Middle America Under Siege

As sad as this is, and my family is right at the center of this issue, the government is doing precious little to positively impact the situation. Simple handouts will help for the short term, but for the long haul, what America needs is more jobs. So where do jobs come from? Jobs are created from profit. Profit is a bad word to the self-proclaimed progressives. In their view, all profit is bad profit. And they would eliminate profit if they could. Companies that are growing in terms of customer bases and production require more people to fill positions. Corporations are not alive, nevertheless, progressive insist on further penalizing corporations through draconian measures that will succeed only in further shrinking the economy.

First of all the minimum wage. The minimum wage was meant to be an entry level wage for the very young. Few people continue to have this type of pay structure into their adult years unless they have made the mistake of dropping out of school, going to jail or relying on welfare and social programs to provide subsistance and prevent a continuous resume of work. Minimum wages were never meant to be an adult salary. They were meant for entry level employees with the unwritten promise that as they gained experience, they would move onto more lucrative work. My son is a manager at ChikFila. Due to rising minimum wages, they will be raising their prices to consumers across the board. And they will not be alone. See, when you raise the cost of employing people small businesses must recoop those costs through higher prices to the consumer. Now consider the Cap and Trade bill passed by the House. This will add to the cost of manufacturing, the cost of transportation and delivery and the cost to consumers. But do you know who won't be crying about these higher prices? Every local, state and federal entity that tacks on taxes will be overjoyed at the higher revenue they will achieve because of rates based on sales cost. And for most of us, these are not taxes that are deductible from our federal burden.

Let's consider the reluctance of the "progressive" party to require two important pieces of law-e-verify and Voter ID. First of all, in order to cash a check, to food stamps to do just about anything, you must have picture ID. Yet there are some apologists for illegal immigration that continue to believe this is persecution of a minority and use bogus arguements of how having to present ID when you vote penalizes the aged and the poor. All the poor that are citizens can easily get photo ID's from the states as can the elderly even if they do not drive. The arguements are presented in order to protect a potential (or in the case of our Left Coast states-current) voters . As for e-Verify, once again I defer to my son who works in fastfood. Their entire kitchen staff is Hispanic. And everyone no matter what their ethnicity must present drivers license, social security number and verification of their identity. Yet, even with that, there have been a few who have been escorted away or even fired for using someone else's identity. How is this not identity theft and why is it that the government doesn't pinpoint illegal immigration as the source for much of this type of crime? If we removed the ten or more million people who are here working illegally, that would make a significant dent in the unemployment numbers. And, lest you think this is just minimum wage jobs, I know of people who have worked as teachers who didn't have a verified ID.

Let's finally consider the burden on middle America to subsidize the failing state governments of the "green" states. If you will bother to look up the Green Party-a subsidy of the World Workers' Party and under the umbrella of the communist party, you will find that the current Democrat party is espousing Green Party platforms. They seek the systematic takeover of industry by government modeled on the failed systems of such programs in Spain, France and Germany. Right now, France and Germany have governments that are aghast that we are not learning from their mistakes. Please understand, even if the message is smoothly delivered, it is still a message of socialism. Unfortunately, the Rust Belt allowed unions to call the shots in the last election. People voted for a perceived ideal rather than the economic reality of the issues. And in the end, they will be the ones that pay because if these programs are implemented, these jobs will never come back. So how long before we all start moving into Canada? How long will they keep the borders open?

Our Fluid Media Society

Comedian Tom Green died yesterday. I know it because my son's friend got an email on his cell phone from the website of his fans. This is absolutely true. What is not true is that Tom Green died. Instead his website was hacked into by Chan4hackers. They killed him off. And since the electronic media is so much more real to some people than reality, people starting mourning. And what is worse is that tabloid media wasn't the one who picked up the story. CNN picked it up. And that's not the only case.

In a similar story, actor Jeff Goldblum fell off a boat, electronically, and died, also electronically. Luckily, this was not the case and Mr. Goldblum was witty enough to give his own eulogy on the Colbert Report. Actor Harrison Ford was also offed by electronic tabloids. It's very easy to create this type of false sensation, and you have to wonder about the people who do this. Is it for their own gratification? Is it to get back at other groups? And if tweeters and such can get this kind of action on the fluffy world of celebrities, what can similar tactics do with the more serious issues of our day?

Many people blindly spread rumors via email without due diligence. This is how monetary panics start. This is how people's lives are destroyed. And this also plays into the way elections are being manipulated. It is easy to move people on the basis of The Big Lie. That is the theory which contends that if you say something loud enough and long enough, people will believe it, even if it is wrong. This also allows for organizations that have their own special interests in mind, to deliberately upset the balance and misinform people for their own warped purposes. So while Twitter and such social networking outlets are fine for keeping up with friends, I wonder if the downside is that we know less than we knew before we accessed them.

Helen Thomas Schools Gibbs Old Style

The press and the media crucified President Bush for stumbling in his answers during the press conferences. He was conducting those press conferences just like corporate meetings, where the group asked questions while the executive answered them. He didn't script the answers. All that was scripted was his initial speech. It has been apparent to many of us, just recently the media, that every press conference, every "public forum" and every supposedly casual meeting is actually highly manipulated and scripted. During the last press conference, President Obama was very abrupt when questions not on the list were asked. Isn't that the purpose of a press conference or a public forum. In the clip linked on the headline, Chris Reid of CBS and Helen Thomas ask why all questions were to be emailed in advance. Reid actually poses the question of how this administration can label these meetings "public forums" when questions are selected and answers formulated in advance. At that point, wouldn't it be more efficient to put it in a written format? One of the most telling questions was when Reid asked Gibbs if President Obama would support additional taxes on the middle class....Gibbs didn't like that much. So while we are stewing in a fetid cesspool of self-serving agendas and left wing entitlement, ask yourselves if you weren't much happier with someone who stumbled through answers, but gave you the best of what he knew at press conferences.

It's like some of us have been saying for awhile now, Obama and his handlers are manipulating the press for their agendas. In order to even be moderately involved in a truly free press, reporters should be outraged.

The Electric Truth

If you choose to seek out different electricity providers, you will find they offer a statement listing their power sources. What is ironic is that some of the companies that like to view themselves as green have almost exactly the same sources in the same proportions as the bad old electric companies. This means that like it or not a bulk of our energy comes from three sources: oil, coal and nuclear. These sources are all held in disdain by the Obama Administration and cap and trade seeks to make it more costly to use these abundant and efficient fuels. In fact, Congress seeks to force the hands of power providers to create alternative energy even when the technology is more costly and less efficient. If you have ever been shopping for swimsuits with a teenaged daughter, you understand this mentality. The left wants something that doesn't exist. They want a clean power source that is efficient and cost effective but it simply isn't there. But they are willing to do without energy at all if it means having what they want. This is a very petulant attitude and seems to be matched on all sides by congressional actions and those of the president's staff. I mean, you could put the cast of The Hills in these roles and the results would be the same kind of snarky, sneaky double dealing we have seen in the past week. I don't know if it has to do with California or just leftists in general, but this is no way to run a country.

"...Electricity is a good thing. It powers your computer, drives economic growth, transmits images from Tehran streets, keeps preemies alive in hospitals, prevents meat from rotting and enchants and cools you in movie theaters.

Yes, electricity is a good thing. Where does it come from?

In the U.S., electricity is produced from these sources. If you are reading this on a handheld and can't read Wikipedia's wonderful pie chart, here is the breakdown:

48.9% -- Coal
20% -- Natural Gas
19.3% -- Nuclear
1.6% -- Petroleum

Got that? A tick over 88% of U.S. electricity comes from three sources: coal, gas and nuclear. Petroleum brings the contribution of so-called "evil" energy--that is, energy that is carbon- or uranium-based--to almost 90%.

The remaining sources of U.S. electricity, the renewables, are, by comparison, tiny players:

7.1% -- Hydroelectric
2.4% -- Other Renewables
0.7% -- Other

Hydroelectric accounts for 70% of renewable energy in America. But, of course, hydro is mostly tapped out. Almost every dam that could be built has been built. Ironically enough, political opposition to building more dams comes from the same crowd of tree huggers who oppose coal, gas and uranium..."

The Real Healthcare Agenda

The Obama Administration likes to trot out urban poor and elderly as an example of who would be best served by Obamacare. But as with cap and trade, the truth is in the details. The Obama Administration is using healthcare as a wedge issue to make illegal aliens more integrated into the American economy. So without paying into any of the programs which leech money from workers' paychecks, illegal aliens will get the same (rationed)healthcare that the rest of us ostensibly will recieve. Make no mistake, by competing with private health insurance companies and levying tax penalties against middle income Americans, many will opt for Obamacare as a catchall and then be forced to find additional private insurance-virtually paying twice for half the care. This Congress will do the same things with Obamacare that they did with Cap and trade, which is to force it through in the early hours of a Friday morning, largely unread, with all earmarks and special programs for special populations intact. Americans are going to have to rise up and realize that this program is not "free" nor is it one that will give care to all uninsured Americans. Instead it is a program to seal the deal with La Raza insuring a firm coalition of Hipanic voters both legal and illegal for the years to come. Hey, when you can get other people to pay for your healthcare, wouldn't you vote for the guy? Pay attention, it's going to get worse.

"America does not need health care reform, but Latino immigrants need health care reform."

And someone from Menendez' office [Ed.: Sen. Robert Menendez, D-NJ] promised that he would make sure that "the useless barriers of citizenship would not be in this bill" and that he would make sure that they would use keywords like "streamline"...

It was La Raza, the Childrens Defense Fund and Senator Menendez from New Jersey, a representative from his office...

...Yes [they said they would get free health care for illegal aliens], these are my notes, Mark. They actually got up and said "Latino children need health care more than whites". And then they would say things like "you must go out into your communities, use words like 'streamline', use phrases like 'all workers' and 'all families'," because they said -- and I quote -- "If the American people find out that this bill is about giving health care to non-citizens, they will rise up against it."

...One of the quotes they said was, "We want to make sure we take care of barriers like verification, but we can streamline programs to the more affluent" and, quote, "Useless treatments for the elderly can be gone because we don't need to spend money for people who are going to die anyway."

That's a direct quote from that meeting. They also said, "We are very concerned there will be an effort to include" the illegal immigrants in this argument, so "we must make sure that we focus this" to the American people that it's looking like we want "health care for everyone".

And they also said that 75% of the children who will be picked up in this will be non-citizens and that 44% of the uninsured are non-citizens and they can't possibly allow the American people to know this." [Ed: Oops!]

Menendez' office said that he's going to make sure that "a family of four that makes $66,000 a year or less will pay nothing at all for the new health care. And he was the one who said he was going to get rid of specifics like "citizenship status" and focus on, quote, "equity for all workers".

And he said he's going to make sure that the Latino immigrants are the focus of the health care reform..."

From Charles Krauthammer

Last Monday was a profound evening, hearing Dr. Charles Krauthammer speak to the Center for the American Experiment. He is a brilliant intellectual, seasoned and articulate. He is forthright and careful in his analysis, and never resorts to emotions or personal insults. He is NOT a fearmonger nor an extremist in his comments and views. He is a fiscal conservative, and has a Pulitzer Prize for writing. He is a frequent contributor to Fox News and writes weekly for the Washington Post. The entire room was held spellbound during his talk. I have shared this with many of you and several have asked me to summarize his comments, as we are living in uncharted waters economically and internationally. Even 2 democrats at my table agreed with everything he said! If you feel like forwarding this to those who are open minded and have not ‘drunk the Kool-Aid’, feel free.

A summary of his comments:

1. Mr. Obama is a very intellectual, charming individual. He is not to be underestimated. He is a ‘cool customer’ who doesn't show his emotions. It's very hard to know what's ‘behind the mask’. Taking down the Clinton dynasty from a political neophyte was an amazing accomplishment. The Clintons still do not understand what hit them. Obama was in the perfect place at the perfect time.

2. Obama has political skills comparable to Reagan and Clinton. He has a way of making you think he's on your side, agreeing with your position, while doing the opposite. Pay no attention to what he SAYS; rather, watch what he DOES!

3. Obama has a ruthless quest for power. He did not come to Washington to make something out of himself, but rather to change everything, including dismantling capitalism. He can’t be straightforward on his ambitions, as the public would not go along. He has a heavy hand and wants to ‘level the playing field’ with income redistribution and punishment of the achievers of society. He would like to model the USA to Great Britain or Canada .

4. His three main goals are to control ENERGY, PUBLIC EDUCATION, and NATIONAL HEALTHCARE by the Federal Government. He doesn't care about the auto or financial services industries, but got them as an early bonus. The cap and trade will add costs to everything and stifle growth. Paying for FREE college education is his goal. Most scary is healthcare program, because if you make it FREE and add 46,000,000 people to a Medicare-type single-payer system, the costs will go thru the roof. The only way to control costs is with massive RATIONING of services, like in Canada . God forbid.

5. He’s surrounded himself with mostly far-left academic types, none of which around him has ever run even a candy store. But they’re going to try and run the auto, financial, banking and other industries. This obviously can’t work in the long run. Obama’s not a socialist; rather a far-left secular progressive bent on nothing short of revolution. He ran as a moderate, but will govern from the hard left. Again, watch what he does, not what he says.

6. Obama doesn’t really see himself as President of the USA , more as a ruler over the world. He sees himself above it all, trying to orchestrate and coordinate various countries and their agendas. He sees moral equivalency in all cultures. His apology tour in Germany and England was a prime example of how he sees America , as an imperialist nation that has been arrogant, rather than a great noble nation that has at times made errors. This is the 1st President ever who has chastised our allies and appeased our enemies at the same time!

7. He’s now handing out goodies. He hopes that the bill (and pain) will not ‘come due’ until after he’s reelected in 2012. He’d like to blame all problems on Bush from the past and hopefully his successor in the future. He has a huge ego and Mr. Krauthammer believes he is a narcissist.

8. Republicans are in the wilderness for a while, but will emerge strong. We’re ‘pining’ for another Reagan, but there’ll never be another like him. He believes Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty and Bobby Jindahl (except for his terrible speech in February) are the future of the party. Newt Gingrich is brilliant, but has baggage. Sarah Palin is sincere and intelligent, but needs to really be seriously boning up on facts and info if she’s to be a serious candidate in the future. We need to return to the party of lower taxes, smaller government, personal responsibility, strong national defense, and states’ rights.

9. The current level of spending is irresponsible and outrageous. We’re spending trillions that we don’t have. This could lead to hyper inflation, depression or worse. No country has ever spent themselves into prosperity. The media is giving Obama, Reid, and Pelosi a pass because they love their agenda. But eventually the bill will come due and people will realize the huge bailouts didn’t work, nor will the stimulus package. These were trillion-dollar payoffs to Obama’s allies, unions and the Congress to placate the left, so he can get support for #4 above.

10. The election was over in mid-Sept. when Lehman brothers failed. Fear and panic swept in, we had an unpopular President, and the war was grinding on indefinitely without a clear outcome. The people are in pain, and the mantra of ‘change’ caused people to act emotionally. Any Dim would have won this election; it was surprising it was as close as it was.

11. In 2012, if the unemployment rate is over 10%, Republicans will be swept back into power. If it's under 8%, the Dims continue to roll. If it's between 8-10%, it’ll be a dogfight. It’ll all be about the economy.

Jobs, Jobs, Jobs, Jobs?

When Pelosi sent the Cap and Trade bill to the vote, those were her last words. It's puzzling how she would believe that a bill that will bind up much of the profit margins in many large industries will somehow create jobs? Jobs are created on a need basis. And if you aren't making a profit, you don't need more workers. In addition, we are currently at a 9.4% unemployment rate. And there's about a 12% underemployment rate-people who are working for less than before. So we are staring at a possible 10% unemployment rate, with the majority of those out of work individuals being young males. Then, at the same time, the Obama Administration wants to shut down military operations in Iraq and bring home all those military personnel and ramp down the numbers in the military by mustering out the lower level members. This is just like any other RIF (reduction in force) and will add to the numbers of out of work young Americans. Unless he means to impose a WPA or CCC type programs-which I doubt many of the college educated people would gravitate to-this is a serious problem. And while they are simply throwing numbers out there, it seems that this administration and these committees are not looking to the future, they are simply trying to find ways to push their agendas and feather their own nests. I hope all the young people who voted for Obama in an American Idol type of election are beginning to see what they have done, and what it will do to them. Remember this is supposed to be a government OF the people, FOR the people, not TO the people. Is it possible that Team Obama has just thrown the young American worker under the bus?

Over Our Dead Air Conditioners

Consider this. The development of most of the southern United States would have been held back if air conditioning did not exist. Likewise, many folks in the north would not be able to survive a typical winter without energy to produce heat. Both of those options will be taxed now thanks to the actions yesterday on cap and trade. This bill, largely hidden from view until the vote, will tax coal, which is a huge natural ABUNDANT source of energy in many areas of the United States. It will also further tax oil, which in turn will result in higher transporation costs added to all goods and services. And this, supposedly, is Your Congress Working For You. Folks, it is time to get busy. This administration will go along unchecked with a Congress intent on pushing through countless expensive and collectivist bills without due diligence. And they will do it because they believe they have a mandate. 51% is NOT a mandate in fact it is just barely a majority. Below is a list of Blue Dog Democrats and their phone numbers. When ACORN acts, they simply open up a boiler room and give people lists just like this one. So the people who many call your Congressman and mine maybe don't live anywhere near their district. This is not illegal. It is necessary. The time for fair political behavior is over because the Leftists in the Democrat party do not intend to allow even the appearance of bipartisanship and by that right intend to ignore the will of 49% of the population. Legislation being passed favors high spending, socialist oriented states over midwestern states. See, anything from Pennsylvania west to Utah simply doesn't matter and Congress has made that point very clear. Below is the list. Use it, call them for every vote or call them just to send an opinion. It is time to take the gloves off because playing nice just gets us run over by political bullies like Pelosi, Franks and Reid.

Blue Dog Democrats:

Congressman Parker Griffith Alabama, 5th District Phone: (202) 225-4801 35801, 35802, 35810 Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords Arizona, 8th District Phone: (202) 225-2542 85747, 85748, 85730 Congressman Marion Berry Arkansas, 1st District Phone: (202) 225-4076 72576, 72587, 72626
Congressman Mike Ross Arkansas, 4th District Phone: (202) 225-3772 71838, 71854, 71901
Senator Lincoln, Blanche L. - (D - AR) (202) 224-4843 Arkansas 72030, 72042, 71640
Pryor, Mark L. - (D - AR) (202) 224-2353 Arkansas 72501, 72774, 72730 C
Congressman Joe Baca California, 43rd District Phone: (202) 225-6161 91761, 91743, 91710
Congressman Dennis Cardoza California, 18th District Phone: (202) 225-6131 93606, 93620, 93622 Congressman Jim Costa California, 20th District Phone: (202) 225-3341 93624, 93652. 93540 Congresswoman Jane Harman California, 36th District Phone: (202) 225-8220 90505, 90304, 90045 Congressman Adam Schiff California, 29th District Phone: (202) 225-4176 91202, 91203, 91204 Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez California, 47th District Phone: (202) 225-2965 92703, 92704, 92806 Congressman Mike Thompson California, 1st District Phone: (202) 225-3311 95605, 95616, 95618, Congressman John Salazar Colorado, 3rd District Phone: (202) 225-4761 81415, 81426, 81505
Udall, Mark, Colorado 2nd District - (D - CO) (202) 224-5941 80442, 80455, 80481
Senator Joseph Lieberman Connecticut I. - (ID - CT) (202) 224-4041 06001, 06256, 06430 D
Senator Carper, Thomas R. - (D - DE) (202) 224-2441 Delaware 19801, 19806, 19810 F
Congressman Allen Boyd** Florida, 2nd District Phone: (202) 225-5235 32360, 32410, 32443
Senator Nelson, Bill - (D - FL) (202) 224-5274 Florida 32244, 32218, 32180 G
Congressman John Barrow Georgia, 12th District Phone: (202) 225-2823 31401, 31312, 30807
Congressman Sanford Bishop Georgia, 2nd District Phone: (202) 225-3631 31770, 31765, 31701 Congressman David Scott Georgia, 13th District Phone: (202) 225-2939 30070, 30234, 30331
Congressman Jim Marshall Georgia, 8th District Phone: (202) 225-6531 31820, 31823, 31807 I Congresswoman Melissa Bean Illinois, 8th District Phone: (202) 225-3711 60071, 60072, 60081
Congressman Joe Donnelly Indiana, 2nd District Phone: (202) 225-3915 46601, 46366, 46635
Congressman Brad Ellsworth Indiana, 8th District Phone: (202) 225-4636 47424, 47591, 47616
Congressman Baron Hill Indiana, 9th District Phone: (202) 225-5315 47250, 47281, 47545
Senator Bayh, Evan - (D - IN)(202) 224-5623 Indiana 47390, 46060, 46201
Congressman Leonard Boswell Iowa, 3rd District Phone: (202) 225-3806 52208, 52307, 52562 K Congressman Ben Chandler Kentucky, 6th District Phone: (202) 225-4706 40444, 40475, 40502 Congressman Dennis Moore Kansas, 3rd District Phone: (202) 225-2865 66112, 66219, 66061 L
Congressman Charlie Melancon ** Louisiana, 3rd District Phone: (202) 225-4031 70355, 70037, 70086 Landrieu, Mary L. - (D - LA) (202) 224-5824 Louisiana
Congressman Mike Michaud Maine, 2nd District Phone: (202) 225-6306 04432, 04216, 04455
Congressman Collin Peterson Minnesota, 7th District Phone: (202) 225-2165 56260, 56209, 56309 Congressman Gene Taylor Mississippi, 4th District Phone: (202) 225-5772 39451, 39556, 39501
Senator McCaskill, Claire - (D - MO) (202) 224-6154 Missouri 63101, 63111, 63120 N
Senator Nelson, Ben - (D - NE) (202) 224-6551 ** Nebraska 68001, 68102, 68505
Senator Shaheen, Jeanne - (D - NH) (202) 224-2841 New Hampshire 03101, 03109, 03060
Congressman Mike Arcuri New York, 24th District Phone: (202) 225-3665 13313, 13062, 13803 Congressman Mike McIntyre North Carolina, 7th District Phone: Phone: (202) 225-2731 28433, 28456, 28467
Congressman Heath Shuler North Carolina, 11th District Phone: (202) 225-6401 28701, 28733, 28778 Senator Hagan, Kay R. - (D - NC) (202) 224-6342 North Carolina 28202, 28210, 28801
Congressman Earl Pomeroy North Dakota, At-Large Phone: (202) 225-2611 58102, 58501, 58601 OCongressman Dan Boren Oklahoma, 2nd District Phone: (202) 225-2701 74422, 74430, 74501
Congressman Zack Space Ohio, 18th District Phone: (202) 225-6265 43005, 43028, 43802
Congressman Charlie Wilson Ohio, 6th District Phone: (202) 225-5705
Congressman Chris Carney Pennsylvania, 10th District Phone: (202) 225-3731 17860, 17889, 17850 Congressman Patrick Murphy Pennsylvania, 8th District Phone: (202) 225-4276 18920, 18930, 18966 Congressman Tim Holden Pennsylvania, 17th District Phone: (202) 225-5546 19510, 19526, 19533 S Congresswoman Stephanie Herseth Sandlin South Dakota, At-Large 57103, 57701, 57401
Congressman Jim Cooper Tennessee, 5th District Phone: (202) 225-4311 37080, 37076, 37201
Congressman Lincoln Davis Tennessee, 4th District Phone: (202) 225-6831 37305, 37330, 37348 Congressman Bart Gordon Tennessee, 6th District Phone: (202) 225-4231 38560, 38570, 38575 Congressman John Tanner Tennessee, 8th District Phone: (202) 225-4714 38201, 38229, 38240 UCongressman Jim Matheson Utah, 2nd District Phone: (202) 225-3011 84007, 84023, 84092 V
Senator Warner, Mark R. - (D - VA) (202) 224-2023 ** Virginia 24210, 23510, 23112 W
Senator Kohl, Herb - (D - WI) (202) 224-5653 Wisconsin 54701, 54914, 54601

Pelosi Calls for Cap And Trade TODAY!!

Nancy Pelosi Schedules Household Energy Tax Vote this Week!
June 23, 2009

Late last night, during yet another closed-door meeting in the House of Representatives, the liberal Majority maneuvered to bring the highly unpopular 946-page energy-rationing bill, better known as the Waxman-Markey cap-and-tax bill, to the House floor for a vote by the end of this week!
Sponsored by Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA), the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, H.R. 2454 imposes a system of "cap-and-tax" in order to combat so-called "global warming." This massive, across-the-board household energy tax is being disguised by congressional liberals and is being sold under the slogan "cap-and-trade," which simply means giving the government power to put a cap on the amount of carbon emissions (CO2) produced by the production of electricity, gasoline, and heating oil, and forcing businesses to actively lobby Congress for higher cap levels and to buy permits for the emissions they are allowed.
Rather than calling it "cap-and-trade," it should be called "cap-and-tax"-as it caps Americans' standard of living and taxes our use of products whose manufacture emits CO2.
If passed and signed into law, H.R. 2454 will further cripple our economy and drain your pockets in the following ways:
It will raise your household electricity rates by 90 percent, gasoline by 74 percent, and residential natural gas prices by 55 percent by 2035, after adjusting for inflation.
It imposes an annual burden of $144.8 billion per year on U.S. households, and it will reduce household earnings by a projected $37.8 billion.
It will further cut U.S. employment levels by 965,000 jobs by reducing economic output by $136 billion per year-this translates to a $1,145 increase in energy costs per American household.
It will force low-income households to disproportionately bear the across-the-board energy cost increase, as a larger percentage of the poor's income goes toward energy costs, as opposed to wealthier households.
It sets the stage to effectively kill the coal industry as it will be taxed so heavily, it will not be able to sustain itself.
If enacted, H.R. 2454 would be the biggest government takeover of the economy since the Second World War, which is the last time energy, food, and other basic commodities were rationed. Waxman-Markey amounts to a $2 trillion tax increase on middle-class Americans. Not only would this be the biggest tax increase in the history of the world, but it is yet another example of President Barack Obama violating his campaign promise not to raise taxes on the middle class. This cap-and-tax bill is simply an underhanded way of facilitating a colossal transfer of wealth from consumers to big businesses.
Household energy taxation with the ultimate goal of energy-rationing is dangerous, not only for your pocketbook, but also for the well-being of your family and your standard of living.

H.R. 2454 is a hidden tax and it must be defeated this week in the House!Take Action:

The Democrat Majority has announced that amendments to this bill can be made no later than 9:30 a.m. on Thursday, June 25th. We expect a floor vote to occur soon after that, so please begin calling your Representatives and tell them to vote NO on cap-and-tax!

Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121

An Economics Lesson

There are many people who see taxing the Bad Old Corporations as a good thing. What with their overpaid CEO's and their profits, surely they are cash cows ripe for slaughter, right? But hold on there...do you know how pricing occurs? Read and learn
1. A corporation is NOT ALIVE. This is important to remember because although the economic health of a corporation is measured in dollars, it cannot live or die as a human would.
2. This means that when additional penalties such as taxes, fees, government sanctions are placed on a corporation on upon a product it makes, the penalty doesn't stay within the corporation. Instead it is rolled into the final cost to the cosumer. And yes, that includes PROFIT.
3. Profits are what the corporation makes AFTER COSTS. Costs include things like raw materials to make products, energy used to make and transport products, manpower to make products, locations to make products and all the ancillary fees, insurances and liability costs. So after they make the product, package the product, ship the product-whatever is left over is profit. Now some people see profit as evil. But profit is the fuel that allows corporations to grow. Whether is building a new factory, riasing employees compensation or creating more jobs, profit is the factor that allows that to happen. When government takes profit away through taxation or over regulation, it slows down or stops the creation of more jobs, more wealth and a more stable economy.
4. Local and state governments run off of tax revenues. Taxes are collected on sales, on production and on land. If corporations do not make a profit, the tax revenues go down. If the corporations close, then the local entities lose a taxable property and the resulting revenue. In addition, if fewer products are sold, then the local governments make less. That shortfall is what we are seeing now in Dallas. Socialists would insist that the federal government keep all programs in place by making up the difference. But at some point that cannot be sustained. And slowing down corporations is what puts a wrench in the system.
5. When corporation go out of business, aside from job losses, there is also a loss of choice to the consumer. Part of the reason people oppose Walmart moving into an area is because other grocery stores move out. Lack of choice means lack of competition. Lack of competition means higher costs to consumers. If you are the only ice cream source in town, you can charge more than if there are two others in place. This is why it is not necessarily cheaper to live a bucolic life in the country. Without the competition, costs stay high.
6. Over regulation of any industry makes it unresponsive to the market. We have seen this over and over and frankly, the government control of GM is troubling because no government program comes without countless rules in place. If those rules all worked toward the simple principles of making good products at a fair price, there would be no problem. But when politicians get involved, they put pet project in place. This is what happened with American companies. The foreign companies didn't have the same culture of gratitude created by the UAW and the Congressional leadership. So they could make adjustments to allow a good car to be built for a good price. That's not to say that Americans can't build a good car-I have 16 year old Venture so I know that isn't true-it's just that interference by government costs more down the line and doesn't provide an efficient solution.
I hope that clears up some confusion and that when you listen to the bills being offered that you consider that bigger isn't always better and that people in Washington really don't care that much about people in Tupelo, Richardson or Tucumcari.

Economic Meltdown-So Let's Strike!

Everytime someone mentions how much better teaching in Texas would be if we just had unions, a story like the one below comes through and disproves it. It seems that in the worst economic meltdown since the Big One in 1929, Bell Helicopter was willing to give workers a bonus to offset higher healthcare expenses. The cost would be a loss of janitorial jobs. For some reason, being a janitor at a Bell facility is a union job. So although the union leaders supported the accord, the rank and file voted it down. (Must take a breath here before I explode) Do you know ANYONE that is getting a bonus this year? We may not even get our regular increases! As for the health care costs, I have to laugh. Ask any teacher in the state of Texas system about the cost per family for health insurance.

And...to top this off, just in the past hour the word came across that the agency that controls military repairs is removing the license from this facility and the FAA is thinking about following suit. So my hats off to you union guys! You stood your ground and not only scuttled a very fair contract, but possibly created a situation where the entire facility will be closed and EVERYONE WILL LOSE THEIR JOBS! What were you guys thinking?

Bell Helicopter union to strike
HURST, Texas, June 15 (UPI) -- Union workers at Bell Helicopter in Texas rejected a contract offer and voted to begin a strike at midnight Monday, the United Auto Workers said.
"The membership said they were not going to buy this. I hope Bell Helicopter listens," Tom Wells, chairman of Local 218 told the Fort Worth, Texas, Star-Telegram Monday.
Union members voted 1,177 to 680 to reject the contract that with cost-of-living adjustments included a total wage increase of 18.7 percent over the life of the contract.
The contact also included a $4,500 cash bonus an 11.7 percent increase in monthly pension benefits for new retirees.
The contract, however, would have eliminated 44 janitorial positions, by absorbing janitors into higher paid positions, although union members still balked at voting to erase jobs.
"No employees would be bumped or laid off from this event," said Bell spokesman Tom Dolney in an e-mail.
But union member Alexander Martinez disagreed. "What they're offering is wrong. They're trying to eliminate jobs," Martinez said.
The strike includes Bell manufacturing plants in the Forth Worth, Texas, area, but not the military helicopter plant in Amarillo, which is not covered by the UAW contract, the newspaper said.--UPI Wire

Obama Lectures AMA: Open Mouth, Insert Foot

So President Obama is talking (down to) the American Medical Association. He publicly stated that he is against caps on awards in class action suits. That probably suits John Edwards down to the ground. But at the same time he doesn't want doctors practicing "defensive medicine". I ask you, if you were faced with the very real possibility of having someone sue you with or without grounds, and having that case more than likely settled out of court, but at the same time raising your liablitiy insurance 200%, wouldn't you be just a teensy be defensive? I've been on the receiving end of such treatment and while I don't understand the procedures, I do understand that many doctors feel that they are targets for class action lawyers. Much of this could have been avoided with meaningful tort reform which would limit the trawling for cases done by many lawyers. Even less than his understanding of the mechanism in place in the medical community, President Obama reveals a certain cluelessness in his speech. Can you spot it in the following excerpt?

"...It simply doesn't make sense that patients in the 21st century are still filling out forms with pens on papers that have to be stored away somewhere. As Newt Gingrich has rightly pointed out, we do a better job tracking a FedEx package in this country than we do tracking a patient's health records. You shouldn't have to tell every new doctor you see about your medical history, or what prescriptions you're taking. You should not have to repeat costly tests. All of that information should be stored securely in a private medical record so that your information can be tracked from one doctor to another – even if you change jobs, even if you move, and even if you have to see a number of different specialists...."

Full speech HERE

Ummm...did anyone bother to inform His Highness that Federal Express is a PRIVATE COMPANY. That's why customers can track where their packages go. And now he's saying that a government system would do that as well? If that's the case, then why is the US Postal Service going broke? And why should we trust a government that doesn't track mail as well as FedEx to perform medicine as well as the many private physicians and hospitals that exist? And once again, what about that "no tax for under $250,000" promise? How do you reconcile that with the many who get health insurance through their work having to pay taxes in order to fund this juggernaut boondoggle?

The Sum of All Fears

I came across this on another blog today. I would paraphrase but frankly there is so much meat in this post that it's important to view it completely.

"

AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA

By Lou Pritchett

Dear President Obama:

You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me.

You scare me because after months of exposure, I know nothing about you.

You scare me because I do not know how you paid for your expensive Ivy League education and your upscale lifestyle and housing with no visible signs of support.

You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth growing up in America and culturally you are not an American.

You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll.

You scare me because you have never had military experience, thus don't understand it at its core.

You scare me because you lack humility and 'class', always blaming others.

You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned yourself with radical extremists who hate America and you refuse to publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see America fail.

You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the 'blame America' crowd and deliver this message abroad.

You scare me because you want to change America to a European style country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector.

You scare me because you want to replace our health care system with a government controlled one.

You scare me because you prefer 'wind mills' to responsibly capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves.

You scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose that lays the golden egg which provides the highest standard of living in the world.

You scare me because you have begun to use 'extortion' tactics against certain banks and corporations.

You scare me because your own political party shrinks from challenging you on your wild and irresponsible spending proposals.

You scare me because you will not openly listen to or even consider opposing points of view from intelligent people.

You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both omnipotent and omniscient.

You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything you do.

You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the Limbaughs, Hannitys, O'Relllys and Becks who offer opposing, conservative points of view.

You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.

Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years.

Lou Pritchett


Note: Lou Pritchett is a former vice president of Procter & Gamble whose career at that company spanned 36 years before his retirement in 1989, and he is the author of the 1995 business book, Stop Paddling & Start Rocking the Boat.

Mr. Pritchett confirmed that he was indeed the author of the much-circulated "open letter." “I did write the 'you scare me' letter. I sent it to the NY Times but they never acknowledged or published it. However, it hit the internet and according to the ‘experts’ has had over 500,000 hits.

If This Isn't Scary Enough....

Consider the Source. Read first and then the answer is at the end.

"It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American decent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I meant people.


True, the situation has been well prepared on and off for the past century, especially the past twenty years. The initial testing grounds was conducted upon our Holy Russia and a bloody test it was. But we Russians would not just roll over and give up our freedoms and our souls, no matter how much money Wall Street poured into the fists of the Marxists.

Those lessons were taken and used to properly prepare the American populace for the surrender of their freedoms and souls, to the whims of their elites and betters.

First, the population was dumbed down through a politicized and substandard education system based on pop culture, rather then the classics. Americans know more about their favorite TV dramas then the drama in DC that directly affects their lives. They care more for their "right" to choke down a McDonalds burger or a BurgerKing burger than for their constitutional rights. Then they turn around and lecture us about our rights and about our "democracy". Pride blind the foolish.

Then their faith in God was destroyed, until their churches, all tens of thousands of different "branches and denominations" were for the most part little more then Sunday circuses and their televangelists and top protestant mega preachers were more then happy to sell out their souls and flocks to be on the "winning" side of one pseudo Marxist politician or another. Their flocks may complain, but when explained that they would be on the "winning" side, their flocks were ever so quick to reject Christ in hopes for earthly power. Even our Holy Orthodox churches are scandalously liberalized in America.

The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama. His speed in the past three months has been truly impressive. His spending and money printing has been a record setting, not just in America's short history but in the world. If this keeps up for more then another year, and there is no sign that it will not, America at best will resemble the Wiemar Republic and at worst Zimbabwe.

These past two weeks have been the most breath taking of all. First came the announcement of a planned redesign of the American Byzantine tax system, by the very thieves who used it to bankroll their thefts, loses and swindles of hundreds of billions of dollars. These make our Russian oligarchs look little more then ordinary street thugs, in comparison. Yes, the Americans have beat our own thieves in the shear volumes. Should we congratulate them? "

Who published it?
PRAVDA-the news outlet for the former Soviet Union and current Russian Republic. It's linked in the headline.

He Who Controls the Food...

...controls the future. Looking at this in terms of where we are seeing armed violence, political instability and war-the common thread is food or lack of it. I've been rereading Orwell's "1984" and the comments that did not alarm me twenty years ago now disturb me greatly. Consider these broad quotes from that book-"Ignorance is Strength" and "War is Peace." In the first, we are confronted with the idea that it is better not to know than to know. Think of the people we seeing Jaywalking on Leno or the characters in the movie "Idiocracy." There are wide ranges of people in our culture who not only do not know the basic precepts of our culture, but they do not care that they do not know. They don't understand the acquisition and maintenance of freedom, but would rather seek out common, lowbrow comforts. Look at how the writing in sitcoms, movies, even animated shows has sunk to lower and lower parameters. We are celebrating stupidity and ignorance at every corner. The case could be made that the recent election results were more a referendum on rejecting reality and demanding that illusions replace them. Is this not similar to Orwell's constant changing of history, literature, songs and games to fit the current paradigm? And when you consider the muting of our freedom of speech by the voices of the poorly labeled "liberals" are we not fairly close to thoughtcrime being charged? As for the "War is Peace" quote-think on the industrial complex. The change in our economy has much to do with the dissolution of the military as consumers as anything else. There are military vehicles that are only built by GM. What happens to those vehicles, who will make them, when GM goes away? And on a larger scale, what happens in the vacuum of development if America allows defense research to stagnate and die while other nations continue to develop new technologies?

The increasing encroachment of government on our freedoms is frightening not because of its scope, but because of the complacency we are seeing in much of the population. I have likened this before to a lobster being slowly placed in a pot of water and not realizing how dangerous this was until he was cooked. If ever there was a slippery slope to socialism, this presidency is it. The only way to change that is to vote in rational, conservative statemen and women at the local, state and federal levels. We are already seeing come to fruition billions in debt that may never be served by our children and grandchildren. We are buying selfish time for this generation and foisting it off on our children. Perhaps all those DINK's can do that without any qualms, but for those of us who have kids, we don't want to see them live in poverty so that spoiled Boomers can spend their retirements playing golf. And keep in mind, I speak as someone on the tail end of the Boomer generation, and I will probably NEVER be able to retire.

What About Those "Green Jobs?"

Remember when President Obama, then Candidate Obama, said he would produce millions of "green jobs?" The pundits swooned and the glitterati ate it up like cream. But here's the deal, green energy-which is largely the source of green jobs-is costly. So costly in fact that many economists speculate that it could result in multiple jobs LOSSES for every job created. Since we look to Europe for all ideas these days, one of the key creators of green jobs is Spain. And the result has been higher energy costs and, you guessed, industry and job LOSSES. So while the chortling continues, don't get so comfy in your new green job, because it may not last all that long and there may not be any other jobs open to replace it once its gone...

Full story here

"...I mention this in the context of the Obama administration's assertion that by subsidizing alternative energy sources, it will create 5 million green jobs. To that end, Congress passed in the stimulus bill $110 billion to subsidize and otherwise support such green efforts. And in conceptual support of that argument, the administration has referred to "what's happening in countries like Spain, Germany and Japan, where they're making real investments in renewable energy."

Well, in March, one of Spain's leading universities, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, published an authoritative study "of the effects on employment of public aid to renewable energy sources." The report pointed out: "This study is important for several reasons. First is that the Spanish experience is considered a leading example to be followed by many policy advocates and politicians. This study marks the very first time a critical analysis of the actual performance and impact has been made. Most important, it demonstrates that the Spanish/EU-style 'green jobs' agenda now being promoted in the U.S. in fact destroys jobs, detailing this in terms of jobs destroyed per job created."

The central finding of the study is that -- treating the data optimistically -- for every renewable-energy job that the government finances, "Spain's experience reveals with high confidence, by two different methods, that the U.S. should expect a loss of at least 2.2 jobs on average, or about 9 jobs lost for every 4 created."

Despite expensive and extensive green-job policies, a surprisingly low number of jobs were created. And about two-thirds of those "green" jobs were just to set up the energy source, in construction, fabrication, installation, marketing and administration. Only 10 percent of the green jobs created were permanent jobs actually operating and maintaining the renewable sources of energy.

Each wind industry job created in Spain required a subsidy of about $1.4 million. Overall, the average subsidy cost for each green job was about $800,000 (571,138 euros). And to create about 50,000 green jobs, Spain lost 110,000 jobs elsewhere in the economy, principally in metallurgy, nonmetallic mining and food processing and in the beverage and tobacco industries.

Each green megawatt brought on line destroyed 5.28 jobs elsewhere in the economy (8.99 by photovoltaics, 4.27 by wind energy and 5.05 by mini-hydropower). The total higher energy cost -- the higher cost of renewable energy over the market price of carbon-based energy -- between 2000 and 2008 was about $10 billion. Moreover, the report concluded, "These costs do not appear to be unique to Spain's approach but instead are largely inherent in schemes to promote renewable energy sources."

The high cost of green energy predictably drove energy-intensive Spanish companies and industries out of Spain to countries with cheaper carbon-based energy, while the cost to Spanish taxpayers of renewable-energy subsidies was "enormous--4.35 percent of all (value-added taxes) collected, 3.45 percent of the household income tax, or 5.6 percent of the corporate income tax..."

At What Price Healthcare?

It's been said that any government that is big enough to give you everything is also big enough to take away everything.

Take a moment and think about that.

We currently have a population that has not really had to suffer much in terms of poverty or need. Sure, there are those who have done without. As Jesus said-the poor will always be with us. But by and large, Americans have had the freedom to make of themselves what they choose. Historically, our founders sought to give citizens access to the education denied common folks in their European, African and Asian homelands. They hoped this would result in a population that embraced their freedoms with wisdom and acceptance of the responsibilities attached. Sadly, as with most things that become common, Americans take education for granted. The assumption is that children are empty vessels to be filled rather than flaccid muscles to be worked. The value of actual work has been lowered to where even novices assume that they are entitled to the perq's their parents waited decades to achieve.

So let's go back to the first statement. If we are given the so-called boon of "universal healthcare" who will be the gatekeeper. When workers paid their own insurance, they made the decisions as to how much coverage to have and how to exercise the benefits. But if government writes the checks, at some point there will be a situation where limits will have to be enforced. This will occur at either end of the life spectrum. Already we are seeing the movement in government to accept not just early abortions, but late term abortions as an acceptable alternative. China has had a one child policy for decades. With the cost of childcare, and the distant clamoring for public education to become America's Babysitter, how long will it be before similar policies take place here? Or let's consider those children born prematurely or with disabilities? Already we are seeing couples who screen for disabilities before pregnancy and one can only wonder what happens down the road if a disabled child is born to full term legal limits of viability. And what about preemies? I know kids who are happy normal teens now who were two months premature. But such NICU care is costly. More costly than the Obama Administration wants to admit. So do we tax everyone higher to pay these bills? Or will these children be left to die or survive on their own? And what of end of life issues? We have two states that have allowed assisted suicide to some extent. Will the cost of staying alive in senior years change into the "duty to die" for our national debt? I am not talking about sustaining life at all costs through intervention, I am talking of things such as dialysis or other measures which allow people to live longer. If these costly care measures are eliminated to insure the economic viability of Universal Healthcare, will we be able to accept the moral consequences down the line? Add to that the current measures to tax those of us who get health insurance through our employers. My insurance covers my whole family. Yet I will be taxed for not being irresponsible. Explain to me how this makes sense.

While I think things can be done to offer cost effective insurance to many people, I am also aware that many people would rather spend their money in other ways than in buying insurance. Right now, that is their option. I could point out some well fixed families who live in high income areas who choose not to buy insurance and instead spend their money on vacations or new cars or any of a number of things that I would love to do, but I choose to take responsibility instead. What is galling to me is to see people who spend their money on so many other things, but who cry about the high cost of health care and insurance. At some point, we have totally missed the whole "wants vs. needs" conversation. And I am truly disturbed by the trends I am seeing to simply throw away freedom for a cheap program.

Remember back at the start-I told you any government big enough to give you everything can also take it away. If single payer or Universal healthcare is such an efficient system, why do both the UK and Canada have private health insurance programs? Remember, these nations are and were ruled by royalty. They have a cultural acceptance of varying tiers of population influence. American isn't supposed to be like that. We are supposed to be the hale and hardy pioneers who earn by the work or their own sweat and muscles. If we trade our freedom for a program that could ultimately tell us how to live, what to do and can deny access if we don't obey, then we are reentering the very type of tyranny that we fought to escape. And for all you liberals out there, please remember, this is a two-edged sword. While you may like the idea of such a program, living under its restrictions may be far more galling than you realize. Big programs have Big price tags. And Big Programs also have Big Bureaucracy that wastes money, time and effort through serving the preservation of the program over preservation of the health of the individual.

The worse sentence in history-we are from the government and we are here to help. Remember that.

Here's the Problem: A Rant

I teach in a public school.
I teach in the United States.
We no longer really hold our children of any age accountable for their actions, or their inaction.
The result is that the wheels fall off, things don't get done and in the end people fail, or don't get to participate or don't get things they way they want.
I've written before about how our "Bumper Bowling" mentality is destroying our mental edge.
If everyone succeeds, then what's the use of trying?
And then I get emails from parents whining because their child is failing.
I don't fail kids, kids fail themselves.

I am in my classroom from 7:45 until 4:30 or later every day.
I am willing to come in earlier or stay later. I have worked with kids using every possible alternative teaching style, tool or fashion if it gets the point across.
Yet I can't get students to come in to retake tests, even when they would probably significantly raise their grades. They simply cannot be bothered to go out of their way to exercise any effort to change things. And their parents seem to agree with this, because they don't bother to enforce any sort of order, rules or suggestions to their kids no matter what their age.

As for parents, good luck finding them. Oh sure, there will always be the helicopter parents and PTSA moms who show up for Open House, but try finding a valid phone number for your average failing kid. I have sometimes had to call as many as five numbers. One time I was told the kid had NEVER lived at the house. Another time we got a number for the YMCA in a town 120 miles away. I don't know if the parents lie on the forms, or if it's the kids. But for some kids if their arm gets broken, they are going to lie around in pain because we can't locate any adult.

And this in part explains why our nation is in the situation it finds itself.
Everyone, according to Oprah, the DNC and The View, is entitled to a job, a house, reproductive freedom, free healthcare, free education and on and on and on.
But it has long been my observation that when you give people something with no strings attached, they aren't invested in it. They don't see it as valuable. So they waste it, ignore it or take it for granted.

We don't give drivers' licenses for free. So people are especially careful to renew them, pay for insurance and have their social security cards so that they will be valid to drive.
We don't charge to vote, so very few people bother. When you compare our voting records with those of other nations, it's really pretty sad.

Likewise, when we give all the kids trophies, then nobody has to try hard. And when nobody tries hard, nobody excels. I teach in a district where some teachers are APPALLED that we would have juried art shows for our high school students. I don't understand the reasoning. We have students who are about to embark into one of the most competitive fields in the market and we want to cushion them from the possibility that maybe they aren't good enough? Should we really be encouraging kids to pursue professions where they simply do not have the stuff to succeed? How many marginal college students are hanging on by tenths of points in majors they hate, when they would be excellent electricians? Are we encouraging kids to go to college just because it looks good on the schools' records rather than considering that some kids might be better off pursuing a career?

Please excuse this rant. I have had a long week. And I have literally DAYS of curriculum writing in front of me along with the folderol and froufrou of the end of the year and graduation. Today, six weeks after the deadline, two seniors showed up at my door with money for honor cords. I was not there because I was at the Ad Building in a curriculum writing session. I takes six weeks to get the cords. I announced, posted signs and warned them. But I am sure I will get terse, angry emails from parents because THEIR KIDS DROPPED THE BALL. That was the trigger for this rant, but the sources have been simmering for awhile now.

Follow The Money

Let's try a game. Would you like to play a game? It's called "Follow the Money".

For example: President Obama>Moveon.org>George Soros.

Now I wonder what Soros could possibly want from the President of the United States...Soros can't be president, because he's Hungarian. But he has a lot of stock that he's bought on the cheap lately, and he has a way of funding his internet nutjobs to make certain issues or particular bills he supports to appear "important." Soros has stated that he wants America a socialist nation. He also has some wealthy friends who no doubt are sitting on money pulled out of the market to help weaken it when necessary. since President Obama needs the good will, or perceived good will, of the Moveon.org crowd, he can't risk making old George angry.

Let's try another one: NBC>MSNBC>GE>Tom Daschel> President Obama.

Let's never forget the network that brought us news that made CNN appear middle of the road. They pay Keith Olberman's paycheck. They support the constant stream of snide remarks and innuendos for anyone or anything conservative, while glossing over any problems, no matter how serious, the current administration is creating. Journalism? Forget it. Impartiality? Not Hardly. I am surprised there is even room for Michelle considering how many groups are in bed with this administration.

Let's see what other follow the money relationships we can find:

Federal Student Funding>Notre Dame University>controversial pro-choice speaker at graduation

Constructions companies>President Obama>Illegal Immigrants

See, isn't this fun. Try it at home. Laugh if you can. Or cry....

Losing the Cowboy

Remember what TV used to be? Remember Bonaza and Rifle Man and Sugarfoot and High Chaparral? People saw the cowboy as the epitome of the true freedom of America. He was a free spirit. He could go where he wanted, make his own fortune and didn't expect or rely on others to make things happen for him. Where are the cowboys today? Today the term "cowboy" is often used a a derogatory term, intending to label someone that goes off without warning. But cowboys weren't really like that. They were the ultimate pragmatists, doing whatever worked. And they were the ideal example of democracy in action, refusing to endure laziness or sloppiness on the job because they knew it would put them in danger down the line. So being a cowboy is not the negative that northern liberals like to assume. They don't even know the cowboy as a real person, but see him as some sort of comic book parallel set up by Hollywood. Those guys weren't cowboys, but I am sure they wanted to be.

I lament the loss of the cowboy. He has been forced aside by programs that actively seek to remove masculinity from the modern vernacular. A man can only be strong if he is also sensitive. That's the modern credo. But there have been times and situations where we needed men to be MEN. We needed men to build this nation. And despite the modern view of the "Cowboys vs. Indians" scenario, it was never the Cowboys that the Indians needed to fear-it was the bureaucrats that were so insulated and far away from where things actually happen. That is the last thing we need in a culture. And it's the last thing we need in a President. There are people who blame GWB for moving when they would have rather wallowed in international sympathy. That was never the cowboys' way. The Cowboy believes in the theory of "lead, follow or get the hell out of the way." A cowboy above all fixes things, it's part of his nature. Teddy Roosevelt probably understood the mindset of the cowboy best with his admonishment to "walk softly, but carry a big stick." Now we have people who boldly blast their ideas regardless of the efficacy of these programs down the line. They couch their prose in what sounds best on a soundbite or what appeals to today's favored demography. We are run by people who mince words, hide intentions and consider their own needs before the needs of the country. Down that narrow path lies chaos.

GWB was a man who was needed in the place he was during 9/11 and after. If anything, his failure to stand up to Congress and say no was more damaging than any of the imaginary shortcomings promoted by Soros, Moveon.org and Garafalo. He allowed them to fill the vacuum with the cacophony of their rhetoric to his own demise and the ultimate turnover of the reins of power to people who are simply not willing to accept what their own senses tell them. They would rather argue hyperbole than dig dirt. We need someone willing to clean out the stalls in Washington, and I just don't see that happening with any of the folks up there right now. Now we have a president who is not only not a cowboy, he's willing to deal with people who actively seek to harm Americans. And they mean to harm ANY AMERICAN regardless of sex, race, religion or background simply because we are Americans. He seems to have no personal honor although he does demonstrate a great deal of egotism. Even the lowest cowboy has some loyalty to his boss or his outfit. But in this case, it appears that the current resident of the White House is more than willing to sacrifice the safety of the nation on the altar of international public opinion.

President Obama seems to have his fingers in many pies. A cowboy knows that if you lose focus on one calf, you end up losing the herd. President Obama in trying to be all things to all people. He is simply throwing up ideas like pancakes on the ceiling waiting to see if he throws them hard enough that maybe they will stick. It is as if he intends to place his brand on every program, every bill and every move made by Congress. He seeks to remake this nation into a shadow state where every step is cushioned by the well meaning but costly limitations of government intervention.

If this course is followed, we will spend and waste money on an exponential scale, because the moral of the story is that if you protect everyone from every possible danger, then those people stop taking care of themselves. Example: If the much vaunted Obamacare system comes into fruition and covers EVERYONE NO MATTER WHAT, then why should anyone stop smoking, stop drinking, stop using drugs, stop overeating? There will be no penalty for bad behavior and the end result of covering everyone will be that bad behavior will be sustained and rewarded AND taxpayers will pay spiraling higher rates to keep these idiots alive. At some point, the realization will come that this cannot continue, and then we will see rationing. So maybe Grandpa will be put on the waiting list for that bypass in favor of younger recipients. How far is that from the scenario of the bad Sci-Fi movie "Logan's Run" wherein 30 year olds were launched into death with a celebration.

Would a cowboy think of just the age of the person when offering aid? Would you want a doctor that wasn't a cowboy willing to risk any attempt to save you? Aren't some things in life just worth taking a risk? And in the end, if we don't have someone in power who cares enough to risk their own popularity for the sake of keeping America and Americans safe and strong, what will be our fate? Somewhere down the road, we will be looking once again for a cowboy and lamenting the years that he's been gone. I just hope we aren't too late.