to 50 killings every week on our city streets were carried out by marauding whites instead of other blacks.

And what do the black leaders and the white liberals blame for this urban holocaust? They blame the gun. How far would we have gotten in this country if we would have blamed the rope for lynchings? “The key to cutting back on these lynchings is a reduction in the amount of rope we have on the streets. If these guys didn’t have the rope they wouldn’t be able to hang anybody”.

Whenever I write about race invariably I will receive e mailed comments accusing me of racial prejudice. Nothing could be farther from the truth. I believe liberals are the epitome of racial prejudice.

I believe everybody should be held to the same level of responsibility. Blacks are just as capable as whites, entitled to the same struggles, the same disappointments and the same benefits. Liberals are the ones who believe that blacks are not capable of competing with whites. That is why we have this constant push to lower the standards and deflect blame. Liberals have created a welfare society with generation after generation of impoverished, dependent minorities who live in far greater fear of each other than of anything a white man will do to them. Liberals have made failure attractive and success nearly impossible. Once they have you in their endless system of hopeless despair liberals understand that you cannot break the narcotic hold welfare dependence thereby assuring them of your vote.

You can build all the schools you want but if the desks sit empty you have accomplished nothing. You can give all the job training you want but if it’s acceptable to just make babies and live off the welfare dole the lure of building a new and better life is lost. You can blame racism for the inequities in life or you can develop the necessary skills that will prevent anybody from holding you back.

Racism exists. From the white liberals who glorify the acceptance of failure and diminished standards, to the black leaders who preach excuses and justification instead of empowerment.

Statistically Speaking Part 2

2009-08-05T19:25:00.000-05:00

Let’s continue our discussion on race.

I listen carefully when the local newscasters drop their fake “buddy buddy banter” and read an actual news story. I am constantly amazed at the blatant attempt to give every detail of a crime except the race of the perpetrator.

In a recent TV news story several members of a white family were killed by the boyfriend of one of the daughters. Among the dead were the father, a sister and the grandmother. The daughter was seriously injured as was the mother of the family, all stabbed repeatedly in what was described as a blood bath. The TV news crews covered every aspect of the crime scene and the lives of the victims, going so far as having video of the murdered sister’s high school and the church they attended. They named the boyfriend and gave information about where he lived and worked. The only item missing from the report was that the killer was black.

The August 2nd Chicago Tribune ran a front page article, complete with pictures of a police news conference, detailing violent attacks on pedestrians in Chicago’s upscale Lincoln Park neighborhood. In the 531 word piece the paper detailed the attacks and the victims. The paper gave no description of the group of men who were sneaking up on unsuspecting victims, immediately beating them in the face and head and then stealing their wallets and cell phones. I thought perhaps as these attacks occurred at night and were so sudden and unexpected that nobody got a good look at the attackers. But a when I called the police desk I was told the perpetrators were a group of black men between 15 and 20 years old.

Why has it become standard procedure for news outlets to leave out racial description when discussing crimes committed by minorities? Don’t they think it is an important part of the overall description of the crime and the criminal?

As I explained yesterday, we cannot have a true and honest discussion without including all the facts. The ACLU is up in arms about the number of minorities pulled over by police, but until they catch these violent predators I hope that police pull over and investigate every group of young black men they see cruising the streets of Lincoln Park at night. God help us if the police ever get to the point of reluctance in investigating crimes because they don’t want to skew some study results on racial profiling. That would be as stupid and dangerous as announcing to your enemy when you are going to withdraw your troops.

I understand the frustration for every law abiding group of young black men that gets pulled over, but they must understand that the problem is not an act of prejudice but rather an investigation based on a description. They should be mad at the group of black attackers that caused the heightened sense of alarm. Police are not going to waste their time investigating groups of blacks if the description of the attackers is red haired Irish kids.

An honest and open discussion on race relations begins with honesty and openness, not some politically correct concept of protecting racial identity so as not to appear prejudiced. The Tribune online edition has a section of Chicago Police mugshots from recent arrests. I took a look at the latest 100 booking photos. The number of minorities was about 5 to 1 over whites. You can say it’s because police are focused on minorities but that doesn’t say that the minorities didn’t actually commit the crime. Look at the minority population in prisons, look at the number of minorities in the court system, look at the minority rate of high school drop outs, look at the minority rate of unwed pregnancy, look at the minority rate of single parent households, look at the minority rate of drug abuse, look at the minority rate of welfare recipients, all of these factors hopelessly binding them to a system of government handouts designed to keep them dependent and poor. All of this matters if we are going to actually be honest about race relations and move the discussion forward.

Or are we really just looking for more of the same.

We’ll bring this discussion to a head tomorrow.

Statistically Speaking

2009-08-04T16:33:00.001-05:00

The truth is that 82% of all statistics presented as the truth are made up on the spot. And the rest….well, let’s just say that numbers don’t lie, but the people reporting them sometimes do

As the country continues its preordained, politically correct discussion on race, the facts are getting skewed by the intentional misuse of misleading statistics. To be sure, statistical studies are an important tool in problem solving. But in order to find root cause solutions or even carry on a meaningful discussion one must first be willing to incorporate all the facts.

Industry has adopted a statistical system of process management and problem solving through the advancement of Six Sigma programs. These Six Sigma projects teach the importance of addressing all issues involved when attempting to find the root cause problem and implement solutions. The goal in these sometimes very time consuming activities is to zero in on the correct remedy rather than take a shot gun approach or worse yet attempt to debate a problem to death. It demands careful analysis and a true willingness to change based on the results of the study.

While the positive impact on industry from this approach has been profound, the supposed discussion the country is engaged in regarding race relations lacks several of the key features necessary for success. Rarely are all the facts addressed when discussing race and even less frequently is the discussion based on a willingness of all parties involved to actually change anything. We can discuss until we all turn blue, but rather than looking for solutions most of the discussion is simply trying to attach culpability.

Such is the case with the recent release of traffic studies of Illinois communities and the state as a whole. The Chicago Tribune carried a front page article ambiguously suggesting that while police search an inordinate percentage of minority driven vehicles at traffic stops, a higher percentage of white drivers actually have contraband found when searched. The study showed officers found contraband in 15.4% of the cases for minorities as opposed to 24.7% for whites. The ACLU jumped on this statistic as proof of unwarranted searches on minorities. But while it was mentioned that these were “consent searches” no other explanation of what that means was given. Once again, in an attempt to assure a particular conclusion not all the facts are included.

A “consent search” is conducted only if the driver gives his permission. There are actually very few “consent searches” performed, accounting for a mere 1% of all traffic stops. If the driver refuses the request to search his vehicle and officers still have probable cause to believe a search will render some form of contraband, other means are used to get legal authority to conduct the search. The results of these searches are not included in these statistics as they are no longer considered a “consent search”. The reality is that minority drivers are far less likely to allow a “consent search”, whether they have something to hide or not. It also shows that while whites are more likely to give consent they are not nearly as clever as they think they are in concealing their contraband.

The purpose of releasing these study results as they were is not to further the discussion on race but rather to promote a particular outcome to the discussion as illustrated by comments made by ACLU of Illinois spokesman Ed Yohnka. He said “There is just a predisposition to believe that minorities have contraband….. The data and indisputable nature of this is exactly what the president was talking about…..”

The ACLU is also filing complaints citing that in Chicago minority drivers are 4 times more likely to get searched than whites. But this statistic tells us nothing about the nature of the stop, the nature of the occupants in the car or the neighborhood in which the stop was conducted. I hate to break the news to the ACLU but there are a lot more drugs and guns rolling down the streets in the poor minority neighborhoods of Chicago than there are in the wealthy neighborhoods.

Just a quick glance at the violent crime statistics in the city will explain why more minority vehicles are searched. To somehow try to tie race to police enforcement without accounting for crime levels in the areas being patrolled is patently misleading and unimaginably dangerous.

If you want to have an honest and open discussion about race I’m all for it. But let’s start with all the facts and work our way from there.

More tomorrow.

You Bet Your Life

2009-08-03T19:06:00.000-05:00

Stop the presses! A member of the Senate has the same disease as millions of other Americans.

Don’t get me wrong. I take no pleasure in the fact that Senator Chris Dodd has prostate cancer. But the level of furor over his recent announcement is truly puzzling to me, as is the lack of some very important questions left unasked by the bastions of truth in the press.

Dodd announced last week that he was diagnoses with early-stage prostate cancer. The reality is that over 230,000 American men are diagnosed with the same disease every year. Prostate cancer is the most common type of cancer and is the number one type of cancer (other than skin cancers) in the United States, even surpassing breast cancer in women. As Dodd stated, if you are going to get a cancer this may be the one to get as the recovery rate is excellent. Today, only 1 in 32 men diagnosed with this disease die from it.

Now there are a number of reasons for this limited number of deaths, not the least of which is that this cancer is fairly slow in its advance and strikes elderly men who may well die of other causes before the cancer is sufficient to kill them. It is also eminently treatable, especially if diagnosed early. Treatments range from the standard chemotherapy and radiation to extremes like surgical castration. New diagnostic methods and treatments are brought to the public every year.

I had a close friend die of prostate cancer. Every death attributable to this disease is tragic. But if 230,000 men are diagnosed every year Lord knows how many others are tested with good results. If all these men are getting tested and treatment for the leading cancer in the United States has a survival rate in excess of 97%, where is the “health care crisis” I keep hearing about?

Senator Dodd credited his excellent Senatorial health insurance, which covers annual physicals, for the early diagnosis. He went on to say that this is the reason that he is fighting for the passage of the ObamaCare health insurance bill. But 230,000 other men are getting the same benefit now. My question is, if the ObamaCare plan is so good how come the House and Senate members are not going to be covered by it? I find it most interesting that nobody in the liberal lapdog mainstream press has asked that question either.

At the same time as Senator Dodd was talking about his health issues, California was announcing a $1.4 billion reduction in the state-run Medi-Cal insurance they offer. Why is California reducing their state run health insurance? Because they are going broke from running the state economy the same way Barack Obama wants to run the national economy.

Overtaxing has driven business out of California to friendlier and financially more realistic environs. Giving away free health care to illegal aliens has forced numerous California hospitals to close their doors, adding the burden onto the remaining health care centers. California found they simply could not tax enough to spend all they wanted to spend, so they had to cut back on some of the spending or become insolvent.

The ObamaCare plan is projected to cost taxpayers an additional $1 trillion dollars. But in reality the cost of this plan could run much higher as employers opt to drop their insurance offerings and place people on the government dole.

The recent government meltdown regarding the administration of the comparatively small $1 billion Cash for Clunkers program shows just how quickly these government programs can overwhelm the system. Car dealers were forced to hire people just to do the necessary paperwork to get $4500 new car rebates. If that’s for a simple billion dollar car sales program just imagine the level of bureaucratic red tape, paperwork and possible catastrophe involved in a national health insurance plan handling 1000 times as much money and infinitely more paperwork.

Even though I disagree with most of what Senator Dodd stands for, I wish him a complete and speedy recovery. But more than that I wish he and his fellow Senators would abandon their current health care insurance and jump on board the ObamaCare plan. I look for the Members of the US House to do the same. Especially Democrats.

Don’t just vote for the plan, sign up for it. Don’t tell us what a great plan this will be, show us that you are willing to bet your life and your family’s life and physical well being on it.

It’s kind of that whole goose and gander thing, right?

Reaganomics v. Obamanomics

2009-08-02T17:36:00.000-05:00

We no longer have to take it on faith.

The Cash for Clunkers program has been a success, to say the least. In just a period of days car dealers from around the country sold 250,000 new cars. The program, which had been scheduled to last until November, ran through the allocated $1 billion quicker than a Congress member on the Appropriations Committee. The success took even the bill’s sponsors by surprise and there were a few anxious days for car dealers as they tried to figure out whether or not they would actually get the rebates they had based their car sales on.

The success has been so stimulating that the US House passed a bill adding an additional $2 billion to keep the ball rolling. While there is some grumbling in the Senate there is little doubt the bill will pass there as well with equal velocity.

Why was this program so successful? Because it goes 100% against everything Barack Obama and the Democrat Congresses unprecedented governmental spending, non-stimulating plan stands for.

Cash for Clunkers was designed as an energy saving, environmental program. It may indeed serve some limited purpose in replacing less fuel efficient cars with lower emission, higher mpg models. But of the 250,000 car-buyers sold I’m guessing nobody really cared about that aspect. People flocked to dealers because with the government rebate and the discounts car dealers were putting on these new cars it made financial sense to buy. Nobody was looking to save the planet. They were looking to save money. The overall environmental impact of these 250,000 new vehicles will be insignificantly small.

The Cash for Clunkers program is the only true stimulus package Congress has passed so far. And the reason it is a successful stimulus package as opposed to the tax and spend non-stimulating programs is because it is from the Reaganomics play book rather than Obamanomics. It put the money in the hands of the all consumers not just those deemed in need of a new car. If this program had been designed like the Obama economic recovery plan or ObamaCare health insurance plan the rebates would have been given only to the poor and evil wealthy Americans would have had to pay over the sticker price to offset those rebates. Obviously, designed like that, it not only wouldn’t have stimulated new car sales it would have diminished what little there were. It proved once again that it is the people spending their money that stimulates the economy not government.

It also targeted the purchase of a particular product rather than all those supposed stimulus checks which could be spent on anything from old credit card debt to crack cocaine, or stashed in a mattress and not spent at all.

In his book “The Case for Faith” author Lee Strobel interviewed noted theologian Dr. William Lane Craig PH.D. on faith. Dr. Craig gave an interesting analogy saying “Let’s say you’re going to the office to see if your boss is in. You see his car in the parking lot. You ask his secretary if he’s in and she says ‘Yes, I just spoke with him.’ You see the light from under his office door. You listen and hear his voice on the telephone. On that basis you have good grounds for concluding that your boss is in his office. But you could do something quite different. You could go to the door and knock on it and meet the boss face-to-face. At that point the evidence of the car in the lot, the secretary’s testimony, the light under the door, the voice on the telephone- all of that would still be valid, but it would take a secondary role, because now you’ve met the boss face-to-face”.

I think this analogy is perfectly suited to this situation. Conservatives have been touting the benefits of Reaganomics and the Bush tax cuts explaining how they would be of far greater benefit than Obama’s socialist wealth redistribution approach. But the Cash for Clunkers success is like meeting Reaganomics face-to-face.

Government giving people back their money and encouraging spending on products rather than taxes.

The proof it works is staring Obama right in the face.

Homosexuality Is The New Black

2009-07-30T15:22:00.001-05:00

I foolishly thought equality was about leveling the playing field, not tipping it on end.

In yet another blatantly political and typically Democratic move Chicago’s Mayor Richard Daley is supporting a proposal to set aside a portion of city contracts and giving preferential treatment for those contracts to businesses owned by gays and lesbians.

“The City That Works” already has set asides for businesses owned by blacks, Hispanics, Asians and women. This would be yet another block of city business opportunities no longer made available to white, heterosexual businessmen.

When asked about the proposal submitted by openly gay Alderman Thomas Tunny of the 44th Ward, Mayor Dailey said “I think it’s good. It helps small businesses. It helps businesses grow in the city and that’s what we want.”

Far be it from me to correct the math of “da Mayor” that received 4 million votes in a city of 2.9 million people, but if you set aside business to benefit one group don’t you have an equal and opposite adverse effect on another? Of course you do!

As a lifelong Democrat, who knows how the vote goes, this Mayor understands that if he can keep the various minority communities on his side the white community will fall into place. Daley has already run against blacks, women and Hispanics, and successfully defeated them all. He also knows that he has a strong voting bloc in the gay community and while he may not have proposed this manifestly unfair business bias himself, he has very little choice in his public support of it. But please Mr. Mayor, don’t say this is to benefit small business or any business for that matter. It is exclusively to the benefit of your next reelection bid and patronage stranglehold. It is actually to the detriment of business and the city as well.

Chicago, like most major metropolitan areas, is currently suffering from the reduced revenues of economic recession. The 2009 budget for the city is a whopping $6 billion dollars. It included some belt-tightening in anticipation of the lean times ahead and also included an additional $52.5 million in new and increased taxes and fees. This is on top of the record $276.5 million in new and increased taxes and fees included in the 2008 budget. It is important to note that this budget does not include Cook County costs which are paid for directly by the county tax and spend machine.

The 2009 budget, when passed, contained 784 fewer layoffs than the year prior. However since its passage the mayor has put several city employee unions feet to the fire insisting on additional non-paid days off or else he would be forced to institute a wave of city worker layoffs.

In this climate of reduced business for city businesses and reduced revenue for the city itself are we sure that taking even more of the business that is left available to the general business community and setting it aside for yet another special interest group is the proper and fair thing to do? How can that be?

How is it possible that because you are homosexual your business is deemed more worthy to survive than a heterosexual owned business? And in a time of near budgetary crisis in the city, how is it possible that setting aside more of the city’s contracts, further diminishing the competitive bidding process and increasing costs, is a good thing?

Are the cost structures different at homosexual owned businesses that would require they get some special treatment to level the playing field? Have homosexual owned businesses been on the receiving end of years of prejudice that we need to make some sort of amends? I’m pretty sure I understand how we identify black, Hispanic, Asian and female owned businesses. How exactly is the city going to verify a homosexual owned business? Just the thought of that verification process could keep some city inspectors from sleeping at night.

This is a tragically unfair proposal and definitely not in the best interest of the city. I understand why the Mayor supports it. But it’s still a pretty low blow.

So to speak.

ObamaCare = Death and Taxes

2009-07-29T15:02:00.000-05:00

The only things sure in life are death and taxes. ObamaCare increases both.

President Barack “Pants-On-Fire” Obama continued his dog and pony road show of nationalized health care with a stop to discuss his Medicare cutting health plan with members of AARP. Obviously hoping the seniors he encountered still had their deductive reasoning numbed from trying to install their digital TV converters; Obama gave them a well rehearsed histrionic explanation of his plan that was equally as confusing.

He attempted to assure those present that the massive cuts in Medicare that his ObamaCare plan calls for will in no way reduce the care provided. The current US House version of the plan calls for over $246 billion in Medicare spending cuts. Obama attempted to reassure his audience that this money could be cut by cutting out waste and limiting payments for governmentally deemed “unnecessary” hospital readmissions. But he may have lost their confidence when he followed that explanation up with a suggestion that seniors need to make plans for end-of-life care. He may as well have said funeral arrangements.

Seniors at this event and those previous have stated serious concerns about their right to choose what medical treatment will still be available to them. Things like orthopedic joint replacements, cardiac and other surgeries and advanced drug therapy are all slated for far greater governmental oversight, weighing the benefits of treatment against the overall life expectancy of patient. While it truly will come down to an actuary numbers game, Obama tried to comfort those attending by saying “Nobody is talking about cutting Medicare benefits”. Does that mean it won’t happen or just that nobody is talking about it? This attempted mollification is in direct conflict with his previous explanation that pain medicine may be the government mandated course of treatment for many seniors rather than expensive life-saving surgery.

The ObamaCare plan calls for reduced payments to doctors for Medicare patients and reducing or eliminating payments to hospitals for Medicare patients that must be readmitted after being sent home. It is reasonable to assume that doctors, who are in the business of providing healthcare, will be forced to limit their exposure to Medicare patients just to stay in business. It is also reasonable to assume that hospitals will be far less likely to allow senior patients back in after they have been discharged for fear of not getting paid at all. Even if “Nobody is talking about a reduction in Medicare benefits” the outcome of these cuts will have that exact effect.

The House plan also foolishly calls for barring private insurance companies from denying coverage to people with preexisting conditions. The obvious effect this will have is a dramatic increase in insurance premiums and reduced benefits for everybody to cover these patients. It is just another example of how this administration plans to nationalize what was once private business.

For their part, the always liberal AARP is a strong supporter of Barack Obama and his smoke and mirrors health plan, which the White House has called a milestone. But AARP was also a strong supporter of the Clinton healthcare plan in the mid 1990’s and suffered a huge backlash from their members in that failed attempt. Once more details of this ObamaCare redistribution of healthcare are made clear they will likely suffer the same fate again.

The entire H.R. 3200 bill currently under consideration in the House is 1017 pages long. The President spoke only briefly to the AARP audience considering the massive implications this $1 trillion behemoth proposes. But it is fitting that he ended his comments with suggestions to seniors about aligning proper end-of-life care and living wills. This nationalized health plan does provide consultations aimed at reducing costs for people deemed to be near death.

ObamaCare – Where the death of seniors is always an appropriate option in redistributing healthcare to the poor.

Soylent Green anyone?

The Art Of Apology

2009-07-28T15:59:00.002-05:00

We have become quite adept at the art of apology.

“I’m sorry”. It’s easy to say. It must be. We seem to say it all the time whether we mean it or not.

Other than as an expression of grief where it is not used as an apology at all, such as “I am so sorry” said to the grieving widow at a funeral, “I’m sorry” has limited impact at best. That’s because it has various meanings depending on the situation. There is usually a whole other part to the sentence:

“I’m sorry” – I got caught
“I’m sorry” – you are going to be mad at me for a while
“I’m sorry” – I may have to deal with the consequences of my actions
“I’m sorry” – this didn’t work out like I had planned

Usually these two magic words have far less to do with remorse than they do with limiting consequence. They are kind of the first step in an attempt at the healing process, but not necessarily a good first step. Many times when we say “I’m sorry” we are simply attempting to close a page on what happened without having to actually change anything.

Just a month ago the US Senate unanimously passed a resolution sponsored by Iowa’s Democrat Senator Tom Harkin, apologizing to blacks “on behalf of the people of the United States, for wrongs committed against them and their ancestors under slavery and Jim Crow laws”.

This is the most disingenuous type of apology of all.

To apologize for something done by somebody else is tantamount to saying “I wouldn’t have done that”. It is an attempt to elevate oneself above the person or group that perpetrated the offense. It has absolutely no other meaning or relevance. It is as if the United States Senate apologized to the Vatican for the crucifixion of Jesus.

Quite frankly, the black community should be offended by this blatant attempt to pander their political support and pat them on the head like good little boys and girls. Senator Harkin said he was surprised that this had not been done 100 years ago. Well Senator, perhaps it is because 100 years ago our politicians were less pathetic.

6000 American lives were lost and $6 billion dollars was spent fighting over the issue of slavery. Over 360,000 of those killed were union solders, fighting against slavery. Over 99% of them were white. The war tore families’ apart and pitted brother against brother. The psychological damage and permanent physical disabilities caused by injuries is beyond measure. An American President was assassinated, not because of the end of slavery but because he was proposing voting rights for the freed slaves. If that is not enough of a commitment by the United States to those held as slaves then I doubt a meaningless bill 200 years later will have much impact.

Which brings us to this week at a picnic table set up just outside the oval office where the I’m sorriest President in the nation’s history will hold an apology-laden beer fest with the history of racial inequities once again the main topic of discussion. But please, look closely at the attendees of this photo op mea culpa-thon. It will be a black President of the United States and a black director of one of America’s most prestigious universities talking about how blacks have been held back to a white rank and file police officer.

The script to this absurd display is already written. The President will do what he does best, apologize. The white cop will explain that he was just doing his job and may even explain that he was taking the crazed professor into custody for his own protection. Professor Gates will do what he does best; prattle on about how the white man has been the black man’s problem for the past 200 years. He will also be dreaming of where to spend the royalty money from the book he will no doubt write about his harrowing experience.

Senator Harkin, I cannot apologize for slavery. It was a hideous practice but not one that I ever engaged in. But I sure am sorry to see we have come to this.

Money Changes Everything

2009-07-27T16:53:00.000-05:00

“Money can’t buy me love” - The Beatles

“But it does allow one to rent for the evening” - Big Frick

How many times have we heard it, the bible says money is the root of all evil? Folks quote it like they are seminary scholars. But if these biblical faux-fessors actually read the Good Book they would see that 1 Timothy 6:10 actually says “for the love of money is the root of all sorts of evil”. Big difference.

The evil comes not in the possession of money or even the striving for money. It comes in what you are willing to do for it and what you are willing to do with it. There is nothing inherently evil in having money or in enjoying the fruits of your labors. That’s capitalism. Certainly there are those whose sole purpose in life is to amass a greater fortune at any cost simply for the status that it provides. There are stories of exceedingly wealthy misers who pinched pennies with no regard for those less fortunate. John Paul Getty installed pay phones in his palatial home for guests to use and John Elwes the British Member of Parliament and inspiration for Dickens’ Ebenezer Scrooge reportedly went to bed when darkness came to save money and candles, wore old tattered clothes rather than spend money on new and would set out to kill the birds on his farms because they would steal his hay to build their nests. But some of the wealthiest capitalists on the planet are also some of the most magnanimous. Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are two prime examples of this having given away hundreds of millions of dollars to various charities and people in need.

It is not new for the poor to want to be rich and the rich to want to be richer. That drive for the creature comforts money provides is as old as the idea of money itself. But having money today seems to be the biggest crime one can commit against humanity. The wealthy are becoming “enemies of the state” with full support of that impression developed and fostered by the Democrats.

Bankers make too much money, CEO’s make too much money, Wall Street traders make too much money, so naturally Congress, set to strike while the iron is hot, is looking to set limits on private citizen’s income being paid by their employers. The fact is, if you want to really level the playing field everybody should be paid like most of these wealthy Americans are paid. No, I am not suggesting everybody be paid as much. Simply that everybody be paid in the same manner, incentivized pay structures for everyone.

The latest pay flap involves a Citi Bank energy trader who is now owed $100 million in contractually obligated incentivized pay. Is it too much to pay him? I don’t know. How much did he make Citi Bank? Oprah Winfrey is slated to make $250 million this year alone. Nobody in Congress is looking to have her pay slashed. And that is how it should be. Oprah is actually paid on an incentivized pay structure based on revenues her name can generate for advertisers. So why is it when an incentivized pay package is set up in business it is considered evil? All the recipient is doing is making a ton of money for his employer. If Citi Bank owes this guy $100 million it’s because he made them plenty.

Why not set it up so everybody is paid by what they actually do rather than by what they promise to do or what they are supposed to be capable of doing?

In non-union manufacturing facilities where the employees are paid not only by their own piecework output but the overall output of the line, it is almost unnecessary to have supervisors checking production levels. Workers whose paycheck are dependent on the performance of other workers are far more inclined to make sure everybody is doing their job correctly and at the proper pace.

Imagine going into a retail store where everybody is paid by the store’s sales. I’m guessing you wouldn’t have to wait long for some help provided by somebody who actually knew what the hell they were talking about. How about paying road maintenance crews by the foot rather than by the hour? You won’t see one guy with a shovel and four guys watching him, tying up traffic up for days to cold patch pot holes. How about paying union members by productivity? I’m guessing cars would be flying off the assembly lines in Detroit and new buildings would go up in half the time.

And how about paying our politicians by delivering on their promises rather than just making them. In business some draw against commission salesmen can actually end up owing the company money for poor performance. I think the same should hold true for elected officials.

You want to give the country a new health care plan? Great! It gives Americans less choice, less care and costs over a trillion dollars. Sorry Barack, Nancy, Harry and Barney. You’re going to be working for free for a long time.

These huge paychecks we read about are all based on incentive programs. Rather than taking away incentives for a job well done we should be taking a lesson.

Experience

2009-07-26T19:57:00.000-05:00

Experience is what you get when you don’t get what you want.

It seems pretty obvious that a lot of folks had to settle for experience in the Cambridge Police arrest of Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates because they sure didn’t get what they wanted.

Jesse Jackson and Al “Jheri Curl” Sharpton didn’t get a chance to fire up their private jets and wing their way to the aid of a poor downtrodden black guy. They didn’t get the chance to stand in front of clicking cameras and live news crews to dredge up 200 years of black oppression while ignoring the fact that the alleged victim of the racist police overreaction is a very highly paid professor at an Ivy League school.

Professor Gates didn’t get what he wanted. Even with all the wall to wall coverage of this incident he has not gotten the sympathy he was looking for. Noticeable by their absence are the testimonials from colleagues about his irreplaceable contribution to education at Harvard or the “man in the street” interviews with his neighbors bemoaning the cruel treatment of a model neighbor and pillar in the community. Nor does it appear that he will get a chance to tearfully recall in civil court the psychological damage done to him by this incident, insisting that the monetary settlement he is suing the Cambridge Police for has actually nothing to do with the money. He also hasn’t gotten the widespread support he was looking for from anybody outside a small circle in the black community. While he has received apologies from the university and the first black Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, neither of whom had anything to do with the incident so their apologies are meaningless, he did not receive the apology he had asked for from the arresting Sergeant James Crowley.

Gates has said he is looking to just move on rather than continue to be a distraction to the pending ObamaCare health insurance push. He also called this a teaching experience and wished that the Cambridge Police Department would use this incident as a lesson. In other words he is the teacher and they are students, which is strange coming from the guy who was in the handcuffs.

President Barack Hussein Obama didn’t get what he wanted. He was looking to rally support for his long time friend but instead got an earful from police unions and associations around the country. The firestorm has been so one sided in public support of the arresting police officers that the President was forced to apologize for his baseless comments to all those that actually knew the facts. But more importantly Obama was not able to keep from showing his true colors when it comes to issues of race. He has been successful for years avoiding anything racial, but now that he has been elected as president of all the people he has shown, as George Orwell displayed in his classic book Animal Farm, that all of us are equal but some of us are more equal.

We will have to see if Sgt. Crowley gets what he wants. All he has asked for from the President is to get the media off his lawn. It was reported that Crowley was the one to suggest the meeting at the White House for a beer with Obama and Gates. While I am assuming that Crowley was not one of the three people in Cambridge that voted Republican in the last election, I also doubt seriously that it was his idea for the chummy meeting. This “couple a beers” meeting has spin control written all over it. But as a friend of mine jokingly queried, it does lead to some interesting conversations as to what kind of beer each will drink.

Everybody involved got some experience but I doubt anybody actually learned anything from this.

I think it’s safe to say that Gates can’t be taught anything because he is not responsible for anything he does. It is and always will be somebody else’s fault and if he can make it racial, all the better.

Sgt. Crowley didn’t learn anything. As a veteran police officer I am certain he has dealt with pompous jerks before and working in Cambridge I am sure many of them have been from Harvard.

As for Barack Obama, he has been warned repeatedly about going off the script. He knew better than to speak his mind and show his racist attitude, well learned from years of tutelage by Reverend Jeremiah Wright.

And the American people, well we will just have to wait and see.

A Presidential Racist

2009-07-23T18:53:00.004-05:00

Stupid police in a nation of cowards.

The President decided to jump into the fray of the poor black professor who was arrested by the mean-spirited white policemen in Cambridge, Mass. While admitting he didn’t know if race actually played a part in the arrest, Obama did make the presidential proclamation that the police “acted stupidly”. Then, putting it into crystal clear perspective, the Chosen One admitted that he was able to make this demeaning assessment of the police without knowing the facts of the case. Admittedly, I am depending on the press reports of the President’s comments as I chose not to watch his network love-fest, fee free infomercial on ObamaCare last night. My sock drawer needed my immediate attention.

Unfortunately the President omitted one key fact from his comments. That being he is a close personal friend of this black radical Harvard professor. I guess it’s comforting to know that this President of Hope and Change is close personal friends with both black and white radical professors as in Bill Ayers and Henry Louis Gates as well as a black radical pastor, a black radical Attorney General and a Hispanic radical judge . On second thought, comforting may not be the correct word.

The only reason this is even news is because the professor is black and the police are white. Henry Louis Gates is the director of Harvard University’s Du Bois Institute of African and American Research. As such, professor Gates should be familiar with the overwhelming statistics of black on black crime and black on white crime. But as this is a research institute at a major Ivy League University actual statistics are viewed merely as irrelevant obstacles.

The incident began when a white woman noticed two black men forcing their way into the front door of a home. Had this happened in a black neighborhood, where young black men are gunned down daily by other young black men, at high noon, in front of hundreds of witnesses but when police arrive no one saw anything, the incident would have most likely gone unreported. But as this was in an area where folks show their displeasure with possible home invasions, police were called.

Police reports show that when officers arrived Gates was in the house with the other man. When police asked this learned professional racist for identification to prove he belonged there, instead of understanding how his entrance may have looked to passersby and simply providing his ID thus ending the incident, professor Gates became belligerent and argumentative, insisting on causing a racially motivated confrontation. He told the officers they had not heard the last of him and demanded to know their names and badge numbers, which seems like a strange request from a collage professor as both are always clearly displayed on the officer’s chest. Gates did end up getting arrested. Not for breaking and entering but for disorderly conduct after angrily following the exiting officers from the house to continue his discordant racial tirade on the front porch.

The charges have since been dropped by the District Attorney due to political considerations rather than any legal ones.

I was stopped several weeks ago exiting a building by an Asian and a black police officer. They asked me my name and requested my ID. I provided what they asked for, they said thank you and I went on my way. The entire incident lasted all of about a minute. It never dawned on me that these officers were racially motivated as I was the only white guy amongst us three. I knew I did nothing wrong and simply assumed the officers were investigating some poor guy that looked similar to me. They asked, I obliged, we moved on. That seemed to me to be the logical thing to do in that situation and I’m not even a Harvard professor.

Was this Cambridge confrontation racially motivated? Yes. But it was racially motivated by the black guy not the white cops. Were the President’s comments racially motivated? Yes, but once again not by anything the white cops did. Hell, he admitted he didn’t even know the facts. The Right Reverend Jeremiah Wright must be so proud of his protégé right now that he is grinning from ear to ear.

If I was a Cambridge police officer Professor Gates would not have to worry about me ever showing up at his address again, regardless of the circumstances. But he can be assured that the officers in Cambridge will continue to protect his life and property by putting their own lives on the line, just as they thought they might be doing the night they showed up for the possible breaking and entering call at his house.

The professional Cambridge police officers did exactly what one would expect them to do. Unfortunately so did the Director of Harvard’s Institute of African and American Research and the 20 plus year member of Reverend Wright’s flock.

Sleepless Nights

2009-07-22T19:59:00.002-05:00

I hope they never sleep again.

I hope every politician that voted in favor of the appalling, murderous practice of abortion and every doctor that ever performed one will lay awake every night for the rest of their lives, their minds racing with the thoughts of the abhorrent cruelty of their actions. Particularly now with the publication of new research that proves that these unborn babies have memories and feelings.

Doctors in the Netherlands have reported their studies on the advanced neurological development of unborn babies between 30 and 38 weeks of gestation. Their studies concluded what many of us already firmly believed. That these unborn infants are capable of thought and feeling. Their nervous system is far advanced over what many previously believed and their brain is actually capable of learning.

Led by an obstetrician Dr. Jan Nijhuis, doctors tested these in utero babies with very low sound wave vibrations. The babies were subjected to the sound waves and doctors recorded their reactions using ultrasound. They found that at first these unborn babies were startled by the sound and showed visible reactions to it. But after the sound was repeated 13 or 14 times at regular 30 second intervals the babies became accustomed to the sound waves and stopped reacting. Almost as if they came to realize that the sound was not going to hurt them. They went on to discover that if this test was repeated on the same baby, he or she would become accustomed to the sounds much quicker than they did the first time. Even if the tests were conducted 3 or 4 weeks apart the baby remembered. It was previously thought that this habituate type of memory only lasted a few hours to 24 hours long. This test proved that theory completely wrong.

It also proved that because the nervous system is that far developed these little babies can feel pain and fear. These are second trimester babies capable of being legally aborted by a 16 year old without parental approval at any Planned Parenthood facility in country.

Dr. Nijhuis stated that even though it is thought that babies younger than 30 weeks of gestation are not capable of similar habituate memory, it could be that doctors have not tested them using the right type of stimulus. He plans to continue to his research and expand it to younger babies refining the testing protocol.

The information the doctor has published so far should be enough to cause every doctor that took a Hippocratic Oath to cease performing abortions. It proves emphatically that we simply do not know enough about developing babies to justify randomly tearing them limb from limb, and worse yet the gruesome practice of late term abortion should be outlawed immediately. Regardless of how strongly our “Healthcare for Everyone” President supports it.

But while this should be seen as proof that abortion is the murder of a living, thinking, feeling baby, pro-abortion activists are already claiming that the doctors research can be used as a means of identifying developmentally disabled babies, who display less ability with habituate memory, so they can be easily identified for subsequent abortion.

And now our President wants to include this infanticide as part of his ObamaCare health insurance program.

We cannot allow this to continue.

Back To The Future Of Change

2009-07-21T19:10:00.003-05:00

You asked for it, you got it!

Change Baby, Change!

The Democrats continue their assault on common sense by finding new and interesting ways to damn financially successful Americans as elite fat cats worthy of having their treasures plundered.

Program after program, from Congresses near trillion dollar non-stimulating spending spree to the untenable bureaucratic nightmare of ObamaCare universal health insurance, is all allegedly going to be funded by increased taxes and decreased tax deductions on the wicked well-heeled. Barack Obama and his faithful minions are amazingly able to speak with straight faces as they explain how the money earned by hard working, people employing, small business men and women is the rightful bounty of the unwashed masses.

Pay no mind that some of these supposed ne’er-do-wells have risked everything they own to succeed in business. Don’t give a second thought to the fact that most have spent years toiling and sacrificing to amass their fortunes. Don’t even concern yourself with the reality that for many of these small business owners much of their total income reported to the IRS as income is actually their Sub S business revenues used to employ other people who are happy to have a job.

The Democrats are going back to the same well worn well they always go to but this time there could be dire consequences associated with their socialistic wealth redistribution money grab.

Historically wealthier Americans have been considered Republican voters. In 1995 of the 25 most affluent districts in America Democrats represented only 5. Today in those same 25 districts Democrats represent 14. This is making at least some Democrats, particularly in those districts, more than a little worried about the fallout from their actions. And with good reason.

Back in 1993 then President Bill Clinton used a similar fraudulent strategy of increasing taxes on the upper tax brackets with the claim that the increase was necessary to reduce the federal deficit. The bill passed in 1993 and in 1994 the GOP swept through both houses of Congress like an Arkansas tornado through a trailer park. The Clinton tax hikes helped fuel the recession that began in 1999. Clinton was followed by President GW Bush who lowered tax rates, eased the recession, stimulated the economy and increased revenues to the IRS.

Democrats like then freshman House member Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky who cast the deciding vote in favor of the tax hike are still bitter after having been shown the door in the next election. “I never should have been asked to take that vote, ever” Margolies-Mezinsky said recently.

But the constant fallacious drubbing by Democrats on President Bush and the improvident promise of undefined change successfully numbed the memory of undecided voters and the Dem’s regained control. But the problem with being in power is that your hand is now on the rudder and steering this bloated ship of state is far more difficult than simply pointing an accusing finger.

21 Democrat freshmen and one sophomore Congress member submitted a letter last week opposing the Democrat led tax hikes and surtaxes. It said in part “Especially in a recession, we need to make sure not to kill the goose that will lay the golden eggs of our recovery.”

Even Obama has changed his tune on ObamaCare by claiming we need to have a bill passed by the end of the year, having moved the drop dead date back from yesterday. But be assured these 21 Democrat Congress members along with the rest of the Democrat House and Senate will be harangued on a daily basis to march in step to the tune of the Chosen One.

And with that, Obama may indeed bring about his promise of Change.

It just may happen to be in the majority party of Congress come the midterm elections.

Declaring a Class Jihad

2009-07-20T18:53:00.001-05:00

Did I miss a memo?

When did we decide as a nation that it was understandable and more importantly excusable to have generation after generation living off the government teat, but that it is inexcusable and for all intents and purposes prosecutable, to take advantage of the opportunities afforded in this country and work your way into wealth?

When did the “pursuit of happiness” become the right to happiness at someone else’s expense? When did we as a nation decide Robin Hood was a suitable role model for government? Why am I asking questions I already know the answer to? It all started many years ago but it came to fruition on January 20, 2009.

Liberals in this country have been promising folks a bigger piece if the pie for as long as we have had liberals. But historically it was deemed by these left-minded Salvationists to be the responsibility of the wealthier members of society’s to ensure that the poor and less fortunate at least had the ingredients and an oven to bake their own pie. Not so anymore. Now if you want a bigger piece of the pie, or hell, the whole pie altogether, all you have to do is take it from someone who already baked one. Does the phrase from the classic nursery rhyme Henny Penny “Who will help me eat the bread” ring a bell?

Democrats have shifted the focus from the opportunities that are available to make our own lives better, onto the assets some people have and how allegedly unfair it is that everybody doesn’t have the same. To be sure, there are those in this country that have acquired their wealth in what was laughingly called the old fashioned way, they inherited it. But the truth is that the vast majority (almost 95%) earned their wealth the real old fashioned way, they worked for it. And even for those that came by their wealth through inheritance, somebody worked for that money.

I am not one of the fortunate. I was born with these incredible good looks and charming personality instead of a tidy dowry. I have worked to get myself into a comfortable place but nowhere near what one would call wealthy. It never dawned on me that just because someone had something I didn’t have meant I was automatically entitled to it. If I saw someone with something I wanted it inspired me to work harder so I could get it too. That is the backbone of our nation, the desire to improve our lives through hard work and innovation and make things better for our children. But not anymore.

Where is my incentive to get up early every morning and spend my days studying or working if the government is simply going to step in after the fact and take what I have worked for to give it to someone who didn’t? My question to the Obama administration is, if we are here to serve others, what the hell are the others here for?

The policy course being set by the Democrats is so socialist in its principles that even some Democrats are starting baulk. As stated in the Wall Street Journal - "There could come a time," said Rep. Michael McMahon, a freshman Democrat from New York City's borough of Staten Island, when Democrats are in open rebellion. "We will certainly see in the next few weeks where we are going."

To continually cite, as the Obama administration is doing, that these surtaxes and tax increases will effect only the top 1% of wage earners misses a very basic principle of economics. Every dollar taken from a taxpayer’s pocket, regardless of that taxpayer’s overall wealth, is taken out of the economy. Wealthy people buy things. Their spending creates jobs for people who are not wealthy but would like to be. If Congress takes billions of dollars out of these silk lined designer pockets, that’s a lot of products that are not going to be bought and a lot of jobs no longer needed to make those products.

You cannot win the war on poverty by instituting class warfare.

Good News Bad News

2009-07-19T21:38:00.001-05:00

A man is at an economist’s office and the economist says “I have some good news and I have some bad news”.

That classic “doctor joke” opening line is pretty much how I see our current economic plight, but not nearly as funny. It’s more like – A horse walks into his 401K director’s office and the director says “Hey! What’s with the long face?”

As we proceed through another earnings season, so far the flurry of reports already made public give some hope that the worst is already behind us. Even though only a small fraction of companies set to report their quarterly earnings have reported thus far, a vast majority (71%) of those that did, beat Wall Street analyst’s expectations. That’s the good news.

But, now for the rest of the story.

The better than expected bottom lines are a direct result of businesses doing what businesses do during uncertain times, cut costs. Regardless of where the costs were or the benefit associated with the expense, cuts have been made across the board. Newspapers and television reporters are all too eager to expose some Wall Street investment CEO or Detroit automotive big wig that spent $20 grand on special toilet paper for his private potty, but the reality is that 99.99% of businesses have cut back on every conceivable expense from the CEO to mop bucket Joe.

The numbers being reflected are a direct result of this cost cutting. It has nothing to do with government stimulus or improving business conditions. The game has been whoever can cut the most cost out of their business wins. The problem is some of the costs cut will only help to delay or limit true recovery.

Historically it has been all about the bottom line. How much money a company makes defines its ability to not only stay in business but to grow as well. The numbers being reported so far, while encouraging on the bottom line, are still anemic at best on the top line. How much business is the business doing. You can cut until there is nothing left but the CEO and a security guard, but sales and production drive a company. And if the sales are still not there then neither is the recovery.

The problem we face today is that businesses have cut back so much that it may be next to impossible to recover without some form of debt relief. Operations that were designed to run with 250 employees are now running with 30. That not only means a dramatic reduction in output but also an equally dramatic reduction in cost effectiveness. Materials do not flow through a production facility operating with 15 to 20% of its work force. In manufacturing environments the cost per piece to produce a product has gone up due to this decrease in flow dampening profitability. Inventory levels of raw materials, reduced as part of the cost cutting, further hamper productivity thus diminishing profits. In order for these manufacturing facilities to join in the recovery they will need to increase production and inventory levels. But as current sales continue to lag the money necessary to bring back employees and to buy increased inventory simply isn’t available.

Businesses have historically depended on credit to help them increase production. They borrow money to help get things started and pay the loans back after the products are sold and paid for by their customers. But in today’s environment credit is tight at best and non-existent in many cases. While clueless media types are quick to blame banks, the reality is that banks want to lend money. That’s their business. But banks already have their loan portfolios filled with business loans that are in default or are carrying increased risk. In this environment banks are far more likely to hold their money to cover potential losses on loans already granted than to use it to make more loans. The only hope for many of these businesses unable to get new credit lines will be bankruptcy protection.

While bankruptcy has historically been viewed as a negative, in this case it just might be a sign that the recovery is actually upon us. It won’t be easy and it won’t be pretty. This scenario leaves the distinct possibility of a rash of bankruptcies shuddering though various market sectors. As one company files for protection it forces many of its creditors into a position to file as well.

It’s a phase we must pass through, but we will survive.

Funny Funnies

2009-07-16T19:59:00.004-05:00

I get a lot of e mail.

Every day my inbox is jammed with advice on the next stock set to take off like a rocket, countless deals on retail merchandise that I simply can’t live without, notifications that I may already have won my weight in gold or a lovely consolation prize like a plastic water bottle that fits on your belt when you jog (like that’s gonna happen), numerous comments from BigFrick.com readers from around the world, some of whom think I am witty and remarkably smart and others who think I may in fact be Satan’s spawn. And jokes. Lot’s and lot of jokes.

Many of the jokes are retreads; some of which may date back to World War II. A lot of them are worth a snicker if only for nostalgic reminiscence. I occasionally will copy and paste one of the better jokes and send it off to a close circle of friends. Most I read and delete, knowing full well that I will likely get the same joke sent to me by a flurry of other folks.

But on rare occasions I get a real belly laugher. Today was such a day.

I had planned to write today’s piece on the absurd ObamaCare health insurance plan working its way through the hall of Congress. But the joke I received today was better, at least in my opinion, than anything I could have written.

I salute whoever came up with this idea and take no credit for this fine piece of parody. I apologize to those faithful readers who are from outside America and have not seen the television commercial this joke parodies. Attempting to explain the joke or the television commercial would be useless. Suffice it to say this is a commercial from an insurance company named AFLAC. It takes place in a barber shop and stars Yogi Berra and his inimitable vocabulary.

Thumbs Up For Ben Stein

2009-07-15T19:22:00.004-05:00

Nobody is ever going to mistake me for Roger Ebert.

I am just not a big movie guy. I find most of the current offerings from Hollywood to be nothing but rewarmed pabulum at best. The swarthy Johnny Depp as Frank Dillinger, no thanks. A remake of the classic novel the Bad Seed set to scary music and called The Orphan, I don’t think so. Transformers 3, Rocky 17 or a remake of the Honeymooners with an all black cast, not in this lifetime.

But I will give you a fairly new movie to see. You will probably have to dig through the bargain bin for it already. It is a movie by Ben Stein called Expelled.

In an effort of full disclosure I really like Ben Stein to begin with. I find his commentary and writings on current economic conditions to be firmly based in reality and his regular commentaries on life in general to be spot on correct and humorously poignant. His recent movie Expelled, while it did have a spattering of publicity, was for the most part hustled off the big screen in theaters and sent to DVD almost immediately upon release. I bought the movie as soon as it came out knowing nothing about its content other than it was from Ben Stein. I am pleased to say I consider the purchase to be money very well spent.

In Expelled, Stein attempts to open our eyes to the false sense of security we have when it comes to education and more importantly to the institutions of higher learning we have come to know and trust. He makes it abundantly clear that many of the great minds of what we laughingly call science leave much of their open-minded pursuit of truth and facts at the door when they enter many of our major universities.

Expelled concerns itself with the tragic consequences many very smart people have been subjected to for simply mentioning the possibility of intelligent design in the creation of life. In most cases these scholars are not proposing intelligent design as an answer, but only mentioning it as an alternate theory. But for many in academia the mere mention of a creator or that there is a theory that life is not a random act of providence is enough to fire and banish the offending colleague from anything related to higher education.

In one instance examined a very well respected professor mentioned intelligent design in a paper he wrote about the beginnings of life. The paper was peer reviewed and accepted, but after publication the professor was shunned by others in his department and terminated from the university where he worked.

Stein also gives ample opportunity to several leading authorities who dismiss intelligent design as shear insanity to explain their theories of how life came to be on this planet. Their fantastically nonsensical explanations are almost as profound as their smug beard stroking intellectual attitudes.

Having watched Expelled makes it easier to understand the story coming out of Texas where various special interest groups are attempting the Orwellian task of rewriting history. While the Texas Board of Education recently approved changes allowing new science standards that make room for creationist considerations regarding evolution there is heated debate over the new social studies text books.

Three reviewers of the new proposed K through 12 curriculums are favoring inclusion of the existing examples that the Bible, Christian faith and the civic virtues faith have played in the founding and early direction of America and the state of Texas. Three other reviewers, who were appointed by politically liberal board members, are favoring exclusion of those items and inclusion of more politically correct ideas, including an emphasis on the roll Hispanic and Native Americans played in the states foundation.

History is not politically correct and to attempt to make it so makes it worthless. We may not be able to prove beyond a doubt that God created life on this planet, but we can surely prove the role faith in Him has played in molding our nation and the state of Texas.

It is apparent to even a casual observer that while we have hallowed halls of higher learning, many of those strolling down those halls have a lot to learn.