Over dinner tonight the discussion turned to politics, particularly health care. I made the bold statement of saying that I opposed Obama's health care plan, and several people at our little dinner party started to attack me. "Don't you care about people?" they asked. "Do you suggest doing nothing?" they wondered. "Bush did whatever he wanted when he was President, now it's our turn," they justified.
My argument was simple, although shocking and revolutionary. I think that government should work hardest on protecting very important things, the most important of which are people's ability to live (and live as long as they can), the ability to choose for themselves, and the idea of keeping and earning stuff. And that above all, above providing health care or fighting global warming or running automobile companies, government should not attack these important things and try to take them away. And Obama's health care plan does this.
Obama's health care plan attacks life, by subsidizing abortion clinics at birth, by denying care and treatment (through rationing and bureaucratic delays) during life, and by denying care and treatment (through 'consoling and discussion') at the twilight of life.
Obama's heath care plan attacks choice, by replacing the patient-doctor relationship with one of patient-bureaucrat-doctor, where if you choose a procedure or drug, a government employee can tell you no. It removes responsibility to work hard and insure your own self, and gives up your freedom and liberty to government run and regulated faceless bureaucrats.
Obama's health care plan attacks property, because in order to pay for it, he needs to raise money. That money is either borrowed, which lessens the worth of all other money in the system, including mine, or the money is raised, by taking it from me. I worked for whatever money I earn- if the government did not exist, I would still work for whatever money I earn and it would be mine- therefor the government is not the creator of money nor the lawful taker of it. Obama's heath care plan will take my property in the form of higher taxes, fees, or borrowed funds.
My argument to my friends was simple- that all men are created equal, that we all have certain rights, that some of the most important of these rights is life, liberty, and property, and that the purpose of government is to protect these rights. And that whenever government becomes destructive to these rights by taking them away, that government is a tyranny, and all good patriots must oppose it with all their manly strength.
My friends, sadly, did not agree with my arguments- they sided with King George instead.
Friday, July 31, 2009
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Democrats Pay Interns to Pretend to be Distressed and Mail Lawmakers Regarding Healthcare
One of the problems with the current Democratic proposal for healthcare reform is the process. I know liberals believe that the ends justify the means, and they are willing to do anything to make America have a government-run healthcare system, but some of the means that Democrats are engaging in are the sort of dirty and disgusting stuff that should cause voters to throw them out of office next election.
One such dirty and disgusting tactic that Democrats are engaging in is hiring interns in their county offices to write letters to lawmakers pretending to be distressed individuals who are unable to get healthcare under the current system.
These interns write letters and emails pretending to be people who are very poor, have a severe disability, are faced with extreme situations, or otherwise have really bad problems, and urge lawmakers to vote to pass the healthcare reform that Democrats are proposing based on this evidence. The interns are not these things- they are instead being paid to lie to lawmakers by Democrats. This type of tactic is insulting on many levels, but is happening all over the nation now, being employed openly by Democrats to win the healthcare debate.
This disgusting Democrat tactic was easily discovered by Republican lawmakers. Whenever they received these letters and emails, they would try to contact the sender to let them know that our government already provides extensive healthcare coverage that almost certainly covered their problems. You see, we already have government provided healthcare to a large segment of our population, paid for by taxpayer dollars from you and me. And Republican lawmakers care, so when they track down the senders of these sad letters to tell them that they are already covered, they discover that the senders are not sad individuals at all, but paid Democratic interns.
Commissioner Shelley Taub exposed this tactic at a recent county commissioner meeting, which I covered in a blog post here. Although she exposed just a single example, the person she discovered who wrote a sad letter to her had as a full time job sending out letters such as these, and so although she exposed just one example of Democratic slime, a good amount of it is now flowing in the system (and it's the bad slime, like in Ghostbusters II).
You can contact Taub to obtain the evidence yourself by going to her page here- at the meeting she read us the evidence and and told us the full story of how she spent her weekend trying to track down the poor unwed mother who was on death's door in order to put her in touch with government help, only to discover that it was deception perpetrated by the Democratic party.
When Taub exposed this local piece of fraud, she was told that it was only "an overzealous individual from the county party’s office stepped outside of the realm of acceptable conduct and encouraged county party interns to follow suit," and that this person was "officially reprimanded them for their unacceptable actions." The email Taub received closed by encouraging Taub to ignore "these distractions"- the phony emails and letters that are flooding the system lying about the situation and encouraging public officials to vote a certain way based on deception and lies- because "there is a very real need... for improved health care coverage." The ends justify the means, in other words, and Democrats are sorry they were caught this time, but they will strike again.
Life, liberty, and property are being taken from us by deception and lies. Don't vote for this party, whether they be blue, black, or green.
UPDATE: If you would like to email someone your disgust with this, Mike McGuinness, Chairman of the Oakland County Democratic Party, was the guy who ran this shop of deception and lies. His email address is chair@ocdp.org.
UPDATE II: Looks like I am generating the news cycle again. Today in the Oakland Press there is a story about this very issue- Commissioner: Dems sent falsified letters. The author of this story must be a reader on my blog. Check it out!
UPDATE III: This story has some legs- big blogs around the country are picking it up and running with it, including the very good blog Atlas Shrugs. Here is their thoughts on this story.
One such dirty and disgusting tactic that Democrats are engaging in is hiring interns in their county offices to write letters to lawmakers pretending to be distressed individuals who are unable to get healthcare under the current system.
These interns write letters and emails pretending to be people who are very poor, have a severe disability, are faced with extreme situations, or otherwise have really bad problems, and urge lawmakers to vote to pass the healthcare reform that Democrats are proposing based on this evidence. The interns are not these things- they are instead being paid to lie to lawmakers by Democrats. This type of tactic is insulting on many levels, but is happening all over the nation now, being employed openly by Democrats to win the healthcare debate.
This disgusting Democrat tactic was easily discovered by Republican lawmakers. Whenever they received these letters and emails, they would try to contact the sender to let them know that our government already provides extensive healthcare coverage that almost certainly covered their problems. You see, we already have government provided healthcare to a large segment of our population, paid for by taxpayer dollars from you and me. And Republican lawmakers care, so when they track down the senders of these sad letters to tell them that they are already covered, they discover that the senders are not sad individuals at all, but paid Democratic interns.
Commissioner Shelley Taub exposed this tactic at a recent county commissioner meeting, which I covered in a blog post here. Although she exposed just a single example, the person she discovered who wrote a sad letter to her had as a full time job sending out letters such as these, and so although she exposed just one example of Democratic slime, a good amount of it is now flowing in the system (and it's the bad slime, like in Ghostbusters II).
You can contact Taub to obtain the evidence yourself by going to her page here- at the meeting she read us the evidence and and told us the full story of how she spent her weekend trying to track down the poor unwed mother who was on death's door in order to put her in touch with government help, only to discover that it was deception perpetrated by the Democratic party.
When Taub exposed this local piece of fraud, she was told that it was only "an overzealous individual from the county party’s office stepped outside of the realm of acceptable conduct and encouraged county party interns to follow suit," and that this person was "officially reprimanded them for their unacceptable actions." The email Taub received closed by encouraging Taub to ignore "these distractions"- the phony emails and letters that are flooding the system lying about the situation and encouraging public officials to vote a certain way based on deception and lies- because "there is a very real need... for improved health care coverage." The ends justify the means, in other words, and Democrats are sorry they were caught this time, but they will strike again.
Life, liberty, and property are being taken from us by deception and lies. Don't vote for this party, whether they be blue, black, or green.
UPDATE: If you would like to email someone your disgust with this, Mike McGuinness, Chairman of the Oakland County Democratic Party, was the guy who ran this shop of deception and lies. His email address is chair@ocdp.org.
UPDATE II: Looks like I am generating the news cycle again. Today in the Oakland Press there is a story about this very issue- Commissioner: Dems sent falsified letters. The author of this story must be a reader on my blog. Check it out!
UPDATE III: This story has some legs- big blogs around the country are picking it up and running with it, including the very good blog Atlas Shrugs. Here is their thoughts on this story.
Obama is an Unpopular President- Approval Numbers Similar to Bush in 2000
This is how the Democrats tell the story.
After George W Bush won election in 2000, the Democrats pointed over and over again to his low polling numbers, claiming that this was evidence that the country was divided. Byron York, writing in the National Review, characterized his approval rating as "wandering listlessly in the low 50 percent range." Democrats viewed these low approval ratings as a weakness, a sign that the President was unpopular and did not have a mandate to lead. Indeed, throughout his whole Presidency and in elections after they were able to point to those approval ratings numbers as evidence that Bush was never a legitimate President.
Bush's approval rating sunk from a high of 62% soon after he was elected to a meager 53% only months after he was elected. It was a sign of how unpopular he was.
Obama's approval rating has sunk from a high of 63% soon after he was elected to a meager 53% only months after he was elected. It is a sign of how unpopular he is.
Will Democrats tell this story? Or will they continue to portray Obama as a God in the media? I suspect that they will continue to insist that Obama is popular, even if his approval numbers drop to Jimmy Carter or Nancy Pelosi levels. When you have a minority group (extreme liberal Democrats are a minority group) ruling a nation, it usually is unpopular, and yet these groups typically prop up their regime with shows and displays. It is only a matter of time until Obama's popularity hits 43% and a statue of him is put up. As his popularity drifts lower, displays of power and worship will become more prominent.
Democrats need to be defeated in 2010 and 2012. Bush might not have been the smartest President, and you may disagree with some of his policy decisions, but at least he did not try to change America into a thug-ruled dictatorship.
After George W Bush won election in 2000, the Democrats pointed over and over again to his low polling numbers, claiming that this was evidence that the country was divided. Byron York, writing in the National Review, characterized his approval rating as "wandering listlessly in the low 50 percent range." Democrats viewed these low approval ratings as a weakness, a sign that the President was unpopular and did not have a mandate to lead. Indeed, throughout his whole Presidency and in elections after they were able to point to those approval ratings numbers as evidence that Bush was never a legitimate President.
Bush's approval rating sunk from a high of 62% soon after he was elected to a meager 53% only months after he was elected. It was a sign of how unpopular he was.
Obama's approval rating has sunk from a high of 63% soon after he was elected to a meager 53% only months after he was elected. It is a sign of how unpopular he is.
Will Democrats tell this story? Or will they continue to portray Obama as a God in the media? I suspect that they will continue to insist that Obama is popular, even if his approval numbers drop to Jimmy Carter or Nancy Pelosi levels. When you have a minority group (extreme liberal Democrats are a minority group) ruling a nation, it usually is unpopular, and yet these groups typically prop up their regime with shows and displays. It is only a matter of time until Obama's popularity hits 43% and a statue of him is put up. As his popularity drifts lower, displays of power and worship will become more prominent.
Democrats need to be defeated in 2010 and 2012. Bush might not have been the smartest President, and you may disagree with some of his policy decisions, but at least he did not try to change America into a thug-ruled dictatorship.
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
US Government Sets Record for Debt- $200 billion in one week
According to CNN Money, the U.S. government began a record weekly sale of $200 billion in Treasury debt this week. You can read the article here to get the details on what sorts of debt is sold, but I think the key line is here:
This is Democrat control of our economy. Children spending money that isn't there, borrowing it from our enemies around the world, paying them interest and giving them control over our country, all to pay for schemes that lower the quality of life in our nation. Democrats mean borrowed money and stolen property to pay for lessening the protections of life and liberty.
While analysts expect this week's auctions to go well, there is concern that the growing supply of Treasurys could eventually overwhelm demand as the United States continues to offer massive amounts of debt each month. (Although) demand from overseas buyers has remained healthy.Translation- there is a real fear that the US government is soaking up all the money in the world, and there will be no buyers on our debt notes next month, as the US debt explodes in a manner never before conceived. Oh, and the buyers of our record debt, who are going to earn considerable interest on it for a long time, are oversea's buyers.
This is Democrat control of our economy. Children spending money that isn't there, borrowing it from our enemies around the world, paying them interest and giving them control over our country, all to pay for schemes that lower the quality of life in our nation. Democrats mean borrowed money and stolen property to pay for lessening the protections of life and liberty.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
National Council for a New America
Whenever you get a lot of Republicans together in one room, the topic inevitably turns to the future of the Republican Party and attempts to rebrand it. One such attempt is the National Council for a New America (NCNA), which is the brainchild of top Republicans like Eric Cantor and John Boehner. This new group has gotten heavyweights like Palin, Jindhal, McCain, Romney, and Jeb Bush to sign on to it, and will attempt to duplicate the success of The Contract with America.
This forum will focus on engaging Americans around the country in a series of policy debates in an attempt to develop ideas and proposals that the Republican Party can run with in the next election, or to get people around the nation behind policy proposals that they have already developed (not sure which). The NCNA will bring together citizens from across the country to begin a dialogue with the American people through a series of forums, town halls, and an online effort that will engage people in discussion- a Republican attempt to 'start the conversation'.
Here are some of the topics that this group with focus on: "Economy: Real Solutions for Economic Recovery," "Healthcare: Building a 21st Century, Patient-Centered System," "Education: Preparing Our Children to Succeed," "Energy: Solutions for Energy Independence," and "National Security: Defending American Liberty and Freedom."
Efforts like these are important, and I think can be a good part of helping Republicans win more elections. Together with the Tea Parties, which get citizens out and active, the NCNA will get Republicans together to talk about policy and government, and that is always a good thing. I've contacted Cantor's office already and offered to help set up a policy discussion here in my area- you should go ahead and do that too.
If you're interested in this group, read about it here, here, and here.
This forum will focus on engaging Americans around the country in a series of policy debates in an attempt to develop ideas and proposals that the Republican Party can run with in the next election, or to get people around the nation behind policy proposals that they have already developed (not sure which). The NCNA will bring together citizens from across the country to begin a dialogue with the American people through a series of forums, town halls, and an online effort that will engage people in discussion- a Republican attempt to 'start the conversation'.
Here are some of the topics that this group with focus on: "Economy: Real Solutions for Economic Recovery," "Healthcare: Building a 21st Century, Patient-Centered System," "Education: Preparing Our Children to Succeed," "Energy: Solutions for Energy Independence," and "National Security: Defending American Liberty and Freedom."
Efforts like these are important, and I think can be a good part of helping Republicans win more elections. Together with the Tea Parties, which get citizens out and active, the NCNA will get Republicans together to talk about policy and government, and that is always a good thing. I've contacted Cantor's office already and offered to help set up a policy discussion here in my area- you should go ahead and do that too.
If you're interested in this group, read about it here, here, and here.
Obama Can't Play Baseball- But He Can Play Hardball
Although Barack Obama throws a baseball like a girl (video here), he plays hardball with the best of them, using tactics he learned from his years in inner city Chicago. Via Hot Air Blog there is a story about how Arizona Senator Jon Kyl suggested that not only should Congress refuse to consider a second stimulus package, they should bring the current spending to a halt before it wastes even more money. Rather than make a reasoned argument for their stimulus package, however, the White House threatened to choke Arizona’s federal funds in retaliation.
Hot Air Blog also adds this:
A day (after Kyl's suggestion), Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer received letters from Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, Department of Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan and Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar all pointing out the billions headed to Arizona.As Hot Air Blog comments on, Democrats use their usual faulty logic in making this threat. Arizona will eventually get $520 million in infrastructure spending of the $48 billion in the bill- a quick calculation shows that as somewhat less than 1/50th (or 1/57th) of the funds, meaning Arizonans won’t get the same share as other states. That probably isn't because Arizona has two Republican Senators, a Republican Governor, and usually has electoral votes go Republican- Democrats aren't that petty (that's sarcasm, by the way- taxpayer money is going primarily to Democratic states from Republican ones)
Kyl “publicly questioned whether the stimulus is working and stated that he wants to cancel projects that aren’t presently underway,” LaHood wrote to Brewer. “I believe the stimulus has been very effective in creating job opportunities throughout the country. However, if you prefer to forfeit the money we are making available to your state, as Senator Kyl suggests, please let me know.”
Hot Air Blog also adds this:
Also, I’m not sure if anyone at the White House realizes this quite yet, but all of that money comes from Arizona in the first place — and taxpayers all over the nation. They’re not promising some vast new wealth; they’re promising to return our money back to ourselves, with a hefty chunk of it removed to pay for the bureaucrats that manage it.This is hardball, played Chicago way- take someone's money and then blackmail them with it. Democrats at their finest.
Monday, July 27, 2009
Rick Snyder- Do Not Support in the Primary
Here in Michigan, the next big race is for Governor, and although I'm still debating between Hoekstra and Cox myself, one guy who I wish would take me off his mailing list is Republican Rick Snyder.
Snyder describes himself as a moderate Republican. 'Moderate' means that he supports using human embryos to create stem cells for medical research, he promotes gay marriage, and that he supports race and gender preferences, and (source: Free Press article). His ideas about government- 'sweeping government reform,' 'cultural transformation,' no concrete ideas- sound a lot like the inexperienced 'hope' and 'change' junk that is destroying our national government.
Snyder is a supporter of the moderate-wing of the Republican party- a quick search on http://www.opensecrets.org/ (type in Snyder, Michigan, Ann Arbor, search all cycles) shows that Snyder supports guys like Joe Schwarz (knocked out in primary of '06 for being too liberal), Elizabeth Dole, and John McCain, and that he likes to give money to a PAC called "Its My Party Too PAC" (which supports socially progressive moderate candidates). Most of his donations at least have been to Republicans, although he has given Democrat John Dingell 3K.
To be fair, when I started writing this piece I had it titled "Blasting Rick Snyder" and was going to really tear into the guy, mostly based on some stuff I read at Michigan Taxes Too Much. But then I did a little research and moderated my view somewhat.
Snyder is inexperienced, and we know from our experience with Granholm and Obama that putting a novice in charge of the state does not work well. Snyder is a socially 'moderate', which means that he feels that the 'life' portion of 'life, liberty, and property' is optional- as if you can pick and choose what are natural rights given to us by God. Snyder's support for gay marriage and racial preferences also demonstrate that he is not in tune with voters on the issues, and I'm getting sick of politicians who talk about moderation but on the issues are liberal.
What Michigan needs is someone running our state who is experienced and does a good job with public policy- that means a much maligned 'insider' politician. We need someone who espouses conservative principles- the type of ideas and policies that led Michigan to success under Engler and the opposite of those ideas and policies that led Michigan to failure under Granholm. Finally, we need someone who is in step with voters on issues- not someone who glibly speaks of hope and change, but someone who can move our state in the right direction. And that person is not Rick Snyder.
UPDATE: Although I did not support Snyder in the primary and feel he is not a solid conservative Republican, he will make a considerably better Governor than Granholm and a way way way better Governor than the communist angry special-interest controlled Virg 'Job Killer' Bernero. So, consider everything I have said in the correct light- as bad as Rick is, Virg is a thousand times worse.
Snyder describes himself as a moderate Republican. 'Moderate' means that he supports using human embryos to create stem cells for medical research, he promotes gay marriage, and that he supports race and gender preferences, and (source: Free Press article). His ideas about government- 'sweeping government reform,' 'cultural transformation,' no concrete ideas- sound a lot like the inexperienced 'hope' and 'change' junk that is destroying our national government.
Snyder is a supporter of the moderate-wing of the Republican party- a quick search on http://www.opensecrets.org/ (type in Snyder, Michigan, Ann Arbor, search all cycles) shows that Snyder supports guys like Joe Schwarz (knocked out in primary of '06 for being too liberal), Elizabeth Dole, and John McCain, and that he likes to give money to a PAC called "Its My Party Too PAC" (which supports socially progressive moderate candidates). Most of his donations at least have been to Republicans, although he has given Democrat John Dingell 3K.
To be fair, when I started writing this piece I had it titled "Blasting Rick Snyder" and was going to really tear into the guy, mostly based on some stuff I read at Michigan Taxes Too Much. But then I did a little research and moderated my view somewhat.
Snyder is inexperienced, and we know from our experience with Granholm and Obama that putting a novice in charge of the state does not work well. Snyder is a socially 'moderate', which means that he feels that the 'life' portion of 'life, liberty, and property' is optional- as if you can pick and choose what are natural rights given to us by God. Snyder's support for gay marriage and racial preferences also demonstrate that he is not in tune with voters on the issues, and I'm getting sick of politicians who talk about moderation but on the issues are liberal.
What Michigan needs is someone running our state who is experienced and does a good job with public policy- that means a much maligned 'insider' politician. We need someone who espouses conservative principles- the type of ideas and policies that led Michigan to success under Engler and the opposite of those ideas and policies that led Michigan to failure under Granholm. Finally, we need someone who is in step with voters on issues- not someone who glibly speaks of hope and change, but someone who can move our state in the right direction. And that person is not Rick Snyder.
UPDATE: Although I did not support Snyder in the primary and feel he is not a solid conservative Republican, he will make a considerably better Governor than Granholm and a way way way better Governor than the communist angry special-interest controlled Virg 'Job Killer' Bernero. So, consider everything I have said in the correct light- as bad as Rick is, Virg is a thousand times worse.
Saturday, July 25, 2009
Survey- Romney Tied with Obama for 2012- Real Hope Exists
Our country will regret for decades taking a flyer on an inexperienced politician from Chicago, but we can still recover, provided that his party is sounded rejected in the midterm elections and we move on as fast as we can from the Obamaccident of 2008. The good thing is, this is looking more and more like a possibility.
On Monday, Scott Rasmussen reported that in a telephone survey of likely voters that Republican Mitt Romney is now running even with Democrat Barack Obama, 45-45.
After only a few short months, voters have begun to sour on the hope-and-promises rhetoric of Obama, and are starting to see that behind all the promises of bipartisanship and change his actual conduct as president is very partisan and the ideas he advances are old-school liberalism. Jimmy Carter was blasted in 1980 by a runner-up former Governor, and Obama deserves to be blasted in 2012 by a runner-up former Governor named Romney.
On Monday, Scott Rasmussen reported that in a telephone survey of likely voters that Republican Mitt Romney is now running even with Democrat Barack Obama, 45-45.
After only a few short months, voters have begun to sour on the hope-and-promises rhetoric of Obama, and are starting to see that behind all the promises of bipartisanship and change his actual conduct as president is very partisan and the ideas he advances are old-school liberalism. Jimmy Carter was blasted in 1980 by a runner-up former Governor, and Obama deserves to be blasted in 2012 by a runner-up former Governor named Romney.
Obama's Version of Liberty and Freedom
Is this really the change that you and your family voted for?
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Deep Thoughts on DC Trip- LaHood, Palaces, Rainbows, Washington, and Lincoln
My wife, our my three kids, and I are vacationing this week in Washington DC, and as I walked around town taking pictures, random thoughts popped into my head. Here are some of them:
- Ray LaHood is not a very impressive guy. LaHood is currently the Secretary of Transportation, and he has the distinction of being a Republican in Obama's cabinet and a former teacher. His evaluation of Obama sounds like he has been drinking the coolaid over at the White House- he said Obama was bipartisan, open-minded, willing to listen to anyone, etc, and I don't see that at all. About the only right thing LaHood said was when I asked him whether it was tougher being a teacher or a cabinet member, and he said it was tougher being a teacher- I agree with him on that. I mean, how hard is it just to throw a billion dollars at something, and that's how the Obama White House runs.
- Washington DC is booming. I think it is one of the few states in the nation to actually have increasingly employment, job growth, and GDP growth. There are signs everywhere of prosperity and building- roads are being repaired, monuments are being revamped, buildings are adding on, and fresh paint and plaster is in abundance. On a guidebook of DC I read that our capitol was designed to look like the capitols of the Emperors and despots of Europe, but it was okay because we lived in a free nation that celebrated liberty and property. Well, as our country becomes more despotic and tyrannical, it is going to look increasingly like those capitols of the old days, when the Emperor took money from the countryside to build himself new statues and bigger palaces.
- My camera filled up, so I wasn't able to get a picture of this, but when my wife and I walked to see the White House, we saw a rainbow. It was kind of sunny but raining, and the rainbow was gorgeous. It began at the Washington Monument, soared into the sky, and set on the Ronald Reagan building. I wasn't going to read anything into that, except that after we saw the White House and walked away from it, we turned and looked back, and the rainbow was gone, but you could see the Washington Monument behind the White House, and the water coming off the top if it had darkened the tip, and it looked like the Monument was crying. I thought to myself- 'what would George Washington think about the guy currently occupying the White House?' There is no way of knowing, but I think I could guess that he would not think favorably of Obama.
- In the Rotunda of the National Archives, next to the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Declaration of Independence, there is a display set up on how our American freedom documents have inspired other nations around the world. On it, there is this line from George Washington's inaugural address:
"the preservation of the sacred fire of liberty and the destiny of the republican model of government are justly considered, perhaps, as deeply, as finally, staked on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American people"
This line makes me wonder if the sacred fire of liberty is still burning. Have we lost it- in a short-sighted grab for the comforts of tyranny have we extinguished it? And what happens if America turns it back on liberty, property, and life? Will it begin to fade in the world? Have we as humans blown our one and best chance at truly building a free republic based on natural rights and core principles? - Last thought of the day, and it comes after reading Lincoln's second inaugural address at the Lincoln Memorial (Incidentally, whatever happened to great inaugural addresses? Can you recite or remember a single thing from Obama's 'historic' one?). I'm not going to rewrite it or copy it here, although short, you've read enough today. Read it sometime here. There were two messages that I took from it. First, it was the sense of being right- Lincoln knew that the North was right, and that is why it was victorious. We are right on Iraq, Afghanistan, and many other issues, and there is no need to apologize for it- they pray to their gods, we pray to ours, and we emerge victorious- in his infinite wisdom, God knows what he is doing. The other thing that I took from Lincoln's address was the willingness to pay the price. The Civil War was terrible, but if that is what it took to right the wrongs of slavery, so be it. In our society, we are not willing to pay a price for anything- we want everything free and given to us. The financial industry paid the price for bad loans and risky practices- and we bailed them out. The auto companies paid the price for building bad cars- and we bailed the out. Many people pay the price for not getting health insurance- and now we want to bail them out. There is a price for everything, and we need to be able to pay that price again.
Interview with Representative Todd Platts
At dinner at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel in Washington DC tonight I ran into Representative Todd Platts, Republican Congressman from Pennsylvania's 19th district. We had an enjoyable conversation, and I walked away from my meeting with him feeling that he is a genuinely good Congressmen who cares about his district.
The main thing that we talked about was healthcare. Congressman Platts serves on the Education and Labor Committee, which is the main committee that is dealing with the healthcare legislation. He said that he got the healthcare bill, which was over 1000 pages in length, and then had two days to look it over before it was passed out of committee. Amendments were only allowed to be discussed under very narrow rules, and he felt that the end result was a healthcare bill that was flawed in every possible way.
The Republicans do have real ideas on how to lower healthcare costs and expand access- Congressman Platts talked about not having the government tax small business owners or individuals health care premiums, about letting people from all over the nation pool together to get healthcare, about having healthcare providers and insurance agencies compete across state lines, and several other even more technical policies that would reduce cost and expand coverage.
According to Congressman Platts, the Democrats refused to hear any of these ideas and are fixed on one goal- making the United States government the sole provider for healthcare in our nation. Oh, the Democrats might pretend like this is not their goal, but when you begin to talk about the logical conclusions to their proposals, they shut their minds and ears and quit listening- they know what they are doing, they know what they are doing is disingenuous, they know what they are doing is wrong, but they don't care, they are not going to let a crisis go to waste. Now is the time to remake America, before voters wake up and realize what they have done, and they know it.
Congressman Platts is a good guy, and will work hard to slow down or at least inform the American public about this healthcare bill, but the only chance it has of not passing is if you contact your Congressman and put public pressure on them. He can't do it alone. I also encourage you to support Congressman Platts for re-election in 2010- we need more guys like him in government.
The main thing that we talked about was healthcare. Congressman Platts serves on the Education and Labor Committee, which is the main committee that is dealing with the healthcare legislation. He said that he got the healthcare bill, which was over 1000 pages in length, and then had two days to look it over before it was passed out of committee. Amendments were only allowed to be discussed under very narrow rules, and he felt that the end result was a healthcare bill that was flawed in every possible way.
The Republicans do have real ideas on how to lower healthcare costs and expand access- Congressman Platts talked about not having the government tax small business owners or individuals health care premiums, about letting people from all over the nation pool together to get healthcare, about having healthcare providers and insurance agencies compete across state lines, and several other even more technical policies that would reduce cost and expand coverage.
According to Congressman Platts, the Democrats refused to hear any of these ideas and are fixed on one goal- making the United States government the sole provider for healthcare in our nation. Oh, the Democrats might pretend like this is not their goal, but when you begin to talk about the logical conclusions to their proposals, they shut their minds and ears and quit listening- they know what they are doing, they know what they are doing is disingenuous, they know what they are doing is wrong, but they don't care, they are not going to let a crisis go to waste. Now is the time to remake America, before voters wake up and realize what they have done, and they know it.
Congressman Platts is a good guy, and will work hard to slow down or at least inform the American public about this healthcare bill, but the only chance it has of not passing is if you contact your Congressman and put public pressure on them. He can't do it alone. I also encourage you to support Congressman Platts for re-election in 2010- we need more guys like him in government.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
British Government Tells Young Students To Have Sex Every Day to Be Healthier
When government runs healthcare, politics starts intruding in and good healthcare starts going out. According to the Times Online, the British department in charge of healthcare, the National Health Service, recently published a pamphlet that it then distributed to schools around the nation. This government-issued document informs students that they have a right to an enjoyable sex life, and that regular intercourse can be good for their cardiovascular health.
These are the sort of arguments that I might make in my own household, but they are not the sort of views that I think should be ordered by the government. It is kind of creepy to think that once Big Brother nationalizes our healthcare system, some bureaucrat will write a booklet similar to this one, in which young children are informed about the benefits of sexual pleasure.
According to the government, society has been stupidly pretending that there is a need for safe sex and that you should be in a loving committed relationship prior to having sex- the government bureaucrat who ordered this document sent to all schools feels that the main reason for sex is mindless enjoyment, and if more kids are brainwashed that way, this pervert might get lucky more often.
Not to sugarcoat it, in my mind, this government employee is either a dirty old man who likes to hit on younger girls or some sort of new-age feminist who is lacking in real happiness.
The document is called Pleasure, and has a nice slogan in it- “an orgasm a day keeps the doctor away” it says. Then it goes on to ask "what about sex or masturbation twice a week?”, suggesting that this type of physical activity is healthy. Let me stress yet again that this is a government bureaucracy, the one that runs the healthcare system, doing this, in England.
This is not too far off here in America if Obama and the liberals running our nation have their way.
These are the sort of arguments that I might make in my own household, but they are not the sort of views that I think should be ordered by the government. It is kind of creepy to think that once Big Brother nationalizes our healthcare system, some bureaucrat will write a booklet similar to this one, in which young children are informed about the benefits of sexual pleasure.
According to the government, society has been stupidly pretending that there is a need for safe sex and that you should be in a loving committed relationship prior to having sex- the government bureaucrat who ordered this document sent to all schools feels that the main reason for sex is mindless enjoyment, and if more kids are brainwashed that way, this pervert might get lucky more often.
Not to sugarcoat it, in my mind, this government employee is either a dirty old man who likes to hit on younger girls or some sort of new-age feminist who is lacking in real happiness.
The document is called Pleasure, and has a nice slogan in it- “an orgasm a day keeps the doctor away” it says. Then it goes on to ask "what about sex or masturbation twice a week?”, suggesting that this type of physical activity is healthy. Let me stress yet again that this is a government bureaucracy, the one that runs the healthcare system, doing this, in England.
This is not too far off here in America if Obama and the liberals running our nation have their way.
Michael Steele Meets with Teachers
Here is some news that you won't read anywhere else.
RNC Chairmen Michael Steele met today with a group of Republican teachers at an event hosted by the National Education Association, the largest union in the country. It was perhaps the first time in recent memory that the head of the Republican party met with teachers at the NEA headquarters.
"You are all Republicans?" he asked when he got to the podium. After a loud happy chorus of "yes!" he asked "And you are in the NEA?" The crowd yelled "yes" again, as everyone at this particular NEA gathering was in fact a Republican teacher. "That's freaken awesome!" Steele said in delight.
The Republican National Committee (RNC) is not opposed to teachers- Steele wanted us to all be aware that the RNC and the Republican party is never opposed to teachers, in spite of how they might view or talk about the teachers union. "The RNC would like to thank all you teachers for what you do," he said.
The first thing he talked about was how he viewed healthcare, and he tried to relate it back to teachers. He suggested that our nation not "lurch blindly into healthcare," referring to the speed and secrecy which the Democrat's healthcare bill may be introduced. The most important thing he said though about this issue was that we need to view healthcare through the lens of the patient-doctor relationship, and not to make it a patient-bureaucrat relationship. This healthcare debate, he said, is about choice or orders, the individual or government, cost not access, and we need to keep those thoughts in mind.
Speaking to Republican teachers, Chairmen Steele focused most of his comments on education. He "had the privilage to teach," he said, refering to his time teaching history and economics, and he knew that teachers have "the hardest job in the world." When he was Lt. Governor, he said that he "wanted to get into the classrooms and see what was really going on- and not deal with bureaucrats, or unions, or politicians, but instead deal with the teacher/student relationship." He got into the classrooms and talked with thousands of teachers, and this gave him an insight into how to improve the education system.
But when he sat down with the NEA, it became "all personalities and politics, and not issues and problems." Steele talked about how the NEA and the Republican party need to work together to build bridges and find consensus on issues, and move towards making progress on improving our educational system.
Steele several times looked around in surprise at being at the NEA building, which is usually not friendly to Republicans, but about 30% of the NEA is Republican, and they are becoming more organized and active in their union.
Speaking from his position as head of the RNC, he said that what we need to do as a country is put in place more policies that let teachers do their jobs and let them be the great teachers that they are, and those are the sort of ideas that the NEA and the Republican party should both be embracing.
RNC Chairmen Michael Steele met today with a group of Republican teachers at an event hosted by the National Education Association, the largest union in the country. It was perhaps the first time in recent memory that the head of the Republican party met with teachers at the NEA headquarters.
"You are all Republicans?" he asked when he got to the podium. After a loud happy chorus of "yes!" he asked "And you are in the NEA?" The crowd yelled "yes" again, as everyone at this particular NEA gathering was in fact a Republican teacher. "That's freaken awesome!" Steele said in delight.
The Republican National Committee (RNC) is not opposed to teachers- Steele wanted us to all be aware that the RNC and the Republican party is never opposed to teachers, in spite of how they might view or talk about the teachers union. "The RNC would like to thank all you teachers for what you do," he said.
The first thing he talked about was how he viewed healthcare, and he tried to relate it back to teachers. He suggested that our nation not "lurch blindly into healthcare," referring to the speed and secrecy which the Democrat's healthcare bill may be introduced. The most important thing he said though about this issue was that we need to view healthcare through the lens of the patient-doctor relationship, and not to make it a patient-bureaucrat relationship. This healthcare debate, he said, is about choice or orders, the individual or government, cost not access, and we need to keep those thoughts in mind.
Speaking to Republican teachers, Chairmen Steele focused most of his comments on education. He "had the privilage to teach," he said, refering to his time teaching history and economics, and he knew that teachers have "the hardest job in the world." When he was Lt. Governor, he said that he "wanted to get into the classrooms and see what was really going on- and not deal with bureaucrats, or unions, or politicians, but instead deal with the teacher/student relationship." He got into the classrooms and talked with thousands of teachers, and this gave him an insight into how to improve the education system.
But when he sat down with the NEA, it became "all personalities and politics, and not issues and problems." Steele talked about how the NEA and the Republican party need to work together to build bridges and find consensus on issues, and move towards making progress on improving our educational system.
Steele several times looked around in surprise at being at the NEA building, which is usually not friendly to Republicans, but about 30% of the NEA is Republican, and they are becoming more organized and active in their union.
Speaking from his position as head of the RNC, he said that what we need to do as a country is put in place more policies that let teachers do their jobs and let them be the great teachers that they are, and those are the sort of ideas that the NEA and the Republican party should both be embracing.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Is Al Gore the Re-incarnation of the Xhosa Prophetess Nongqawuse?
MasterResource has the best title for a post I have seen in a long time, and I'm reusing it, because it makes you laugh, and then you read the post and you cry. You laugh because it is funny, and you cry because it really is happening. Here is the post:
If a calamity does occur, one person who is sure to survive it is someone who has a massive house, a private air plane, lots of money, a houseboat, and is very well fed. Sadly, that means Al Gore will still be around!Alarmingly, the prophet that Gore most resembles may turn out to be Nongqawuse, who led her people to ruin in the mid-19th century. Nongqawuse was a teenager and a member of the Xhosa tribe in South Africa. One day in April or May of 1856, she went down to the river to fetch water. When she returned, she said that she had encountered the spirits of three of her ancestors who told her that her people must destroy their crops and kill their cattle. In return, the sun would rise red on February 18, 1857, and the Xhosa ancestors would sweep the British settlers from the land and bring them fresh, healthier cattle. (Some of the Xhosa cattle had been suffering from a lung ailment, which may or may not have been brought by the British settlers’ cattle.)
Astonishingly, the Xhosa chieftain, Sarhili, agreed to do exactly as this young girl urged. Over the next year, a frenzy occurred in which it is estimated that between 300,000 and 400,000 cattle were killed and crops destroyed. Historians sometimes call it the “Great Cattle Killing.”
But on February 18, 1857, the sun rose as usual. It was not red. And the Xhosa ancestors did not show. But the Xhosa people had destroyed their livelihood. In the resulting famine, the population of the area dropped from 105,000 to less than 27,000. Cannibalism was reported. Following Nongqawuse’s advice was a calamity of staggering proportions for the Xhosa people.
Like Nongqawuse, Gore tells us that the sun will soon rise red over the land. Well, maybe. But already the models that he relies on have been proven wrong. The intense period of warming that these models predicted over the past ten years never came to pass. Yet we are repeatedly told that it’s still coming and that it’s just a little late. Apparently, we should pay no attention to the fact that the polar ice is expanding again. Instead, we must put the brakes on our use of energy–the very thing that makes the modern world possible–to avoid antagonizing the spirits of our ancestors, I mean to avoid climate disaster.
Again, I am persuadable. But it will take more evidence than I have seen so far (and yes, I’ve spent more time than the average lawyer trying to piece together the evidence, though that’s not saying much).
There are two more parallels to the Great Cattle Killing that are worth pointing out. First, Nongqawuse’s urgings did not come out of nowhere. Some of the cattle were indeed sick. The problem is that her proposed course of action was utterly disproportionate to the problem, just as Gore’s proposals are disproportionate given the state of our knowledge. Second, some historians believe that the Great Cattle Killing was in part motivated by class animosity. The Xhosa people had been losing ground to white settlers for years, and some members of the tribe blamed their more prosperous members. Cattle were a status symbols, and initially at least, the burden of their destruction seemed to be something that would fall disproportionately upon these tribal leaders. The cattle were, in effect, the SUVs of their time.
Friday, July 17, 2009
Inspired Comments on a Friday
There are certain ideas, certain beliefs, that should be the basis of every political conversation that you have, that mark your every political speech. These ideas came to us from our ancestors, who fought the most powerful nation in the world and through the grace of God won, winning more land, richer land, than any nation has ever won before or since. And it was the generations before us who toiled on this land, expanding it, enriching it, all while following the ideas of our founders.
We must never forget that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by God with rights which can not be taken away, and that some of these rights- the most important ones perhaps- are the right to live, the right to live in freedom, and the right to keep and own property.
These rights existed before government, and government has no moral claim on them- only a tyrannical government can ask you to kill your unborn baby or not seek medical care when you are old, only a despotic government will take away your personal responsibility and ability to make choices, and only a bad government will pretend that it is entitled to your property.
It is very important that we remember these things, because if we stray from our founding beliefs, than our prosperity and safety will disappear. As our nation does stray into these bitter times, many our once again remembering how bold, how controversial, how radical our founding fathers were, believing those ideals so enumerated in the Declaration of Independence. It is in our hearts and souls that we know these words were correct when spoken, and we know that government is put among men only to protect life, liberty, and property, and not to provide homes, healthcare, education, welfare, or consumer goods.
Our ancestors established America and gave it to us, so that their descendants could enjoy the dream that they had won. They did not really want us adding or subtracting to the meaning and intent of their dreams- they wanted us to stick closely to the dream, the freedom, the liberty, the protection that they had won with the grace of God.
This is still a great nation, and we can keep in great, but only if we keep the Declaration of Independence in our hearts and speak it often. When in public meetings or when making a public comment, try to work in the words "all men are created equal," or "right to life, liberty, and property," or "government's purpose is to secure these rights". There is no need to re-invent the wheel- there is only the need to re-remember our Founding.
These comments were inspired by The Bible, Deuteronomy 4.
We must never forget that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by God with rights which can not be taken away, and that some of these rights- the most important ones perhaps- are the right to live, the right to live in freedom, and the right to keep and own property.
These rights existed before government, and government has no moral claim on them- only a tyrannical government can ask you to kill your unborn baby or not seek medical care when you are old, only a despotic government will take away your personal responsibility and ability to make choices, and only a bad government will pretend that it is entitled to your property.
It is very important that we remember these things, because if we stray from our founding beliefs, than our prosperity and safety will disappear. As our nation does stray into these bitter times, many our once again remembering how bold, how controversial, how radical our founding fathers were, believing those ideals so enumerated in the Declaration of Independence. It is in our hearts and souls that we know these words were correct when spoken, and we know that government is put among men only to protect life, liberty, and property, and not to provide homes, healthcare, education, welfare, or consumer goods.
Our ancestors established America and gave it to us, so that their descendants could enjoy the dream that they had won. They did not really want us adding or subtracting to the meaning and intent of their dreams- they wanted us to stick closely to the dream, the freedom, the liberty, the protection that they had won with the grace of God.
This is still a great nation, and we can keep in great, but only if we keep the Declaration of Independence in our hearts and speak it often. When in public meetings or when making a public comment, try to work in the words "all men are created equal," or "right to life, liberty, and property," or "government's purpose is to secure these rights". There is no need to re-invent the wheel- there is only the need to re-remember our Founding.
These comments were inspired by The Bible, Deuteronomy 4.
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Oakland County Board of Commissioners Meeting July 09
Yesterday I sat in on an Oakland County Board of Commissioners Meeting. They decided to start having these at night, which is good, since now citizens who have jobs can come in and watch government in action. The main topic of this meeting was to discuss the County Executive's recommended budget for the next couple years.
The first portion of the meeting was public comment, and it was at this time that I felt like I time-traveled back to the middle ages. I was in a great hall, with the king in front of us, and one by one petitioners went forward and asked the king in his infinite wisdom to give charity and gifts to the serfs who came before him. With a wave of his hand, he would indicate whether he personally liked the cause or issue or not, and so dispense with the money in his treasury, money taken from citizens through force and war.
This is modern government in America. One by one, unions and citizens came forward and demanded more money from the county government for various issues. It was good enough that they wanted the money, and it wasn't good enough to these people that that money was not there, and even if it was there, it wasn't even their money- it was my money and yours.
Most of the focus of public comment was on Oakland County Health Plan. Apparently our county government offers health care that covers the bottom 35% of our county, but that wasn't good enough to many people. Several people came forward who made too much money to be covered by the plan, or ran businesses that paid their employees too much so that they weren't covered. The arguments were made that the health care plan should cover the bottom 60% of our county, and if more money was needed to pay for it, than taxes or fees should be levied on the top 40%.
Our nation was founded on liberty and choices. What struck me about this discussion on the Oakland County Health Plan was the fact that when faced with a choice, people made one decision and than wanted the government to give them the other option. One guy, suffering from cancer and scared for his life, does not have health insurance- because, as he said, it was important to him to have a house and a car. He made a decision to not have health insurance, and instead have those other things. That's his call- but it isn't his call to now say that others have to pay for his health insurance.
The rich guy came forward and said that everyone should commit to giving 5% of their income to this program, if they are in the top income earners, is becoming more normal in our society. If he wants to donate his money, that's his business- but it is not the business of our government to take my money and give it to causes that it likes- that isn't a free country, that is a tyranny. In his appeal he talked about empathy and giving, but I saw him come in- his car is better than mine, his suit is better than mine, and if he wants to care and give to others, that's his call, but I need my money to care and give to my children and family and the charities that I care about. Increasingly saying that you care and have empathy means you are superior to others, and that isn't true- no one is ever better than you.
The main argument about expanding the health care plan centered on the fact that it would probably not cost the County government that much. The idea is that the state will cover the cost, and that the federal government will reimburse the state. So, since the federal government pays for it, that means it is free. Democrats and liberals now believe that money does not exist- the county passes the buck to the state which passes it to the federal government, who spends money that they don't have, without a care in the world. But money does exist- the federal government debt will lead to credit crunches, inflation, and eventually collapse of the world's economic system.
After public comment, Commissioner Shelly Taub brought up something that I will come back to later. Then the budget was submitted. Here is a story about that.
The first portion of the meeting was public comment, and it was at this time that I felt like I time-traveled back to the middle ages. I was in a great hall, with the king in front of us, and one by one petitioners went forward and asked the king in his infinite wisdom to give charity and gifts to the serfs who came before him. With a wave of his hand, he would indicate whether he personally liked the cause or issue or not, and so dispense with the money in his treasury, money taken from citizens through force and war.
This is modern government in America. One by one, unions and citizens came forward and demanded more money from the county government for various issues. It was good enough that they wanted the money, and it wasn't good enough to these people that that money was not there, and even if it was there, it wasn't even their money- it was my money and yours.
Most of the focus of public comment was on Oakland County Health Plan. Apparently our county government offers health care that covers the bottom 35% of our county, but that wasn't good enough to many people. Several people came forward who made too much money to be covered by the plan, or ran businesses that paid their employees too much so that they weren't covered. The arguments were made that the health care plan should cover the bottom 60% of our county, and if more money was needed to pay for it, than taxes or fees should be levied on the top 40%.
Our nation was founded on liberty and choices. What struck me about this discussion on the Oakland County Health Plan was the fact that when faced with a choice, people made one decision and than wanted the government to give them the other option. One guy, suffering from cancer and scared for his life, does not have health insurance- because, as he said, it was important to him to have a house and a car. He made a decision to not have health insurance, and instead have those other things. That's his call- but it isn't his call to now say that others have to pay for his health insurance.
The rich guy came forward and said that everyone should commit to giving 5% of their income to this program, if they are in the top income earners, is becoming more normal in our society. If he wants to donate his money, that's his business- but it is not the business of our government to take my money and give it to causes that it likes- that isn't a free country, that is a tyranny. In his appeal he talked about empathy and giving, but I saw him come in- his car is better than mine, his suit is better than mine, and if he wants to care and give to others, that's his call, but I need my money to care and give to my children and family and the charities that I care about. Increasingly saying that you care and have empathy means you are superior to others, and that isn't true- no one is ever better than you.
The main argument about expanding the health care plan centered on the fact that it would probably not cost the County government that much. The idea is that the state will cover the cost, and that the federal government will reimburse the state. So, since the federal government pays for it, that means it is free. Democrats and liberals now believe that money does not exist- the county passes the buck to the state which passes it to the federal government, who spends money that they don't have, without a care in the world. But money does exist- the federal government debt will lead to credit crunches, inflation, and eventually collapse of the world's economic system.
After public comment, Commissioner Shelly Taub brought up something that I will come back to later. Then the budget was submitted. Here is a story about that.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Liberalism is a Religion
Unlike liberals, whose main motivation seems to be to control other people, my main motivation is to understand other people, and thereby understand the world better. Several times in my blog I have wrote about my attempts to understand how liberals think, and my attempts are starting to converge.
In The Religion of the Democrats I wrote:
In The First Commandment I really noticed liberals religion:
Today my brother emailed me another piece of the puzzle. Albert Mohler, in this article, starts putting the pieces to the puzzle together after reading a piece by Howard P. Kainz, which reminds him of something that he had read earlier by J. Gresham Machen.
The radical idea (for 1920) is that evangelical Christianity and its liberal rival are, in reality, two very different religions. Oh, I realize that you might not believe that liberalism is a religion, but does it have dogmas? A group of writings that you have to read? People who 'know' the ideas better than others and are accepted speakers on any liberal subject? Observances or holidays that we have to celebrate? Parades or rallies? Do liberals get all frothy and upset when someone utters a heresy like "affirmative action is racist" or "global warming isn't real"? What does 'future man' look like to a liberal- going to heaven, or a heaven on Earth? Liberalism is a religion.
I want to caution you that I agree with the author- "not all liberals are committed to this religious vision of liberalism... conservatives may find common cause and common ground with these non-religiously committed liberals."
In order to make this world a better place, you should be aware that there are people out there that BELIEVE on faith alone that mankind must overcome 'religious superstition' by means of Reason, that empirical science can and will answer all the questions about the world, and that the human race, by invalidating and disregarding Christian traditions, can and will achieve perfectibility.
In The Religion of the Democrats I wrote:
The modern Democrat party feels that people are trapped in an unfair and unjust material world. In churches they blame a lot of people for this, and their anger and bitterness is felt quite clearly. They frequently point fingers at God himself, who unjustly and unfairly did this to certain groups and races... They frequently reject the traditional Christian teachings of God, and try to go over his head to find some greater power than him. To Democrats, there is some higher power yet than even God- The People, The World, The Globe- they call it by many names, but the idea is the same, that there is some remote and powerful being out there who is higher than God... Democrats today believe that man is good and that the world is evil- that man was a good and decent person but was ambushed and put in a nation or world where bad things occur. It isn’t man’s fault, it isn’t any groups fault- no one is at fault, since man is good. The fault lies with the world, which must be changed from its fallen state..."In Book Review: The Man Who Was Thursday I wrote:
...their ideas about economic suicide for no reason, their dislike of labeling things right and wrong, and their views on life and mark them as the modern Democratic Party. And at the center of the inner circle there is a man who speaks to applauding crowds and says pleasing phrases, but he is under no illusions, and his actions have terrible consequences for our great nation...In Stonehenge and the Descent into Barbarianism I noted that:
...As government becomes increasingly powerful in Europe and America and we move father away from our Founder's conservative views, more and more often we are seeing evidence of Western societies slide back to barbarianism, and this celebration by hippies, leftists, liberals, and pagans at Stonehenge is yet another example. Pagan religion is becoming increasingly popular and accepted in our society. I see it most in the numbers of people who openly and proudly proclaim that they are not Christian, and also are the most fervent and devout believers in man-made-caused-one-way-global-warming-solved-by-government-power. They now worship the Green God. Other people, in an effort to be fair and politically correct to everyone, have decided to worship every god, embracing a polytheistic view of the world, whereby they pray to whatever god they think will help them the most. Animal rights activists worship animals and many people worship men (like Obama)- paganism is on the rise, not decline, in our society...
In The First Commandment I really noticed liberals religion:
...In my view, this commandment is fairly easy to understand- believe in God, believe in his power, and worship him and no other gods. Not only that, one should also refuse to 'worship' other things- money, sex, success, beauty, status, etc. Also, this commandment further prohibits one from holding false beliefs about God- in other words, don't believe in a false or incorrect God... society increasingly promotes worship of a new God- Mother Earth. The increasingly worship of this God, increasingly at odds with the God of the Bible and Christians, is a shocking breach of the 1st Commandment... A moral society is a just one, and we are losing our morality- we are attacking our morality, and it all begins with worshipping of other gods...
Today my brother emailed me another piece of the puzzle. Albert Mohler, in this article, starts putting the pieces to the puzzle together after reading a piece by Howard P. Kainz, which reminds him of something that he had read earlier by J. Gresham Machen.
The radical idea (for 1920) is that evangelical Christianity and its liberal rival are, in reality, two very different religions. Oh, I realize that you might not believe that liberalism is a religion, but does it have dogmas? A group of writings that you have to read? People who 'know' the ideas better than others and are accepted speakers on any liberal subject? Observances or holidays that we have to celebrate? Parades or rallies? Do liberals get all frothy and upset when someone utters a heresy like "affirmative action is racist" or "global warming isn't real"? What does 'future man' look like to a liberal- going to heaven, or a heaven on Earth? Liberalism is a religion.
I want to caution you that I agree with the author- "not all liberals are committed to this religious vision of liberalism... conservatives may find common cause and common ground with these non-religiously committed liberals."
In order to make this world a better place, you should be aware that there are people out there that BELIEVE on faith alone that mankind must overcome 'religious superstition' by means of Reason, that empirical science can and will answer all the questions about the world, and that the human race, by invalidating and disregarding Christian traditions, can and will achieve perfectibility.
Sunday, July 12, 2009
Students Accept Majority Tyranny
Last week I was asked by a testing group out west to help grade some essays that students wrote. I apologize for not being too specific- I always fear for my future employment when I write posts like this. Thousands of students from the area took this test, which was designed to evaluate how well students understood how government worked in our society. These students all took either a semester or year-long course in government prior to taking this class, and all the students who took the test were either seniors or juniors in high school (17 or 18 years of age).
I personally graded over a thousand of these essays over several days of work. In doing so, I was able to read first hand what the students in our classrooms thought and believed, and what I read chilled me.
The test asked students to discuss the advantages of being in the majority party in Congress compared to being in minority party. The correct answers included being able to control the agenda, controlling debate, having the presiding officer, setting the rules for debate, and having their majority also reflected in committees. The majority party was put in place by citizens in free elections and should have these powers. In general, students were unable to identify a single advantage listed above, and the average score for these students was just above a zero. After years of school and a class on government, they knew almost nothing about government. But my point is not that the students are not being taught, because they are being taught. My point is what they are being taught.
According to most of the students (about 2/3rds), the advantage of being the majority party in Congress, like the Democrats are today, is that they can pass laws that favor themselves, they can vote to transfer money from the minority party's districts and supports to the majority party's districts and supporters, that being in the majority means they can pay themselves more money and the minority party less, that being in the majority means that they can tax anybody they want, and can do 'whatever they want.' The phrase 'the majority party can do whatever they want' was written on over half of the essays that were written.
Let me point out again that this test was about government and was taken by thousands of students- roughly about 200,000 high school students who had just taken a class on government. Let me point out again that since I graded a large number of these, my observations could be considered roughly within the realms of statistical accuracy.
The overwhelming thought that I left with was that students in our nation, the youth and future of our country, are totally okay and fine with majority tyranny. In their minds, there is nothing wrong with one party, just because it has more, putting in place laws and policies that favor their supporters over others. In my class, I pound majority rule with minority rights, and I talk about the problems of democracy and why we went with a republic, but most teachers, in fact almost all teachers, seem to be giving students the impression that minorities do not have rights and that our nation is a democracy.
The future of our nation is mentally and morally okay with a majority group enriching itself and advancing itself at the cost of the minority group.
The future of our nation does not understand government, history, or economics, based on this test, and for that matter writes poorly and reasons even worse. The Constitution is almost never mentioned and as far as students know, it might as well not even exist. But as our nation slides into uneducated, unsophisticated, unlearned, unreasoning idiots, they are becoming more okay with tyranny.
They are okay with the President doing 'whatever he wants,' students are okay with 'Congress doing whatever it wants,' and after months of government classes they are okay with the majority party 'doing whatever it wants.' This chills me, especially because right now, the Democrats are taking advantage of this 'crisis' to funnel billions to groups like ACORN that will work to keep them in a permanent majority. A Democrat permanent majority will do whatever it wants, will enrich itself at your expense, and will spread the wealth from you to other Democrats. Corruption and tyranny will increase, and America will be lost- and the future of our nation is okay with that.
Sometimes people question where I get my ideas on government from, and ask for 'evidence' that students are not learning what they need to learn in schools and instead are being indoctrinated with liberal left-wing propaganda. This is evidence. My own personal experiences after reading thousands of students own writings demonstrate it. I just hope you now believe me.
I personally graded over a thousand of these essays over several days of work. In doing so, I was able to read first hand what the students in our classrooms thought and believed, and what I read chilled me.
The test asked students to discuss the advantages of being in the majority party in Congress compared to being in minority party. The correct answers included being able to control the agenda, controlling debate, having the presiding officer, setting the rules for debate, and having their majority also reflected in committees. The majority party was put in place by citizens in free elections and should have these powers. In general, students were unable to identify a single advantage listed above, and the average score for these students was just above a zero. After years of school and a class on government, they knew almost nothing about government. But my point is not that the students are not being taught, because they are being taught. My point is what they are being taught.
According to most of the students (about 2/3rds), the advantage of being the majority party in Congress, like the Democrats are today, is that they can pass laws that favor themselves, they can vote to transfer money from the minority party's districts and supports to the majority party's districts and supporters, that being in the majority means they can pay themselves more money and the minority party less, that being in the majority means that they can tax anybody they want, and can do 'whatever they want.' The phrase 'the majority party can do whatever they want' was written on over half of the essays that were written.
Let me point out again that this test was about government and was taken by thousands of students- roughly about 200,000 high school students who had just taken a class on government. Let me point out again that since I graded a large number of these, my observations could be considered roughly within the realms of statistical accuracy.
The overwhelming thought that I left with was that students in our nation, the youth and future of our country, are totally okay and fine with majority tyranny. In their minds, there is nothing wrong with one party, just because it has more, putting in place laws and policies that favor their supporters over others. In my class, I pound majority rule with minority rights, and I talk about the problems of democracy and why we went with a republic, but most teachers, in fact almost all teachers, seem to be giving students the impression that minorities do not have rights and that our nation is a democracy.
The future of our nation is mentally and morally okay with a majority group enriching itself and advancing itself at the cost of the minority group.
The future of our nation does not understand government, history, or economics, based on this test, and for that matter writes poorly and reasons even worse. The Constitution is almost never mentioned and as far as students know, it might as well not even exist. But as our nation slides into uneducated, unsophisticated, unlearned, unreasoning idiots, they are becoming more okay with tyranny.
They are okay with the President doing 'whatever he wants,' students are okay with 'Congress doing whatever it wants,' and after months of government classes they are okay with the majority party 'doing whatever it wants.' This chills me, especially because right now, the Democrats are taking advantage of this 'crisis' to funnel billions to groups like ACORN that will work to keep them in a permanent majority. A Democrat permanent majority will do whatever it wants, will enrich itself at your expense, and will spread the wealth from you to other Democrats. Corruption and tyranny will increase, and America will be lost- and the future of our nation is okay with that.
Sometimes people question where I get my ideas on government from, and ask for 'evidence' that students are not learning what they need to learn in schools and instead are being indoctrinated with liberal left-wing propaganda. This is evidence. My own personal experiences after reading thousands of students own writings demonstrate it. I just hope you now believe me.
Friday, July 10, 2009
Students Lack of Historical Knowledge is an Outrage
When I was in high school, I was concerned about how much history students knew, so I created a test that I felt would measure historical knowledge. It probably wasn't scientific or perfect- I was a young kid with no training on developing tests- but it was 20 multiple-choice questions. Every student in the high school took this test- I gave it out at lunch with free candy that I bought. The results were startling- my fellow students knew very little about history. The average score was 20% correct- they only knew 1 in 5 answers.
Flash forward to today. I read an interesting story over at Education Watch International called "Trendy British teaching is 'producing a generation of history numbskulls'". Professor Derek Matthews, an economics lecturer at Cardiff University, was also curious about his students' historical knowledge that he decided to investigate by having them take a simple test- five simple questions on British history. Over three years, 284 students took the test- like me, a sample probably too small to count as scientific but providing enough data to draw a conclusion. And the conclusion Matthews drew was the same as mine- that another entire generation of teenagers know almost nothing about the history of Britain.
It's not that that students know little- they know next to nothing! When I asked who the United States fought in the War of 1812, only 20% knew. When Matthews asked who led the British to victory at the Battle of Waterloo, only 17% knew. When I asked who the British defeated at Waterloo, only 20% knew. When Matthews asked students to name a single British Prime Minister from 1800-1900, only 1 in 10 could. An entire generation of students in America and Britain do not know anything about the basics of their country's history.
But don't students have to take history classes in high school and in college? Yes, they do- every year they are taking some sort of history class. But what exactly are they learning in these classes? Open up your son or daughters history book and really look at what is in there. Massive amounts of information with no theme or purpose. Trendy topics. Long sections on women and minorities, small sections on battles and economics. Generic skill training, like how to read a map or read primary text, after which students can recall nothing from the map or the text. Yes, students take history classes, but they aren't learning history.
In a later report on the 'death' of school history teaching, Professor Matthews said levels of ignorance among the young were an 'outrage' that 'should be intolerable'. Should be intolerable- but aren't. These levels of ignorance are tolerated in our society- many feel that it isn't fair to punish a student and not let him or her graduate just because they don't know useless information about our past.
Society puts pressure on students to learn how to Twitter or design a Facebook page more so than learn what policies worked and didn't work. Students spend more time reading Harry Potter than reading a single word of literature written before they were alive. In students' minds, the world did not exist before they were born, contributing to an increasingly egotistical and self-centered society that votes for politicians who pretend to be The One.
So, what is the solution? I'd be happy to hear your thoughts- please email me how you think history could be better taught in our public schools. Next year I am teaching a couple sections of World History, and am looking for some ideas. I'll only be teaching them for a year or two, and then going back to all government classes. I'm thinking something revolutionary and daring- having the students spend time reading history from the textbook, discussing in class the 'holes' like battles, biographies, economics, and principles, and then discussing the lessons learned from it. A real focus on learning history, not simply flipping pages and doing reports on women and minorities. What do you think?
Flash forward to today. I read an interesting story over at Education Watch International called "Trendy British teaching is 'producing a generation of history numbskulls'". Professor Derek Matthews, an economics lecturer at Cardiff University, was also curious about his students' historical knowledge that he decided to investigate by having them take a simple test- five simple questions on British history. Over three years, 284 students took the test- like me, a sample probably too small to count as scientific but providing enough data to draw a conclusion. And the conclusion Matthews drew was the same as mine- that another entire generation of teenagers know almost nothing about the history of Britain.
It's not that that students know little- they know next to nothing! When I asked who the United States fought in the War of 1812, only 20% knew. When Matthews asked who led the British to victory at the Battle of Waterloo, only 17% knew. When I asked who the British defeated at Waterloo, only 20% knew. When Matthews asked students to name a single British Prime Minister from 1800-1900, only 1 in 10 could. An entire generation of students in America and Britain do not know anything about the basics of their country's history.
But don't students have to take history classes in high school and in college? Yes, they do- every year they are taking some sort of history class. But what exactly are they learning in these classes? Open up your son or daughters history book and really look at what is in there. Massive amounts of information with no theme or purpose. Trendy topics. Long sections on women and minorities, small sections on battles and economics. Generic skill training, like how to read a map or read primary text, after which students can recall nothing from the map or the text. Yes, students take history classes, but they aren't learning history.
In a later report on the 'death' of school history teaching, Professor Matthews said levels of ignorance among the young were an 'outrage' that 'should be intolerable'. Should be intolerable- but aren't. These levels of ignorance are tolerated in our society- many feel that it isn't fair to punish a student and not let him or her graduate just because they don't know useless information about our past.
Society puts pressure on students to learn how to Twitter or design a Facebook page more so than learn what policies worked and didn't work. Students spend more time reading Harry Potter than reading a single word of literature written before they were alive. In students' minds, the world did not exist before they were born, contributing to an increasingly egotistical and self-centered society that votes for politicians who pretend to be The One.
So, what is the solution? I'd be happy to hear your thoughts- please email me how you think history could be better taught in our public schools. Next year I am teaching a couple sections of World History, and am looking for some ideas. I'll only be teaching them for a year or two, and then going back to all government classes. I'm thinking something revolutionary and daring- having the students spend time reading history from the textbook, discussing in class the 'holes' like battles, biographies, economics, and principles, and then discussing the lessons learned from it. A real focus on learning history, not simply flipping pages and doing reports on women and minorities. What do you think?
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Government Thugs vs Bacon-Wrapped Hot Dog Vendors
Reason.tv has some interesting videos on its site. The one that I found the most fascinating is called "Food Fight." In this video, which is hosted by Drew Carey, we a battle between private businesses and government officials. In what is only to become more common with the passage of legislation giving more government power over controlling the health care and energy industries, the video shows how public officials paid for by citizen taxpayer dollars spend their time going around Los Angeles seizing bacon-wrapped hot dogs.
Yes, amid the hustle and bustle of downtown Los Angeles, there exists an underground world of illicit trade in bacon-wrapped hot dogs. The Department of Health has made it illegal to sell a hot dog wrapped in bacon, and if they catch any street vendors doing so, they will use their police powers to hassle these private businesses, shut them down, seize their goods, or even destroy their businesses. It is all seen on the video- there is actually camera footage of government thugs confiscating a food cart and dumping the bacon-wrapped hot dogs into the trash.
"Bacon is a potentially hazardous food,” says the LA County Health Department. Personally, I think a government that can throw a food vendor in the in the slammer for 45 days for selling bacon dogs is a bigger threat to our lives, liberty, and property. Which do you want- a dangerously powerful government or a street vendor who pays taxes and sells consumers products they want?
A government bureaucrat, supported by no data at all, feels personally that bacon-wrapped hot dogs are not safe, and put in a rule that makes it illegal to sell them. Apparently he feels he is the business of stopping people from doing what they want because he doesn't agree with it- sounds like more government officials in the business of tyranny.
Be prepared for more of this- is your home or business going to be up to the new Green Codes or the new Health Codes that government officials come up with every day? With Democrats in office, you really need to ask yourself- are you really living in a free country any more?
If you thought I was joking, you should have been paying more attention to the news- Government tightens food standards is only the beginning. Obama and the Democrats have just decreed that the bureucratic agencies that rule us now have more power over private businesses and can decide what temperature eggs must be kept at and who you are allowed to buy chickens from.
This new system for 'monitoring eggs' was coupled with 'other steps' gives federal monitors more authority and more force with which to respond when you break their rules. These new powers are designed to combat salmonella in eggs, but are only the first step- the Department of Agriculture is soon to be created similar powers to those who raise cows for meat and milk, and the FDA is developing ways to control those who grow tomatoes, melons and leafy greens.
Democrats, liberals, and Obama are only about one thing- controlling your life. Now they are even trying to control what you eat! Will the attacks on property, liberty, and life never end?
Yes, amid the hustle and bustle of downtown Los Angeles, there exists an underground world of illicit trade in bacon-wrapped hot dogs. The Department of Health has made it illegal to sell a hot dog wrapped in bacon, and if they catch any street vendors doing so, they will use their police powers to hassle these private businesses, shut them down, seize their goods, or even destroy their businesses. It is all seen on the video- there is actually camera footage of government thugs confiscating a food cart and dumping the bacon-wrapped hot dogs into the trash.
"Bacon is a potentially hazardous food,” says the LA County Health Department. Personally, I think a government that can throw a food vendor in the in the slammer for 45 days for selling bacon dogs is a bigger threat to our lives, liberty, and property. Which do you want- a dangerously powerful government or a street vendor who pays taxes and sells consumers products they want?
A government bureaucrat, supported by no data at all, feels personally that bacon-wrapped hot dogs are not safe, and put in a rule that makes it illegal to sell them. Apparently he feels he is the business of stopping people from doing what they want because he doesn't agree with it- sounds like more government officials in the business of tyranny.
Be prepared for more of this- is your home or business going to be up to the new Green Codes or the new Health Codes that government officials come up with every day? With Democrats in office, you really need to ask yourself- are you really living in a free country any more?
If you thought I was joking, you should have been paying more attention to the news- Government tightens food standards is only the beginning. Obama and the Democrats have just decreed that the bureucratic agencies that rule us now have more power over private businesses and can decide what temperature eggs must be kept at and who you are allowed to buy chickens from.
This new system for 'monitoring eggs' was coupled with 'other steps' gives federal monitors more authority and more force with which to respond when you break their rules. These new powers are designed to combat salmonella in eggs, but are only the first step- the Department of Agriculture is soon to be created similar powers to those who raise cows for meat and milk, and the FDA is developing ways to control those who grow tomatoes, melons and leafy greens.
Democrats, liberals, and Obama are only about one thing- controlling your life. Now they are even trying to control what you eat! Will the attacks on property, liberty, and life never end?
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Democrats Takes Time to Honor Michael Jackson
Democrats in Congress didn't bother reading the stimulus bill. Democrats in Congress didn't have time to read the anti-energy bill. Democrats in Congress don't have time to look at a single Republican initiative, amendment, or motion. And yet now Democrats have plenty of time to talk about Michael Jackson, even taking time out of a busy Congress session to give him a moment of silence. That is called misplaced priorities, and is exactly what you get when you elect Democrats to office.
Democrats in the House of Representatives were so dismissive about your concerns over the recently passed anti-energy bill that they stopped a discussion on it to take time out to each get on the floor and try to steal some of the attention caused by the death of a singer. Several Democrats stood up to say "look at me," continuing a policy of capitalizing on crisis' that Obama used to capture the White House last year.
The misplaced priorities don't just stop in the House. White House adviser David Axelrod on "Meet the Press" Sunday said President Obama has "written the family and shared his feelings with the family. He felt that was the appropriate way to go." One wonders how many fallen troops Obama has written- I read once that Lincoln wrote to the mother of every fallen solider in the Civil War.
Did Obama write Farah Fawcett's family or Ed McMahon? Why Michael Jackson? Because he is black? Does Obama decide who to offer condolences to based on the color of their skin? He likely never met Jackson or was inspired by him. Jackson was not an especially great humanitarian or patriot. Why does he get a letter from the President of the United States of America? Does he have nothing better to do, or is this the new government of the United States, getting involved in everything, even if it is not related to its business?
Elect Democrats or liberals to office, and this is what you get- misplaced priorities.
Democrats in the House of Representatives were so dismissive about your concerns over the recently passed anti-energy bill that they stopped a discussion on it to take time out to each get on the floor and try to steal some of the attention caused by the death of a singer. Several Democrats stood up to say "look at me," continuing a policy of capitalizing on crisis' that Obama used to capture the White House last year.
The misplaced priorities don't just stop in the House. White House adviser David Axelrod on "Meet the Press" Sunday said President Obama has "written the family and shared his feelings with the family. He felt that was the appropriate way to go." One wonders how many fallen troops Obama has written- I read once that Lincoln wrote to the mother of every fallen solider in the Civil War.
Did Obama write Farah Fawcett's family or Ed McMahon? Why Michael Jackson? Because he is black? Does Obama decide who to offer condolences to based on the color of their skin? He likely never met Jackson or was inspired by him. Jackson was not an especially great humanitarian or patriot. Why does he get a letter from the President of the United States of America? Does he have nothing better to do, or is this the new government of the United States, getting involved in everything, even if it is not related to its business?
Elect Democrats or liberals to office, and this is what you get- misplaced priorities.
Another Forgotten War- The Philippines
Via Big Hollywood, there is a great post by the yeoman Michael Yon, who is now in the Philippines being a great journalist and really writing the story of our times. When I teach my students about modern warfare, I make sure that I mention that the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan are part of a larger initiative to fight terrorism around the world, and so are not isolated to those countries.
It's not like the US invaded Iraq to conquer it, or overthrew the Taliban because we are a bad country- America is the good guy, the hero, the moral country, and is trying to bring order and civilization to the whole world so that the people of the world can enjoy the blessings of life, liberty, and the protection of property that we enjoy. It is a noble goal, although one you may not really feel comfortable with.
Because it is a large goal, it takes us around the world. There are operations in Somalia, operations in North Africa, and operations in the Philippines. The effort in the Philippines has gone largely unnoticed in the United States, but we do have a sizable force there and it is one of the main fronts in our global war on evil (lawlessness, killing of innocents, barbaric behaviors, piracy, banditry, etc).
If you want to really understand the conflict in the Philippines better, read Michael Yon's account of it here. It's good stuff.
It's not like the US invaded Iraq to conquer it, or overthrew the Taliban because we are a bad country- America is the good guy, the hero, the moral country, and is trying to bring order and civilization to the whole world so that the people of the world can enjoy the blessings of life, liberty, and the protection of property that we enjoy. It is a noble goal, although one you may not really feel comfortable with.
Because it is a large goal, it takes us around the world. There are operations in Somalia, operations in North Africa, and operations in the Philippines. The effort in the Philippines has gone largely unnoticed in the United States, but we do have a sizable force there and it is one of the main fronts in our global war on evil (lawlessness, killing of innocents, barbaric behaviors, piracy, banditry, etc).
If you want to really understand the conflict in the Philippines better, read Michael Yon's account of it here. It's good stuff.
Monday, July 6, 2009
Obama Lied! Obama Mislead Citizens! Stealing the Language of the Left
Democrats once screamed over and over the mantra that "Bush lied" and "Bush mislead" Americans to drag up illegally into the Iraq War. Democratic Senator Obama was one of the loudest to shrill this mantra, claiming over and over again that to get us to go to war in Iraq, Bush suppressed information that was contrary to his views, only published government reports that agreed with his agenda, and knowingly falsified information to bring us to war.
But one of the primary characteristics of a liberal is that they only care about power, and principles such as honesty and transparency only mean something when they feel those things can be used to gain more control over someone elses life. Now that Democrat Obama is in charge of the White House, information is suppressed, political pressure is brought to bear to make sure that government reports only say what Obama wants them to say, and information is knowingly and actively falsified in order to pass legislation.
And the media and the liberals are silent. They were so vocal about lying and misleading during the Bush years, when President Bush killed terrorists and brought democracy and freedom to the Iraqi people. In retrospect, some of the information he used to bring us to war was not the most accurate, but most likely that was caused by mistakes, bad assumptions, and groupthink. That's a little bit different than a deliberate and purposeful attempt to mislead people using information that you know is false, or suppressing information that clearly contradicts your views, or putting political pressure from the White House of government agencies to ignore all those who speak out against its agenda. One is mistaken- the other is criminal.
Although Obama has only been in power of the US state for a short time, he and his minions are already applying pressure to produce government reports that fit their agenda, suppress those that disagree, and falsify information. For example, the EPA apparently dismissed an analyst’s report questioning the science behind global warming.
So liberals and Democrats, start up your shrill cries again- "Obama lied!" "Obama mislead!" The following are adaptions from from various "Bush lied" websites (here, here, here, here)- only the names and subjects have been changed, the language and structure remains the same. Surprisingly, changing 'Bush' to 'Obama' and 'war in Iraq' to 'global warming' is all I really have to do to use the language of the left against itself. Feel free to use these phrases whenever you want:
But one of the primary characteristics of a liberal is that they only care about power, and principles such as honesty and transparency only mean something when they feel those things can be used to gain more control over someone elses life. Now that Democrat Obama is in charge of the White House, information is suppressed, political pressure is brought to bear to make sure that government reports only say what Obama wants them to say, and information is knowingly and actively falsified in order to pass legislation.
And the media and the liberals are silent. They were so vocal about lying and misleading during the Bush years, when President Bush killed terrorists and brought democracy and freedom to the Iraqi people. In retrospect, some of the information he used to bring us to war was not the most accurate, but most likely that was caused by mistakes, bad assumptions, and groupthink. That's a little bit different than a deliberate and purposeful attempt to mislead people using information that you know is false, or suppressing information that clearly contradicts your views, or putting political pressure from the White House of government agencies to ignore all those who speak out against its agenda. One is mistaken- the other is criminal.
Although Obama has only been in power of the US state for a short time, he and his minions are already applying pressure to produce government reports that fit their agenda, suppress those that disagree, and falsify information. For example, the EPA apparently dismissed an analyst’s report questioning the science behind global warming.
So liberals and Democrats, start up your shrill cries again- "Obama lied!" "Obama mislead!" The following are adaptions from from various "Bush lied" websites (here, here, here, here)- only the names and subjects have been changed, the language and structure remains the same. Surprisingly, changing 'Bush' to 'Obama' and 'war in Iraq' to 'global warming' is all I really have to do to use the language of the left against itself. Feel free to use these phrases whenever you want:
- "Obama led people to believe that global warming is real by repeatedly linking talking about it in his speeches. This is so effective that many Americans actually believed some sort of climate change bill is needed."
- "Obama has stated that Congress had access to all the same information that the White House had. Thus he should not be blamed for passing the Cap and Trade legislation. But Obama was briefed many times about the falsehood of various stories and this information never reached Congress."
- "This global warming bill is intended to mark the official emergence of the United States as a full-fledged global climate czar, seizing sole responsibility and authority as planetary policeman. It would be the culmination of a plan 10 years or more in the making, carried out by those who believe the United States must seize the opportunity for global domination, even if it means becoming the "American imperialists" that our enemies always claimed we were."
- "Obama still insists that there is a "relationship" between human activity and the entire planet warming up. But several groups have released reports saying, among other things, that there is no "collaborative relationship" between human activity and global warming."
- "Americans who are fundamentally misinformed about global warming provide the bulk of those questioned in polls which show support for Obama and the global warming bill. Subtract them from polls and Obama is an unpopular president -- widely seen as having accomplished a bait and switch, redirecting U.S. anger and vengeance toward an issue that does not interest us."
- "Obama issued statements which 'were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to pass the cap and trade bill under decidedly false pretenses.'"
- "Obama has a habit of just making shit up when it suits his needs. Just look at his selling of his cap and trade legislation. Lies, lies and lies. But while I consider these lies the worst of the lot, the health care lies may be the one that causes the most damage. Some background: the Obama Administration wants to sell its socialized medicine plan to a wary nation. The budget was already out of control, and Democrats notice that the people are wary of creating new government entitlements. Obama needs their votes. So he lies to them."
On Sarah Palin's Annoucement
By now, I am sure you have heard the news, and if you would like volumes of analysis, other bloggers have put it together- I'd start with The Anchoress. But my favorite take on on Republican Governor Sarah Palin's resignation announcement is from Mark Steyn over at the Corner at National Review:
Is it a bad thing that Palin is a normal person? Is it something to deride her about- that she choose her family and state over her political career? Is it something to mock, that she cares and feels? A lot of you in your hearts are upset because you want her to be The One- but we already have a One, and it isn't Obama, it is God, and people really shouldn't think of themselves or pretend to be The One because that's not a good path in life.
Sarah Palin might have ended her political career, and she might not have, but it is her decision, and we should all respect it. Romney/Palin 2012.
Think about it- if you were to be called to serve your community or state, and then the media and the liberal lawyers and other politicians turned on you and your family as viciously as they have on Palin, and you were spending most of your time defending yourself rather than doing your job, and no matter how good a job you still managed to do the savage attacks only continued, how long would you last?So Occam's Razor leaves us with: Who needs this?
In states far from the national spotlight, politics still attracts normal people. You're a mayor or a state senator or even the governor, but you lead a normal life. The local media are tough on you, but they know you, they live where you live, they're tough on the real you, not on some caricature cooked up by a malign alliance of late-night comics who'd never heard of you a week earlier and media grandees supposedly on your own side who pronounce you a "cancer."
Then suddenly you get the call from Washington. You know it'll mean Secret Service, and speechwriters, and minders vetting your wardrobe. But nobody said it would mean a mainstream network comedy host doing statutory rape gags about your 14-year old daughter. You've got a special-needs kid and a son in Iraq and a daughter who's given you your first grandchild in less than ideal circumstances. That would be enough for most of us. But the special-needs kid and the daughter and most everyone else you love are a national joke, and the PC enforcers are entirely cool with it.
Most of those who sneer at Sarah Palin have no desire to live her life. But why not try to — what's the word? — "empathize"? If you like Wasilla and hunting and snowmachining and moose stew and politics, is the last worth giving up everything else in the hopes that one day David Letterman and Maureen Dowd might decide Trig and Bristol and the rest are sufficiently non-risible to enable you to prosper in their world? And, putting aside the odds, would you really like to be the person you'd have to turn into under that scenario?
National office will dwindle down to the unhealthily singleminded (Clinton, Obama), the timeserving emirs of Incumbistan (Biden, McCain), and dynastic heirs (Bush). Our loss.
Is it a bad thing that Palin is a normal person? Is it something to deride her about- that she choose her family and state over her political career? Is it something to mock, that she cares and feels? A lot of you in your hearts are upset because you want her to be The One- but we already have a One, and it isn't Obama, it is God, and people really shouldn't think of themselves or pretend to be The One because that's not a good path in life.
Sarah Palin might have ended her political career, and she might not have, but it is her decision, and we should all respect it. Romney/Palin 2012.
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Independence Day 2009
As a good patriot, today I am celebrating the 4th of July like every American should- displaying my patriotism with flags and fireworks, improving my property by mowing my lawn and trimming the bushes, enhancing the quality of my life by eating great food and spending time with my family, and remembering my liberty by re-reading our founding documents. If you haven't done so already, make sure you take a minute of your time today to reflect and read the Declaration of Independence, and don't feel silly about reading it before the BBQ or as the bedtime story for your kids tonight.
In particular, read and think about the first part of it:
Those ideas needed to be fought for back in 1776- but they still need to be fought for today. Our liberties have been rationalized away by our leaders. Our legislators spend us into servitude and seize our own property to do so. The 2nd Amendment needed a controversial U.S. Supreme Court decision just be be affirmed.. Our courts regularly mock the Constitution and believe it to be a dead thing.
In particular, read and think about the first part of it:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it...Those lines mean something, to me, conservatives, Republicans, and America, and we should always remember how revolutionary those ideas are, how incredible it is to actually believe them, and how much of a leap of faith you must make to follow them.
Those ideas needed to be fought for back in 1776- but they still need to be fought for today. Our liberties have been rationalized away by our leaders. Our legislators spend us into servitude and seize our own property to do so. The 2nd Amendment needed a controversial U.S. Supreme Court decision just be be affirmed.. Our courts regularly mock the Constitution and believe it to be a dead thing.
You and I will always been free and independent- no government can take that away from us- but every day, our free and independent condition is lessened- with each new dollar taken from us, with each new exception to our rights made, with each life lessened, as a nation we dishonor our Founding Fathers and what they fought for.
So on this Independence Day, rededicate yourself to our founding ideas.
Thursday, July 2, 2009
The Religion of the Democrats
For months, my two brothers and I have been discussing the connections in our modern political system between church and state- that is, between religion and politics. We reject the false theory that religion and politics should be separated, because it is not possible. A person’s views on God, the nature of God, and the teachings of God do affect their political views- nay, those are the basis of a person’s political views. A person’s religion will form the foundation on which that person builds their political theories, and thus it is very important to consider what religious beliefs important political figures has.
This is not to say that one should vote based on religion- I’m not advocating identity politics or discrimination in any way. And this is not to say that the State should establish a particular religion as the only recognized religion- this is not the role of government and lessens liberty. But it is important to know what major political figures believe about the world so that you can better understand how they will use policy and power to shape the world.
One way of looking at the world is advocated by our current President, Democrat Barack Obama, and he has many others who share his worldview, such as Democrat leaders Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Through their statements and policy proposals, they have revealed how they view the nature of the universe.
Generally speaking, the modern Democrat party feels that people are trapped in an unfair and unjust material world. In churches they blame a lot of people for this, and their anger and bitterness is felt quite clearly. They frequently point fingers at God himself, who unjustly and unfairly did this to certain groups and races.
This does not mean that Democrats reject God, although there are a lot of agnostic and atheists in this party today. Rather, they frequently reject the traditional Christian teachings of God, and try to go over his head to find some greater power than him. To Democrats, there is some higher power yet than even God- The People, The World, The Globe- they call it by many names, but the idea is the same, that there is some remote and powerful being out there who is higher than God.
Democrats today believe that man is good and that the world is evil- that man was a good and decent person but was ambushed and put in a nation or world where bad things occur. It isn’t man’s fault, it isn’t any groups fault- no one is at fault, since man is good. The fault lies with the world, which must be changed from its fallen state.
The chief way for a person to change this fallen world and once again hope of being divine is by believing in these facts and by more fully understanding how great humans are. Obama’s speeches are filled with platitudes and phrases about how he knows that people are good, about how he feels that people are great, and that if only they would follow his ideas, then we could overcome this fallen world and be great ourselves.
The key to Obama’s speeches are that knowledge and understanding and empathy are the central factor in this process of restoration. And I’m not talking about knowledge as in an understanding of policy, book learning in economics, experience in certain industries, etc- I’m talking about esoteric experiences of direct participation with the divine.
It is more important for Obama to appoint Czars of various industries who feel what he feels, who have empathy like he has empathy, and who know what he knows, rather than appoint czars from within particular industries. It is more important that they are acquainted with Obama than they have real knowledge of subject matters. It is more important that they be inward 'knowing' people or people on journeys of self-exploration than be people who have common sense and are average people.
The idea is that the disorder and badness of the world can be overcome by dreaming and believing, and above all, by trusting the leadership of Obama and his guidance of this journey, because he is.
A lot of time it feels as if Democrats today are alienated from the world- Obama holds himself as aloof, above the world, and it is not uncommon for Democrats to insist that they be called by fancy titles that make them higher than the rest of us. They don’t feel connected with us, especially those of us in the heartland of the nation, those of us who are laughed at for clinging to our guns, gods, and goods.
This is not all speculative stuff- there is a policy impact of this. Obama and the Democrats, acting on these beliefs, seek to implement and or create a policy to actualize their speculations- to create a sort of heaven on earth. Now is the time, the one point in human history, these Democrats claim, when the kingdom of God can be replaced with the kingdom of man.
For example, some Democrats believe that we can establish the perfect healthcare system once selected bureaucrats, who have special knowledge, take control and overturn the natural forces of capitalism. Or that the perfect education system can be established if only it is run by chosen government official, who will overcome the natural forces of man and make us better people.
Democrats are now marked by a desire to dominate others, as seen by the Cap and Trade bill, because it is they who has The Vision. They Know, and they laugh at others who pretend to know things, because they Know that they don’t. As a result, there is very little regard for the welfare of those who are harmed by the resulting politics, which ranges from coercive to calamitous.
Hopefully, this little essay helps you to understand the beliefs behind Obama, Pelosi, and the Democrat Party today, and in the future you will not wonder why they do the things that they do. Their political policies are indeed affected by their religious views, and in understanding their religious views better, you will better understand their political views.
This is not to say that one should vote based on religion- I’m not advocating identity politics or discrimination in any way. And this is not to say that the State should establish a particular religion as the only recognized religion- this is not the role of government and lessens liberty. But it is important to know what major political figures believe about the world so that you can better understand how they will use policy and power to shape the world.
One way of looking at the world is advocated by our current President, Democrat Barack Obama, and he has many others who share his worldview, such as Democrat leaders Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Through their statements and policy proposals, they have revealed how they view the nature of the universe.
Generally speaking, the modern Democrat party feels that people are trapped in an unfair and unjust material world. In churches they blame a lot of people for this, and their anger and bitterness is felt quite clearly. They frequently point fingers at God himself, who unjustly and unfairly did this to certain groups and races.
This does not mean that Democrats reject God, although there are a lot of agnostic and atheists in this party today. Rather, they frequently reject the traditional Christian teachings of God, and try to go over his head to find some greater power than him. To Democrats, there is some higher power yet than even God- The People, The World, The Globe- they call it by many names, but the idea is the same, that there is some remote and powerful being out there who is higher than God.
Democrats today believe that man is good and that the world is evil- that man was a good and decent person but was ambushed and put in a nation or world where bad things occur. It isn’t man’s fault, it isn’t any groups fault- no one is at fault, since man is good. The fault lies with the world, which must be changed from its fallen state.
The chief way for a person to change this fallen world and once again hope of being divine is by believing in these facts and by more fully understanding how great humans are. Obama’s speeches are filled with platitudes and phrases about how he knows that people are good, about how he feels that people are great, and that if only they would follow his ideas, then we could overcome this fallen world and be great ourselves.
The key to Obama’s speeches are that knowledge and understanding and empathy are the central factor in this process of restoration. And I’m not talking about knowledge as in an understanding of policy, book learning in economics, experience in certain industries, etc- I’m talking about esoteric experiences of direct participation with the divine.
It is more important for Obama to appoint Czars of various industries who feel what he feels, who have empathy like he has empathy, and who know what he knows, rather than appoint czars from within particular industries. It is more important that they are acquainted with Obama than they have real knowledge of subject matters. It is more important that they be inward 'knowing' people or people on journeys of self-exploration than be people who have common sense and are average people.
The idea is that the disorder and badness of the world can be overcome by dreaming and believing, and above all, by trusting the leadership of Obama and his guidance of this journey, because he is.
A lot of time it feels as if Democrats today are alienated from the world- Obama holds himself as aloof, above the world, and it is not uncommon for Democrats to insist that they be called by fancy titles that make them higher than the rest of us. They don’t feel connected with us, especially those of us in the heartland of the nation, those of us who are laughed at for clinging to our guns, gods, and goods.
This is not all speculative stuff- there is a policy impact of this. Obama and the Democrats, acting on these beliefs, seek to implement and or create a policy to actualize their speculations- to create a sort of heaven on earth. Now is the time, the one point in human history, these Democrats claim, when the kingdom of God can be replaced with the kingdom of man.
For example, some Democrats believe that we can establish the perfect healthcare system once selected bureaucrats, who have special knowledge, take control and overturn the natural forces of capitalism. Or that the perfect education system can be established if only it is run by chosen government official, who will overcome the natural forces of man and make us better people.
Democrats are now marked by a desire to dominate others, as seen by the Cap and Trade bill, because it is they who has The Vision. They Know, and they laugh at others who pretend to know things, because they Know that they don’t. As a result, there is very little regard for the welfare of those who are harmed by the resulting politics, which ranges from coercive to calamitous.
Hopefully, this little essay helps you to understand the beliefs behind Obama, Pelosi, and the Democrat Party today, and in the future you will not wonder why they do the things that they do. Their political policies are indeed affected by their religious views, and in understanding their religious views better, you will better understand their political views.
JibJab: Obama as a Superhero
Best part is at the end when Obama fights terrorists. Best line is "he will fuel your car with nuts and corn." Very funny. Thanks to Life with Mr. O for pointing this out.
If you are in the mood to enjoy more pointless videos, I did come across this one over at theblogprof. It is probably the best tennis match I ever saw. Keep your eye on the bouncing balls.
If you are in the mood to enjoy more pointless videos, I did come across this one over at theblogprof. It is probably the best tennis match I ever saw. Keep your eye on the bouncing balls.
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Sarah Palin: A Runner
This post is kind of a fluff piece, but after all the serious posts lately (Obama on Honduras: More Evidence of a Bad President, Obama Says 'Just Die Already', Retailers Head for Exits in Detroit, Visiting the 'Model' High School), I wanted to post this. And I wanted to post the picture that went with it.
Did you know that Sarah Palin is a runner? I'm pretty sure you knew that Obama was a professional basketball player- magazine and newspapers covered that over and over, even though astute observers remarked that he actually plays basketball as much as I play hockey (a couple times a year). Seriously, a real athlete, someone who doesn't just pretend to be one, is former Republican Vice-President candidate and current Governor of the State of Alaska, Sarah Palin.
Sarah Palin was recently interviewed by Runners World. There is some good stuff there. I like this quote from her "Sweat is my sanity." Or this one "Running with [1-year-old son] Trig in the baby jogger is nice since I don't have to say anything. He likes to hear me sing." Her answer to 'What did your parents teach you about running?' is a solid "Th
ey taught me self-discipline and goal setting." This is revealing- "Sometimes you've got to call upon your rock to get through the tough times... (my rock is) my faith in God."
This is yet another point in her favor: When asked 'Do you listen to music during your runs?' her reply was " kick off my runs with the old Van Halen and AC/DC, then I get into my country music, then I always wrap it up with a couple of mellow Amy Grant songs."
Whatever you think about Sarah Palin's policy positions, one has to admit that she is a good person. She is decent, honest, respectful, honest, sweet, nice, cool, and a real person. She does not pretend to be better than me, which is good, because all men are created equal, and she isn't.
Enjoy the picture that went along with the story!
Did you know that Sarah Palin is a runner? I'm pretty sure you knew that Obama was a professional basketball player- magazine and newspapers covered that over and over, even though astute observers remarked that he actually plays basketball as much as I play hockey (a couple times a year). Seriously, a real athlete, someone who doesn't just pretend to be one, is former Republican Vice-President candidate and current Governor of the State of Alaska, Sarah Palin.
Sarah Palin was recently interviewed by Runners World. There is some good stuff there. I like this quote from her "Sweat is my sanity." Or this one "Running with [1-year-old son] Trig in the baby jogger is nice since I don't have to say anything. He likes to hear me sing." Her answer to 'What did your parents teach you about running?' is a solid "Th
ey taught me self-discipline and goal setting." This is revealing- "Sometimes you've got to call upon your rock to get through the tough times... (my rock is) my faith in God."This is yet another point in her favor: When asked 'Do you listen to music during your runs?' her reply was " kick off my runs with the old Van Halen and AC/DC, then I get into my country music, then I always wrap it up with a couple of mellow Amy Grant songs."
Whatever you think about Sarah Palin's policy positions, one has to admit that she is a good person. She is decent, honest, respectful, honest, sweet, nice, cool, and a real person. She does not pretend to be better than me, which is good, because all men are created equal, and she isn't.
Enjoy the picture that went along with the story!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)