Monthly Archives: February 2014

Unpopular Facts – Cheese and Freedom

Years ago when my puppy was still a puppy he would escape out the front door or slip out under the fence.   I would have to chase him through the neighborhood with the hope of wrangling him back into the house.  So there I was, old and slow while he was young and on four legs.  No matter how much I called his name he sensed freedom.  He would stop, look at me, then head on his merry way.  We would resort to waiving a piece of American cheese to entice him near enough so that he could be captured.   After a while he caught on to that and even cheese would not wrangle him back into the house. The call of freedom was greater than the slice of cheese.  Ten years later,  after all this time being told that he is to stay within his territory, it takes a lot of effort to get him to cross even out the front door.    Over time and repetition he has learned what is expected of him.  Pavlov accomplished the same thing with his dogs.  He produced a conditioned response in them through food and repetition.  They lost their will toward freedom.  For a dog that is ok, but what about for an American?

The media in the United States has treated the majority of the American population just like we treat our pets.  By repeating stories with expected behavioral outcomes the media has trained much of the populace to not even recognize the truth when it is presented.    The mindless absorption of network news, TV talk shows, and custom storylines has been used to shape public opinion in ways that belie the truth.  Telling you that you have been manipulated is certainly not popular.  You may be the exception that not been manipulated by the barrage of media opinion, but I would suggest that even those who fully recognize the manipulation cannot completely escape it.  The effort to control your thought and behavior is constant and when coming from news organizations who profess the truth first, it’s disgraceful.

Much of today’s media view the populace as automatons, robotic sponges that will absorb the philosophy they espouse.  Often based on purposeful misrepresentation their goal is to herd the populace in ways that support their narrative.    One of the clearest examples of this is the concept of politically correct speech.  The idea that people should be able to state their opinions without a forceful backlash has faded significantly during my lifetime.  Now, stating an unpopular opinion is cause for vile backlashes and threats.    The media instead of holding up the first amendment is purposely participating in its destruction by reinforcing the idea that certain words are bad or that only idiots would believe in any form of creationism.  The truth of ideas and the value of their debate in society is squashed by a media that no longer supports the first amendment.  Limiting speech helps keep the populace in line and encourages them to support the media favored approach to government.

                Below is a partial list of ideas that the media is now pushing.  I hope it provides food for intellectual thought.

That man made global warming is a fact although the last 15 years has seen no such change in global temperature.

That a baby, even at 7 months is not really a life and to argue otherwise is to hate women.

That there is no connection between a stable family and a successful life.

That people have to have a government benefit to survive. (The inner cities have had these the longest.  What does that say?)

That dignity does not come from having a productive life.

That the government knows best to provide for your healthcare.

That NSA spying on peoples phone calls without an individual warrant is not a violation of the 4th Amendment.

That the constitution is an outdated document.

That fossil fuels are bad even though we live in one of the cleanest most prosperous countries. (Horse dung was bad.)

That everyone should have as much sex as possible just for fun.

That taxes fuel the economy. (More people out of work now than in 40 + years.)

That the rich are stealing from you.

That you are entitled to something for nothing. (Eventually those providing the something for nothing will stop providing it.)

That communist/socialist states are doing well. (Argentina is in revolt,  people in Cuba can’t get a car newer that 1960)

That people need big government.  (Smaller government produces far more prosperity—it is proven.)

That guns kill, not the people with the guns.  (There is a reason for the 2nd Amendment.)

The media and government are counting on our believing these and many other lies so we will hand our power and prosperity over to the helping hand of big brother.  Freedom is not free.  If we do not stand for truth and demand of the media that they start reporting things in an unbiased, agenda free way.  They, along with your government will steal both your freedom and prosperity.

Claims Department — Affordable Care Act

Hello, welcome to the IRS Health Claims pre-approval hotline.  If you are calling about a prior claim please call our Claims Service Hotline, otherwise for pre-approval,  please enter in your social security number and press # when done.  Someone will be on the line to assist you momentarily.

                                (2 hours later)

“JIM”:   Hello, this is Jim, welcome to the IRS Health Claims Pre-approval hotline.   I see that you have indicated that you will

need approval for the treatment of heart disease.   Reviewing your current information, I see that you have had a heart attack previously,

is that correct?

“GEORGE”;  the patient:   Yes, that is correct.

“JIM”:   What procedure do you need to have approved?

“GEORGE” : According to my doctor I need blood work for cardiac enzymes, a stress test, a catheterization, and most likely stents.

“JIM”:   Our records show that you are 58 years old.  Are you planning to return to work after the procedure?

“GEORGE” : Why does that matter?

“JIM”:   This information is used to calculate your available lifetime medical benefit under the affordable care act.  Since you already used $256,432 of your maximum benefit we need to calculate how much additional benefit you qualify for.

“GEORGE” :  How is that benefit calculated?

“JIM”:   We at the IRS take great care to calculate that benefit from all the information that you provide or which is already in the file we have on you.  It is our goal to make that determination as fairly as possible given all the factors.

“GEORGE”: But what are the factors?

“JIM”: Expenses already incurred, the likelihood that more expenses will be incurred, your age, your estimated productive remaining years and such.  Now, please just answer the questions as they are addressed to you. 

“JIM”:  Are you planning to return to work after the procedure?

“GEORGE”: yes.

“JIM”:   Do you currently work for a profit or non-profit organization?

“GEORGE”: profit

“JIM”:  How many times did you eat fast food last month?

“GEORGE”: about 20.

“JIM”:  Do you smoke?

“GEORGE”:  Used to.

“JIM”:  Do you vote in presidential elections?

“GEORGE”: What?

“JIM”:  Do you vote in presidential elections?

“GEORGE”: Why is that pertinent?

“JIM”:  Sir, you need to answer the questions.  These all have statistical correlations.

“GEORGE”:  Ok, yes I vote.

“JIM”:  Would you classify yourself a more liberal or conservative?

“GEORGE”:  I don’t see….

“JIM”:  Just answer the question sir!

“GEORGE”:  Conservative.

“JIM”:  At what age do you plan to retire?

“GEORGE”:  65.

“JIM”:  Thank you sir for answering the questions.  The system is reviewing your information. 

Based on the computer’s projection we will approve all the diagnostic tests and procedures.  Should you need stents or some other therapeutic treatment the Affordable Care act will not cover those.   You are already close to your lifetime maximum.

 “GEORGE”:  Are you telling me that if I try to get my heart fixed, you will not pay for  it.

“JIM”:  That is correct.

“GEORGE”:  Surely there is some way to appeal this.

“JIM”:  Sir the ACA does not provide for any appeals the decisions of the IRS are final.

“GEORGE”:  but….

“JIM”:  Thank you for calling the IRS, have a good day.  CLICK!

 Back at the IRS office Jim speaking to his co-worker says, “There is one more white conservative who won’t be voting next year.  High FIVE!!!!!”

 

 

 

Childhood and The President — I will do what I want.

Growing up, I was always in trouble.  Whenever mom or dad would tell me to do something I would announce my intention to either do the thing or not do the thing.  I not only announced my intention but would announce it with attitude.   They always knew where I stood and should I refuse to do what they asked I would get into big trouble.   Often a power struggle ensued.  As a kid however, you have no power so I lost most if not all of those battles.

My brother however had a different strategy.  Whenever he was told to do something he would just agree to do it.  Now before you think he was being compliant and obedient, note that verbal agreement is not action.   He would agree whether or not he had any intention of carrying out the task.   Often the request itself would get lost to time and the task would never be completed.   The result was that there were almost no power struggles between him and my parents.  His approach seldom resulted in conflict.    

Most of us would say that if you agree to something then you should do that thing.  Whole philosophies are built on that concept.  The basis of honor, honesty, commitment and contracts are all based on the concept that someone’s word can be depended upon.  For me, the convenience of just agreeing never sat very well.   I did not see commitment as a fuzzy concept.  To his credit, as my brother got older he was one of the most dependable people I ever knew.   His word was something you could depend with absolute assurance.  He was still incredible at maintaining peace, but did so with a commitment to his word.  Not so, President Obama.

Our president has demonstrated much the same approach to commitment as did my brother as a child.  Saying what is expedient to get the most mileage has become one of his trademarks.  It is as if his intentions or words of the moment are reality and we are supposed to believe that reality from moment to moment.   Of course he said that, “If you like your insurance you can keep it.”  He knows it was false, but it was what he wanted people to believe.  My brother wanted my parents to believe that he would do his chores.  He did not want to do the chores only to convince them of his good intentions.   My brother, unlike President Obama grew up to be a man of his word and the “I will do what I want philosophy” no longer dominated his actions. 

Unfortunately, the “I will do what I want” approach to governing is not a good model for a democratic society.  Recently Obama announced that he would double gas mileage standards by 2024 and save each person $8,000 per year.    Whether or not there was any science to make that promise was not relevant. Whether or not it is possible was not relevant.  The announcement also assumed that he knows what the price of gas will be in 10 years.  The only basis he had for the announcement is that it is something he wants.  Sadly, most of the news goes along with announcing this without ever challenging the announcement’s factual underpinnings.   According to the President, his announcing the thing is the same as its becoming reality.  Facts do not matter.

With the Healthcare law and immigration law the President has told the nation what parts of the law were valid and what parts were not valid even when those decrees were completely antithetical to the actual wording of the law.  The penalties that are part of not complying with the law as written are still due even if the President decided not to “implement” them.  Beyond the fact that he has no actual power to change a law that is already passed, just because he says that he is changing the law does not actually change it.  Those that cross our borders and live here without going through formal channels are still illegal aliens under the law.   The President can call it what he likes and violate his oath of office by not enforcing the law, but they are still illegal under the law. 

Just like with my brother, If Mom and Dad did not come back to him and challenged him on the fact that he did not do as he said he would, then he would never have done what was expected.  If Congress does not go back to the President and force him to follow the constitution he will continue to do what he wants with no check on his power.  He has been clear in action and deed that this is an “I will do what I want.” presidency.  Perhaps, while a child is learning responsibility, a short venture into the ”I will do what I want lifestyle”,  it is not so bad.  It is also what you would expect of a dictator.  It is not a good approach for the democratically elected leader of the United States.  

Watching While Rome Burns

My name is ….  Actually my name I no matter because it am one of the last Republican’s to serve in Congress.  There will be no more republicans. 

When the Obama administration started to selectively enforce immigration laws, I said nothing.

When the Obama administration started changing Obamacare without Congressional approval I said nothing.

When the Obama administration started using its agencies to persecute those they did not like, I said nothing.

When the Obama administration started using the NSA to listen to everyone’s telephone conversations I said nothing.

When the Obama administration started using the FDA and EPA to create laws not approved by Congress, I said nothing.

When the Obama administration started telling businesses what they had to pay people without Congressional approval I said nothing.

When the Obama administration implemented Common Core and quit teaching the constitution I said nothing.

When the Obama administration started placing watchers in newsrooms I said nothing.

When the Obama administration through Homeland Security bought millions of rounds of ammunition I said nothing.

When the Obama administration started using the Obamacare death panels to deny treatment to their enemies I said nothing.

When the Obama administration started investigating republican Congressmen I said nothing.

When the Obama administration forced most republican Congressman out of office I said nothing.

When the rule of law, freedom and the US Constitution died I said nothing for by then it was too late.

Granny Gropes

     In 2011  the 85 year old Lenore Zimmerman  was strip searched by the TSA all in the interest of public safety.  Now almost thirteen years after 9/11 Americans have exchanged freedom from unreasonable search and seizure for a program that allows government workers to inspect your property without a warrant, to rifle through your pockets on a whim and to grope children and grannies to their hearts content.  Surely such a program is worthwhile in stopping terrorists from boarding planes. So how many terrorists have all the invasive procedures stopped —- ZERO. 

            When I was a child and the cold war was still hot we were often told how in order to travel in Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union the person wanting to travel needed government papers before they were allowed to leave their home city.    This requirement was portrayed as an oppressive limitation on freedom.   Of course that would never happen here, or so we were told.  Still today, in order to get on a plane, the government requires you to have your ID and to show your boarding pass.  Further, the government can stop you for no reason other than whim and ask you questions strip search you or confiscate your property.  This is all done without a warrant or any pretense of having probable cause for the action.   It has happened here.  The reason, or so we are told that this is allowed is to guarantee public safety.

            What about the argument that we are safer because we tolerate this.  The Boston bombers came to the US in a plane and Tamerlan Tsarnaev traveled back to the US from the Soviet Union.  He freely boarded the plane leaving and freely boarded the plane returning to the US, terrorist training already provided.  Did our loss of freedom protect us from the Boston Bombers?   Not in the least. 

            If the possibility of increased public safety, (not real public safety) is enough to allow searches when we board a plane, at what point will check points be on the road.  Cars are both weapons and potential carriers of explosives.  Every road and every highway needs to be checked.  The same excuse “that it is in the interest of public safety”  is as valid in searching vehicles as it is searching luggage.  In fact, there are already cases where the TSA has searched cars in the airport long term parking.

            The constitution is clear, there are to be no searches, or invasions of people’s property or person without reasonable suspicion that a crime is taking place.  In other words, no warrant, no search.  Nevertheless, the government now captures phone data, geolocation data, interpersonal connection data (who you talk to) , emails, and texts with no warrant.  According to the constitution, none of this is permitted.  The people in Washington, even those that have their doubts about these programs are unwilling to give up the power and authoritarian rule that these programs represent.  We are not stopping terror, only enabling the government future persecution of its own populace.  The idea that “public safety” justifies any constitutional violation is ludicrous.   We have almost open boarders to the south but our citizens are placed under constant supervision.  Does this not smell of totalitarianism?  We are living in the world that the government warned us against 40 years ago.  

Government Lies – An Impotent Press

Ever since there was a government, governments have lied to their people.   I am sure that Vespasian told his people that the Roman Coliseum would be built it one year and only cost 200,000 Denarii’s.  (just a guess).   The fact that he knew it would most likely take 10 years and 1 million Denarii’s was never challenged by the Roman Press.  With an emperor, should the press dare challenge his word, it only happened one time.  We can find comfort in two places; that we will not be executed for exposing a government lie (most likely), and that our government almost 2000 years later, is still lying. 

The question is not whether government lies, but whether the press and the populace will hold that government accountable.  In the past few years the American press has not held government accountable.  The constitution guarantees a freedom of the press.  If the press never challenges the party line then it both is not free and does not need constitutional protection.  Every time the press fails to uphold the constitution and their responsibility they tacitly approve of the government’s behavior and they lose credibility.  That loss of credibility becomes impotence.  In time they will have no power, and no influence and those that dare to speak up will be persecuted.  Below are some examples.

When the President said, “If you like your like your insurance you can keep it.” 

            Where was the press?

  When border agents are killed with guns provide to the drug dealers by our federal government:

            Where was the press?

When IRS agents are caught persecuting the political enemies of the democrats:

            Where is the press?

These three scandals are still going on yet the press does not step up and investigate nor do they shout from the rooftops that our government can’t be trusted.  All three of the above issues violate the protections provided by the constitution for an individual to have a right to their life, liberty or pursuit of happiness.   A dead border agent loses his life because the federal government wants to make owning guns look bad. (Not to mention what a warped idea that was.)  His rights are violated and the press just lets that fact slip by. When it becomes one of their lives it will be too late for them to stand up. 

The destructions of people’s health insurance plans could have been predicted and prevented had the press done its job.  Some of these folks have lost their coverage after believing the lies told.  Nevertheless, the plan that stole their health security is still in place.  If the press did their job then that wrong would have been made right.   Next are death panels.  By then the press will be completely powerless to stop the wrongs.

The IRS pursued non-profits with conservative political views. The press continues to let the IRS do this as no one has been held accountable for this.  Of course, that is just a start, OSHA, and the ATF have also been used to threaten and investigate those with conservative views.  Perhaps the press thinks its ok when it is the Tea Party, but in 6 months when investigations are turned on those who don’t like NSA spying, what will they do.  In time anyone who disagrees with the government will be subject to unjustified investigation and persecution.  By not standing up for the principles of truth and by not holding up parts of the constitution the press is sewing its own destruction.

An impotent press, a cowardly press does not need freedom of the press.  The more the press sides unquestioningly with the government the less freedom we all have.  In the long run, there won’t be any press, only propaganda.  We are largely there now.  It is a shame.  Perhaps reporters should register with the government and we can use the constitution as a fish wrapper.  Our government already does that.

Road to Life – Men’s Part

    No one ever discusses abortion from a guy’s perspective.  The pro-abortion rights groups, pro-choice groups to be more politically correct always talk about abortion as an issue that impacts women’s health.  Pro-life groups, the anti-abortion crowd, also focus on the woman.  The guys involved are completely ignored.  Yet the reality is that guys are 50% responsible for each pregnancy.  No one really discusses that or focuses on that.  Without the guy’s contribution either as willing father or an accidental sperm donor there would be no abortions.

Let’s face it, the urge for teenage boys or even young men in their 20’s to have sex is hugely powerful.  It’s more powerful than common sense and more powerful than the desire not to have a baby.    It often results in a very inexact implementation of the rhythm method.  These young men are bombarded with advertising that promotes promiscuity, with images that encourage their base desires and with the message that they deserve to have fun.   On the one hand, they hear the message that it is ok to hook up for fun and on the other that a fetus has no value as a life.  They are taught to value pleasure above all else.  In music and movies the message is life is cheap.

During college, students are taught that the world is overpopulated and that having children adds to that overpopulation.  They are taught that a fetus is just a tissue mass, that it has no value, that it is not a life.  The net result of this indoctrination is a generation of young men who, when they get someone pregnant, don’t value the fetus as a life and who have no qualms against suggesting an abortion.   They are taught that it is their sociological duty to have the baby aborted. 

In areas where college propaganda does not reach young men researchers are studying how to make young men who frequent free clinics more aware of Plan B and the options to abort.   

Since young ladies hear the same message, the standard response to an unplanned pregnancy is to eliminate the inconvenience.   If on occasion one of those men feel differently and want to keep the baby, the girl involved who has also heard all the same messages may still choose abortion.  She has heard that a baby will destroy her life.  The result is that there is a huge societal pressure to kill babies that result from the poor choices made by people who chose to have unprotected sex.   In most cases, the men have no choice and no recourse if the woman decides to abort. 

Whether you are pro-life or pro-choice the devaluing of human life from the push to validate abortion will impact you at some point.  We see it starting in how young people view life in the inner city and how the government views life when maintaining it becomes expensive.    If life has not value at its start, then if will soon have no value at its end.  Over time, it will have no value in the middle and there will be no one to step in at that point.