Popularity Trumps Hypocricy!

Here we have Obama flying to New York for a date at heaven only knows what cost, surely hundreds of thousands of dollars. Obama has probably destroyed the country with untold debt. He is adored. Auto executive fly in private jets to Congress for business. They are roundly excoriated. Hypocrisy!

Is It 1984?

Has anyone noticed that we hear from our president every day, some little sermon or perhaps an announcement of another appointment (yet one more czar?) or initiative. We hear at once that we are are spending (who is we?) too much, but immediately we have another spending spree on a new project to the effect that we save a penny and spend a dollar. Words, words followed by more words. I can't begrudge President Obama using the teleprompter. How could he possibly talk so much without some aid?

I also notice that Mr. Obama uses 'I', 'me' and 'my' very frequently as he makes his pronouncements. I suppose this is to get away from the royal 'we' and 'our' that is customary with leaders. Ah, the common touch. No, it is really the display of a gargantuan ego and most unbecoming of a president.

Taken all together, we seem to be in the early stages of an Orwellian world with Obama as Big Brother giving us our continuous stream of propaganda or dictums. I fear for the republic.

Obama, Pelosi - You Are Not Dad & Mom

Real short. Who elected Barak Obama or Nancy Pelosi to tell us how we should live our lives. These two seem to think that they were elected to direct our lives or coerce us into changing how we live. The famous "share the wealth" pronouncement by Obama and recently Pelosi's "Every aspect of our lives must be subject to an inventory..." are not what I, for just one person, want from these two. Barak never held down a real job and Nancy, I think, would have us scale down while she commandeers military jets and ... well you get the idea.

These two and their comrads need to get about the business of bolstering our defenses, controlling government's appetite for gobbling up our freedoms and our money. They need to "share the wealth" by cutting taxes and subject government programs to "an inventory" and then cut them back to reasonable levels. We don't need these two for parents.

For some reason, this country is perceived by our 'leaders' to be at the root of all evil, or at least most of it. It's not. Don't believe that for a moment. Try living in other countries. Leave your priveleged status behind and see how wonderfully responsible and fairminded is life in them. Your eyes will be opened.

We are a good and decent country by any standards. We have been successful not because of government, rather because we controlled it. Don't 'change' that success formula because an inexperienced young man or a priveleged woman say so.

Guilt - Tactic to Put You on Defense

I am going to write more about this later but just have to get it off my chest.

I was listening to a proponent of national health care or universal health care or single payer health care or whatever. Their basic point is that tens of millions of Americans do not have health insurance, and if we just brought the system under federal control, all would be better. Of course, this is not true. People do have access to health care through various programs and certain rights to obtain care.

What annoys me is that the "tens of millions of uninsured" line is designed to make us feel guilty. Somehow we are responsible to provide what others don't have. I agree that we should help, and we do now through taxes and through charities. It is our responsibility to help our fellow human beings, but our help should be tailored to the situation and to our ability to pay. A government program will not do that.

A government run system will grant equal benefits to irresponsible people. Should we have to pay for equal care for persons who take illegal drugs, who have more children than they can support, who choose not to work, who are criminals, who behave recklessly, etc.? Why?

What is the purpose of taking responsibility for your life - planning, working, sacrificing...? The point is that unless we believe that we are responsible for the decisions of others or the just plain bad luck of others, we should not be taxed to support them. What is the point of working? Probably the liberal response would be something like self actualization or some similar platitude. But most of us work because it is our responsibility to take care of ourselves.

Think about it. What if the United Nations said that the United States, a rich country, is responsible to provide health care equal to our own to the peoples of other countries and was going to tax us to do that. How many would agree that we should pay that tax? Are we responsible for the situations in these countries that make living in them so tenuous? Can you imagine how paying for their health care would affect your pocketbook? What we do is provide help when a catastrophe strikes; we provide aid to countries but within limits. We are compasionate but don't take full responsibility. We don't tax ourselves to provide the same services in those countries as we have here. There are limits.

Perhaps if we could be certain that our payments for health care through taxes would only benefit those who worked hard and sacrificed but who were hurt by circumstances truly out of their control, most of us would support the idea of coverage for them at our collective expense. But that is not the case. A government run program will never do that. It will dole out care with little control over cost. We will pay dearly for that.

And furthermore, should the level of care be the same for all? Should one not be able to choose a higher level or faster access by paying for it himself? Why not?

We saw what happened when congressmen pushed for home loans for people who did not have the means to pay. The system collapsed and tens of millions of people saw their savings go up in smoke. Taxing for universal health care is a similar bad idea and will further erode the financial health of responsible people. How would we like to pay 20% to 25% more for all of our purchases on top of the income, property, sales, use, and other taxes that we pay now?

The secret to a vital health care system is for us to pay for routine care and insure for catastrophes. When people have to pay for their decisions they will take responsibility for them.

Problems, Problems - Things Are Changing

Can you believe that we have reached the stage in our country where the government, run by an inexperienced politico, is the owner and manager of major industries? This is something we could not have believed not so long ago. But here it is, a reality!

You can see the effect. Our 'captains of industry' are signing on to the Obama agenda. Why? Because he has shown that the U.S. government can own their companies. The government can hire and fire the executives. It can subordinate bondholders to other interests which is a clear contravention of the legal structure of corporations. This is incredible.

And can you believe that we have organizations like ACORN playing any role in the census of the United States? ACORN is under investigation in many states for its activities. Therefore, in an abundance of caution, the magnitude of the investigation should be sufficient to bar it from participation in the census. Remember that the census is used to determine representation in Congress and the distribution of many federal dollars. To permit ACORN to participate is just plain wrong or worse.

Obama taxes - Here they come!

I have little patience for writing a piece about what should have been obvious to Americans during the elections - Obama coupled with a Democrat majority in Congress would spell unprecedented destruction of the American way of life through government intervention in our lives, our businesses, our culture, our place in the world order, and I believe our very freedom to pursue happiness as we see it. Where was our common sense? Did we think that 'change' automatically meant 'good change' or 'healthy change' or what?

Barak Obama was for many people an antidote to George Bush. People were weary of the war and felt deceived about the decision to attack Iraq. (Okay, that's understandable. I don't mean to discuss Bush here. He is not the threat to our future as a people and as a nation; Barak Obama is.) On top of the tensions over Iraq, the business cycle kicked-in, abetted by massive fraud and incompetence in the financial world, and the economy tanked. But all of this was not a reason to suspend reality and vote for 'change' - without understanding what that 'change' would be.

To make matters worse, we had John McCain as the Republican candidate - the alternative to Barak Obama. Was he ever a non-starter! He just didn't get it! He was a myopic, boring, somewhat hysterical candidate - not the right man for the job - not inspiring. But he was the lesser of two evils. He would have been less interventionist with respect to the economy and strong on defense (the latter being the real mission of a national government). Both of these would have been good. In short, McCain would have been the better choice. As uninspiring as he is, he would not have damaged us.

To the point. Obama said he would cut taxes for 95% of Americans. Most people thought that this meant a reduction in income taxes for 95% of Americans. But 95% of us do not pay income tax. (Mr. Obama would probably say that he meant income and payroll taxes.) Many of us are paid (get money) at income tax time - get it? - not taxed but given money. (And I am not talking about a refund of excess taxes paid.) So that means we are using the tax code more and more to spend money - that is, give money to people who do not pay taxes, people who did not earn that money. (An aside, how can people who only receive money from the government ever be expected to understand the responsibilities of paying for that government? Answer: They cannot!)

Then Mr. Obama began a spending spree that has no peace-time precedent. Understand, no peace-time precedent. You see: a war ends, and we can pay the debt. Perhaps the 'stimulus' spending will end and we can pay that debt, but what about the costs of health care reform and other social programs that will only expand? In the future we will have to pay for the war, and the continuing war and now hugely expensive new initiatives such as universal health care.

How will we pay for these? The answer is taxes and more taxes, overt and hidden. Watch your wallet; watch your bank account; watch.... Remember that $250,000 threshold? It has been lowered, and it will go lower. Middle class people will begin paying through income taxes and in other ways. Wake up, you are hearing it now - Cap and Trade, Value Added Tax (VAT), and more to come. These taxes will hit people hard, very hard. People of all incomes will pay these taxes. Of course, Obama and colleagues will try to buy the some of us by increasing payoffs through the 'earned income credit' in the income tax code. What do higher earned income credits mean to people who don't receive this give away? More taxes! We are in for it.

What can we do about this? Simple, ORGANIZE, FIGHT BACK! Let's kick the spenders out. The so-called tea parties were a start. The people who organized these (our real, responsible leaders) must use their precious time to create a vast network of responsible people who in turn must devote themselves to defeating the policies of tax and spend. If this does not happen, this nation will be forever changed, forever a nation strange to those who new it in its greatness. The burden will fall the hardest on those who are working the hardest, those who are shouldering the real responsibility for American success. That is a tough proposition, but it is necessary for these competent people to take the lead.

We must set aside the issues that divide us and work for a responsible government. Maybe it's not too late?

Pelosi & the CIA Briefing

We have Nancy Pelosi accusing the CIA of not informing her about enhanced interrogation techniques including water boarding. The CIA says it informed the appropriate members of Congress - at the time Congresswoman Pelosi among them. What is the conclusion? Who has lied? We should know.

Why has this disappeared from the news? Answer: The Democrat-friendly press bought the Democrat's argument (smoke screen) that there are more important matters to occupy the government, the press and the people. Basically, they say this matter is a distraction.

Sorry, it can hardly be a distraction when the Speaker of the House, number three in the presidential line of succession and leader of one branch of Congress says that a vital governmental agency has deceived the Congress. If she is correct, we have a major problem in the agency. If she lied, we have a major political figure who is not worthy of her job and is playing with national security.

A thorough investigation is warranted. But this is not likely to happen with a Democrat-controlled Congress, a Democrat in the White House in command of the CIA, and a largely lapdog press. This country is in trouble.

Where To Begin - Heath Care Reform?

This is my maiden voyage blogging. And already I have probably managed to either offend someone ('maiden' = sexist?) or lost a bunch of people ('maiden voyage' = archaic?). Too bad. The first 'offense' is commonsensically nothing more than nonsensical political correctness, and the second is ignorance which all of us share at some point (and can be remedied?).

My intention here is to challenge or oppose policies and proposals and even ways of thinking that I (one person) believe are illogical, detrimental or downright destructive and to ask questions that do not seem to attract the attention of the venerable fourth estate. Or is the press purposefully silent?

Enough! Let's get something done.

In the news lately is the Obama health care proposal. Aside from the questionable value of nationalizing private businesses, I am struck by how the proposal is promoted; i.e., we are going to realize a $2 billion savings (cost avoidance?) over ten years. Are we thinking; is our smell test working? Savings over 10 Years. Whenever the government or a politician tells us that something is going to cost less over pick-a-number years, we are probably being had. Why? Read on.

What are the politicos doing or not doing?

1. They are not telling you that the savings, here and now while you are listening and watching, is virtually nothing. If the savings were significant, they would be touting that. And don't buy the line: This is the start-up year and savings will, of course, be lower. Think: Yes, Mr. Politician, you give me a dollar now, later you'll give me millions. Right!


2. They know there are so many variables that an easy explanation as to why the savings was not realized will be easily had. The story goes: If the price of oil just had not risen, our savings would have been had. Sometimes the excuses are valid, but over the years the multiplicity of them will only confound the analysis and cover the rascality. Ten years is along time, and some excuse will surely happen along to cover the inconvenient truth.


3. When the period needed to realize the savings exceeds the proponents' terms of office, they are, of course, not accountable and their successors will say it didn't happen on my watch (wasn't my program). Heads I win; tails you lose.


4. Oh, and the $2 trillion, is it in today's dollars or inflated dollars?

Any anyway what is $2 trillion over ten years? $200 billion per year, tidy sums, but against what base? We need to know that also. In other words, what percentage of spending is being avoided? In the instance of Mr. Obama's health care proposal, there may be good answers to some or all of these questions. The problem is that we may be buying (or being force-fed) a pig in a poke.

Without knowing more, how can we possibly support changing something as vast and important as the health care system? Remember that a generation ago, we rejected Hilary Care. We weren't buying that oinker.

Obama is President. In him we have a person with no real experience as the leader of anything significant or being responsible for anything important. He is changing so much with so little foundation of experience. And we are the ones who will be affected. Now is that common sense? I would be interested in knowing?