We have a tradition in this country of trust in the individual. We are a country shaped by the rugged individual. We look back fondly on cowboys, ranchers, gold miners, and Rockefellers. Men who headed out into the world to make it big without the help of anyone, especially the government. Men who took control of their destiny and won.
But now, we have begun to turn away from that model of society. We have begun to look to the government to solve our problems. We are looking for the government to take care of us as though they are lords of the manor and we are the serfs. We are voluntarily giving up ourselves and becoming serfs. We are saying, by choice, that we cannot care for ourselves and that another must look to our needs. We are saying the essential elements of democracy no longer exist in this country. We are no longer holding our elected leaders responsible or requiring that they listen to their constituents.
Now Europe easily took up this type of motto. They are after all a continent steeped in the history of monarchies and serfs. We, however, are not. We are a country that revolted against taxation without representation. Now we are saying, “Hey, government, if you don’t want to listen and spend like there’s no tomorrow ensuring that everyone in this country will have to pay drastically higher taxes in the future, that’s ok.”
We in the U.S. have always reveled in facing challenges and overcoming. We have always distrusted the government. We joke daily about how the government can screw up anything. Yet now, we are quietly acquiescing to government control of our lives. It is as though the American spirit has finally been crushed.
Well, in honor of Tea Party Day, I say no. I say my spirit still survives. I believe in the individual. I believe the government should be limited. I believe in state’s rights. I believe that all of us should look to ourselves for hope in the future and positive change. Do not believe the hype. You can help yourself. You don’t need to government.So reach out to your neighbor and offer those in need your help, without assistance of the government. Look around your neighborhood, reach out and help. Look to yourself and reach out and help yourself.
You are your own hope and change. The government isn’t.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Saturday, February 7, 2009
A letter to the president
Dear President Obama,
You sure can speak well. You just talk and talk about hope and change and FEAR. You tell us that if we don’t get that stimulus passed, we’ll lose more jobs and slide into a catastrophe. If we pass this stimulus bill, we’ll get more jobs. However, Mr. Obama, this is no longer the campaign trail and rhetoric is no longer the full scope of your job. Your job is now about results. So, Mr. President, I would like to ask you a question. How? How is this stimulus bill supposed to create jobs?
The CBO (staffed with primarily democrats, mind you) says the bill result in a long-term net loss to the American economy. Sounds kind of like you want to give America its own lost decade like Japan had. I would prefer that not happen. But that’s just me. Perhaps you think it is a fair exchange to sacrifice the long-term economic success of our country in exchange for socialist-reminiscent policies the American people wouldn’t support if they knew what you were actually proposing. If this is indeed what you believe, perhaps you should first tell the American people about your plan to screw them over. I mean, it’s only fair since it is their tax money being used and their kids’ futures being mortgaged.
Also, Mr. President, you joked that a spending bill is a stimulus bill and you don’t get what the Republican’s objection to your current bill is. Well, Mr. President, I fear you might actually be an idiot. You see, money come from somewhere, so when you spend with one hand you take it out the other. If that other hand has a higher multiplier result for its spending patterns, then by taking it you are actually causing a net loss to the economy. Sir, you see, all spending is not the same. The fact that you somehow believe it is all the same is very worrisome to me and I am going to ask you to go ahead and read some books on economics. Even Keynes would call that statement stupid.
In your multiple personality disorder like quest to name your prior President mentor, you temporarily landed on JFK. Now, you didn’t stay long, and this is probably for the best since I am pretty sure JFK would have hated you. You see, JFK cut taxes because he knew it is proven to help the economy. He also got us into Vietnam, but that is another story.
Of course, then you moved onto FDR. Of course, you couldn’t stay with him, because the lessons from his story wouldn’t allow you to sneak it your payoffs to interest groups and secret advancements of your ideology. You know, that ideology you try to hide from the American people by misnaming things and stating falsehoods? Like calling tax credits tax cuts and blaming Bush’s deregulation policies when he didn’t deregulate anything. You know what isn’t proven to help the economy, and you might have learned this if you actually studied FDR and the Great Depression? Government spending does not seem to have a strong immediate impact on quickly reviving the economy. Otherwise, the Great Depression wouldn’t have lasted so long. There is thing called the crowding out effect. You may want to look it up. You know what else? Protectionist trade policies real hurt the economy in the recession. Both Hoover and FDR could tell you that. But I guess this is a lesson you didn’t want to learn, so you moved onto a new idol.
Good old Mr. Lincoln. First, he was a Republican, in case you didn’t know. He also violated the constitution to save it. He would likely not have favored your decisions regarding Gitmo and he also wouldn’t likely favor your decision to release terrorists. He was a president in a time of war and great societal upheaval. I wonder if that is what you want for this country. Are you hinting that you want to bring about a new civil war? I’m not really in favor of that and I really don’t think anyone else it. Oh, by the way, your opposition is the gun rights party, so they are probably going to kick your butt. Maybe you like Lincoln’s divided cabinet. But that divided cabinet created a whole mess of problems, which is why Lincoln didn’t always listen to them. Perhaps, that is why you favor Lincoln. You want have historical support for you decision to not listen to anyone. I know you ego is big, Obama, but you know nothing about the economy, so you might want to listen to some people who do.
There are a lot of articles out there of late discussing the complete lack of stimulus spending in this stimulus bill (what is it, 12% - 24% could qualify as stimulus spending), and, Mr. President, it may be time to listen. You see, Mr. President, the Republicans are stubborn and they will let you and your party sink you own ship. They will let themselves be viewed as playing partisan politics if it means saving this country from the catastrophe you are trying to force upon us.
You speak of preventing catastrophes, Mr. President, but you are about to create one. Perhaps it is time you grew up a bit and starting thinking about the consequences of your actions. No amount of pretty speeches will save you if you pass this bill and it tanks the economy.
You sure can speak well. You just talk and talk about hope and change and FEAR. You tell us that if we don’t get that stimulus passed, we’ll lose more jobs and slide into a catastrophe. If we pass this stimulus bill, we’ll get more jobs. However, Mr. Obama, this is no longer the campaign trail and rhetoric is no longer the full scope of your job. Your job is now about results. So, Mr. President, I would like to ask you a question. How? How is this stimulus bill supposed to create jobs?
The CBO (staffed with primarily democrats, mind you) says the bill result in a long-term net loss to the American economy. Sounds kind of like you want to give America its own lost decade like Japan had. I would prefer that not happen. But that’s just me. Perhaps you think it is a fair exchange to sacrifice the long-term economic success of our country in exchange for socialist-reminiscent policies the American people wouldn’t support if they knew what you were actually proposing. If this is indeed what you believe, perhaps you should first tell the American people about your plan to screw them over. I mean, it’s only fair since it is their tax money being used and their kids’ futures being mortgaged.
Also, Mr. President, you joked that a spending bill is a stimulus bill and you don’t get what the Republican’s objection to your current bill is. Well, Mr. President, I fear you might actually be an idiot. You see, money come from somewhere, so when you spend with one hand you take it out the other. If that other hand has a higher multiplier result for its spending patterns, then by taking it you are actually causing a net loss to the economy. Sir, you see, all spending is not the same. The fact that you somehow believe it is all the same is very worrisome to me and I am going to ask you to go ahead and read some books on economics. Even Keynes would call that statement stupid.
In your multiple personality disorder like quest to name your prior President mentor, you temporarily landed on JFK. Now, you didn’t stay long, and this is probably for the best since I am pretty sure JFK would have hated you. You see, JFK cut taxes because he knew it is proven to help the economy. He also got us into Vietnam, but that is another story.
Of course, then you moved onto FDR. Of course, you couldn’t stay with him, because the lessons from his story wouldn’t allow you to sneak it your payoffs to interest groups and secret advancements of your ideology. You know, that ideology you try to hide from the American people by misnaming things and stating falsehoods? Like calling tax credits tax cuts and blaming Bush’s deregulation policies when he didn’t deregulate anything. You know what isn’t proven to help the economy, and you might have learned this if you actually studied FDR and the Great Depression? Government spending does not seem to have a strong immediate impact on quickly reviving the economy. Otherwise, the Great Depression wouldn’t have lasted so long. There is thing called the crowding out effect. You may want to look it up. You know what else? Protectionist trade policies real hurt the economy in the recession. Both Hoover and FDR could tell you that. But I guess this is a lesson you didn’t want to learn, so you moved onto a new idol.
Good old Mr. Lincoln. First, he was a Republican, in case you didn’t know. He also violated the constitution to save it. He would likely not have favored your decisions regarding Gitmo and he also wouldn’t likely favor your decision to release terrorists. He was a president in a time of war and great societal upheaval. I wonder if that is what you want for this country. Are you hinting that you want to bring about a new civil war? I’m not really in favor of that and I really don’t think anyone else it. Oh, by the way, your opposition is the gun rights party, so they are probably going to kick your butt. Maybe you like Lincoln’s divided cabinet. But that divided cabinet created a whole mess of problems, which is why Lincoln didn’t always listen to them. Perhaps, that is why you favor Lincoln. You want have historical support for you decision to not listen to anyone. I know you ego is big, Obama, but you know nothing about the economy, so you might want to listen to some people who do.
There are a lot of articles out there of late discussing the complete lack of stimulus spending in this stimulus bill (what is it, 12% - 24% could qualify as stimulus spending), and, Mr. President, it may be time to listen. You see, Mr. President, the Republicans are stubborn and they will let you and your party sink you own ship. They will let themselves be viewed as playing partisan politics if it means saving this country from the catastrophe you are trying to force upon us.
You speak of preventing catastrophes, Mr. President, but you are about to create one. Perhaps it is time you grew up a bit and starting thinking about the consequences of your actions. No amount of pretty speeches will save you if you pass this bill and it tanks the economy.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
How to get out of this Economic Mess
1. No unnecessary government debt (if it doesn’t help revive the economy, get it out of the stimulus bill). If I have to buckle down so does the government. Not that I don’t think the government should help. It helped create the mess after all.
a. I should add as caveat that I am not a big Keynes fan, especially since the private enterprise multiplier is bigger than the government spending multiplier and doesn’t result in massive debt for future generations or indebtedness to foreign countries like China.
2. Tax cuts for everyone (and I mean actual tax cuts not Obama’s definition which is essentially welfare for the working – Obama, tax credits are not tax cuts, just in case you wondered). Especially tax cuts for manufacturing companies that employ Americans. Their very existence makes stimulus spending have a greater impact.
3. We need to improve our infrastructure so I approve spending on dig ready projects. Otherwise, keep it out of the stimulus bill.
4. Let companies do their thing. Now I know we are bitter about the wallstreet collapse and want to blame wallstreet CEOS. Well, actually I think democrats and left-wingers want to blame CEOs because it gets them off the hook for all their government programs and government backed entities (Fannie, Freddie, Hannie) that helped get us into this mess. But besides all that we should remember that workers have jobs because companies employ them, so we should be a little nicer to companies. Otherwise there are no jobs. Just in case you didn’t grasp the whole worker/employer dynamic.
5. Also, call out unions when they get ridiculous. No union should own a multi-million dollar private golf course (hear that big three union bosses – you should probable unload that). And no union worker should earn hourly more than an attorney does.
6. Shrink Fannie and Freddie so this never happens again. Somehow this whole mess makes me think of the titanic, “a ship too big to sink.” And we still haven’t learned a thing.
7. The markets work. Let me show you an example. Oil prices have dropped. That means input costs are going down. That means companies can sell goods for cheaper. That means more people can buy them. That means demand for the product will go up. That means companies can increase supplies. That means they can hire more workers. That means unemployment will go down as long as we maintain low input costs – miracles of miracles. Companies are already expressing gratitude at lower input costs and the fact that it will help them lay off les workers. Therefore, if anyone mentions a tax on gad (Obama) tell them to stop being an idiot. Considering the re-occurring nominee with tax problems theme going on right now, you may just want to tell Obama that as a matter of course.
a. Another example. House prices have dropped. House sales are again going up. And at the last report they were going up quicker than predicted. It’s nice how market corrections work. The market is in the bottom stages of recovery already.
b. Let me give you a counter example. During the Great Depression FDR thought keeping workers wages high would get us out of the depression because workers would have more money to spend. He imposed various policies to encourage this. This meant input costs went up. This meant goods cost more. This meant that less were purchased. And it also meant that employers couldn’t afford sufficient workers so less workers were employed. It also meant the whole lot of them went bankrupt. This helped, along with other really bad policies like increasing taxes, driving out private industry from the market so the government could run things, and of course Hoover’s Smoot-Hartley, the Great Depression last a decade. Obama, you may have heard of the Smoot-Hartley bill. It’s what Europe just reminded you of.
8. Do not cap executive pay. That is just stupid. All the smart guys and girls will stay away from wallstreet and go to other industries where they can make more money. I could maybe understand bonuses (not support a cap, but understand the argument). Pay caps just mean you have no idea how companies work. Is this where the Obama = idiot line comes in again?
9. Tell people to depend on themselves. Be innovators. Work hard, stop bitching and dig in. That is what our country was founded on. It was not founded on Hollywood actors and sports stars or crazy global warming zealots who want to push us back into the dark ages. It was founded on the premise of the individual. That the individual is mightier than the government. We rejected the European inheritance of feudalism and the concept of a ruling elite that needed to look after the unwashed masses. We started our country with the premise that we all are created equal. We are all the masses and as individuals we are all great. We founded our country on self-reliance. On the belief that a limited government is good. That government should always be a little distrusted. After all the power to do a lot of good is also the power to do just as much bad. We were not a country founded on reliance on the government. We were founded on reliance on ourselves as individuals. It made us a great country. This new theory of relying on the government just drags us away from the very foundation that made this country great and leads us perilously close to mediocrity. It spits in the face on all the great achievements the individuals in this country have attained. It devalues the very heart of the founding principles of our country. So Obama, Pelosi, I reject your argument. I do not want to accept your progeny of feudalism. I will embrace individualism and capitalism and limited government and rejoice in all the great things it has brought us.
a. I should add as caveat that I am not a big Keynes fan, especially since the private enterprise multiplier is bigger than the government spending multiplier and doesn’t result in massive debt for future generations or indebtedness to foreign countries like China.
2. Tax cuts for everyone (and I mean actual tax cuts not Obama’s definition which is essentially welfare for the working – Obama, tax credits are not tax cuts, just in case you wondered). Especially tax cuts for manufacturing companies that employ Americans. Their very existence makes stimulus spending have a greater impact.
3. We need to improve our infrastructure so I approve spending on dig ready projects. Otherwise, keep it out of the stimulus bill.
4. Let companies do their thing. Now I know we are bitter about the wallstreet collapse and want to blame wallstreet CEOS. Well, actually I think democrats and left-wingers want to blame CEOs because it gets them off the hook for all their government programs and government backed entities (Fannie, Freddie, Hannie) that helped get us into this mess. But besides all that we should remember that workers have jobs because companies employ them, so we should be a little nicer to companies. Otherwise there are no jobs. Just in case you didn’t grasp the whole worker/employer dynamic.
5. Also, call out unions when they get ridiculous. No union should own a multi-million dollar private golf course (hear that big three union bosses – you should probable unload that). And no union worker should earn hourly more than an attorney does.
6. Shrink Fannie and Freddie so this never happens again. Somehow this whole mess makes me think of the titanic, “a ship too big to sink.” And we still haven’t learned a thing.
7. The markets work. Let me show you an example. Oil prices have dropped. That means input costs are going down. That means companies can sell goods for cheaper. That means more people can buy them. That means demand for the product will go up. That means companies can increase supplies. That means they can hire more workers. That means unemployment will go down as long as we maintain low input costs – miracles of miracles. Companies are already expressing gratitude at lower input costs and the fact that it will help them lay off les workers. Therefore, if anyone mentions a tax on gad (Obama) tell them to stop being an idiot. Considering the re-occurring nominee with tax problems theme going on right now, you may just want to tell Obama that as a matter of course.
a. Another example. House prices have dropped. House sales are again going up. And at the last report they were going up quicker than predicted. It’s nice how market corrections work. The market is in the bottom stages of recovery already.
b. Let me give you a counter example. During the Great Depression FDR thought keeping workers wages high would get us out of the depression because workers would have more money to spend. He imposed various policies to encourage this. This meant input costs went up. This meant goods cost more. This meant that less were purchased. And it also meant that employers couldn’t afford sufficient workers so less workers were employed. It also meant the whole lot of them went bankrupt. This helped, along with other really bad policies like increasing taxes, driving out private industry from the market so the government could run things, and of course Hoover’s Smoot-Hartley, the Great Depression last a decade. Obama, you may have heard of the Smoot-Hartley bill. It’s what Europe just reminded you of.
8. Do not cap executive pay. That is just stupid. All the smart guys and girls will stay away from wallstreet and go to other industries where they can make more money. I could maybe understand bonuses (not support a cap, but understand the argument). Pay caps just mean you have no idea how companies work. Is this where the Obama = idiot line comes in again?
9. Tell people to depend on themselves. Be innovators. Work hard, stop bitching and dig in. That is what our country was founded on. It was not founded on Hollywood actors and sports stars or crazy global warming zealots who want to push us back into the dark ages. It was founded on the premise of the individual. That the individual is mightier than the government. We rejected the European inheritance of feudalism and the concept of a ruling elite that needed to look after the unwashed masses. We started our country with the premise that we all are created equal. We are all the masses and as individuals we are all great. We founded our country on self-reliance. On the belief that a limited government is good. That government should always be a little distrusted. After all the power to do a lot of good is also the power to do just as much bad. We were not a country founded on reliance on the government. We were founded on reliance on ourselves as individuals. It made us a great country. This new theory of relying on the government just drags us away from the very foundation that made this country great and leads us perilously close to mediocrity. It spits in the face on all the great achievements the individuals in this country have attained. It devalues the very heart of the founding principles of our country. So Obama, Pelosi, I reject your argument. I do not want to accept your progeny of feudalism. I will embrace individualism and capitalism and limited government and rejoice in all the great things it has brought us.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
An Article from Steve Backiel - Very Good Read
Steven M. Backiel is the Executive Director of the Republican Party of Cuyahoga County
The Non-Prosecuted Crimes of Our Century
Our history books tell us of the great conflicts of mankind and the role our nation has played in each. Children in history classes can tell you the dates and countries involved in each World War and can show you a map of what nations stood and which fell. Today, those in school will be able to pinpoint Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan and give details on each conflict. The question, however, remains to be asked and answers are not forthcoming from our current or future leaders when it comes to the issue of Genocide on the continent of Africa.
The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide- to which the United States is a signatory- obliges the United Nations to act to prevent genocide. The convention defines genocide as “acts committed with intent to destroy a national, racial or religious group by deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about their physical destruction”
Investigating the twentieth century, there would be many examples of genocide that our history books and professors fail to cover with the same determination that they would, say WWI or II. Examples are the 1915 Armenian Genocide one million dead, Russian Civil War 1918-1922 over twelve million killed, and China’s Mao Tse-Tung murdered forty nine million people during the eight year period of the “Great Leap Forward” and “Cultural Revolution”.
If you’re wondering if our leaders are informed about the crime of genocide simply take these “acts” of genocide publicized by the movie Hotel Rwanda as a case in point.
April 6 Rwandan Armed Forces and Hutu Militia set up roadblocks and go house to house killing Tutsis and moderate Hutu politicians. Thousands die on the first day. The UN Assistance Mission in Rwanda stands by while the slaughter occurs.
April 7 Belgian soldiers with the UN assigned to guard the Hutu Prime Minister are captured and tortured to death. President Clinton issues a statement expressing “his concern and condolences”.
April 9 France and Belgium send troops to rescue their citizens. American civilians are also rescued. The Red Cross estimates that tens of thousands of Rwandans have been murdered.
April 14 the UN Security Council votes unanimously to withdraw most of the UNAMIR troops, cutting the force deployment from 2500 to 270.
April 21 The Red Cross estimates hundreds of thousands of Rwandans are now dead.
The UN Security Council passes a resolution condemning the killings but omits the word “genocide” had the term been used, the UN would have been legally obligated to act to “prevent and punish the perpetrators”.
May 2 White House starts holding daily confidential briefings on Rwanda.
May 3 President Clinton signs a Presidential Decision Directive (PDD25), created after a review of the nations peacekeeping policies. PDD 25 aims to limit U.S. Military involvement in international peacekeeping operations.
May 13 U.N. votes on restoring UNAMIR’s strength in Rwanda; however the US Representative Madeline Albright, delays the vote for four days.
May 17 the UN agrees to send 5500 troops and acknowledges that “acts of genocide may have been committed” however deployment is delayed over arguments of who will pay the bill and provide equipment.
The Red Cross estimates 500,000 Rwandans have been killed.
June 22 no sign of UN deployment, the Security Council authorizes the deployment of French forces to south-west Rwanda “Operation Turquoise” creates “safe areas”.
Mid-July although disease claims many lives in the refugee camps, the genocide is over- 800,000 Rwandans have been murdered in 100 days.
The crimes of genocide continue today in Sudan, Chad and the Congo, they are driven by Islamic religious extremists and financed by Africa’s corrupt governments. Yet there is no national outcry for peace in these African nations, the US, even after a unanimous Congressional vote (422-0) in July 2006 calling the human rights abuses by their rightful name of genocide, isn’t sending troops to aid the people from losing generations of their citizenry.
We disregard the fact that 3 million lives have been extinguished in the Sudan, over 3.5 million have been killed in Eastern Congo, and there are 2.5 million people displaced from Darfur alone that now face death from starvation and disease as the Sudanese government and Janjaweed militias attempt to block all humanitarian aid from reaching them. To bring the Sudan and Congo numbers into a clear focus you would be talking about the murder of everyone living in the states of Hawaii, Idaho, Maine, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island and to bring the refugee numbers from Darfur into focus, imagine the entire population of the state of Nevada being displaced. All the warning signs of Rwanda have been seen time and time again and yet here we are, the worlds last super power, still debating what is an “act of genocide” and what constitutes the “crime of genocide” and while we struggle with definitions more and more people are terrorized, maimed and murdered and it appears no one will ever be held responsible for the death of a continent.
The Non-Prosecuted Crimes of Our Century
Our history books tell us of the great conflicts of mankind and the role our nation has played in each. Children in history classes can tell you the dates and countries involved in each World War and can show you a map of what nations stood and which fell. Today, those in school will be able to pinpoint Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan and give details on each conflict. The question, however, remains to be asked and answers are not forthcoming from our current or future leaders when it comes to the issue of Genocide on the continent of Africa.
The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide- to which the United States is a signatory- obliges the United Nations to act to prevent genocide. The convention defines genocide as “acts committed with intent to destroy a national, racial or religious group by deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about their physical destruction”
Investigating the twentieth century, there would be many examples of genocide that our history books and professors fail to cover with the same determination that they would, say WWI or II. Examples are the 1915 Armenian Genocide one million dead, Russian Civil War 1918-1922 over twelve million killed, and China’s Mao Tse-Tung murdered forty nine million people during the eight year period of the “Great Leap Forward” and “Cultural Revolution”.
If you’re wondering if our leaders are informed about the crime of genocide simply take these “acts” of genocide publicized by the movie Hotel Rwanda as a case in point.
April 6 Rwandan Armed Forces and Hutu Militia set up roadblocks and go house to house killing Tutsis and moderate Hutu politicians. Thousands die on the first day. The UN Assistance Mission in Rwanda stands by while the slaughter occurs.
April 7 Belgian soldiers with the UN assigned to guard the Hutu Prime Minister are captured and tortured to death. President Clinton issues a statement expressing “his concern and condolences”.
April 9 France and Belgium send troops to rescue their citizens. American civilians are also rescued. The Red Cross estimates that tens of thousands of Rwandans have been murdered.
April 14 the UN Security Council votes unanimously to withdraw most of the UNAMIR troops, cutting the force deployment from 2500 to 270.
April 21 The Red Cross estimates hundreds of thousands of Rwandans are now dead.
The UN Security Council passes a resolution condemning the killings but omits the word “genocide” had the term been used, the UN would have been legally obligated to act to “prevent and punish the perpetrators”.
May 2 White House starts holding daily confidential briefings on Rwanda.
May 3 President Clinton signs a Presidential Decision Directive (PDD25), created after a review of the nations peacekeeping policies. PDD 25 aims to limit U.S. Military involvement in international peacekeeping operations.
May 13 U.N. votes on restoring UNAMIR’s strength in Rwanda; however the US Representative Madeline Albright, delays the vote for four days.
May 17 the UN agrees to send 5500 troops and acknowledges that “acts of genocide may have been committed” however deployment is delayed over arguments of who will pay the bill and provide equipment.
The Red Cross estimates 500,000 Rwandans have been killed.
June 22 no sign of UN deployment, the Security Council authorizes the deployment of French forces to south-west Rwanda “Operation Turquoise” creates “safe areas”.
Mid-July although disease claims many lives in the refugee camps, the genocide is over- 800,000 Rwandans have been murdered in 100 days.
The crimes of genocide continue today in Sudan, Chad and the Congo, they are driven by Islamic religious extremists and financed by Africa’s corrupt governments. Yet there is no national outcry for peace in these African nations, the US, even after a unanimous Congressional vote (422-0) in July 2006 calling the human rights abuses by their rightful name of genocide, isn’t sending troops to aid the people from losing generations of their citizenry.
We disregard the fact that 3 million lives have been extinguished in the Sudan, over 3.5 million have been killed in Eastern Congo, and there are 2.5 million people displaced from Darfur alone that now face death from starvation and disease as the Sudanese government and Janjaweed militias attempt to block all humanitarian aid from reaching them. To bring the Sudan and Congo numbers into a clear focus you would be talking about the murder of everyone living in the states of Hawaii, Idaho, Maine, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island and to bring the refugee numbers from Darfur into focus, imagine the entire population of the state of Nevada being displaced. All the warning signs of Rwanda have been seen time and time again and yet here we are, the worlds last super power, still debating what is an “act of genocide” and what constitutes the “crime of genocide” and while we struggle with definitions more and more people are terrorized, maimed and murdered and it appears no one will ever be held responsible for the death of a continent.
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Craving Religion and False Idols
We as humans crave God and religion. Whether it is because there is a God or because of some fluke of evolution, I do not know. What I do know is that in the pit of everyone’s soul is the desire to cling to something.
When we reject religion, we turn to something else. Some cling to the big bang theory as an explanation as to the start of the process of life, though they cannot explain how it happened and cannot put together a single experiment or equation to prove how nothing became something, became something in the form of the entire universe. Interestingly enough, something the big-bang-no-God theorists conveniently forget is that the concept of the big bang theory came from a priest and was roundly rejected by scientists because it meant that time had a beginning and the implications of this was too much for scientists of that time.
Other anti-God-religionists cling to global warming as their religion. A consensus has been reached, they cry, that doomsday is upon us if we do not do something. Unfortunately for them, there is less evidence to support the supposed catastrophe due to global warming (excuse me, now that we seem to no longer be warming “global climate change”) than there is to prove that Christ rose from the dead. I wouldn’t say that too loud, however, because for the global warming religion this is blasphemy that will subject you to public ridicule, humiliation, and exclusion. For those of the global warming religion, all opposition must be suppressed so that there is no one to explore the distinct lack of scientific proof behind their prophesies. I wouldn’t bother to point this out to them, however, as their dogmatic convictions leave no room for intelligent conversation that would disprove their closely held beliefs.
I had an interesting conversation the other day about the global warming fanatics. The hypothesis was proposed that the global warming religionists do not just cling to global warming out of some lost sense of God, but also because of its economic underpinnings. To address the supposed catastrophe waiting for us do to global warming would require drastic government intervention and funding. For those of the entitlement persuasion who seem to hold no distrust for the government when their party is in power, the idea of an even bigger monolith of government that would impose a system of rules that would help knock out economic inequality by bringing us all down to the same level (and it would be down, not up, as government involvement has never really helped to bring anyone out of poverty, but has sure helped to shove a lot of people down through misguided attempts to help)is an ideal clarion call to arms. And global warming gives them the battle cry they need to start off on their crusade.
Ah, it is the fault of those who crave more (and consequently work harder for more) that are at fault for the worlds ills, what with their cravings for more and bigger and better, that is at fault for everything. It is, of course, never the fault of those who make poor choices throughout their lives and never succeed. If you villainize success, then you are the better person for not working hard. This thought process sits well with my generation who have been spoiled throughout life and have been taught that just trying (even half-assedly) is enough. They can sit and smoke pot between breaks from their coffee shop job and feel superior to the doctor and lawyer quickly grabbing a cup of caffeinated sustenance on their way long hours of work to earn good money.
These coffeehouse baristas do not need to feel bad for never growing up and striving for more because their low carbon foot print due to not being able to afford a car makes them better than the doctor who saves lives for money because he drives his dastardly car from his nice house in the suburbs to the hospital across town. Global warming gives an excuse not to strive for success and gives an excuse to knock down those who work hard to benefit from the capitalist system that has given us so much.
And capitalism has given us a lot in life. The United states, with its traditional capitalist mindset, has always had greater job creation than all of socialist Europe combined. Even the current economic crisis does not stem from capitalist ideals, but instead from government interference in the markets. However, just as the global warming believers conveniently ignore that the Manne hockey stick (the graph that set off the global warming conversion) has been disproven, they will ignore the socialist tendencies that pushed the United States towards its current economic collapse. The truth is that if there was no CRA and no Fannie or Freddie, there would be no economic collapse. But with the Democrats gaining control of the government and the global warming religion holding revival services in honor of their idolic One, this is one true story that will be drowned out by the chants of a false religion.
When we reject religion, we turn to something else. Some cling to the big bang theory as an explanation as to the start of the process of life, though they cannot explain how it happened and cannot put together a single experiment or equation to prove how nothing became something, became something in the form of the entire universe. Interestingly enough, something the big-bang-no-God theorists conveniently forget is that the concept of the big bang theory came from a priest and was roundly rejected by scientists because it meant that time had a beginning and the implications of this was too much for scientists of that time.
Other anti-God-religionists cling to global warming as their religion. A consensus has been reached, they cry, that doomsday is upon us if we do not do something. Unfortunately for them, there is less evidence to support the supposed catastrophe due to global warming (excuse me, now that we seem to no longer be warming “global climate change”) than there is to prove that Christ rose from the dead. I wouldn’t say that too loud, however, because for the global warming religion this is blasphemy that will subject you to public ridicule, humiliation, and exclusion. For those of the global warming religion, all opposition must be suppressed so that there is no one to explore the distinct lack of scientific proof behind their prophesies. I wouldn’t bother to point this out to them, however, as their dogmatic convictions leave no room for intelligent conversation that would disprove their closely held beliefs.
I had an interesting conversation the other day about the global warming fanatics. The hypothesis was proposed that the global warming religionists do not just cling to global warming out of some lost sense of God, but also because of its economic underpinnings. To address the supposed catastrophe waiting for us do to global warming would require drastic government intervention and funding. For those of the entitlement persuasion who seem to hold no distrust for the government when their party is in power, the idea of an even bigger monolith of government that would impose a system of rules that would help knock out economic inequality by bringing us all down to the same level (and it would be down, not up, as government involvement has never really helped to bring anyone out of poverty, but has sure helped to shove a lot of people down through misguided attempts to help)is an ideal clarion call to arms. And global warming gives them the battle cry they need to start off on their crusade.
Ah, it is the fault of those who crave more (and consequently work harder for more) that are at fault for the worlds ills, what with their cravings for more and bigger and better, that is at fault for everything. It is, of course, never the fault of those who make poor choices throughout their lives and never succeed. If you villainize success, then you are the better person for not working hard. This thought process sits well with my generation who have been spoiled throughout life and have been taught that just trying (even half-assedly) is enough. They can sit and smoke pot between breaks from their coffee shop job and feel superior to the doctor and lawyer quickly grabbing a cup of caffeinated sustenance on their way long hours of work to earn good money.
These coffeehouse baristas do not need to feel bad for never growing up and striving for more because their low carbon foot print due to not being able to afford a car makes them better than the doctor who saves lives for money because he drives his dastardly car from his nice house in the suburbs to the hospital across town. Global warming gives an excuse not to strive for success and gives an excuse to knock down those who work hard to benefit from the capitalist system that has given us so much.
And capitalism has given us a lot in life. The United states, with its traditional capitalist mindset, has always had greater job creation than all of socialist Europe combined. Even the current economic crisis does not stem from capitalist ideals, but instead from government interference in the markets. However, just as the global warming believers conveniently ignore that the Manne hockey stick (the graph that set off the global warming conversion) has been disproven, they will ignore the socialist tendencies that pushed the United States towards its current economic collapse. The truth is that if there was no CRA and no Fannie or Freddie, there would be no economic collapse. But with the Democrats gaining control of the government and the global warming religion holding revival services in honor of their idolic One, this is one true story that will be drowned out by the chants of a false religion.
Sunday, November 16, 2008
CNN hates Palin
So I was watching CNN this morning and the bias was so thick you could cut it with a knife. I had been going through the news channels and first CNN had one of their journalists interviewing a priest from the Catholic church. This was actually a very good story. The journalist was fair and unbiased. I decided to continue to watch CNN. This was a bad idea on my part.
The next journalist up had a panel discussion of sorts on Palin’s recent tour through the media. This interviewer doesn’t even deserve the name journalist. In case you were unaware (which I was), Palin apparently waged a culture war this past election and lost. As she was the VP on the ticket, I find this an interesting assertion. I was also unaware we were in a culture war. I think knowing of a culture war is a prerequisite to losing it, but I think CNN says I'm wrong.
Also, did you know the mainstream media never talked about her son Trigg being the possible son of her daughter? As I don’t read daily kos (the blog that started the story), I wonder how I heard of this story. As I distinctly hearing the rumor on CNN, amongst other major news outlets, I am confused now what is considered “mainstream media.” Or maybe the panel was a bunch of idiots that are so ramped up on hating Palin that if she found a cure for cancer, they’d try to make it a bad thing.
Also, apparently her smart responses to the recent round of interviews is not because she is smart, but because she is devious and manipulative (I do not make this up – this is actually what one of the panelists said). I wonder if they have ever listened to Obama (their savior as far as I can figure), or compared his speeches.
But I guess as I am apparently bitterly clinging to my guns and religion and selfishly clinging to the money that I earned and think would be a waste if dispersed through Obama’a magical tax cut (you can’t cut 0 my friends and 38% of American’s don’t pay taxes, so unless 96 + 38 now equals 100, Obama’s tax cut is a pack of deceit and manipulation), maybe my opinion doesn’t count.
To understand Obama’s tax plan see my earlier posts on the topic.
To think why it won’t work, let’s think where the money is going. The plan is apparently a trickle up approach. Well considering the bottom 38% aren’t paying taxes, I am going to say we are already in a mixed trickle down trickle up and the middle class is disappearing so I don’t know how well this idea is going to work. Well, actually I do. Let’s follow the money under the Obama tax plan.
First, tax the hell out of those at the top or almost the top, including small businesses that employ millions of people (which composes more than 5%, but again Obama’s tax cut plan is magic so little details like this don’t matter). Next, take the money and redistribute it (reminiscent of Marxism). When you redistribute give the most to those who pay the least (i.e, nothing). Now the bottom 40% or so now sits with checks of possibly $2,000 or so. They go shopping. And where do they go to shop? Walmart or Target or other equivalent price level stores. Where do the goods in these stores come from? China.
So the end result is that we’re are going to take money away from those who could afford American made goods or afford to employ Americans and give it to those who will ship the money to China. Somehow this doesn’t make sense when you are trying to strengthen the economy and employ more American. Sure, maybe a few more people will get jobs at Walmart, but how many more could get jobs (including manufacturing jobs) if we didn’t take the money away from those who had rightfully earned it, that percentage of America that can actually afford American made goods.
But I guess the next thing Obama will say in his incitement of class wars, is that those in the magical top 5% didn’t earn their money, but that it belongs to the masses. Well, if he does say this, we’re almost communists and we should probably elect a new president (though I think we should do this anyway).
Later maybe I discuss how the Big 3 are going to go under unless the Unions get in touch with reality. There is a reason Toyota and Honda are not even close to the mess the Big 3 are in and it’s not just sales numbers. Did you know – no unions at Toyota and Honda. Also, did you know that one of the reasons Ford shipped the Ford Fiesta plant to Mexico because the Union wouldn’t let them build the stream lined production plant. I guess because it wouldn’t employ enough workers. Well, the Unions helped kill the steel industry. Now they’ll help kill the Auto industry. And Obama will push through a bill that helps union bosses pressure workers into unionizing. So the Union will have more industries to kill (Not that I am opposed to the concept of Unions, just the fact that their demands are not realistic in the current globalized economy). Also, read some stuff on the Great Depression and Unions during that time – makes you think.
The next journalist up had a panel discussion of sorts on Palin’s recent tour through the media. This interviewer doesn’t even deserve the name journalist. In case you were unaware (which I was), Palin apparently waged a culture war this past election and lost. As she was the VP on the ticket, I find this an interesting assertion. I was also unaware we were in a culture war. I think knowing of a culture war is a prerequisite to losing it, but I think CNN says I'm wrong.
Also, did you know the mainstream media never talked about her son Trigg being the possible son of her daughter? As I don’t read daily kos (the blog that started the story), I wonder how I heard of this story. As I distinctly hearing the rumor on CNN, amongst other major news outlets, I am confused now what is considered “mainstream media.” Or maybe the panel was a bunch of idiots that are so ramped up on hating Palin that if she found a cure for cancer, they’d try to make it a bad thing.
Also, apparently her smart responses to the recent round of interviews is not because she is smart, but because she is devious and manipulative (I do not make this up – this is actually what one of the panelists said). I wonder if they have ever listened to Obama (their savior as far as I can figure), or compared his speeches.
But I guess as I am apparently bitterly clinging to my guns and religion and selfishly clinging to the money that I earned and think would be a waste if dispersed through Obama’a magical tax cut (you can’t cut 0 my friends and 38% of American’s don’t pay taxes, so unless 96 + 38 now equals 100, Obama’s tax cut is a pack of deceit and manipulation), maybe my opinion doesn’t count.
To understand Obama’s tax plan see my earlier posts on the topic.
To think why it won’t work, let’s think where the money is going. The plan is apparently a trickle up approach. Well considering the bottom 38% aren’t paying taxes, I am going to say we are already in a mixed trickle down trickle up and the middle class is disappearing so I don’t know how well this idea is going to work. Well, actually I do. Let’s follow the money under the Obama tax plan.
First, tax the hell out of those at the top or almost the top, including small businesses that employ millions of people (which composes more than 5%, but again Obama’s tax cut plan is magic so little details like this don’t matter). Next, take the money and redistribute it (reminiscent of Marxism). When you redistribute give the most to those who pay the least (i.e, nothing). Now the bottom 40% or so now sits with checks of possibly $2,000 or so. They go shopping. And where do they go to shop? Walmart or Target or other equivalent price level stores. Where do the goods in these stores come from? China.
So the end result is that we’re are going to take money away from those who could afford American made goods or afford to employ Americans and give it to those who will ship the money to China. Somehow this doesn’t make sense when you are trying to strengthen the economy and employ more American. Sure, maybe a few more people will get jobs at Walmart, but how many more could get jobs (including manufacturing jobs) if we didn’t take the money away from those who had rightfully earned it, that percentage of America that can actually afford American made goods.
But I guess the next thing Obama will say in his incitement of class wars, is that those in the magical top 5% didn’t earn their money, but that it belongs to the masses. Well, if he does say this, we’re almost communists and we should probably elect a new president (though I think we should do this anyway).
Later maybe I discuss how the Big 3 are going to go under unless the Unions get in touch with reality. There is a reason Toyota and Honda are not even close to the mess the Big 3 are in and it’s not just sales numbers. Did you know – no unions at Toyota and Honda. Also, did you know that one of the reasons Ford shipped the Ford Fiesta plant to Mexico because the Union wouldn’t let them build the stream lined production plant. I guess because it wouldn’t employ enough workers. Well, the Unions helped kill the steel industry. Now they’ll help kill the Auto industry. And Obama will push through a bill that helps union bosses pressure workers into unionizing. So the Union will have more industries to kill (Not that I am opposed to the concept of Unions, just the fact that their demands are not realistic in the current globalized economy). Also, read some stuff on the Great Depression and Unions during that time – makes you think.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
A Quick What Doesn't Bother Me Blog
The FDA is starting to stop the importation of goods from China (or at least those containing milk) until the companies can prove that they do not contain Melamine. I am all for this. With a global economy we must recognize that we are gets good from all over the world and most are coming from countries with much lower safety standards. It's time we put the burden on those companies importing these inferior goods to ensure they don't harm us.
Here is the article:
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081113/D94E4NP02.html
I think the US should require all incoming goods to pay an inspection fee if they come from a country with questionable safety standards to ensure we Americans aren't harmed.
Of course, I also think they should start enforcing international patent law in China, but that is another blog.
Here is the article:
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081113/D94E4NP02.html
I think the US should require all incoming goods to pay an inspection fee if they come from a country with questionable safety standards to ensure we Americans aren't harmed.
Of course, I also think they should start enforcing international patent law in China, but that is another blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
