It’s reported that Mr. Obama is once again calling for a “National Police Force”, intended apparently to provide federal augmentation to the local Gendarmes nationwide, and naturally to provide “security” within our borders. During the late presidential campaign, Mr. Obama claimed that “We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.” Something might occur within the United States that the US ARMY with a million or so soldiers can’t handle!? That I find very hard to believe! And now we need a civilian police type “security force” armed with machine guns, tanks, and attack helicopters!? And all this time I thought that having Police SWAT teams and FBI snipers was quite bad enough.
My first thought was why can’t the Army handle things? After all, the Posse Comitatis Act was passed in 1878 and was intended to severely limit the federal government in using the military for law enforcement. But, recent bills passed by our Congress allow the armed forces to be used under the revised “Insurrection Act”, to “restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or other such condition occurs in the United States, or when the President determines that domestic violence has occurred, where the legal authorities of that State are unable to maintain public order, or to suppress any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy. Also, if such a condition hinders the execution of the laws of a State, or if a State opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States.”
Then there are an entire series of “Executive Orders” authorized in times of “increased international tension, economic crisis, and/or financial crisis”, to “institute industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to establish control over the mechanisms of production, distribution, energy sources, wages, salaries, credit, and the flow of money”. “Homeland Security Presidential Directive HSPD-20”, signed by President Bush, claims the power to execute procedures for continuity of the federal government in the event of a "catastrophic emergency", construed as "any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions." Naturally most of these presidential directives and executive orders are classified, so we really have no idea of what they say the president can or can’t do, and at present even interested congressmen are denied access to them. But an unclassified portion of one directive claims that the president has the power to declare a catastrophic emergency, but does not specify who has the power to declare the emergency over. The signing of these directives were not covered by the media, or discussed by Congress, which has, according to the National Emergencies Act passed in 1976, oversight of presidential emergency powers. On October 1, 2002 the United States Army established it’s “Northern Command”, to provide command and control of Department of Defense homeland defense mission, and to coordinate the DoD support of civil authorities. Again, the Army is supposed to handle whatever situation, not some sort of presidential Preatorian Guard. What’s interesting here is that Congress has over the years delegated much of it’s authority to the office of the president, with no oversite or “checks and balances” in place, and I have yet to see anything in the Constitution allowing them to do that! It sounds to me as if the White House has pretty well covered everything needed to seize total control of this country and everyone in it, and yet Mr. Obama is now calling for additional federal forces!?
So what are we to think of this “National Police” organization? Perhaps we’re to have our very own Secret Police? Secret police (sometimes called political police) are defined as a government agency which operates in secrecy against internal threats to the state. Such police forces are nearly always associated with totalitarian regimes where they’re used to maintain the “president for life” in political power, and are quite often used to uphold the dictator’s orders by operating above and beyond duly established law. “Secret police” are accountable only to the executive branch, with their operations hidden from the public and most government officials, and are used as instruments of political repression. And we might remember that, after the Ruby Ridge and Waco Texas incidents, and along with the clandestine records keeping and electronic eavesdropping going on, the FBI is considered by many people to be a secret police agency in it’s own right.
Probably the best known secret police organization was the Geheime Staatspolizei (Secret State Police, abbreviated “Gestapo”) organized by the Nazis in 1933. The Gestapo, through its power of arrest and confinement without recourse to law, was the principal means for eliminating any enemies of the Nazi regime. They operated without any restriction by civil authority, which meant that its members could not be tried for any crimes committed in the course of their “police” activities. Under the law, the only appeal of the accused was to the next higher authority within the Gestapo itself. They were given the responsibility of administering the concentration camps, wherein the arrest and commitment to the camps was usually because the person “endangered, by his attitude the existence and security of the people and the State”. This included offenses like "working against the Greater German Reich with an illegal resistance organization," "being a Jew," "suspected of working for the detriment of the Reich," "being strongly suspected of aiding desertion," "because as a relative of a deserter he is expected to take advantage of every occasion to harm the German Reich," "refusal to work," "sexual intercourse with a Pole," "religious propaganda," "working against the Reich," "loafing on the job," or "defeatist statements." Concentration Camps huh… Well, at least we don’t have to worry about that… or do we?
While the stories are impossible to properly confirm or deny, reports abound that a number of internment camps have been established, and are ready to detain citizens if mass insurrections occur. These reports come from a wide range of sources, both from the far right, and even from members of the US Congress! Rep. Paul Broun (R-Ga.) declared that the government “might use a pandemic disease or national disaster as an excuse to declare martial law.” (I’ve noticed that the government is threatening us with a Swine Flu epidemic this fall…) In his September 2008 newsletter, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.) stated “Even though we know that detention facilities are already in place, [the government] now wants to legalize the construction of FEMA camps on military installations using the ever-popular excuse that the facilities are for the purposes of a national emergency.” Legislation introduced by Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-Fl.) would have the DHS establishing at least half a dozen national emergency centers for large-scale imprisonment of American citizens on military installations in a Guantanamo-style setting… after martial law is declared. To counteract these charges, some claim the “renovated military bases” will simply be used to hold illegal aliens. The Idaho Observer recently reported that “… it was revealed that Halliburton subsidiary, Kellogg, Brown & Root (KBR), had received a $385 million contract to build detention facilities ‘for an emergency influx of immigrants.’” Halliburton? It figures.Claiming that these camps are to hold illegal immigrants doesn’t make much sense either, considering that the government is so “undocumented immigrant” friendly. More likely detainees would be tax protesters and those deemed “extremists” and “enemies of the state” by the recent DHS report about “homegrown right-wing terrorists.” I’ve personally seen the rather disturbing U.S. Army advertisement recruiting soldiers who might be interested in becoming ‘internment / resettlement’ specialists. The job description is “Internment/Resettlement (I/R) specialists in the Army are primarily responsible for day-to-day operations in a military confinement/correctional facility or detention/internment facility.” That’s normally not a military job that needs much recruiting, as there isn’t much call for those troops, and the position is usually filled by regular Military Police personnel. With that, I’ve also seen pictures of what are reported to be the prison railcars, again built by Halliburton, to be used to transport “detainees” to the camps.
Is all this for real, or is it nothing more than another panicky conspiracy theory? Personally I don’t know, and I guess I won’t know until it happens. But remember, the US Government has a history of illegally imprisoning dissidents that goes clear back to 1836, and Mr. Obama did quite plainly tell us that he planned to “Change America”. He just didn’t say what he and the far left intend to change us to… And remember that government, no matter how well intentioned it may claim to be, is inherently the enemy of freedom.
A lot of European Jews disbelieved the rumors of Nazi evils, right up to the point they were being herded into the gas chambers.
Monday, September 21, 2009
Pride
Somewhere along the line, the idea of going to Congress to serve the country for a couple of terms has changed into going off to Congress as self serving long term career politicians. With that, politics have become increasingly polarized into left and right; conservative and liberal; with only a few middle of the road politicians representing those who see themselves as moderates. Fortunately, there are sometimes a few notable exceptions to this general rule. However, far too many recent members of Congress fall into the category of "gutless wonders", and it’s totally amazing to me that these clowns can keep getting re-elected! From what I’ve seen and read lately, there is less respect for members of Congress today than there is for lawyers or used car salesmen, because of their embarrassing antics, chronic misbehavior, elitist attitudes, and constant bowing down to what has become an imperial presidency! Still, with a little effort Congress could restore the Republic and accomplish just about anything else it set its mind to. But here the question is, will Congress ever again work as a unified political body rather than as a mob of self centered special interest supporters? After all, our political system is supposed to be about what is best for America and American citizens, and not necessarily what’s best for illegal aliens, petty South American dictators, or perhaps even Toyota!
I also find it quite disturbing that we don't seem to be making anything in North America anymore. A quick check through nearly any store will reveal that most of the products for sale are cheap made-in-China junk that self-destructs within a few weeks of purchase. Even NASA buys rocket engines from Russia, the Air Force buys tanker planes from Europe, the Marines buy armored vehicles from Canada, and the Army buys machine guns from Belgium. “Cash for Clunkers” saw a big boost in auto sales… for Toyota and Nissan. Our Electronics come from Asia, as do most of our clothes. American auto parts are… made in Mexico. Buy a steak at the grocery store, and chances are that the beef came from Argentina or Australia! There was a time when we had confidence in our society and our beliefs, which was reflected in our institutions, our manufacturing, and in our inventiveness. We were confident, strong, proud, mostly self supporting, and not afraid to say so. Yet today it seems we are ashamed of ourselves, and want to apologize to the world for who we are and what we have accomplished (I won't mention any names here), which amounts to little more that national suicide! One quite important reason to produce our own products is called "NATIONAL SECURITY", the antithesis of globalization. Sure, we have the knowledge and technical skills to do most anything, but where is the manufacturing capability? When our leadership comes back to the realities of national pride, strong borders, take no crap - give no excuses, protect our citizens, and live by the "Walk Softly and Carry A Big Stick" attitude we will be much safer as a nation. Why is it that we have the resources and the know-how to be almost completely self-sufficient, yet we steadily send our jobs and our money overseas… and import their oil? Our armed forces are ready, willing, and able to defend this nation, yet it appears that our government can’t get its national defense act together no matter what… why is that? What caused this rapid deterioration in the American national character?
There was a time when we were all “Americans”, primarily of European Celtic-Germanic-Norse stock, and that did included a hefty mix of other “races” as well. But today, with rampant illegal immigration, and of course the loony left’s politically correct “diversity”, we’ve happily become a hodge-podge of African-Americans, Mexican-Americans, Asian-Americans, Arabic-Americans, and lord only knows what else. All these hyphenated groups cling to their perceived “national identity” complete with language, social mores, mode of dress, national allegiance, and even their criminal gangs! America, and the few “American-Americans” remaining, are rapidly becoming a shrinking minority! It appears we have a poison flowing through our national character and our politics. We not only disagree with each other more than ever, but have almost come to detest one another. Politically, culturally, racially, we seem ever ready to go for each others' throats. Pat Buchanan recently asked “In what sense are we one nation and one people anymore? For what is a nation if not a people of a common ancestry, faith, culture and language, who worship the same God, revere the same heroes, cherish the same history, celebrate the same holidays, and share the same music, poetry, art and literature?” Well, Christmas and Easter once united Americans in a common celebration. Now we fight over whether they should even be mentioned in our public schools! We used to share classical, pop, country & Western and jazz music, now we have varieties tailored to specific generations, races and ethnic groups. One part of America loves her history, another reviles it as racist, imperialist and genocidal. Our old heroes like Columbus, George Washington, and Stonewall Jackson are being replaced by Che Guevara, Dr. King and Cesar Chavez. The American Left has pretty well rewritten our history books, and they are now loaded with PC garbage that makes the Founding Fathers into greedy racist slaveholders, the pioneers into a rapacious mob of outlaws and gunfighters, and of course FDR’s welfare state is turned into our ultimate social triumph. From the Puritans to the Clinton administration, everything is “explained” from a far left view, irregardless of the truth.
In quotes from letters written by fourth-graders in 1976, predicting life in the 'year 2000', there are many of the old images of life in the future as envisioned in that era. But one little girl's thoughts are evidence that the leftist propaganda was being drummed into children's brains fairly successfully by 1976. She wrote “The government will pay every person as much as they want without them having to work.” Another thought is that these children would now be in their mid-40’s. I wonder if they still believe in the government paying every person as much as they want without them working'? If they’re Democrats, I doubt they’ve changed their thinking since the fourth grade.
Are our present difficulties a result of our loss of confidence and optimism, or was it just the constant liberal cries of 'waste!' that caused us to lose interest in the future? Or perhaps the liberals among us feel guilty because we excelled at just about everything we set our hand to, and thus caused the rest of the world to feel envious and resentful? As our social spending increased throughout the seventies and afterward, one wonders what might have been, had we not been pressured into a ''war on poverty''. In retrospect, did all that spending help ''pull people up from poverty'' as promised, or result only in the demand for even more handouts? Meanwhile the kids of the 70s are now middleaged, and having been spoon-fed that leftist pap since birth, is it any wonder we've come to where we are now?
I also find it quite disturbing that we don't seem to be making anything in North America anymore. A quick check through nearly any store will reveal that most of the products for sale are cheap made-in-China junk that self-destructs within a few weeks of purchase. Even NASA buys rocket engines from Russia, the Air Force buys tanker planes from Europe, the Marines buy armored vehicles from Canada, and the Army buys machine guns from Belgium. “Cash for Clunkers” saw a big boost in auto sales… for Toyota and Nissan. Our Electronics come from Asia, as do most of our clothes. American auto parts are… made in Mexico. Buy a steak at the grocery store, and chances are that the beef came from Argentina or Australia! There was a time when we had confidence in our society and our beliefs, which was reflected in our institutions, our manufacturing, and in our inventiveness. We were confident, strong, proud, mostly self supporting, and not afraid to say so. Yet today it seems we are ashamed of ourselves, and want to apologize to the world for who we are and what we have accomplished (I won't mention any names here), which amounts to little more that national suicide! One quite important reason to produce our own products is called "NATIONAL SECURITY", the antithesis of globalization. Sure, we have the knowledge and technical skills to do most anything, but where is the manufacturing capability? When our leadership comes back to the realities of national pride, strong borders, take no crap - give no excuses, protect our citizens, and live by the "Walk Softly and Carry A Big Stick" attitude we will be much safer as a nation. Why is it that we have the resources and the know-how to be almost completely self-sufficient, yet we steadily send our jobs and our money overseas… and import their oil? Our armed forces are ready, willing, and able to defend this nation, yet it appears that our government can’t get its national defense act together no matter what… why is that? What caused this rapid deterioration in the American national character?
There was a time when we were all “Americans”, primarily of European Celtic-Germanic-Norse stock, and that did included a hefty mix of other “races” as well. But today, with rampant illegal immigration, and of course the loony left’s politically correct “diversity”, we’ve happily become a hodge-podge of African-Americans, Mexican-Americans, Asian-Americans, Arabic-Americans, and lord only knows what else. All these hyphenated groups cling to their perceived “national identity” complete with language, social mores, mode of dress, national allegiance, and even their criminal gangs! America, and the few “American-Americans” remaining, are rapidly becoming a shrinking minority! It appears we have a poison flowing through our national character and our politics. We not only disagree with each other more than ever, but have almost come to detest one another. Politically, culturally, racially, we seem ever ready to go for each others' throats. Pat Buchanan recently asked “In what sense are we one nation and one people anymore? For what is a nation if not a people of a common ancestry, faith, culture and language, who worship the same God, revere the same heroes, cherish the same history, celebrate the same holidays, and share the same music, poetry, art and literature?” Well, Christmas and Easter once united Americans in a common celebration. Now we fight over whether they should even be mentioned in our public schools! We used to share classical, pop, country & Western and jazz music, now we have varieties tailored to specific generations, races and ethnic groups. One part of America loves her history, another reviles it as racist, imperialist and genocidal. Our old heroes like Columbus, George Washington, and Stonewall Jackson are being replaced by Che Guevara, Dr. King and Cesar Chavez. The American Left has pretty well rewritten our history books, and they are now loaded with PC garbage that makes the Founding Fathers into greedy racist slaveholders, the pioneers into a rapacious mob of outlaws and gunfighters, and of course FDR’s welfare state is turned into our ultimate social triumph. From the Puritans to the Clinton administration, everything is “explained” from a far left view, irregardless of the truth.
In quotes from letters written by fourth-graders in 1976, predicting life in the 'year 2000', there are many of the old images of life in the future as envisioned in that era. But one little girl's thoughts are evidence that the leftist propaganda was being drummed into children's brains fairly successfully by 1976. She wrote “The government will pay every person as much as they want without them having to work.” Another thought is that these children would now be in their mid-40’s. I wonder if they still believe in the government paying every person as much as they want without them working'? If they’re Democrats, I doubt they’ve changed their thinking since the fourth grade.
Are our present difficulties a result of our loss of confidence and optimism, or was it just the constant liberal cries of 'waste!' that caused us to lose interest in the future? Or perhaps the liberals among us feel guilty because we excelled at just about everything we set our hand to, and thus caused the rest of the world to feel envious and resentful? As our social spending increased throughout the seventies and afterward, one wonders what might have been, had we not been pressured into a ''war on poverty''. In retrospect, did all that spending help ''pull people up from poverty'' as promised, or result only in the demand for even more handouts? Meanwhile the kids of the 70s are now middleaged, and having been spoon-fed that leftist pap since birth, is it any wonder we've come to where we are now?
Sunday, September 6, 2009
Gadsden Flag
It would seem that the Obamacrats are somewhat angry about the public opposition to Mr. Obama’s ideas of universal health care, which of course I can well understand. Having looked through the proposed universal health insurance system, it is, in my view, nothing more than a European style plan for socializing our medical care nationwide. That however is not the subject of this weeks rant. But rather, the loony left is also upset by the “small yellow flags” being handed out as a symbol of “resistance” at some of the Town Hall Meetings where assorted politicians attempt to convince us that all those expensive ideas are intended to do “what’s good for us”, and of course to “save us from ourselves”.
Those small flags being passed out are copies of the renown “Gadsden Flag”, reputed to be the first flag flown by the fledgling the United States of America. The flag was designed by, and is named after, an American general and statesman, Christopher Gadsden of South Carolina. It was reportedly used by the United States Navy and Marine Corps as their first national banner. There's also an interesting history behind the Gadsden flag, and its diamondback rattlesnake, entwined with one of America’s most outstanding personalities, Benjamin Franklin.
In 1751, Franklin wrote a satirical commentary in his Pennsylvania Gazette suggesting that as a way to thank the British for their policy of sending convicted felons to the colonies, Americans should send rattlesnakes to England. In 1754 he published the first known political cartoon in an American newspaper, which was the image of a snake cut into eight sections, each representing one of the individual colonies. The small New England colonies were combined into one section as the head of the snake, while South Carolina was at the tail. Beneath the snake were the ominous words "Join, or Die", meaning that the colonies must unite politically if they were to survive England’s ministrations. The snake illustration or variations of it were reprinted from Massachusetts to South Carolina, and Franklin's rattlesnake became an early symbol of American national identity.
A merchant ship called the Black Prince returned to Philadelphia in 1775 from a voyage to England, and was carrying letters to the Second Continental Congress informing them that the British government was sending ships to America loaded with munitions for the British troops stationed in the colonies. Congress decided that General Washington needed those arms more than General Howe, and devised a plan to capture the British ships. They authorized the creation of the first Continental Navy, and additionally the mustering of five companies of Marines. Christopher Gadsden was an American patriot leading the Sons of Liberty in South Carolina who was later made a colonel in the Continental Army. In 1775 he was in Philadelphia representing his home state in the Continental Congress. He was also one of the Marine Committee who decided to outfit and man the first Navy ships (one of which was the Black Prince, armmed and renamed “Alfred”).
In December 1775, "An American Guesser" wrote to the Pennsylvania Journal: "I observed on one of the drums belonging to the marines now raising, there was painted a Rattle-Snake, with this modest motto under it, 'Don't tread on me.' As I know it is the custom to have some device on the arms of every country, I supposed this may have been intended for the arms of America." The writer then speculated on why a snake might be chosen as a symbol for America. First, "the Rattle-Snake is found in no other quarter of the world besides America. The rattlesnake also has sharp eyes, and may therefore be esteemed an emblem of vigilance." Furthermore, "She never begins an attack, nor, when once engaged, ever surrenders: She is therefore an emblem of magnanimity and true courage. ... she never wounds 'till she has generously given notice, even to her enemy, and cautioned him against the danger of treading on her." "I confess I was wholly at a loss what to make of the rattles, 'till I went back and counted them and found them just thirteen, exactly the number of the Colonies united in America; and I recollected too that this was the only part of the Snake which increased in numbers. "'Tis curious and amazing to observe how distinct and independent of each other the rattles of this animal are, and yet how firmly they are united together, so as never to be separated but by breaking them to pieces. One of those rattles singly, is incapable of producing sound, but the ringing of thirteen together, is sufficient to alarm the boldest man living." Many scholars agree that this "American Guesser" was Benjamin Franklin.
Congress chose a Rhode Islander, Esek Hopkins, as the first commander of the new Navy. The flag that Hopkins used as his standard was designed by Gadsden, adapted from those yellow drumheads with their fierce rattlesnake, and was presented to Hopkins. It's reported that John Paul Jones, as the first lieutenant aboard the flagship, ran it up the gaff. The Gadsden flag was widely used during the American Revolution as there was no standard flag at that time, which left people free to choose their own banner. After the Revolution, George Washington and many members of Congress preferred stars and stripes to rattlesnakes, and the Gadsden flag, losing official favor, became associated with the spirit of the rebellion and its resistance to tyranny, rather than serving as our national ensign.
Reportedly, a Louisiana driver was recently stopped and detained for having a "Don't Tread on Me" bumper sticker on his car. The "suspect" was held for some time, being investigated for "extremist" activities, and warned about the "subversive" message it sent before he was released. This incident is rather suspicious I’d say, particularly as it occurred shortly after the DHS report warning of “potential terrorists” and political bumper stickers was sent to tens of thousands of law enforcement officers. Still, the report can’t be confirmed, and it does read somewhat like an advertisement for bumper stickers.
But then perhaps I’ll be an extremist as well, and acquire a Gadsden flag with its fierce coiled rattlesnake and defiant ‘Don't Tread on Me’ motto, flying it as a reminder to all that some of us still prefer our liberty and independence, rather than the latest home grown version of communism.
Those small flags being passed out are copies of the renown “Gadsden Flag”, reputed to be the first flag flown by the fledgling the United States of America. The flag was designed by, and is named after, an American general and statesman, Christopher Gadsden of South Carolina. It was reportedly used by the United States Navy and Marine Corps as their first national banner. There's also an interesting history behind the Gadsden flag, and its diamondback rattlesnake, entwined with one of America’s most outstanding personalities, Benjamin Franklin.
In 1751, Franklin wrote a satirical commentary in his Pennsylvania Gazette suggesting that as a way to thank the British for their policy of sending convicted felons to the colonies, Americans should send rattlesnakes to England. In 1754 he published the first known political cartoon in an American newspaper, which was the image of a snake cut into eight sections, each representing one of the individual colonies. The small New England colonies were combined into one section as the head of the snake, while South Carolina was at the tail. Beneath the snake were the ominous words "Join, or Die", meaning that the colonies must unite politically if they were to survive England’s ministrations. The snake illustration or variations of it were reprinted from Massachusetts to South Carolina, and Franklin's rattlesnake became an early symbol of American national identity.
A merchant ship called the Black Prince returned to Philadelphia in 1775 from a voyage to England, and was carrying letters to the Second Continental Congress informing them that the British government was sending ships to America loaded with munitions for the British troops stationed in the colonies. Congress decided that General Washington needed those arms more than General Howe, and devised a plan to capture the British ships. They authorized the creation of the first Continental Navy, and additionally the mustering of five companies of Marines. Christopher Gadsden was an American patriot leading the Sons of Liberty in South Carolina who was later made a colonel in the Continental Army. In 1775 he was in Philadelphia representing his home state in the Continental Congress. He was also one of the Marine Committee who decided to outfit and man the first Navy ships (one of which was the Black Prince, armmed and renamed “Alfred”).
In December 1775, "An American Guesser" wrote to the Pennsylvania Journal: "I observed on one of the drums belonging to the marines now raising, there was painted a Rattle-Snake, with this modest motto under it, 'Don't tread on me.' As I know it is the custom to have some device on the arms of every country, I supposed this may have been intended for the arms of America." The writer then speculated on why a snake might be chosen as a symbol for America. First, "the Rattle-Snake is found in no other quarter of the world besides America. The rattlesnake also has sharp eyes, and may therefore be esteemed an emblem of vigilance." Furthermore, "She never begins an attack, nor, when once engaged, ever surrenders: She is therefore an emblem of magnanimity and true courage. ... she never wounds 'till she has generously given notice, even to her enemy, and cautioned him against the danger of treading on her." "I confess I was wholly at a loss what to make of the rattles, 'till I went back and counted them and found them just thirteen, exactly the number of the Colonies united in America; and I recollected too that this was the only part of the Snake which increased in numbers. "'Tis curious and amazing to observe how distinct and independent of each other the rattles of this animal are, and yet how firmly they are united together, so as never to be separated but by breaking them to pieces. One of those rattles singly, is incapable of producing sound, but the ringing of thirteen together, is sufficient to alarm the boldest man living." Many scholars agree that this "American Guesser" was Benjamin Franklin.
Congress chose a Rhode Islander, Esek Hopkins, as the first commander of the new Navy. The flag that Hopkins used as his standard was designed by Gadsden, adapted from those yellow drumheads with their fierce rattlesnake, and was presented to Hopkins. It's reported that John Paul Jones, as the first lieutenant aboard the flagship, ran it up the gaff. The Gadsden flag was widely used during the American Revolution as there was no standard flag at that time, which left people free to choose their own banner. After the Revolution, George Washington and many members of Congress preferred stars and stripes to rattlesnakes, and the Gadsden flag, losing official favor, became associated with the spirit of the rebellion and its resistance to tyranny, rather than serving as our national ensign.
Reportedly, a Louisiana driver was recently stopped and detained for having a "Don't Tread on Me" bumper sticker on his car. The "suspect" was held for some time, being investigated for "extremist" activities, and warned about the "subversive" message it sent before he was released. This incident is rather suspicious I’d say, particularly as it occurred shortly after the DHS report warning of “potential terrorists” and political bumper stickers was sent to tens of thousands of law enforcement officers. Still, the report can’t be confirmed, and it does read somewhat like an advertisement for bumper stickers.
But then perhaps I’ll be an extremist as well, and acquire a Gadsden flag with its fierce coiled rattlesnake and defiant ‘Don't Tread on Me’ motto, flying it as a reminder to all that some of us still prefer our liberty and independence, rather than the latest home grown version of communism.
Saturday, August 29, 2009
More on the DNC
THESE are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated. Those immortal words were written by Thomas Paine in 1776.
I’ve commented on the reaction of the DNC to the Conservative objections to Mr. Obama’s oncoming health care steamroller. While there are many things involved in the current bill, it essentially says that the government will assume responsibility for our medical care by providing “affordable” medical insurance to all of us, both legal citizens and illegal aliens alike. I will be the first to agree that we desperately need to overhaul the health care system we have today, but I seriously question the wisdom of handing everything to an entirely new mob of federal bureaucrats! For the most part this bill, and all the rest of the loony left health proposals, do nothing more that make the government into one gigantic HMO, with all the problems they have! And of course each and every one of us is expected to happily hand the government our right to decide whether we live or die.
One part of this assault on our rights states will be a government committee with the authority to determine what medical treatment or benefits you will receive. What this means is that your health care will be rationed. The Health Choice Commissar (Czar?) will select your benefits for you, leaving you with no choice or recourse. Things start to get interesting when we read that the income of medical care providers will be completely controlled by the government, irregardless of their specialty or professional competence, there will be no judicial revue of the program and nobody can sue the Government for price fixing. Talk about a sweetheart government monopoly!
And who is going to pay the nearly one trillion dollar bill for all this? We will naturally, with increased income and corporate taxes. Further, employers must automatically enroll employees and their families into the public plan. No one will have a choice with that. Any employer with a payroll in excess of $400 thousand and above who does not provide public health care “insurance” will pay an 8% tax on all their payroll, and business with a payroll below $400 thousand will be assessed an additional payroll tax of between 2 and 6 percent. Then too, any employee who doesn’t have a government accepted health plan will pay an additional income tax of 2 ½%. Health care will be provided to all aliens, legal or otherwise, without charge, and American taxpaying citizens will pick up the tab for that as well.
Even your children aren’t safe under this program, as Obamacare is also about the government's coming into homes and assuming parental rights. Under "home visitation programs for families with young children and families expecting children", government agents would provide parents with modeling, consulting, and coaching on parenting practices. The bill targets specific groups as well, wherein the state "shall identify and prioritize serving communities that are in high need of such services, especially communities with a high proportion of low-income families." With this I guess we can assume that low-income families know less about parenting than middle- and upper-class families.
Just to make sure you don’t cheat on the system, Health Care Administration bureaucrats will have access to all your financial and personal records. In addition, you will be issued a mandatory National Health Care ID card. (I just knew they’d find a way to slip that national ID bit through, and I’ll bet a nickel to a stale donut that RFID chips are soon to follow!) If you have only a couple of employees, they won’t miss you either, as the bill mandates that health care officials audit the books of all employers.
Contrary to the claims of so many left wing socialists in Washington, this plan does eliminate any private health insurance over time, in that it creates a Health Care Exchange intended to bring private plans under government control, and mandates that ALL benefit packages for private Health Care must be in the Exchange, and meet government standards. Mr. Obama publicly stated that ‘Tricare’ (the medical insurance for retired military personnel) and Veterans Administration health care would not be affected… yet both will soon be absorbed into the ObamaCare system, as well be Medicare.
A short study of medical care in the now defunct Soviet Union might make you think a bit more about all this. For the most part, Soviet Doctors were little better trained than are American paramedics today, little more than very high class first aid providers. This is not to disparage our paramedics, dedicated professionals that they are, but I really don’t think I’d want any of them doing brain surgery on one of my grandkids! In the USSR, the medical field had a hard time attracting high caliber people, because even their Doctors were paid less than common laborers! You might have noticed that whenever a soviet leader became seriously ill, they were not treated in the USSR, but rather they went to Europe or the United States for their health care! All this tells me that we’ll quite likely see a booming trade in black market medical services develop! And that is somewhat scary as well. With the rationing and cost analysis of ObamaCare bean counters, if you or a loved one becomes seriously ill or injured (and can’t afford a trip to a Mexican medical clinic), you might want to get your affairs in order posthaste. It’s pretty much the same if you’re over age fifty, and not a government VIP deserving of better than average care.
If this assault on our rights passes congress, welcome to the “United Socialist States of America”, and you can wave goodbye to a nation that once valued individual rights and freedom over “security” and “comfort”. For those who might want to look for themselves, the full text of the Universal Health Scare… err… Health Care Bill currently under consideration (HR 3200) can be found at http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090714/aahca.pdf . It consists of 1017 pages of government double talk. You might also want to drop a line to all of your congressional representatives, voicing your opposition to this entire plan. Mention also that you are a voter, and that if they fail to vote against this federal takeover of our lives, in any of its manifestations, come next election you will surely vote against them!
I’ve commented on the reaction of the DNC to the Conservative objections to Mr. Obama’s oncoming health care steamroller. While there are many things involved in the current bill, it essentially says that the government will assume responsibility for our medical care by providing “affordable” medical insurance to all of us, both legal citizens and illegal aliens alike. I will be the first to agree that we desperately need to overhaul the health care system we have today, but I seriously question the wisdom of handing everything to an entirely new mob of federal bureaucrats! For the most part this bill, and all the rest of the loony left health proposals, do nothing more that make the government into one gigantic HMO, with all the problems they have! And of course each and every one of us is expected to happily hand the government our right to decide whether we live or die.
One part of this assault on our rights states will be a government committee with the authority to determine what medical treatment or benefits you will receive. What this means is that your health care will be rationed. The Health Choice Commissar (Czar?) will select your benefits for you, leaving you with no choice or recourse. Things start to get interesting when we read that the income of medical care providers will be completely controlled by the government, irregardless of their specialty or professional competence, there will be no judicial revue of the program and nobody can sue the Government for price fixing. Talk about a sweetheart government monopoly!
And who is going to pay the nearly one trillion dollar bill for all this? We will naturally, with increased income and corporate taxes. Further, employers must automatically enroll employees and their families into the public plan. No one will have a choice with that. Any employer with a payroll in excess of $400 thousand and above who does not provide public health care “insurance” will pay an 8% tax on all their payroll, and business with a payroll below $400 thousand will be assessed an additional payroll tax of between 2 and 6 percent. Then too, any employee who doesn’t have a government accepted health plan will pay an additional income tax of 2 ½%. Health care will be provided to all aliens, legal or otherwise, without charge, and American taxpaying citizens will pick up the tab for that as well.
Even your children aren’t safe under this program, as Obamacare is also about the government's coming into homes and assuming parental rights. Under "home visitation programs for families with young children and families expecting children", government agents would provide parents with modeling, consulting, and coaching on parenting practices. The bill targets specific groups as well, wherein the state "shall identify and prioritize serving communities that are in high need of such services, especially communities with a high proportion of low-income families." With this I guess we can assume that low-income families know less about parenting than middle- and upper-class families.
Just to make sure you don’t cheat on the system, Health Care Administration bureaucrats will have access to all your financial and personal records. In addition, you will be issued a mandatory National Health Care ID card. (I just knew they’d find a way to slip that national ID bit through, and I’ll bet a nickel to a stale donut that RFID chips are soon to follow!) If you have only a couple of employees, they won’t miss you either, as the bill mandates that health care officials audit the books of all employers.
Contrary to the claims of so many left wing socialists in Washington, this plan does eliminate any private health insurance over time, in that it creates a Health Care Exchange intended to bring private plans under government control, and mandates that ALL benefit packages for private Health Care must be in the Exchange, and meet government standards. Mr. Obama publicly stated that ‘Tricare’ (the medical insurance for retired military personnel) and Veterans Administration health care would not be affected… yet both will soon be absorbed into the ObamaCare system, as well be Medicare.
A short study of medical care in the now defunct Soviet Union might make you think a bit more about all this. For the most part, Soviet Doctors were little better trained than are American paramedics today, little more than very high class first aid providers. This is not to disparage our paramedics, dedicated professionals that they are, but I really don’t think I’d want any of them doing brain surgery on one of my grandkids! In the USSR, the medical field had a hard time attracting high caliber people, because even their Doctors were paid less than common laborers! You might have noticed that whenever a soviet leader became seriously ill, they were not treated in the USSR, but rather they went to Europe or the United States for their health care! All this tells me that we’ll quite likely see a booming trade in black market medical services develop! And that is somewhat scary as well. With the rationing and cost analysis of ObamaCare bean counters, if you or a loved one becomes seriously ill or injured (and can’t afford a trip to a Mexican medical clinic), you might want to get your affairs in order posthaste. It’s pretty much the same if you’re over age fifty, and not a government VIP deserving of better than average care.
If this assault on our rights passes congress, welcome to the “United Socialist States of America”, and you can wave goodbye to a nation that once valued individual rights and freedom over “security” and “comfort”. For those who might want to look for themselves, the full text of the Universal Health Scare… err… Health Care Bill currently under consideration (HR 3200) can be found at http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090714/aahca.pdf . It consists of 1017 pages of government double talk. You might also want to drop a line to all of your congressional representatives, voicing your opposition to this entire plan. Mention also that you are a voter, and that if they fail to vote against this federal takeover of our lives, in any of its manifestations, come next election you will surely vote against them!
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Constitutional Basics
During June of 1776, the Second Continental Congress, realizing that thirteen separate and independent colonies had little chance of winning their war for independence, appointed a committee to draft what became known as the “Articles of Confederation”. This document, once ratified by the colonies in March 1781, was the basis of a political union to be known as “The United States of America”. Under this, our first constitution, the Articles set the rules for operating the new "United States" confederation, which was only allowed to make war, negotiate diplomatic agreements, and resolve disagreements regarding the western territories. The individual states retained sovereignty over all other governmental functions. But, with no authority to raise tax revenues, or to call an army into being, Congress was left with no other option than to literally beg the individual colonies for funds and troops when necessary. Further, the articles left the central government nearly powerless, in that there was no mechanism by which the individual states could be made to accede to the lawful orders of “Congress Assembled”. It soon became apparent that while the Confederation was an improvement over the prior situation, it left many of the original problems unsolved, and eventually caused deep divides between the states that the national government could not resolve.
What later became known as the Annapolis Convention was called to address the difficulties caused by the many political differences between the States. Finding themselves without a quorum, the few state delegates in attendance endorsed a motion that called for all states to meet in a "Grand Convention" at Philadelphia in May, 1787 to discuss ways to improve the Articles of Confederation. This Philadelphia Convention (now known as the Constitutional Convention) took place from May 25 to September 17, 1787, to address the problems of governing the United States of America. Although the Convention was intended only to revise the Articles of Confederation, the intention of many of its proponents was to create a new government rather than to "fix" the existing one. George Washington was selected to preside over this convention. In late July the convention appointed a “Committee of Detail” to draft a document based on the agreements that had been hammered out. A second committee, the “Committee of Style and Arrangement” produced the final version, which was submitted for signing on September 17. Not all of the delegates were pleased with the results; some left before the ceremony, and three of those remaining refused to sign. George Mason demanded a Bill of Rights if he was to support the new Constitution, which was finally added and is considered the final compromise of the Convention. Of the 39 signatories, probably no one was completely satisfied, and their views were aptly stated by Benjamin Franklin who said, "There are several parts of this Constitution which I do not at present approve, but I am not sure I shall never approve them. ... I doubt too whether any other Convention we can obtain, may be able to make a better Constitution. ... It therefore astonishes me, Sir, to find this system approaching so near to perfection as it does; and I think it will astonish our enemies..." On March 4, 1789, the Constitution of the United States of America became the law of the land.
The Preamble tells us that government gets its powers from "We the People," and not the other way around. The Framers of our Constitution handily gave us a limited federal government with severely limited authority which is specifically identified. Then there is the Tenth Amendment which states "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution... are reserved to the States . . . or to the people." And that amendment is our primary defense against abuses by the national government. A second safeguard is the separation of powers among the three branches; legislative, executive, and judicial. As Mr. Obama continues what gives every appearance of becoming a very unusual term in office, he, and a seemingly endless procession of unelected "czars" (32 at last count), would be well advised to examine the very first sentence of Article I: "All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress." Only the legislature, not the executive branch via appointed Czars, is authorized to make laws. (For the moment however we could just call him "Czar Obama".) Mr. Obama is a remarkable man of course, and with 12 years as lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, he is certainly no stranger to the Constitution, and should well know that our government is “bound down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.". Yet he accepts the fashionable notion of a "living" document, which has sufficient flexibility to accommodate rapidly changing social, economic, and technological conditions. With this, he is happily appointing judges who "stand up for social and economic justice" and have "empathy... to understand what it’s like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old." While none of us are opposed to social and economic justice, the question is whether a judge’s ideas about those values should dictate how the Constitution and our laws are interpreted. One legal expert that I consulted informs me that once a law is passed it is most certainly “writ in stone”, and not subject to “flexible interpretation”. As the basis of all law in the United Stated is derived from our Constitution, I’ll leave it to the reader to decide if we have a flexible “living” document or not.
There are two ways our Constitution can be changed. One is through the amendment process which requires two-thirds of both houses of Congress to pass an amendment, and then three-fourths of the states to ratify it. The second does not require those elected representatives, and is called a Constitutional Convention. Article V of the Constitution requires Congress to call a new Constitutional Convention (a "Con-Con") if two-thirds of the states request it, and there are no other rules or guidelines. We don't know how delegates would be apportioned or elected. We don't know what rules the Convention would operate under, or whether changes to the Constitution could be made by a simple majority or a super majority. We don't know if the agenda could be limited or would be wide open to anything. Former Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger once claimed that "There is no effective way to limit or muzzle the actions of a Constitutional Convention. The convention could make its own rules and set its own agenda." All this would mean that Congress will set the rules, and the basic law of the land could be changed forever at the whim of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. While many people may deny the accusation, the far left most certainly is calling for a Con-Con.
All that is needed is for two more states to ask for a Constitutional Convention... Article V says that it takes a request from two-thirds of the states to force a "Con-Con", but it doesn't set a time limit on getting that total. Thirty-two states have already issued a call for a "Con-Con" over the last few decades for various reasons, now only two more states are required. The call from California was only to consider changes to their state constitution, but Ohio recently issued (and then withdrew) a call to consider changes to our national constitution…
Benjamin Franklin was once asked: "Well, Doctor, what have we got, a Republic or a Monarchy?" “A Republic, if you can keep it.” was his response.
What later became known as the Annapolis Convention was called to address the difficulties caused by the many political differences between the States. Finding themselves without a quorum, the few state delegates in attendance endorsed a motion that called for all states to meet in a "Grand Convention" at Philadelphia in May, 1787 to discuss ways to improve the Articles of Confederation. This Philadelphia Convention (now known as the Constitutional Convention) took place from May 25 to September 17, 1787, to address the problems of governing the United States of America. Although the Convention was intended only to revise the Articles of Confederation, the intention of many of its proponents was to create a new government rather than to "fix" the existing one. George Washington was selected to preside over this convention. In late July the convention appointed a “Committee of Detail” to draft a document based on the agreements that had been hammered out. A second committee, the “Committee of Style and Arrangement” produced the final version, which was submitted for signing on September 17. Not all of the delegates were pleased with the results; some left before the ceremony, and three of those remaining refused to sign. George Mason demanded a Bill of Rights if he was to support the new Constitution, which was finally added and is considered the final compromise of the Convention. Of the 39 signatories, probably no one was completely satisfied, and their views were aptly stated by Benjamin Franklin who said, "There are several parts of this Constitution which I do not at present approve, but I am not sure I shall never approve them. ... I doubt too whether any other Convention we can obtain, may be able to make a better Constitution. ... It therefore astonishes me, Sir, to find this system approaching so near to perfection as it does; and I think it will astonish our enemies..." On March 4, 1789, the Constitution of the United States of America became the law of the land.
The Preamble tells us that government gets its powers from "We the People," and not the other way around. The Framers of our Constitution handily gave us a limited federal government with severely limited authority which is specifically identified. Then there is the Tenth Amendment which states "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution... are reserved to the States . . . or to the people." And that amendment is our primary defense against abuses by the national government. A second safeguard is the separation of powers among the three branches; legislative, executive, and judicial. As Mr. Obama continues what gives every appearance of becoming a very unusual term in office, he, and a seemingly endless procession of unelected "czars" (32 at last count), would be well advised to examine the very first sentence of Article I: "All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress." Only the legislature, not the executive branch via appointed Czars, is authorized to make laws. (For the moment however we could just call him "Czar Obama".) Mr. Obama is a remarkable man of course, and with 12 years as lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, he is certainly no stranger to the Constitution, and should well know that our government is “bound down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.". Yet he accepts the fashionable notion of a "living" document, which has sufficient flexibility to accommodate rapidly changing social, economic, and technological conditions. With this, he is happily appointing judges who "stand up for social and economic justice" and have "empathy... to understand what it’s like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old." While none of us are opposed to social and economic justice, the question is whether a judge’s ideas about those values should dictate how the Constitution and our laws are interpreted. One legal expert that I consulted informs me that once a law is passed it is most certainly “writ in stone”, and not subject to “flexible interpretation”. As the basis of all law in the United Stated is derived from our Constitution, I’ll leave it to the reader to decide if we have a flexible “living” document or not.
There are two ways our Constitution can be changed. One is through the amendment process which requires two-thirds of both houses of Congress to pass an amendment, and then three-fourths of the states to ratify it. The second does not require those elected representatives, and is called a Constitutional Convention. Article V of the Constitution requires Congress to call a new Constitutional Convention (a "Con-Con") if two-thirds of the states request it, and there are no other rules or guidelines. We don't know how delegates would be apportioned or elected. We don't know what rules the Convention would operate under, or whether changes to the Constitution could be made by a simple majority or a super majority. We don't know if the agenda could be limited or would be wide open to anything. Former Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger once claimed that "There is no effective way to limit or muzzle the actions of a Constitutional Convention. The convention could make its own rules and set its own agenda." All this would mean that Congress will set the rules, and the basic law of the land could be changed forever at the whim of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. While many people may deny the accusation, the far left most certainly is calling for a Con-Con.
All that is needed is for two more states to ask for a Constitutional Convention... Article V says that it takes a request from two-thirds of the states to force a "Con-Con", but it doesn't set a time limit on getting that total. Thirty-two states have already issued a call for a "Con-Con" over the last few decades for various reasons, now only two more states are required. The call from California was only to consider changes to their state constitution, but Ohio recently issued (and then withdrew) a call to consider changes to our national constitution…
Benjamin Franklin was once asked: "Well, Doctor, what have we got, a Republic or a Monarchy?" “A Republic, if you can keep it.” was his response.
Saturday, August 15, 2009
DNC
It would seem that the Democratic National Committee is on the warpath once again, and again claiming unfair practices are being used against them by those rotten, nasty, and of course evil, conservative Republicans. (There are “fair” practices in politics?) The DNC recently released a statement accusing Republicans of colluding with "K Street Lobbyists" to incite "angry mobs" of extremists, describing a deliberate attempt to disrupt health care town hall meetings in assorted congressional districts across the country. The statement released by DNC spokesman Brad Woodhouse claims that the Republicans, desperate after “losing two elections and every major policy fight on Capitol Hill”, are inciting angry mobs of rabid right wing extremists to disrupt thoughtful discussions about the future of health care in America. These mobs of extremists are trying to “break” the President and destroying his Presidency according to Mr. Woodhouse. I will note that the democrats can so easily forget the eight years of twisted statements, erroneous accusations, and often downright lies that they subjected us to during the Bush presidency. Now apparently “Republican Operatives”, utilizing funds provided by “special interests”, are bussing in “mobs” who are desperately trying to stop the agenda for change that Mr. Obama was elected to bring us… well, as per the DNC that is. The statement continues; “Despite the headline grabbing nature of these angry mobs and their disruptions of events, they are not reflective of where the American people are on the issues – or the hundreds of thousands of thoughtful discussions taking place around kitchen tables, water coolers and in homes.”
Huh!... I spend a lot of time on the internet reading a wide assortment of discussions on nearly as wide a number of subjects. From what I’ve seen so far, and considering that I read discussions in liberal forums as well as conservative and moderate groups, were it up to American voters today, the entire “ObamaCare” concept would be completely dead and buried! I have news for Mr. Woodhouse as well, those “water cooler discussions” he so righteously proclaims, are apparently only held in the halls of the DNC! I look in on everything from veterans groups to space advocates, from environuts to garden societies, and more than a few political discussion groups for good measure. Discounting the few honest folks who say that they really don’t understand what the plan actually is, the “advocates”, pro and con, seem to be about evenly split, with a slight edge to the folks that don’t want anything to do with the idea. And that dear reader, includes a whole lot of “Obamamaniacs”! Several of those comments I’ve read include; “Leave it to the DNC to accuse others of "fear mongering"….they have used this as their standard tactic since before Bill. (Actually, that started with FDR.) What the DNC needs is a group of statesmen (women) to provide true leadership in the party – not Pelosi, Ried, Frank, Chuckie, Charlie and the other clowns in Washington today. Why are we not having a discussion about the attack on personal freedom that the DNC is truely engaged in? BTW – i am a registered democrate. Like Zell Miller said – the party left me a long time ago. Another includes; "Angry Mobs"?, Maybe… 'Extremists", I don't think so. Just because a person/s disagree or don't like something, doesn't make them "Extremist". But if we must be "Extremists", then so be it. Let the Extremism begin. This health care business is all a bunch of smoke in mirrors. Since when does the needs of the few, outweigh the needs of the many. I thought majority counted for something in a "Democracy". Or are we truly no longer a democracy. Especially after the dems comment saying they will pass health care with or without the repubs or american peoples consent.”
I like that last comment, in that “The Age of Extremism” sounds like a good description of where American politics are rapidly heading, and besides, it might be a good title for some future column!
From the opposition come such gems as; “We have all seen the video evidence of the racist idiots at Palin and McCain rallies last fall. I have seen some of the town hall videos. The president won by a large majority of the vote. We, the people have voted for heath care reform. We, the people, have won.” “A large majority of the vote”? Four percent is a large majority? Pardon me a moment while I get my eyebrow back down where it belongs… Anyway, then we have; “72% of Americans WANT a public (government) health insurance option as a choice. The majority of US citizens very intentionally elected representatives and a president who could make a significant change like this happen.” 72%... humm… if you say so… But according to the polls 52% now oppose ObamaCare. Next, another writer says; “Republicans are furious that the people just might like what the Democrats are trying to do for the people. Of course you know they don't care at all about the middle or lower class people in this Country.” (There goes that darn eyebrow again…) And for all these years I thought that the “middle class” were mostly Republican!!! One comment that the members of Congress might ponder is; “Nice how the DNC refers to informed citizens as an angry mob. Anyone who thinks the DNC (Pelosi, Obama, etc.) is looking out for anybody other than themselves clearly lives in a fantasy world. And actually it won't backfire. Those who vote for this disaster will be out of a job in 2010. The Dems are getting just what they did not want, informed people. Of course after seeing many of these posts here, you Obamaholics either don't care about the truth or are too dim to think for yourselves.”
One final quote from a young Lady in California; “Is this anything like the DNC using ACORN? No this was voting Americans, democrats and republicans, sick of the congress not listening to us.” Couldn’t have said it better myself Ma’am. What Democrats are calling ‘mob rule’ most Americans call “democracy in action.” After all, we are still allowed to speak our mind… or has team Obama outlawed that while I wasn’t looking? America is sending President Obama a message, telling him that they don’t trust big government plans for health care.
The RNC describes the DNC reaction to the people they invited to Congressional town hall meetings as; “…from the realm of the strange into the far reaches of the Twilight Zone. Average Americans are showing up at Democrat Congressional town hall events across the country to voice their frustration with the far left liberal agenda being stampeded through Congress by the Democrat majority. Mostly comprised of seniors and veterans, these large crowds at the town hall meetings are actually reading the healthcare bill and asking the tough questions. Democrats are stunned that these Americans are angry about being lied to about the government takeover of healthcare.”
Unlike a good many politicians, I make no claim to being omnipotent, but I’ve about reached the stage of making a political prophesy… If Mr. Obama, Mr. Reid, Ms. Pelosi, and of course the DNC, don’t get their heads out of their… the clouds, the Democratic Party will find that they’ve made a serious error in judging the temperament of the American voter!
Huh!... I spend a lot of time on the internet reading a wide assortment of discussions on nearly as wide a number of subjects. From what I’ve seen so far, and considering that I read discussions in liberal forums as well as conservative and moderate groups, were it up to American voters today, the entire “ObamaCare” concept would be completely dead and buried! I have news for Mr. Woodhouse as well, those “water cooler discussions” he so righteously proclaims, are apparently only held in the halls of the DNC! I look in on everything from veterans groups to space advocates, from environuts to garden societies, and more than a few political discussion groups for good measure. Discounting the few honest folks who say that they really don’t understand what the plan actually is, the “advocates”, pro and con, seem to be about evenly split, with a slight edge to the folks that don’t want anything to do with the idea. And that dear reader, includes a whole lot of “Obamamaniacs”! Several of those comments I’ve read include; “Leave it to the DNC to accuse others of "fear mongering"….they have used this as their standard tactic since before Bill. (Actually, that started with FDR.) What the DNC needs is a group of statesmen (women) to provide true leadership in the party – not Pelosi, Ried, Frank, Chuckie, Charlie and the other clowns in Washington today. Why are we not having a discussion about the attack on personal freedom that the DNC is truely engaged in? BTW – i am a registered democrate. Like Zell Miller said – the party left me a long time ago. Another includes; "Angry Mobs"?, Maybe… 'Extremists", I don't think so. Just because a person/s disagree or don't like something, doesn't make them "Extremist". But if we must be "Extremists", then so be it. Let the Extremism begin. This health care business is all a bunch of smoke in mirrors. Since when does the needs of the few, outweigh the needs of the many. I thought majority counted for something in a "Democracy". Or are we truly no longer a democracy. Especially after the dems comment saying they will pass health care with or without the repubs or american peoples consent.”
I like that last comment, in that “The Age of Extremism” sounds like a good description of where American politics are rapidly heading, and besides, it might be a good title for some future column!
From the opposition come such gems as; “We have all seen the video evidence of the racist idiots at Palin and McCain rallies last fall. I have seen some of the town hall videos. The president won by a large majority of the vote. We, the people have voted for heath care reform. We, the people, have won.” “A large majority of the vote”? Four percent is a large majority? Pardon me a moment while I get my eyebrow back down where it belongs… Anyway, then we have; “72% of Americans WANT a public (government) health insurance option as a choice. The majority of US citizens very intentionally elected representatives and a president who could make a significant change like this happen.” 72%... humm… if you say so… But according to the polls 52% now oppose ObamaCare. Next, another writer says; “Republicans are furious that the people just might like what the Democrats are trying to do for the people. Of course you know they don't care at all about the middle or lower class people in this Country.” (There goes that darn eyebrow again…) And for all these years I thought that the “middle class” were mostly Republican!!! One comment that the members of Congress might ponder is; “Nice how the DNC refers to informed citizens as an angry mob. Anyone who thinks the DNC (Pelosi, Obama, etc.) is looking out for anybody other than themselves clearly lives in a fantasy world. And actually it won't backfire. Those who vote for this disaster will be out of a job in 2010. The Dems are getting just what they did not want, informed people. Of course after seeing many of these posts here, you Obamaholics either don't care about the truth or are too dim to think for yourselves.”
One final quote from a young Lady in California; “Is this anything like the DNC using ACORN? No this was voting Americans, democrats and republicans, sick of the congress not listening to us.” Couldn’t have said it better myself Ma’am. What Democrats are calling ‘mob rule’ most Americans call “democracy in action.” After all, we are still allowed to speak our mind… or has team Obama outlawed that while I wasn’t looking? America is sending President Obama a message, telling him that they don’t trust big government plans for health care.
The RNC describes the DNC reaction to the people they invited to Congressional town hall meetings as; “…from the realm of the strange into the far reaches of the Twilight Zone. Average Americans are showing up at Democrat Congressional town hall events across the country to voice their frustration with the far left liberal agenda being stampeded through Congress by the Democrat majority. Mostly comprised of seniors and veterans, these large crowds at the town hall meetings are actually reading the healthcare bill and asking the tough questions. Democrats are stunned that these Americans are angry about being lied to about the government takeover of healthcare.”
Unlike a good many politicians, I make no claim to being omnipotent, but I’ve about reached the stage of making a political prophesy… If Mr. Obama, Mr. Reid, Ms. Pelosi, and of course the DNC, don’t get their heads out of their… the clouds, the Democratic Party will find that they’ve made a serious error in judging the temperament of the American voter!
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Billion?
The next time you hear a politician casually use the word "billion", carefully rethink having "politicians" spending YOUR tax money. A billion really is a difficult number to envision after all, but one advertising agency put the figure into perspective a few years ago.
A. A billion seconds ago it was 1959.
B. A billion minutes ago Jesus was alive.
C. A billion hours ago our ancestors were living in the Stone Age.
D. A billion days ago no-one walked on the earth on two feet.
E. A billion dollars ago was only 8 hours and 20 minutes at the rate our government is spending our money.
In the US, one billion is one thousand million (i.e., it has 9 zeros and equals 1,000,000,000 or
109). A billion dollars in one dollar bills would make a pile of cash 20 feet tall, 31 ¼ feet wide, and over 50 feet long. A single stack of one dollar bills would be over 57 miles high! This is also what an elementary school class of 400 students can expect to earn in their entire lifetimes, combined! In the arcane world of finance and mathematics, the next magic number is “trillion”. OK, how big is a trillion? Well, in the U.S., one trillion is written as "1" followed by 12 zeros, or (1,000,000,000,000). One trillion seconds of clock time = (1012 sec) / ( 3.16 x 107 sec/yr) = 31,546 years! I think I’ll stop here, as my calculator doesn’t have enough digits to count this high!
The Outstanding Public Debt (National Debt) as of 26 Jul 2009 at 06:26:20 PM, GMT was $11,616,677,905,857, or, a bit more than eleven and a half trillion dollars. So, with the estimated population of the United States being three hundred and six million, each citizen's share of the national debt is $37,886.28. As an interesting side note, in 1791 our national debt was a bit over 75 million dollars. By the end of the Civil War in 1865, it was about two and a half billion dollars. Even with the tremendous expense of WW II, we owed “only” two hundred seventy billion dollars! So today we owe something like forty times as much!? I realize that the cold war was expensive, but really…
Now, with our current economic crunch, those miraculous people we send to Washington want to double even that ridiculous figure! Neil Barofsky, the Inspector General of the “Troubled Asset Relief Program” claims that the price tag for the bailout could reach $23.7 trillion! Apparently suffering from a touch of sticker shock, the senior Republican on the oversight committee (Rep. Darrell Issa) says, "If you spent a million dollars a day going back to the birth of Christ, that wouldn't even come close to just $1 trillion -- $23.7 trillion is a staggering figure." "The potential financial commitment the American taxpayers could be responsible for is of a size and scope that isn't even imaginable." Your tax dollars at work I presume…
At the county level our tax load works out to six or seven hundred dollars a head per year, depending on what the Commissioners have in mind for us in the next year. Outrageous I’d say, but for the most part we can see what we’re getting for our money, and I think most of us are “reasonably” satisfied. At the state level we get hooked for a bit more, with the 2008 tax bill averaging $3,670 per person. But still, we can see where much of that’s going as well, even though the folks in the statehouse don’t seem to know what a budget is. Then of course we have the federal government, where our congressmen (and women) vie for the “spendthrift of the year” award, and the president seems to think that money grows on trees! It’s funny though, back when I was a teenager my Dad often accused me of thinking that money grew on trees… then I had to start working for a living and my attitude changed. Perhaps we should try that with Washington… The universal health insurance plans all appear too complex and expensive to pass both houses. The cap-and-trade emissions bill with its huge costs that will have to be passed on to American producers and consumers seems like an act of national self flagration. The $787 billion stimulus bill has done absolutely nothing to stimulate the economy, so we probably will need "Stimulus II" before long. With that track record, our representatives want to continue shoveling our money into the fire!? HELLO... WASHINGTON… Are your calculators broken??
(Incidentally, there’s an interactive “cap and trade” tax calculator on-line that will give you an idea of the new “hidden” taxes; http://www.taxfoundation.org/capandtrade )
In 1953 journalist Garet Garrett published "The People's Pottage" which opens with: "There are those who still think they are holding the pass against a revolution that may be coming up the road. But they are gazing in the wrong direction. The revolution is behind them. It went by in the Night of Depression, singing songs to freedom." Garrett’s idea was that while America appeared the same, an internal revolution had taken place that was now irreversible. We had only need glance at where we were before the New Deal, where we are now, and where we are headed to see how far we are off the course the Founding Fathers had set for our republic. Keep in mind that the bugaboo of taxes drove the American Revolution, for we were then a tax hating, liberty-loving people. In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson called George III a tyrant for having "erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people and eat out their substance." When "Silent Cal" Coolidge left office in 1929, the U.S. government was spending 3 percent of the entire gross domestic product. By 1932, Americans “trusting” government got us the beginnings of a very expensive social welfare program(s). Today however, even with seven out of ten Americans claiming they distrust government, Obama's first budget will swallow 28 percent of the entire GDP, while state and local governments grab another 15 percent. Even with overlap, government will still consume 40 percent of the GDP, approaching the highest WW II rate! And now Obama plans to repeal the Bush tax cuts, and increase the income tax rate to nearly 40%. Combined state and local income taxes can run another 10%. If you’re self-employed, payroll taxes can add another 15% on the first $106,800 of wages of all workers. Medicare takes about 2.9 percent of all wages over that. Then there are sales taxes that can run to about 8%, property taxes, gas taxes, excise taxes, and "sin taxes" on booze, cigarettes, and soon I suspect, hot dogs, soft drinks, and probably ball game tickets!
So what did George III ever do that could compare with what our own government is doing today?
A. A billion seconds ago it was 1959.
B. A billion minutes ago Jesus was alive.
C. A billion hours ago our ancestors were living in the Stone Age.
D. A billion days ago no-one walked on the earth on two feet.
E. A billion dollars ago was only 8 hours and 20 minutes at the rate our government is spending our money.
In the US, one billion is one thousand million (i.e., it has 9 zeros and equals 1,000,000,000 or
109). A billion dollars in one dollar bills would make a pile of cash 20 feet tall, 31 ¼ feet wide, and over 50 feet long. A single stack of one dollar bills would be over 57 miles high! This is also what an elementary school class of 400 students can expect to earn in their entire lifetimes, combined! In the arcane world of finance and mathematics, the next magic number is “trillion”. OK, how big is a trillion? Well, in the U.S., one trillion is written as "1" followed by 12 zeros, or (1,000,000,000,000). One trillion seconds of clock time = (1012 sec) / ( 3.16 x 107 sec/yr) = 31,546 years! I think I’ll stop here, as my calculator doesn’t have enough digits to count this high!
The Outstanding Public Debt (National Debt) as of 26 Jul 2009 at 06:26:20 PM, GMT was $11,616,677,905,857, or, a bit more than eleven and a half trillion dollars. So, with the estimated population of the United States being three hundred and six million, each citizen's share of the national debt is $37,886.28. As an interesting side note, in 1791 our national debt was a bit over 75 million dollars. By the end of the Civil War in 1865, it was about two and a half billion dollars. Even with the tremendous expense of WW II, we owed “only” two hundred seventy billion dollars! So today we owe something like forty times as much!? I realize that the cold war was expensive, but really…
Now, with our current economic crunch, those miraculous people we send to Washington want to double even that ridiculous figure! Neil Barofsky, the Inspector General of the “Troubled Asset Relief Program” claims that the price tag for the bailout could reach $23.7 trillion! Apparently suffering from a touch of sticker shock, the senior Republican on the oversight committee (Rep. Darrell Issa) says, "If you spent a million dollars a day going back to the birth of Christ, that wouldn't even come close to just $1 trillion -- $23.7 trillion is a staggering figure." "The potential financial commitment the American taxpayers could be responsible for is of a size and scope that isn't even imaginable." Your tax dollars at work I presume…
At the county level our tax load works out to six or seven hundred dollars a head per year, depending on what the Commissioners have in mind for us in the next year. Outrageous I’d say, but for the most part we can see what we’re getting for our money, and I think most of us are “reasonably” satisfied. At the state level we get hooked for a bit more, with the 2008 tax bill averaging $3,670 per person. But still, we can see where much of that’s going as well, even though the folks in the statehouse don’t seem to know what a budget is. Then of course we have the federal government, where our congressmen (and women) vie for the “spendthrift of the year” award, and the president seems to think that money grows on trees! It’s funny though, back when I was a teenager my Dad often accused me of thinking that money grew on trees… then I had to start working for a living and my attitude changed. Perhaps we should try that with Washington… The universal health insurance plans all appear too complex and expensive to pass both houses. The cap-and-trade emissions bill with its huge costs that will have to be passed on to American producers and consumers seems like an act of national self flagration. The $787 billion stimulus bill has done absolutely nothing to stimulate the economy, so we probably will need "Stimulus II" before long. With that track record, our representatives want to continue shoveling our money into the fire!? HELLO... WASHINGTON… Are your calculators broken??
(Incidentally, there’s an interactive “cap and trade” tax calculator on-line that will give you an idea of the new “hidden” taxes; http://www.taxfoundation.org/capandtrade )
In 1953 journalist Garet Garrett published "The People's Pottage" which opens with: "There are those who still think they are holding the pass against a revolution that may be coming up the road. But they are gazing in the wrong direction. The revolution is behind them. It went by in the Night of Depression, singing songs to freedom." Garrett’s idea was that while America appeared the same, an internal revolution had taken place that was now irreversible. We had only need glance at where we were before the New Deal, where we are now, and where we are headed to see how far we are off the course the Founding Fathers had set for our republic. Keep in mind that the bugaboo of taxes drove the American Revolution, for we were then a tax hating, liberty-loving people. In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson called George III a tyrant for having "erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people and eat out their substance." When "Silent Cal" Coolidge left office in 1929, the U.S. government was spending 3 percent of the entire gross domestic product. By 1932, Americans “trusting” government got us the beginnings of a very expensive social welfare program(s). Today however, even with seven out of ten Americans claiming they distrust government, Obama's first budget will swallow 28 percent of the entire GDP, while state and local governments grab another 15 percent. Even with overlap, government will still consume 40 percent of the GDP, approaching the highest WW II rate! And now Obama plans to repeal the Bush tax cuts, and increase the income tax rate to nearly 40%. Combined state and local income taxes can run another 10%. If you’re self-employed, payroll taxes can add another 15% on the first $106,800 of wages of all workers. Medicare takes about 2.9 percent of all wages over that. Then there are sales taxes that can run to about 8%, property taxes, gas taxes, excise taxes, and "sin taxes" on booze, cigarettes, and soon I suspect, hot dogs, soft drinks, and probably ball game tickets!
So what did George III ever do that could compare with what our own government is doing today?
Monday, July 27, 2009
Overmedicated
With all the recent hype about “Obamacare”, and the deaths of several celebrities in the last year or so due to medication overdosing, it’s interesting to see just where we are with the mirade of medications available. I’m lucky in that for the most part I’ve been pretty healthy most of my life, and never had any inclination to willingly take medications of any sort, both those medications prescribed by my doctor, and particularly not the over the counter stuff recommended by assorted celebrities on TV. It’s not that I don’t trust the doctors, nor do I have any religious conviction on the matter, I simply don’t like taking medications of any sort. I’ll also admit that I’ve had a distinct aversion to needles after a few sessions in the “shot line” while a member of the military. Nowadays however, in consideration of my present “senior citizen” status and the assorted medical problems that go with aging, I find myself taking a medium sized handful of pills on a regular basis irregardless of my wishes! So, being the curious sort, I decided to look into the matter a bit.
It seems that nearly 130 million Americans (almost half our population) swallow, inject, inhale, infuse, spray, or pat on prescribed medication every month according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control. There are nearly 3.5 billion prescriptions written every year, and Americans happily devour even more nonprescription drugs. Apparently we buy quite a bit more mendicants per person than any other country in the world. A growing number of doctors, researchers and public health experts are now claiming that Americans are overmedicating themselves, buying and taking far too much medicine, too readily and too carelessly, for their own health. (And that doesn’t include the huge amount of illegal drugs consumed annually.) Do we need all these drugs? A relative few of them do pull people away from almost certain death, while others help a small minority avoid heart attacks or stroke. Yet a balance of risk and benefit is hard to find for the many drugs that treat common, persistent, or daily life conditions: like anti-inflammatories, antacids, and pills for allergy, depression, shyness, premenstrual crankiness, waning sexual powers, or impulsiveness in children. Adding fuel to the fire, over 125,000 Americans die from drug reactions and mistakes each year according to several medical studies of the 90’s. That makes pharmaceuticals the fourth-leading nation wide cause of death, following heart disease, cancer and stroke. Our aging population is partly at fault, with ailments like cancer, heart attacks, stroke and Alzheimer's disease. Other medical conditions have mysteriously proliferated in recent years, including asthma, diabetes and obesity. Assorted studies have shown that exercise and diet ward off heart disease and diabetes just as effectively as drugs do, but Fred Eckel, who teaches pharmacy practice at the University of North Carolina, states that "There tends to be a reliance on drugs as the first option", which is reflected in the fact that prescription drug sales have increased an average of 11 percent per year over the past five years.
According to another study, American children are three times more likely to be prescribed psychotropic medication than are children in Europe. The study, published in BioMed Central’s “Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health” claims that this difference is accounted for by government regulations, and cultural beliefs about medication in emotional and behavioral problems. Julie Zito led a team from the US, Germany and the Netherlands in investigating these prescription issues, and said that “Antidepressant and stimulant prevalence were three or more times greater in the US than in the Netherlands and Germany, while antipsychotic prevalence was 1.5 to 2.2 times greater”. The study also claims that the differences may be due to differing diagnostic systems in that “The US trend of increasing bipolar diagnosis in children and adolescents does not reflect European practice”.
Direct advertising is also likely to account for the increased use of medications in the US, as we try to drug ourselves out of any uncomfortable circumstance. The pharmaceutical industry ran up more than $250 billion in sales last year, mostly in prescription meds according to industry consultants. That roughly equals the sales of all the country's gasoline stations put together! "We are taking way too many drugs for dubious or exaggerated ailments," says Dr. Marcia Angell, author of "The Truth About the Drug Companies." "What the drug companies are doing now is promoting drugs for long-term use to essentially healthy people. Why? Because it's the biggest market." We also overindulge ourselves far too often, the critics say, and violate the classic proscription of Hippocrates: "First, do no harm." Drug safety researcher Dr. James Kaye, of Boston University, remembers a medical school teacher telling the class: "All drugs are poisonous!" Even common vitamins can, if overdone, cause major medical problems. Hospital patients suffer seven adverse drug reactions and three drug mistakes for every 100 admissions estimates Dr. David Bates, a researcher at Boston's Brigham and Women's Hospital. That works out to about 3.6 million drug misadventures every year.
The use of multiple medications is high among the elderly, and many seniors are given ever larger amounts of drugs that are intended to treat side effects from other prescriptions. Seniors are also more likely to see different doctors who may do nothing more than take a quick look at whatever other medications you’re on, and without checking for side effects or assorted interactions. (I’ve run into that particular problem, and had a few choice words with the Doctors as a result!)
Is appears that we have an almost mystical faith in the ability of medications to instantly cure whatever major or minor ailment we might think we have. If we get a small scrape, we run for the antibiotic spray instead of plain old soap and water. A minor headache immediately calls for some “super strength” aspirin instead of just laying down and closing our eyes for a few moments. Minor aches and pains have their own remedies that cover acres of store shelves, while over the counter cold and flu relief do serve a purpose even if they are seriously overrated, and a real hazard if overused. The number of “do it yourself” allergy cures is quite impressive (and dangerous as well), while the flood of drugs promoted for “natural male enhancement” can cause real problems if the user has other medical problems. Many of the “super bugs” being discovered today have a simple origin, in that we commonly take unnecessary medications for every minor ill that besets us, and the bugs that cause those ills become drug resistant over time. Even worse, we tend to continue taking those medications even when the problem has long been cured. What’s going to happen when you suddenly and seriously need a particular class of medication, and nothing works because you’ve immunized yourself against them? Adding to the super bug problem, the country seems full of hypochondriacs, who often take huge numbers of pills every day, just to garner sympathy from their acquaintances?!
Writer and editor John W. Campbell once claimed that anyone who medicated themselves had a damm fool for a doctor. Considering how long a Doctor goes to school to learn the what, why, and how of drugs, I think he was quite right.
It seems that nearly 130 million Americans (almost half our population) swallow, inject, inhale, infuse, spray, or pat on prescribed medication every month according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control. There are nearly 3.5 billion prescriptions written every year, and Americans happily devour even more nonprescription drugs. Apparently we buy quite a bit more mendicants per person than any other country in the world. A growing number of doctors, researchers and public health experts are now claiming that Americans are overmedicating themselves, buying and taking far too much medicine, too readily and too carelessly, for their own health. (And that doesn’t include the huge amount of illegal drugs consumed annually.) Do we need all these drugs? A relative few of them do pull people away from almost certain death, while others help a small minority avoid heart attacks or stroke. Yet a balance of risk and benefit is hard to find for the many drugs that treat common, persistent, or daily life conditions: like anti-inflammatories, antacids, and pills for allergy, depression, shyness, premenstrual crankiness, waning sexual powers, or impulsiveness in children. Adding fuel to the fire, over 125,000 Americans die from drug reactions and mistakes each year according to several medical studies of the 90’s. That makes pharmaceuticals the fourth-leading nation wide cause of death, following heart disease, cancer and stroke. Our aging population is partly at fault, with ailments like cancer, heart attacks, stroke and Alzheimer's disease. Other medical conditions have mysteriously proliferated in recent years, including asthma, diabetes and obesity. Assorted studies have shown that exercise and diet ward off heart disease and diabetes just as effectively as drugs do, but Fred Eckel, who teaches pharmacy practice at the University of North Carolina, states that "There tends to be a reliance on drugs as the first option", which is reflected in the fact that prescription drug sales have increased an average of 11 percent per year over the past five years.
According to another study, American children are three times more likely to be prescribed psychotropic medication than are children in Europe. The study, published in BioMed Central’s “Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health” claims that this difference is accounted for by government regulations, and cultural beliefs about medication in emotional and behavioral problems. Julie Zito led a team from the US, Germany and the Netherlands in investigating these prescription issues, and said that “Antidepressant and stimulant prevalence were three or more times greater in the US than in the Netherlands and Germany, while antipsychotic prevalence was 1.5 to 2.2 times greater”. The study also claims that the differences may be due to differing diagnostic systems in that “The US trend of increasing bipolar diagnosis in children and adolescents does not reflect European practice”.
Direct advertising is also likely to account for the increased use of medications in the US, as we try to drug ourselves out of any uncomfortable circumstance. The pharmaceutical industry ran up more than $250 billion in sales last year, mostly in prescription meds according to industry consultants. That roughly equals the sales of all the country's gasoline stations put together! "We are taking way too many drugs for dubious or exaggerated ailments," says Dr. Marcia Angell, author of "The Truth About the Drug Companies." "What the drug companies are doing now is promoting drugs for long-term use to essentially healthy people. Why? Because it's the biggest market." We also overindulge ourselves far too often, the critics say, and violate the classic proscription of Hippocrates: "First, do no harm." Drug safety researcher Dr. James Kaye, of Boston University, remembers a medical school teacher telling the class: "All drugs are poisonous!" Even common vitamins can, if overdone, cause major medical problems. Hospital patients suffer seven adverse drug reactions and three drug mistakes for every 100 admissions estimates Dr. David Bates, a researcher at Boston's Brigham and Women's Hospital. That works out to about 3.6 million drug misadventures every year.
The use of multiple medications is high among the elderly, and many seniors are given ever larger amounts of drugs that are intended to treat side effects from other prescriptions. Seniors are also more likely to see different doctors who may do nothing more than take a quick look at whatever other medications you’re on, and without checking for side effects or assorted interactions. (I’ve run into that particular problem, and had a few choice words with the Doctors as a result!)
Is appears that we have an almost mystical faith in the ability of medications to instantly cure whatever major or minor ailment we might think we have. If we get a small scrape, we run for the antibiotic spray instead of plain old soap and water. A minor headache immediately calls for some “super strength” aspirin instead of just laying down and closing our eyes for a few moments. Minor aches and pains have their own remedies that cover acres of store shelves, while over the counter cold and flu relief do serve a purpose even if they are seriously overrated, and a real hazard if overused. The number of “do it yourself” allergy cures is quite impressive (and dangerous as well), while the flood of drugs promoted for “natural male enhancement” can cause real problems if the user has other medical problems. Many of the “super bugs” being discovered today have a simple origin, in that we commonly take unnecessary medications for every minor ill that besets us, and the bugs that cause those ills become drug resistant over time. Even worse, we tend to continue taking those medications even when the problem has long been cured. What’s going to happen when you suddenly and seriously need a particular class of medication, and nothing works because you’ve immunized yourself against them? Adding to the super bug problem, the country seems full of hypochondriacs, who often take huge numbers of pills every day, just to garner sympathy from their acquaintances?!
Writer and editor John W. Campbell once claimed that anyone who medicated themselves had a damm fool for a doctor. Considering how long a Doctor goes to school to learn the what, why, and how of drugs, I think he was quite right.
Monday, July 20, 2009
New Laws
Sir Winston Churchill once said that all great things are simple, and many can be expressed in single words, such as freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, and hope. Along with being the consummate politician, Winnie was quite astute I’d say, and a keen observer of human nature. Historians often have a field day with quotes from his many speeches, and use them in a good many books dedicated to explaining his political shift from liberalism to intense conservatism. I think he explained that change in attitude best when he said that anyone under thirty who was not a liberal had no heart, and anyone over thirty who was not a conservative had no brains! I’m certainly not a Churchill fan, but I will give the devil his due, and I think Winston was one of the greatest politicians of the twentieth century. Another of his quotes was “You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else.” With that particular truism, I wonder just what he’d have to say about the political situation the United States finds herself in today.
Team Obama has proposed any number of new laws that force us onto the road to socialism and government control of every aspect of our lives, with Congress as usual, blindly following along. The American people, worshiping at the alter of “change”, are happily surrendering the rights, liberties, and legal protection that served us so well for over two centuries, and that not incidentally made the United States the greatest and most powerful nation in history. What am I babbling about? Well, for starters consider the so called "hate crimes" legislation that many are calling "The Pedophile Protection Act". Democrats were able to slip HR 1913 (S. 909 in the Senate Version) through the Pelosi-controlled House of Representatives. Before it came to the floor, Rep. Louie Gohmert tried to amend the bill to exclude a variety of sex crimes, including pedophilia (child molesting), leaving the liberals in Congress hysterical. The problem is that the supporters of this bill did not want to exclude any deviant, and voted down the amendment that would have excluded pedophilia. Hate crime laws now serve only one purpose, to criminalize any thoughts, beliefs, and emotions that are not considered 'politically correct' by the looney left. It also means you better learn to keep your mouth shut, because stating your beliefs in public is about to become a federal crime, and thus very dangerous. We’re also supposed to believe that this law would equally apply to such democratic favorites as women’s libbers attacking the Boy Scout membership rules, or gays attacking the beliefs of the Catholic Church.
Another, perhaps not so emotion laden upcoming law is Mr. Gore’s favorite, the “Cap and Trade” bill. At the moment only a Senate vote stands in the way of what the Wall Street Journal is calling "the biggest tax in American history." That's because Ms. Pelosi strong-armed the so-called American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (also known as "Cap-and-Trade") through the House. According to the Heritage Foundation this "national energy tax" could cost the average family "nearly $3,000 per household per year" (that adds another $250 per month to your energy bills). House Minority Leader John Boehner stated that it will "put millions of Americans out of work" as American jobs are shipped overseas, while even Mr. Obama admitted that "electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket." And where are those jobs going… to China and India of course, countries that have no intention of crippling their economies with "Cap-and-Trade" schemes. “Cap-and-Trade" is being pushed as a system to encourage businesses to engage in "environmentally responsible activities", but it has little to do with the environment and instead will deprive you of your income, control your behavior, and stifle your liberties. Remember Obama’s campaign comment: "We can't drive our SUVs, and eat whatever we want, and keep our homes at 72 [degrees] all the time, whether we live in the desert or the tundra, and keep consuming 25% of the world's resources with just 4% of the world's population... That's not going to happen." Sounds to me like he was serious, and on that note I think I’ll start laying in a really large supply of candles and firewood, along with some extra groceries!
Then we have the plot to impose socialized medicine on us. Mr. Obama offered a hint of our future under his version of health care reform when he suggested that one way to save costs is not to spend on procedures that “…are not necessarily going to improve care” for the sick and the dying. “Maybe you’re better off not having the surgery, but taking the painkiller,” he said. Perhaps, but who decides if those extra dollars will or will not be spent on your care or the care of your family? Under the plan advocated by President Obama and his allies that someone will be a government bureaucrat, not a Doctor, and bureaucrats aren’t concerned about your long life. If that bureaucrat is doing his job, his only concern will be for the government’s bottom line. These are becoming scary times, and if you're over age of 55 or in ill health, be real scared. If you're chronically ill your future doesn't look very bright either. However, I wouldn’t be all that concerned about local health care, as under a liberal designed medical system every “Red State” village in the country will have its own government certified Witch Doctor, while the few remaining MD’s will be busily caring for Obama’s minions. The takeover of health care is nothing more than another power grab similar to his takeover of the banks and the automobile industry. Its goal is not to improve health care, but to reward political allies, and punish political dissent. After all, the feds already own 60% of GM, and the lord only knows how much of the financial industry. What are they going to do with that control? I don’t know, but it’s interesting to consider that of Mr. Obama’s ten top advisors, not one has any experience at operating a successful business. But they continue telling us that they know what’s best for American business… Following the “success” we’ve had with envirofreaks controlling our public lands and natural resources, I’m real curious to see what happens when those same crazies put their hand to designing cars and trucks. Does anyone besides me remember the “high quality” (sarcasm intended) of Soviet produced consumer goods as came from their government owned and controlled factories in the 50’s and 60’s? There was after all, a good reason for the high demand for western produced goods among the Russian people. You might also have noticed the news report about the federal dispersal of stimulus funds. It would seem that the “blue” counties across the nation are receiving approximately twice the stimulus funding as are the “red” counties, despite whatever needs they might have. I guess that’s the reward for supporting Obama and company.
I have little hope that these infringements upon our Constitutional rights and our liberty will fail to be passed by our rather insipid representatives in Congress. As Churchill said, Americans will try anything, and our current spineless Congress will buy anything Mr. Obama says. But I think that once the American population finally figures out just what they’re loosing, sanity will prevail, we’ll rear up on our hind legs and elect hard-nosed freedom-loving politicians at all levels of government, these laws will be repealed, and the federal government will be put firmly in its place. I’d also hope that the loony left will be told not only “no” but “HELL NO”, and America’s experiment with socialism will be exiled to history’s trash bin where it belongs!
Team Obama has proposed any number of new laws that force us onto the road to socialism and government control of every aspect of our lives, with Congress as usual, blindly following along. The American people, worshiping at the alter of “change”, are happily surrendering the rights, liberties, and legal protection that served us so well for over two centuries, and that not incidentally made the United States the greatest and most powerful nation in history. What am I babbling about? Well, for starters consider the so called "hate crimes" legislation that many are calling "The Pedophile Protection Act". Democrats were able to slip HR 1913 (S. 909 in the Senate Version) through the Pelosi-controlled House of Representatives. Before it came to the floor, Rep. Louie Gohmert tried to amend the bill to exclude a variety of sex crimes, including pedophilia (child molesting), leaving the liberals in Congress hysterical. The problem is that the supporters of this bill did not want to exclude any deviant, and voted down the amendment that would have excluded pedophilia. Hate crime laws now serve only one purpose, to criminalize any thoughts, beliefs, and emotions that are not considered 'politically correct' by the looney left. It also means you better learn to keep your mouth shut, because stating your beliefs in public is about to become a federal crime, and thus very dangerous. We’re also supposed to believe that this law would equally apply to such democratic favorites as women’s libbers attacking the Boy Scout membership rules, or gays attacking the beliefs of the Catholic Church.
Another, perhaps not so emotion laden upcoming law is Mr. Gore’s favorite, the “Cap and Trade” bill. At the moment only a Senate vote stands in the way of what the Wall Street Journal is calling "the biggest tax in American history." That's because Ms. Pelosi strong-armed the so-called American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (also known as "Cap-and-Trade") through the House. According to the Heritage Foundation this "national energy tax" could cost the average family "nearly $3,000 per household per year" (that adds another $250 per month to your energy bills). House Minority Leader John Boehner stated that it will "put millions of Americans out of work" as American jobs are shipped overseas, while even Mr. Obama admitted that "electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket." And where are those jobs going… to China and India of course, countries that have no intention of crippling their economies with "Cap-and-Trade" schemes. “Cap-and-Trade" is being pushed as a system to encourage businesses to engage in "environmentally responsible activities", but it has little to do with the environment and instead will deprive you of your income, control your behavior, and stifle your liberties. Remember Obama’s campaign comment: "We can't drive our SUVs, and eat whatever we want, and keep our homes at 72 [degrees] all the time, whether we live in the desert or the tundra, and keep consuming 25% of the world's resources with just 4% of the world's population... That's not going to happen." Sounds to me like he was serious, and on that note I think I’ll start laying in a really large supply of candles and firewood, along with some extra groceries!
Then we have the plot to impose socialized medicine on us. Mr. Obama offered a hint of our future under his version of health care reform when he suggested that one way to save costs is not to spend on procedures that “…are not necessarily going to improve care” for the sick and the dying. “Maybe you’re better off not having the surgery, but taking the painkiller,” he said. Perhaps, but who decides if those extra dollars will or will not be spent on your care or the care of your family? Under the plan advocated by President Obama and his allies that someone will be a government bureaucrat, not a Doctor, and bureaucrats aren’t concerned about your long life. If that bureaucrat is doing his job, his only concern will be for the government’s bottom line. These are becoming scary times, and if you're over age of 55 or in ill health, be real scared. If you're chronically ill your future doesn't look very bright either. However, I wouldn’t be all that concerned about local health care, as under a liberal designed medical system every “Red State” village in the country will have its own government certified Witch Doctor, while the few remaining MD’s will be busily caring for Obama’s minions. The takeover of health care is nothing more than another power grab similar to his takeover of the banks and the automobile industry. Its goal is not to improve health care, but to reward political allies, and punish political dissent. After all, the feds already own 60% of GM, and the lord only knows how much of the financial industry. What are they going to do with that control? I don’t know, but it’s interesting to consider that of Mr. Obama’s ten top advisors, not one has any experience at operating a successful business. But they continue telling us that they know what’s best for American business… Following the “success” we’ve had with envirofreaks controlling our public lands and natural resources, I’m real curious to see what happens when those same crazies put their hand to designing cars and trucks. Does anyone besides me remember the “high quality” (sarcasm intended) of Soviet produced consumer goods as came from their government owned and controlled factories in the 50’s and 60’s? There was after all, a good reason for the high demand for western produced goods among the Russian people. You might also have noticed the news report about the federal dispersal of stimulus funds. It would seem that the “blue” counties across the nation are receiving approximately twice the stimulus funding as are the “red” counties, despite whatever needs they might have. I guess that’s the reward for supporting Obama and company.
I have little hope that these infringements upon our Constitutional rights and our liberty will fail to be passed by our rather insipid representatives in Congress. As Churchill said, Americans will try anything, and our current spineless Congress will buy anything Mr. Obama says. But I think that once the American population finally figures out just what they’re loosing, sanity will prevail, we’ll rear up on our hind legs and elect hard-nosed freedom-loving politicians at all levels of government, these laws will be repealed, and the federal government will be put firmly in its place. I’d also hope that the loony left will be told not only “no” but “HELL NO”, and America’s experiment with socialism will be exiled to history’s trash bin where it belongs!
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Danger! Danger!
"The world is a dangerous place to live, not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it." -- Albert Einstein
It’s a sad day for America when our citizens, long known for their individualism and love of freedom, have accepted a childlike faith in the powers of big government. Our new federal administration is quickly taking this idea to astronomic new levels as it proposes a seemingly unending series of centralized government plans to regulate, control, and now subsidize, every facet of our lives. And it's not just the far left who are so happy with the thought of individuals bowing to government wishes, with many self proclaimed Republicans now believing that government can protect us from all evil, make us moral and upright, and in whatever spare time is left we can impose democratic governments on other nations. Today’s entire political scene… from the far right to the far left… has become nothing more than an insane grab for power with the vast majority of Americans stuck, seemingly powerless, in the middle.
The Left hates the private sector even as its believers enjoy the fruits of our “despicable” market-based system. Leftist leaning government workers profit by regulating, controlling, and bossing around everyone else, yet somehow it's OK for them to live off the fruit of the land. You've got to wonder about people who are so obsessed with divvying up Americas apple pie, and yet want to regulate and completely control the people who grew the apples, milled the flour, built the oven, and even baked the pie! Certainly people have the right to profit from their efforts, but the left would strip the productive of their gain in order to “redistribute the wealth” to those who are not productive, all in the guise of numerous “reel good” social welfare programs. It was once claimed that no government could afford to ignore the social needs of its people if it intended to stay in power. Quite so I think, but neither can any government afford to address every social need of every citizen unless it wants to soon become bankrupt. In our case that’s shortly after we go broke funding the needs of big business!
Yes, there are things government legitimately is tasked to do. People who criminally violate other people's rights need to be stopped. We need government to protect our nation from foreign invaders. Given the fallible nature of government (and of human beings), our founders created a system filled with checks and balances and limitations on government power. Americans started out grudgingly letting government protect life, liberty and property, and now we’re cheering a government that is obliterating all those things! George Washington once said, "Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master." Advocates of bigger government, even in the guise of social programs, are doing nothing less than calling for the creation of more masters and more servants, with most of us destined to fall into that latter class.
Several years ago a friend asked me why I was so “down” on college educated people. I don’t remember what my answer was, but his question has stuck in my mind ever since, and I’ve never figured out just how to properly answer it. In truth, I have nothing against education… in fact I’m a firm believer in the educational process, and I’d think that without a very long line of educated people behind us we’d still be living in the stone age! What I do object to is the huge number of people who are “educated” far beyond their level of competence, and consider themselves the greatest living experts in their chosen field. Many of them seem to believe that they have all the answers to the problems of mankind, and manage to get themselves hired by the government in order to regulate our lives in accordance with their half-baked theories!
Is it really a surprise that America was for so long a bastion of wealth, ingenuity and freedom? Was it because we had more public-spirited and intelligent government officials, or was it because our government was designed with strict limits so that the private sector could flourish? I don't really like Soviet and Nazi analogies, but there's a reason those systems were so brutal and evil. They were systems that gave full control of daily life to the government. The beauty of our nation's founding is that it drew strict lines around governmental authority. Over many years, those lines have grown dim, and now we allowing them to be erased completely. An editorial in Russia's Pravda newspaper recently chastised America for heading down its current path: "Apparently, even though we suffered 70 years of this Western-sponsored horror show, we know nothing, as foolish, drunken Russians, so let our 'wise' Anglo-Saxon fools find out the folly of their own pride. … The proud American will go down into his slavery without a fight, beating his chest and proclaiming to the world how free he really is. The world will only snicker." Yet even as America heads down that socialist trail, we still lecture the world about our freedom.
I for one am greatly concerned about the sheer number of issues Barack Obama is cramming down the throats of Congress and the American people. Everyday we see more items on his "I want” list, while he doesn’t bother to ask the American people what they want, and refuses to tolerate any opposition to his position on any subject. What did we do, somehow manage to elect a king? Despite evidence to the contrary from countries and even our states (California) who have tried his policies, he doesn’t change his efforts to destroy the United States from within, and turn us into a socialist regime. The national debt he has piled-up will take centuries to pay off, the energy bill will cost us millions of jobs and make any sort of energy unaffordable. His "health care" plan will turn into another nightmare of government inefficiency. Congress is never given time to read (if they even can read) proposed bills, or even to know what is in them, yet they’re expected to happily turn out "yes" votes on command of the omnipotent one. What has happened to our Constitution, and our common sense?
The American people watched the fall of the once mighty Soviet Union, as their version of socialism failed and their government collapsed under its own weight. Daily we watch Red China struggle with their efforts to remain a socialist state and yet allow the private enterprise they can’t survive without. We see the failings of European style socialism displayed on television and in the newspapers nearly every day. We can see starvation marching across socialist North Korea. Yet our left leaning administration is grabbing all the reins of power they can get, and seems hell-bent on forcing the United States to follow in the footsteps of those failed socialist states!
Under no president except Abe Lincoln have the American people ever wanted to leave the union, yet today we have a growing secessionist movement all across the country, primarily I think because so many Americans are well aware that no government in history has ever voluntarily surrendered its power over the common citizen. And unfortunately today’s average American seems far more interested in the doings of movie stars and sports icons than in what our elected politicians are doing to us.
It’s a sad day for America when our citizens, long known for their individualism and love of freedom, have accepted a childlike faith in the powers of big government. Our new federal administration is quickly taking this idea to astronomic new levels as it proposes a seemingly unending series of centralized government plans to regulate, control, and now subsidize, every facet of our lives. And it's not just the far left who are so happy with the thought of individuals bowing to government wishes, with many self proclaimed Republicans now believing that government can protect us from all evil, make us moral and upright, and in whatever spare time is left we can impose democratic governments on other nations. Today’s entire political scene… from the far right to the far left… has become nothing more than an insane grab for power with the vast majority of Americans stuck, seemingly powerless, in the middle.
The Left hates the private sector even as its believers enjoy the fruits of our “despicable” market-based system. Leftist leaning government workers profit by regulating, controlling, and bossing around everyone else, yet somehow it's OK for them to live off the fruit of the land. You've got to wonder about people who are so obsessed with divvying up Americas apple pie, and yet want to regulate and completely control the people who grew the apples, milled the flour, built the oven, and even baked the pie! Certainly people have the right to profit from their efforts, but the left would strip the productive of their gain in order to “redistribute the wealth” to those who are not productive, all in the guise of numerous “reel good” social welfare programs. It was once claimed that no government could afford to ignore the social needs of its people if it intended to stay in power. Quite so I think, but neither can any government afford to address every social need of every citizen unless it wants to soon become bankrupt. In our case that’s shortly after we go broke funding the needs of big business!
Yes, there are things government legitimately is tasked to do. People who criminally violate other people's rights need to be stopped. We need government to protect our nation from foreign invaders. Given the fallible nature of government (and of human beings), our founders created a system filled with checks and balances and limitations on government power. Americans started out grudgingly letting government protect life, liberty and property, and now we’re cheering a government that is obliterating all those things! George Washington once said, "Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master." Advocates of bigger government, even in the guise of social programs, are doing nothing less than calling for the creation of more masters and more servants, with most of us destined to fall into that latter class.
Several years ago a friend asked me why I was so “down” on college educated people. I don’t remember what my answer was, but his question has stuck in my mind ever since, and I’ve never figured out just how to properly answer it. In truth, I have nothing against education… in fact I’m a firm believer in the educational process, and I’d think that without a very long line of educated people behind us we’d still be living in the stone age! What I do object to is the huge number of people who are “educated” far beyond their level of competence, and consider themselves the greatest living experts in their chosen field. Many of them seem to believe that they have all the answers to the problems of mankind, and manage to get themselves hired by the government in order to regulate our lives in accordance with their half-baked theories!
Is it really a surprise that America was for so long a bastion of wealth, ingenuity and freedom? Was it because we had more public-spirited and intelligent government officials, or was it because our government was designed with strict limits so that the private sector could flourish? I don't really like Soviet and Nazi analogies, but there's a reason those systems were so brutal and evil. They were systems that gave full control of daily life to the government. The beauty of our nation's founding is that it drew strict lines around governmental authority. Over many years, those lines have grown dim, and now we allowing them to be erased completely. An editorial in Russia's Pravda newspaper recently chastised America for heading down its current path: "Apparently, even though we suffered 70 years of this Western-sponsored horror show, we know nothing, as foolish, drunken Russians, so let our 'wise' Anglo-Saxon fools find out the folly of their own pride. … The proud American will go down into his slavery without a fight, beating his chest and proclaiming to the world how free he really is. The world will only snicker." Yet even as America heads down that socialist trail, we still lecture the world about our freedom.
I for one am greatly concerned about the sheer number of issues Barack Obama is cramming down the throats of Congress and the American people. Everyday we see more items on his "I want” list, while he doesn’t bother to ask the American people what they want, and refuses to tolerate any opposition to his position on any subject. What did we do, somehow manage to elect a king? Despite evidence to the contrary from countries and even our states (California) who have tried his policies, he doesn’t change his efforts to destroy the United States from within, and turn us into a socialist regime. The national debt he has piled-up will take centuries to pay off, the energy bill will cost us millions of jobs and make any sort of energy unaffordable. His "health care" plan will turn into another nightmare of government inefficiency. Congress is never given time to read (if they even can read) proposed bills, or even to know what is in them, yet they’re expected to happily turn out "yes" votes on command of the omnipotent one. What has happened to our Constitution, and our common sense?
The American people watched the fall of the once mighty Soviet Union, as their version of socialism failed and their government collapsed under its own weight. Daily we watch Red China struggle with their efforts to remain a socialist state and yet allow the private enterprise they can’t survive without. We see the failings of European style socialism displayed on television and in the newspapers nearly every day. We can see starvation marching across socialist North Korea. Yet our left leaning administration is grabbing all the reins of power they can get, and seems hell-bent on forcing the United States to follow in the footsteps of those failed socialist states!
Under no president except Abe Lincoln have the American people ever wanted to leave the union, yet today we have a growing secessionist movement all across the country, primarily I think because so many Americans are well aware that no government in history has ever voluntarily surrendered its power over the common citizen. And unfortunately today’s average American seems far more interested in the doings of movie stars and sports icons than in what our elected politicians are doing to us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)