Holograms on cell phones coming in five years, IBM predicts

From Computerworld.com (Dec. 27):

In five years, cell phones will be able to produce holograms of friends and colleagues talking and moving in real time, IBM researchers say.

"We see 3D [video] technology moving into the cell phone, which will have the ability to transmit information off the cell phone to create a 3D hologram, projecting the hologram on any surface in life size," said Paul Bloom, IBM's CTO for telecommunications research, in a recent interview. [read more]

Cool. The mock-up photo reminds of the hologram of Princess Lea projecting from R2D2 in the movie Star Wars.

Obama Returns to End-of-Life Plan That Caused Stir

From The New York Times.com (Dec. 25):

WASHINGTON — When a proposal to encourage end-of-life planning touched off a political storm over “death panels,” Democrats dropped it from legislation to overhaul the health care system. But the Obama administration will achieve the same goal by regulation, starting Jan. 1.

Under the new policy, outlined in a Medicare regulation, the government will pay doctors who advise patients on options for end-of-life care, which may include advance directives to forgo aggressive life-sustaining treatment.

“While we are very happy with the result, we won’t be shouting it from the rooftops because we aren’t out of the woods yet,” Mr. Blumenauer’s office said in an e-mail in early November to people working with him on the issue. “This regulation could be modified or reversed, especially if Republican leaders try to use this small provision to perpetuate the ‘death panel’ myth.”  [read more]

I also heard this on Fox News too. Will  doctors get a bonus if they are able to persuade a patient to forg0 aggressive life-sustaining treatment? Nah. Then again since the gov’t is paying for the treatment they can dictate what treatments they will cover—you know like health insurance companies do now. And if the gov’t runs out of money for the treatment guess what will happen next. That’s right—no treatment at all or the minimal amount of treatment. And you have no choice or option in the matter since the gov’t is all you have for health insurance.

Environmentalists Can Be Smug Jerks

I read this first in Popular Science August 2010:

According to a study, when people feel they have been morally virtuous by saving the planet through their purchases of organic baby food, for example, it leads to the "licensing [of] selfish and morally questionable behavior", otherwise known as "moral balancing" or "compensatory ethics".

“Do Green Products Make Us Better People” is published in the latest edition of the journal Psychological Science. Its authors, Canadian psychologists Nina Mazar and Chen-Bo Zhong, argue that people who wear what they call the "halo of green consumerism" are less likely to be kind to others, and more likely to cheat and steal. "Virtuous acts can license subsequent asocial and unethical behaviors," they write.

Well, people have been conned if they buy green products they are saving the world. So, of course environmentalists think they are better (read: do-gooders) who don’t buy green products. They develop a superiority complex.

There is nothing wrong with cleaning up pollution, recycling and even reusing certain products. That’s practical environmentalism. We are custodians of the planet. But thinking if you saving earth by using some green product is saving the earth—you are deluding yourself. You don’t have that much power over it. And if you worship the earth over God—you are a pagan.

The Mighty Casey

The following plot summary comes from a Twilight Zone episode called The Mighty Casey broadcasted first in 1960:

"Mouth" McGarry, the manager of a broken-down baseball team on its last legs, allows a robot named Casey to play on his team. Casey has the ability to throw super-fast balls that cannot be hit. Eventually, after Casey is beaned by a ball and given a physical examination, the National League finds out and rules that Casey must be taken off the team because he is not human. Casey's inventor, Dr. Stillman, gives him an "artificial" heart to have him classified as human. Now that Casey has human emotions, he refuses to throw his fast balls anymore. He says that he feels empathy with the batter and does not want to ruin the batter's career by striking him out.

Is it me or did Casey turn into a liberal after getting that “heart” (which was just a ticking clock)? He certainly became politically correct. I know this is just fiction but I don’t think striking out a batter would ruin his career. It seems he became completely emotional and lost all logical thought—real strange for a robot. Then again for liberal robot it might make some sort of weird sense.
I am not sure what Rod Serling’s political stance was but I think he may have been poking fun at the left.

Miscellaneous Thoughts Part 19

• Why not have self-serve pat downs at airports?
• If the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany had completely different ideologies then why did the Soviet Union make a treaty with Germany? You don’t make a treaty with someone you don’t have affinity with.
• If you are an introvert or an individualist in a collectivist state then you might be diagnosed as mentally ill by that same state.
• I think Glenn Beck should interview George Soros in a neutral meeting place like France.
• When going ghost hunting it might be a good idea not to eat any gaseous food before hunting. The food might cause contamination during the hunting.
• Oatmeal and oat bran are Drano for the intestines.
• An euphuism for flatulence:  Bending air.
• The phrase “climate change” makes as much sense as asking someone how they feel and the reply is “I’m emotional.”
• Pot heads of the world unite! And do nothing or you know you might go and get some munchies and laugh uncontrollably….
• Helen Keller must have had it bad. She could not hear someone yelling “Watch out for that…!”

Strange Thinking…Or Maybe Not

There are those in Congress who think that you cannot give income tax relief if it is not paid for.  Now, taxpayers like me would say that doesn’t make any sense. Not paid for? The gov’t is not giving any money to taxpayers. Income belongs to the taxpayer. And the taxpayer gives money to the gov’t via taxes.
But you are not thinking with the correct mindset. Those with this mindset thinks any income the gov’t doesn’t receive via taxes is a cost to the gov’t. A Congressman actually said this. Therefore if tax relief is a cost then the gov’t has to get the money from somewhere else other than taxes. Got it?
If you don’t get it then think of it this way: You are an employee and your boss has announced there will be no more raises until business improves. Until you get paid your paycheck or bonus is the property of the company you work for. It controls your pay. Certain Congressmen think they are your boss. That the money you give to the gov’t via taxes is their money or the government’s. Not yours. Tax relief in their eyes is a raise for you. Understand now? Kind of confusing huh.
If this a strange mindset for the everyday person it is not for those in power who have this mindset. It completely makes sense for them. And there’s the rub. This mindset is not strange for them.

The Inside-Out Strategy

The former White House green jobs czar Van Jones said this:

The opportunity is to recognize that a governing movement is three things: It's top-down — you handled that, you got the White House, the Senate and the House. You handled the top-down. But it's also bottom-up and inside-out. Top-down, bottom-up and inside-out. So now your challenge, as you leave here — our challenge — is to take care of that bottom-up part and that inside-out part: the heart part. That's where we're weak now. And we have the chance as we move forward to take the old admonition from the South African movement and govern from below.

Visualize this: You, the citizen, are the inside-out part inside a clamp where the radicalized gov’t is the top-down part of the clamp and the rioters like the labor unions are the bottom-up part of the clamp. The far-Left wants you squeezed. This is what happened during the Bolshevik revolution in 1917. You get people scared, confused, and frustrated and then they want someone to save them ie the gov’t.  Could this be happening in America today?

Well, the tax code is confusing that is for sure. Frustrating is right up there.

Then there is Obamacare. That is definitely confusing. Scary? A real possibility since it takes some of your rights away.

Could airport security scans and searches be part of this plan?

Or how about increasing prices on food and oil or other staples of life. That would make people scared or at least worried.

And how about that smart grid technology that gives the gov’t the power to control your heating and air conditioning and other things as well?

The radicals want people dependent on the gov’t and panicking.  They don’t want people thinking about what’s happening around them. The radicals need people’s mind and hearts inside-out. Otherwise this plan fails.

The Magic Square Analogy

If you add the rows, columns, the longest diagonals, and even the four corners of the inner and outer squares you get the sum of  34.  If you notice every number is unique. Because of this you cannot swap one number with another without breaking the balance. The “magic” would then disappear.  This I believe is the essence of individualism. Each member contributes his own uniqueness.

Contrast the magic square with the square above. Most of the columns, and diagonals add up to 34. But the four corners don’t and one diagonal does not add up to 34. This square has no “magic”. And it is very boring to look at I think. You can make a magic square out of this square though by removing 10’s. But then it would be really uninteresting. This is the essence of collectivism. Everybody is the same. No individuality. And if you don’t fit in the collective group like the 10’s you might be called an outsider and even exiled from the group to create some artificial balance.  Also, the above square is what wealth-redistributionists have in mind unlike the magic square where everyone is free to earn their own income level.

Magic squares have been around for a long time. Even Benjamin Franklin was fascinated by them. That’s where I first learned of them by reading a book about him.

Washington Set to Control Your Light Switch

From BigGovernment.com (Nov. 29):

The next step in Green won’t even require Congressional approval. The Department of Energy recently decided they have authority over appliances in your home. Energy Secretary Steven Chu recently issued five new energy efficiency standards for large appliances, and is reworking the policy to include ten new categories. According to Assistant Energy Secretary Cathy Zoi “…we have a mandate. Where we can actually just issue regulations and do market transformation.”

It is like we are moving backwards in time, seeing modern life outlawed one convenience at a time. Right now social engineers are busy working on “Smart Grid” technology. (The perennial question: if environmental choices are actually so intelligent, why do the marketers have to convince us, with names like “Smart Car,” and “Insight?”) The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 set aside $11 billion dollars to begin construction of that grid.

Smart Grid sounds harmless and modern, but it will be incredibly intrusive. Appliances in the future will have microchips installed; when you plug them in, they will handshake with the grid, and a central authority will determine whether that appliance deserves to get power or not. If a bureaucrat in Washington decides that it’s not hot enough for you to put on the air conditioner, your air conditioner will not work. If the Fed decides that Margaritas lead to too much trouble on Cinco de Mayo, all blenders can be disabled for the day.

They can also turn off radios, televisions and computers. In the era of electronic information, restricting the freedom of the press is as easy as turning off the light. The idea is to conserve power, but a Smart Government will be able to use the technology to retain power as well. [read more]

  This is exactly what a dictatorship wishes it could do. This is close to absolute control as you can get. So, if the Obama administration does not want anyone to listen to Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck or anyone else it deems a threat to its policies it can zap the electricity to any radio that is tuned to that station during that time slot. Nice. Real nice.

Why Private Property Rights Matter

If though most readers knows what private property is I’ll explain it anyway for those who don’t. Private property is the clothes you own, the car you own, the house you own, etc. Basically anything that you own is private property including money. The key word here is private. Otherwise the state owns the property and can do what it wants with the property.
Since you own the property you can give it away, loan it out, or even destroy it if you wish. It is yours to do whatever you want with it.  But nobody can take it without your permission. “Thou shall not steal.” as it says in The Ten Commandments. God put that commandment in there for a reason. Owning private property is natural for mankind. It is part of our nature. It is even part of the Buddha’s Five Precepts. In a communal society stealing is not even a concept. How can you steal X from someone when everyone in the society owns X? By that very definition if you own X too then you are not stealing.
You could still get in trouble if you take something from somebody without the state’s permission. Since the state really owns the property it decides who gets what.  You might be taking something that was intended for someone else determined by the state. Or you could take something that was private property of the state and only the state. You really think private property will be  completely abolished in a communal society? The powers-that-be will always own their private property. That’s the way it was in the Soviet Union.
Also, if two or more people want the same object then someone has to determine who gets the object. Who you think that will be? Someone in authority of course like the state. If we are talking about large numbers of people like 10 or more people then the state has to determine who will get the object.  Smaller groups of people could get away with a pure communal society but even that could be problematic unless they are family or close friends.  By the way, if the state wants that object too then guess who gets it. The state of course. It will always get the best of everything.
Here are other things to think about in a communal society: The state could take something from you and give it to someone you don’t like or you don’t think needs it or deserves it. This could happen if the receiver is a friend or relative of the state. Also, if you spend time, effort, and/or money in making a product and then the state takes it from you and gives it to someone else where is the incentive to make it again just to have the state take it away from you again? None, unless you are making it for yourself and doing it for fun.

Soros group maps out Obama strategy for next 2 years

From Wnd.com (November 18):

A George Soros-funded think tank with deep ties to the White House has written a roadmap for President Obama to bypass the new Republican Congress and rule for the next two via executive order.

The plan calls for Obama to push a "progressive agenda" on issues of health care, economy, environment, education, federal government and foreign policy. [read more]

Well, that’s something unexpected. Not! If George Soros is the puppet master as Glenn Beck hypothesizes then who is the puppet? Barack Obama maybe? George Soros has been to the White House a couple of times.

Congressional Pay: A Good Idea

This idea I endorse comes from Glenn Beck. He stated this idea on his TV show on last Friday:

Congressman — here it is — congressman shall not be paid — shall not be paid more than those who are currently serving on the front line of duty. They shall never make more than that.

There's no reason why congressmen should be able to enrich themselves — make more than a guy who's on the front lines fighting, somebody who is in a tank right now, somebody else who is risking his life to save a child in another country. Are you kidding me? There is no justification for congressional salaries, none.

Demand Congress lower their salaries and their benefit to the same benefits offered to our soldiers, period.

Right on! How’s that for economic justice as the Left likes to say. Congress can either lower their salaries to equal that of the soldiers or raise the soldiers salaries to equal theirs. Or better yet, have Congress and the soldiers swap salaries for awhile. After all America is in debt and Congress can make some sacrifices like they want the taxpayers to do all the time.

Beck also thought that federal employees should not be paid higher than those serving in the front line of duty. Not bad either.

The Benefits of Banning Federal Funding

Ruth Fischbach and John Loike of Columbia University’s Center for Bioethics have noted that the George W. Bush administration’s 2001 federal funding ban on human embryonic stem-cell research led scientists kicking and screaming into developing alternative cell-transformation approaches---approaches that now show tremendous promise for new treatments.
What’s the moral of this story? Even research scientists are human. Instead of looking for alternatives they looked only for one solution because the gov’t discouraged other alternatives by not funding other alternatives—not deliberately but the result was still the same.  But when President Bush banned federal funding (he did not ban all funding, just federal) he made the researchers look for other sources of funding (like investment bankers, wealthy businessmen, etc.) or alternative approaches to the problem. In other words, Bush let the market decide not the government.
The moral above can be applied to other research the gov’t funds. In essence, the gov’t is saying “this research X  is the best research.” Which may or may not be true.  Especially in the long run when we can look at the results later on.
Source of first paragraph: Wrong. Why Experts Keep Failing Us---And How to Know When Not to Trust Them. (2010) by David H. Freedman.

The 15-day Calendar

The following is a 15-day calendar developed by Damon Vickers in his book The Day After the Dollar Crashes: A Survival Guide for the Rise of the New World Order  when America’s debt is monetized:

Day 1: China says no more bonds.

Day 2: Markets are spooked. Little eerie, quiet, but there's a — there's a kind of a hush all over Wall Street.

Day 3:  Rumors are happening.

Day 4:  Asian markets start to fall.

Day 5:  Dow plunges 900, maybe 1,000 points in 20 minutes.

Day 6: Europe raises their interest rates.

Day 7:  The market starts to rally.

Day 8: The market sells off 900 points.

Day 9: Market stabilizes.

Day 10: The dollar plunges. Ten to 15%.

Day 11: The Federal Reserve meet and then raises the interest rates 5 percent to 6 percent.

Day 12: The Dow falls 3,000 points in one day.

Day 13: The IMF and G20 meet.

Day 14: New World Order.

Day 15: People start breaking into the banks.

I haven’t actually read the book, but it sounds interesting and unnerving.  This information comes from a Glenn Beck TV show transcript.

The Things That Are Unseen Speech

The following speech was given by then Vice President Calvin Coolidge in 1923 at Wheaton College:

We do not need more material development, we need more spiritual development. We do not need more intellectual power, we need more  moral power. We do not need more knowledge, we need more character. We do not need more government, we need more culture. We do not need more law, we need more religion. We do not not need more  of the things that are seen, we need more of the things that are unseen. It is on that side of life that it is desirable to put  the emphasis at the present time. If that side be strengthened, the other side will take care of itself. It is that side which is the foundation of all else. If the foundation be firm, the superstructure will stand. The success or failure of liberal education, the justification of its protection and encouragement by the government, and of its support by society, will be measured by its ability to minister to this great cause, to perform the necessary services, to make the required redeeming sacrifices.

This speech should be displayed in the halls of Congress and The White House—especially today—minus the part about liberal education. He could have added  “We need more humility.” Interesting speech.

An Anatomy of a Crisis

This is how the far-Left plan to bring about the New World Order in America:

First, create or exploit a current crises in the country. This can be done by monetizing the debt so the dollar is worthless. No country will want to loan us money or buy any product from us. This will create hyperinflation. Creating high unemployment by high-taxation and over-regulation all businesses. Corrupting main stream religions with Marxism (collective salvation and social justice) and destroying the family—which is basically what welfare did to the black family. In other words create chaos in the country by any means necessary. Even using violence like in Greece.

Two, encourage the citizens to be dependent on gov’t programs like a drug addict. Discourage self-sufficiency and entrepreneurship. Discourage independence. Try to persuade people that the gov’t is a benevolent parent. This is done through public education.

The far-Left hopes there will be enough people in panic mode wanting a savior to help them. That’s where the far-Left says look toward the gov’t. It can save you they will say.  Then martial law will be invoked. Maybe not all at once but slowly.

Anyone that keeps his cool and says don’t trust the gov’t  will be treated as an enemy of the state.  Also, there will be scapegoats like big business or any big business that is not a friend of the state. The government will say big business caused this crises even if they didn’t.  Any conservative that wants to cut the budget like Social Security,  Medicare or any progressive gov’t program will be scapegoated.  The far-Left will say the Right wants to do harm to the elderly, etc. Then again the far-Left always does this. The State can never have anyone know they are the cause of the crises. Then you have a situation like in the French Revolution.

Don’t think this scenario can come true? It happen during the 1930’s in Germany and in Russia when the Soviet Union ruled.

One final note: George Soros said: “So, an orderly decline of the dollar is actually desirable [my italics].” Refer back to the First Step.

Also President Obama said before he got elected: “We are five days away from fundamentally changing the United States of America.” If that doesn’t give you chills I don’t know what will.

Miscellaneous Thoughts Part 18

• The socialist's/Marxist's motto: One nation under Government with equal misery for all. Or at least that's their unofficial motto.
• Ayn Rand said that the individual is the smallest minority. In mathematics there is a parallel. Single numbers are random by themselves because they cannot be compressed down to an equation. For example, 1, 5, 9, 12 is not a random sequence because it can be compressed to x = x + 4.
• If George Soros wants to spread the wealth around why doesn't he start with himself. He can give 1/3 of his wealth to the citizens of America.
• There should be a DVD called: "The Communists: A Warning from History" too.
• Next on The SyFy Channel: Killer Bees versus Fire Ants. Just joking. No such movie. Beside the bees would probably win anyway.
• The Left saying that the economy could be worse is like telling a car accident victim who has a broken rib and two broken legs it could be worse. He could have been run over by a steamroller. It doesn't make the victim feel any better.
• If the Left think big gov't is wonderful I wonder if they would use a public defender instead of a private one if they ever have to go to trial. Because even lawyers need incentive to do a decent job.
• If every country were free like America then you wouldn't need the UN. Or put it another way if every country had a constitution like America's then the UN would be obsolete.
• Randomness may just be complexity misinterpreted.
• Insane thought: Accordions in marching bands. Why not? They already have tubas. You could the marching band play polka songs then.

Laissez-Faire Evolution?

Instead of tinkering with evolution like the Intelligent Designers believe, I believe God instead built inside organisms a “program” that evolves organisms to higher complexity. This way evolution is directed, creative and takes a lot less energy. He doesn’t always have to be modifying the genes all the time.

In other words evolution would be like the free-market system. Free to evolve without much intervention.

Actually the idea about evolution going from lower to higher complexity is not new.  French Jesuit Pierre Teilhard de Chardin proposed that the universe evolves to a point called the Omega Point.  Of course, that’s just a theory like my idea of evolution. Knowing the mind of God is always a tricky business.

A Personal Congressional Pledge

The following is what I think a pledge from congressional candidate should give to voters. Some of these promises could even be given from a presidential candidate. None of the promises I think are partisan. Any party can state these promises. They are not unreasonable. Here are the promises:

While in office:

I will only raise my salary if the budget is balanced.

I will read the entire bill I vote on. If not given enough reasonable time to read the bill then I will vote against it.

If I don’t understand any bill or any repercussions of any bill I read then I will vote against it.

I will thoroughly research any bill I write or co-sponsor.

I will not add any riders on any bill.

I will not take any money, trips or any other gifts from any organization.

I will not pit one group of Americans against another.

I will show up for every vote on any bill. I will not vote abstain.

I will not lie to or mislead the American people about the contents any bill I write or sponsor.

I will not vote for, sponsor, or co-sponsor any bill that violates the Constitution.

I will not call my political opponents “enemies.”

I believe this is a good start for promises. Some of them might be tough to do. Then again it is always the politicians that say the American people have to sacrifice.

Democrats pressing Obama not to run again

From WND.com (Oct. 27):

Some senior personalities in the Democratic Party have discussed with President Obama's advisers the possibility of him not running for re-election in 2012, according to an influential Democratic Party operative speaking on condition of anonymity.

The operative, who is close to the Democratic leadership, did not indicate whether Obama was undecided about running again. [read more]

I wonder who is going to run for president in his place? Hillary possibly? Dick Morris has speculated that if the Dems lose both houses by record margins, and Obama’s approval falls below 40% that the party leadership will look for another presidential contender ie Hillary.

Ratings might not be the real reason Obama might not run again. He might not like being president—he likes the power and prestige but that’s all. Also, Michelle Obama might not want him to run again either. That’s the rumor anyway.

Either way it would have to be a personal reason. After all it was Harry Reid’s idea for him to run in the first place.

A Peek Inside The Chinese Communist Party

The following snippets are from the book The Party. The Secret World of China’s Communist Rulers (2010) by Richard McGregor:

The Party is like God. He is everywhere. You just can’t see him.  -- A university professor in Beijing.  Most totalitarian systems are like this. Although, the Soviet Union I think wasn’t so invisible.

The word ‘democracy’ is banned in web searches.  This says it all.

The Party has substituted a kind of take-it-or-leave it compact with society.  If you play by the Party’s rules, which means eschewing competitive politics, then you and your family can get on with your lives and maybe get rich. Maybe? Hmmm. Sounds kind of like the American Left.

The more senior an official is, the more difficult it is for the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection to gain approval to investigate them.  To investigate a person, the Commission has to get permission from the person’s supervisor. So, if you’re the Chairman you have nothing to worry about. If you are a low level bureaucrat you are SOL unless your boss really likes you. This is the perfect system for corruption. Then again those in power find ways to protect themselves.

The Party could be unusually pro-business, as long as the state got a cut along the way.  Got a cut along the way? Sounds like a shake-down. Something a criminal mob or gang would do.

The Party invited entrepreneurs to join it, while intimidating and jailing business leaders who fall foul of it. Real nice.

Improving The Flat Tax Plan

Opponents of the Flat Tax plan (mainly those who advocate the FairTax) say that it has been done before and that’s how we got the Progressive tax system we have now. That is true but there is a way to keep that from happening again.

What Congress needs to do is once they propose a flat tax--like the one that Steve Forbes proposed--is to state in the bill that it can never ever be progressive. That is you tax everyone at the same rate.  If you raise the tax rate you raise it on everyone equally. I dare Congress to raise the tax rate to 40% on the middle and lower classes and justify it with a straight face. Then again the Progressives would say the taxpayers have to sacrifice. When does Congress ever make sacrifices? Hardly ever.

Using a Complex Systems Approach to Study Educational Policy

ScienceDaily (Oct. 10, 2010) —

Educational policy is controversial: positions on achievement gaps, troubled schools and class size are emotionally charged, and research studies often come to very different conclusions.

Researchers at Northwestern University's McCormick School of Engineering and Applied Science and School of Education and Social Policy argue in an article published Oct. 1 in the journal Science that such an approach can help integrate insights and better inform educational policy. By breaking down policies into simple rules and computationally modeling them under different conditions, professors Uri Wilensky and Luis Amaral have found a promising new way to understand policy issues such as school choice and student tracking.

But to get a complete view of education, researchers must use methods that integrate insights about micro-level processes (the student) with macro-level outcomes (student achievement). To do this, Wilensky and Amaral look at education as a complex system: a system with many interacting parts that only can be understood by examining the interactions of the parts and the networks that connect them. Knowledge of the parts alone doesn't lead to understanding of the whole system. [read more]

Sounds promising. Too bad the article did not have a diagram of the system in study with the article. Oh, well.

What the research group found out was low achievers tend to do better in a group with high achievers.

Computer 'Trained' to Classify Pictures and Videos Basing on Elements They Contain

From ScienceDaily (Oct. 13, 2010):

University of Granada researchers have developed a new computer technique that allows to "train" computers to interpret the visual contents of a video or picture. This advance will allow to classify automatically pictures basing on whether individuals or specific objects are present in such images. Videos can also be classified according to specific poses.

Apart from detecting individuals in TV video/film shots, this new technique allows to estimate the position of upper limbs (head, chest, arms and forearms) and the automatic classification of video scenes where people appear in a specific pose. Human actions such as walking, jumping, bending down, etc. can also be detected in video sequences. [read more]

Interesting. Just to have the pgm recognize images in pictures is hard enough, but have it recognize images in videos is impressive.

Why scientific programming does not compute

From Nature.com (Oct. 13):

Researchers are spending more and more time writing computer software to model biological structures, simulate the early evolution of the Universe and analyze past climate data, among other topics. But programming experts have little faith that most scientists are up to the task.

A quarter of a century ago, most of the computing work done by scientists was relatively straightforward. But as computers and programming tools have grown more complex, scientists have hit a "steep learning curve", says James Hack, director of the US National Center for Computational Sciences at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee. "The level of effort and skills needed to keep up aren't in the wheelhouse of the average scientist."

As a general rule, researchers do not test or document their programs rigorously, and they rarely release their codes, making it almost impossible to reproduce and verify published results generated by scientific software, say computer scientists. At best, poorly written programs cause researchers such as Harry to waste valuable time and energy. But the coding problems can sometimes cause substantial harm, and have forced some scientists to retract papers. [read more]

The moral of this article is that just because you are smart in one area does not mean you are smart in other areas. Even Einstein had trouble figuring out his taxes.

Having a computer science degree I was taught to document any procedure especially document why a routine was written. No programmer likes to do this but it is important if any other programmer after you is going to understand your code. Especially, if he or she is going to update it later on.

Testing the program is really important. You want the pgm to run correctly and not produce erroneous errors. It's too bad that Congress does not think hard about the side effects of the bills they pass. If you think about it legislation or laws in a way are like the program of the country. Wrong laws make the country work ineffectively. But I digress...

A computer scientist in the article did a survey of 1,000 scientists in different fields. He found out that only 47% of scientists have a good understanding of software testing. They should if they are going to write software to test a theory. The theory and the software program are equal to one another. You want the pgm to be solid as possible or it makes your theory look weak.

Mexico to Build Southern Border Fence

From NumbersUSA.com (Oct. 6):

Mexico, which often criticizes the American government for putting up barriers which restrict the flow of illegal immigrants across the U.S. - Mexico border is building a fence of its own along its southern border with Guatemala.

It has been reported that the head of the Mexican Superintendency of Tax Administration, Raul Diaz, confirmed that the Mexican government is building a wall along the Mexican - Guatemalan border. Diaz stated the official reason for building the border wall is to stop illegal drugs from coming into Mexico, but Diaz did admit that it could also prevent the free passage of illegal immigrants. [read more]

I have only one thing to say: The Mexico gov't is racist! Just joking, but whenever someone in America wants a wall or a fence (like me) along the border that's what the open border people say. Some say, the illegals will just go over or under the wall. Nothing will stop them perfectly. But it will slow them down. They won't be able to just walk across the border. They have to bring along a ladder or shovel won't they? Carrying those items in the heat of the desert can wear out a person. Heck, put a fence along the Canadian border too. Fine with me.

Or if Nevada wants police to stop people who are committing a crime and ask them if they are illegal or not. They are racists. (On a side note, if a Hispanic police officer stops someone for a traffic violation and asks if that person if he is illegal or not is the officer a racist? Just wondering, but I digress...)

As Representative Ted Poe from Texas said:

Every country has the right to defend its border. We should stop listening to anything President Calderon says and do what's right for our country.

I completely agree.

Other Separations of State

People talk about the separation of church and state. That's fine although that phrase was never in the Constitution. Basically that means the gov't cannot create a state-owned religion. If that happens then you have the church elders basically endorsing whatever beliefs the gov't has right or wrong. The first amendment does not mean politicians cannot be moral or have religion. That would dangerous and ludicrous. Since power corrupts I would think you would want the most ethical politician you can vote for.
But I think there should be other "separations" like:

• The separation of business and state. Gov't should not be choosing winners and losers by subsidizing businesses it likes and over regulating businesses it doesn't like. That's the free market's job to choose winners and losers. Once you have crony-capitalism then have businesses attempting to influence Congress for their own benefit.
• The separation of science and state. Gov't shouldn't deciding what is good and bad science by funding a specific research program. When does that it shuts down almost all other avenues of research on a particular problem. In dictatorships, science becomes another part of its propaganda machine. It uses science to justify whatever beliefs it has about nature.
• The separation of the fine arts and state. You want gov't deciding what's good and bad art? In dictatorships, the fine arts become just a propaganda tool (think of the statue of Saddam Husein) and whatever art it deems offensive or critical to the state (read: the dictator) it bans. There is no need for the National Endowments for the Arts.
• The separation of education and state. When the state takes over the education system it becomes indoctrination. Education should be controlled at the local level.

There could be other separations but these are the main ones.

‘No Pressure’: New Environmental Campaign Glorifies Eco-Fascism

This is one disturbing advertisement to say the least. It was created by an environmental group called 10:10.

So, what's the message here? Reduce your CO₂ or be killed? This what you get when you worship the earth and don't respect human life. Even as a joke this video is in bad taste.

You can read the The Blaze article for more info. That's where I got the video.

UK Pundit to Shocked TV Host: Suffering Children Should Be Smothered

I first saw this video on the Glenn Beck TV show. I was shocked by what the advice columnist said as were the host. That woman is a borderline (if not a complete) sociopath. She is advocating nothing less than murder.

I wonder if she takes the same attitude toward an elderly person with Alzheimer's or dementia. Would she consider them an inconvenience? I would hate to be under her care if I had any disability or disease.

A Nation of Peasants?

An article by Victor Davis Hanson:

Traditional peasant societies believe in only a limited good. The more your neighbor earns, the less someone else gets. Profits are seen as a sort of theft. They must be either hidden or redistributed. Envy rather than admiration of success reigns.

In contrast, Western civilization began with a very different ancient Greek idea of an autonomous citizen, not an indentured serf or subsistence peasant. The small, independent landowner -- if left to his own talents and if his success was protected by, and from, government -- would create new sources of wealth for everyone. The resulting greater bounty for the poor soon trumped their old jealousy of the better off.

The public is seldom told that 1 percent of taxpayers already pay 40 percent of the income taxes collected, while 40 percent of income earners are exempt from federal income tax -- or that present entitlements like Medicare and Social Security are financially unsustainable. Instead, they hear more often that those who managed to scheme to make above $250,000 per year have obligations to the rest of us to give back about 60 percent of what they earn in higher health care and income taxes -- together with payroll and rising state income taxes, and along with increased capital gains and inheritance taxes.

That limited-good mind-set expects that businesses will agree that they now make enough money and so have no need to pursue any more profits at the expense of others. Therefore, they will gladly still hire the unemployed and buy new equipment -- as they pay higher health care or income taxes to a government that knows far better how to redistribute their income to the more needy or deserving.

This peasant approach to commerce also assumes that businesses either cannot understand administration signals or can do nothing about them. So who cares that in the Chrysler bankruptcy settlement, quite arbitrarily the government put the unions in front of the legally entitled lenders? [read more]

Communism was able get a hold in old Russia because there were peasants there. Karl Marx convinced the peasants that Communism was good for them--which it wasn't. Punishing the successful didn't help the peasants. Their conditions never changed. It was all just a scam.

The dirty little secret is that The Ruling Class wants the rest of the population to be peasants. Because peasants are easier to control and manipulate. Or at least the Ruling Class hopes they will be that way.

UK Proposes All Paychecks Go to the State First

From CNBC.com (Sept. 20):

The UK's tax collection agency is putting forth a proposal that all employers send employee paychecks to the government, after which the government would deduct what it deems as the appropriate tax and pay the employees by bank transfer.

The proposal by Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC) stresses the need for employers to provide real-time information to the government so that it can monitor all payments and make a better assessment of whether the correct tax is being paid. [read more]

At first this may sound like a good idea. After all it saves the taxpayer mental aggravation in figuring out the tax code and doing the taxes. But what if the gov't screws up the tax calculation (which according to the article could happen)? If could take months for the gov't to correct their mistake.

The question is could this system be coming to America? I rather have a simplified tax system than the gov't just calculating what you owe and deducting it from your income automatically.

The Chronic Gambler and The Congressman

Giving money to a chronic gambler in debt is not much different than giving money to a deficit spending Congressman. In both cases, you'll never see any return on your money. The gambler says "I need more time" to hit the jackpot to pay the borrower back. The Congressman uses the excuse he needs to spend more money to get the country out of debt. But unless both bad habits are broken the behavior continues.
You could get your money from the gambler if you can outlive the law of averages. Then again the gambler might think he is on a winning streak and continue gambling.
It's all about self-control. Which neither one has.

Light bulb factory closes; End of era for U.S. means more jobs overseas

From the Washington Post.com (Sept. 8):

WINCHESTER, VA. - The last major GE factory making ordinary incandescent light bulbs in the United States is closing this month, marking a small, sad exit for a product and company that can trace their roots to Thomas Alva Edison's innovations in the 1870s.

The remaining 200 workers at the plant here will lose their jobs.

What made the plant here vulnerable is, in part, a 2007 energy conservation measure passed by Congress that set standards essentially banning [my emphasis] ordinary incandescents by 2014. The law will force millions of American households to switch to more efficient bulbs. [read more]

Yes, it is sad for a company to go out of business for no good reason. So, much for the economy growing. Then again this is what the environmental nuts wanted--the incandescent light bulb to disappear. It's one thing if a better light bulb comes along and replaces the a previous one just through normal market forces. But to have the "all-knowing" gov't ban a product because of some stupid reason, is just plain wrong.

It's a fact that gov't can't create business growth, but it sure as hell can destroy it.

Death Fog Mystery

In August 1986 in Cameroon nearly 2000 people dropped dead (plus cattle too) dropped dead by Lake Nyos without any signs of struggle or injury. It was a mystery to say the least.

To make a long story short it was CO₂ that was the culprit. CO₂ normally gets released from lakes in small amounts, but in this case huge amounts of CO₂ were released from the bottom of the lake all at once. A person can take small amounts of CO₂ but not huge amounts--you suffocate.

Most scientists thought a volcano caused the deaths. Because survivors smelled volcanic gases and the non-survivors were burnt. But the evidence did not add up to that conclusion.

One scientist named Haraldur Sigurdsson came to the conclusion that CO₂ was the cause of the deaths from previous experience with similar deaths in 1984 in Cameroon with another lake. Eventually his theory was the correct one. The burns were caused from the freezing CO₂ aka dry ice. As for the smell of volcanic gases it was just an olfactory hallucination.

What's interesting about this incident is the psychology. The Cameroon gov't did not initially believe Sigurdsson because of the consensus of the other scientists who thought a volcano eruption caused the deaths. But good scientific investigation won out. As it should. Does this scenario sound familiar to you? (Hint: notice the italics)

As a side note, the EPA has plans to capture and store CO₂ deep underground. Er, okay.

Bill of Rights Institute

I found an interesting website that teaches high school students about the bill of rights called of course Bill of Rights Institute.org. For example one of the lesson plans is called Citizenship and Character: Understanding America's Civil Values. This is what is in the text book:

1. Courage: The Declaration of Independence
2. Respect: First Amendment; Freedom of Religion; Madison’s Memorial and Remonstrance
3. Consideration: First Amendment; Freedom of Speech
4. Perseverance: First Amendment; Petition and Assembly
5. Industry: Fourth and Fifth Amendments
6. Responsibility: Magna Carta; Fifth and Sixth Amendments
7. Justice: The Bill of Rights; Virginia Declaration of Rights; Pledge of Allegiance
8. Initiative: The Voting Amendments
9. Moderation: Franklin’s Autobiography; Washington’s Farewell Address; Jefferson’s Dialogue
10. Integrity: The United States Constitution

The website also has free resources for teachers (although anyone wanting to bone up on their American history can use these resources) like the Founders Online and Founding Documents. For students (or anyone really) is a quiz about the Constitution and the Founders. This quiz is also on the Good Web Sites list on the left.

From what I've seen a very good institute for high school students.

Environmental Protection Agency Reviewing Petition to Ban Lead Bullets

From Weekly Standard.com (August 27):

Will Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson make a back door move to ban lead bullets the day before the November 2 elections?

Several environmentalist groups led by the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) are petitioning the EPA to ban lead bullets and shot (as well as lead sinkers for fishing) under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Although EPA is barred by statute from controlling ammunition, CBD is seeking to work farther back along the manufacturing chain and have EPA ban the use of lead in bullets and shot because non-lead alternatives are available. But here's the catch: the alternatives to lead bullets are more expensive [my italics]. A ban on the sale of lead ammunition would force hunters and sport shooters to buy non-lead ammunition that is often double the cost of traditional lead ammunition. A box of deer hunting bullets in a popular caliber could be upwards of $55. [read more]

I think the US gov't has gone insane--if not already. Although this is a sneaky end-run around gun control. Instead of banning guns--just make the bullets more expensive to buy. And blame it on "saving the environment." You get the same result. Less people owning guns. You can't use a gun if you don't have ammunition for it.

Screen Guide for Americans

The following was written by Ayn Rand for the Motion Picture Alliance for American Ideals. These were meant to be suggestions:

1. Don't take politics lightly.
2. Don't smear the free enterprise system.
3. Don't smear weath.
4. Don't smear the profit motive.
5. Don't smear success.
6. Don't glorify failure.
7. Don't glorify depravity.
8. Don't deify "the common man."
9. Don't glorify the collective.
10. Don't smear the independent man.
11. Don't use current events carelessly.
12. Don't smear American political institutions.

Pretty good suggestions. Nowadays motion pictures are doing exactly the opposite. Notice the suggestions did not say you couldn't criticize politicians.

Economics for Leaders

The following is from a class by FTE.org (Foundation for Teaching Economics). It is a class mainly for economic teachers how to teach economics to students.
Participants learn that:

• People respond to incentives
• Voluntary exchange provides mutual gains
• Profits attract entrepreneurs
• Competition encourages efficiency
• Private property rights are essential in free societies
• The fact of scarcity necessitates some form of rationing
• Opportunity cost is the real cost of what we choose
• Inflation depends on the money supply
• Choices can cause negative effects
• Economic change is inevitable

Make sense to me. Too bad Congress and the POTUS can't take this class especially those who have no understanding of economics or have wrong ideas about it.

There is no upside to amnesty for illegal aliens

From Washington Times.com (August 17):

The way to increase the percentage of American-Hispanics voting for the Republican Party is (1) To raise their standard of living (and everyone else's) by a return to free-market principles; (2) by an open appeal to their shared American patriotism and (3) by clearly and unapologetically stating the unequivocal rejection of amnesty in any guise, shape or form. U.S. citizens of Hispanic origin don't love the rule of law less than other Americans and understand that the United States already has the most generous legal immigration policy on earth. Given a clear choice and a positive appeal, many will rally. [read more]

Basically this opinion piece (written by a Hispanic running for state office in Florida) is criticizing Bush's and Obama's stand on amnesty for illegals. He said the premise that granting amnesty for illegals would make the Hispanic community vote a certain way is wrong. I agree.

When you ignore individual differences and think or assume everyone in a certain racial block or group would act the same way is a form racism--and is not what Conservatives should be doing. I can understand the Left doing this. But not the Right. The Right should read Mr. Garcia's opinion piece and take it to heart.

Hat tip to NumbersUSA.com for this opinion piece.

A History of Slavery

The first slave owner is America was a black man called Anthony Johnson and the first slave (also a black man) was called John Caster. Does that surprise you? This was first brought to my attention on the Glenn Beck TV show. I checked on this later on and found this historical event on the PBS.org website. A court said that Caster could be a free man but Johnson appealed the order and wanted him to be his slave.

America was not the first country to have slaves. In 18th century BC Babylon had slaves. Greece had slaves in 7th century BC. Then we come to ancient Rome. Remember Spartacus? He was a white slave in Rome who led an uprising. In the Middle Ages (6 - 15th century AD) Germans captured Slavs and made them slaves hence the name. During this same period Arabia had slaves. The prophet Mohamed even had slaves. To be fair he freed them later on. As a side note, Jesus never had slaves. But I digress. I could continue but you get the point.

And the point is slavery was not a white/black issue. It was a human issue. Almost every culture had slaves. When you treat someone as your property it is wrong no matter who does it.

You can read more about the history of slavery on the History World.net website.

Arab TV chief: 9/11 mosque would be 'monument' to terror

From WND.com (Aug. 17):

The director of a Dubai-based, Arab television network writes that most of the world's Muslims couldn't care less about building a mosque near Ground Zero and that plans to do so would only create a "monument" to terrorists.

Abd Al-Rahman Al-Rashed, director-general of Al-Arabiya TV, wrote a column in the Aug. 16 London daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat arguing that President Obama was wasting his time championing construction of the proposed mosque, which Al-Rashed says the majority of world's Muslims don't want anyway. [read more]

I agree. The mosque does not have to be built near Ground Zero. There are such things as zoning laws. Freedom of religion does not mean you can build a worship building anywhere--just that you can worship your religion as you wish.

Fix the Constitutional Falsehoods Congress Carved Into the Capitol’s Marble

From CNS News.com (Aug. 18):

The Exhibition Hall at the U.S. Capitol Visitor Center, which opened at the end of 2008, has enshrined in marble a false interpretation of the Constitution that opens the door to an ever-expanding federal government.
The full text of Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1 says: “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.”
One marble exhibit case, however, is inscribed with these selected words: “The Congress shall have Power To ... provide for the common Defence.” Another bears these selected words: “The Congress shall have Power To ... provide for the ... general Welfare.” [read more]

Yea, it's pretty sad when the Capitol's marble does not represent the Constitution very well. Then again Congress hasn't been doing a good of that either.

President Calvin Coolidge: Why his thinking matters today

Calvin Coolidge was one of President Reagan's favorite presidents. An article by Andrew T. Kostanecki talks about his beliefs and the "Roaring Twenties." If you never heard of the "Roaring Twenties" read below:

Under President Coolidge, the economy of the United States enjoyed its greatest period of growth combined with the lowest rate of inflation of the last 100 [my italics] years. The national debt was reduced by 36%. It was the only period in which that has happened since the Civil War. Federal expenditures were reduced by 35%, per capita income rose 37% and tax rates were reduced by 20%. He established charitable deductions, repealed gift taxes, slashed estate taxes and took one third of the population off the tax roles. Yet tax revenues rose and unemployment dropped from 5.5% to 3.2%. It was a time of unparalleled prosperity.

Hence the "Roaring Twenties." And the Left says this period of time just "happened." Like it's a freak occurrence or something. What did Silent Cal as he was called at the time believe? Again from the Mr. Kostanecki article:
• He espoused the dignity and value of hard work, thrift, modesty and self-reliance.
• He had a deep belief in God and in religious freedom.
• He believed that “the chief business of the American people was business” and that the people were basically concerned with producing, buying, selling, investing and prospering in the world.
• He argued that material wealth was only a means to an end for achieving, “the multiplication of schools, the increase of knowledge, the dissemination of intelligence, the encouragement of science, the broadening of outlook, the expansion of liberties and the widening of culture.”
• Above all, he supported tax policies that encouraged investment and he blocked government interference in the natural functioning of the marketplace.
• He supported legislation against price-fixing.
• He believed that the world would do better if he “did no harm” and by holding back and providing stability, the citizens would know what to expect and not to expect from the Government.
• He believed that if the private sector was allowed to take the lead, the possibilities for progress would be boundless.
• He argued for the importance of letting Germany pay off its War debts.
• He championed the renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy. (Kellog-Briand Pact)
• He saw the rights of Colored People as “sacred”, supported civil rights and opposed the then powerful Ku Klux Klan.
• He supported shorter workweeks for women and children, equal pay for equal work, a minimum wage, an increase in the number of children's playgrounds, a reduction in railway fares for workers and their children, improved workplace safety and funding for state hospitals for the mentally ill.
• He passed legislation to limit rent increases and appointed a commission to study the idea of maternity leaves.
• He supported women's suffrage and women's rights.
Can we clone this guy? Just joking. But it would be refreshing if more politicians were like him. I suggest everyone read the rest of the article. Finally, a last thought from President Coolidge:

“I want the people of America to be able to work less for the Government and more for themselves. I want them to have the rewards of their own industry. This is the chief meaning of freedom.”

Every Bill Should State Its Constitutional Authority, Republican Congressman Says

From CNS News.com (Aug. 11):

(CNSNews.com) - A Republican congressman says all bills introduced in Congress should include a statement setting forth the specific constitutional authority under which a law is being enacted.

Rep. John Shadegg (R-Ariz.) says his Enumerated Powers Act will force Congress to re-examine the role of the national government and curb its "ever-expanding reach."The official summary of H.R. 450, introduced on Jan. 1, 2009, reads as follows:

"Requires each Act of Congress to contain a concise and definite statement of the constitutional authority relied upon for the enactment of each portion of that Act. Declares that failure to comply with this requirement shall give rise to a point of order in either chamber of Congress."

The bill has not advanced beyond the Judiciary subcommittee to which it was assigned. [read more]

I like the idea of the bill, but not sure what the "shall give rise to a point of order" statement means. Does not sound like there is much teeth in the bill.

How about if an Act of Congress does not comply with this requirement the act is invalid or unconstitutional. That would be better. Just a thought.

Another Look at The Declaration of Independence

As I was looking at the Declaration I noticed the following grievances about King George:

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our People, and eat out their substance.

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

Almost sounds like what's going on now. The second grievances sounds like King George was appointing czars. The colonists were really ticked off at the king. Take notice of this paragraph in the Declaration:

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free People. [my italics]

Again does that sound familiar? Nah.

Impatient patient stitches own wound

From UPI.com (August 3):

SUNDSVALL, Sweden, Aug. 3 (UPI) -- A Swedish man said hospital workers reported him to police after he got tired of waiting for treatment and stitched his own leg wound. [read more]

The article said the guy waited over an hour. I wouldn't call that being impatient as the headline says. The hospital set out needle and thread (the hospital didn't use cat gut or something other than thread?) so the patient decided to do his own suturing. That must of hurt. Then the hospital reported him to the authorities for "unauthorized suturing."

I wonder if the guy goes back to the hospital if he has another cut or any other medical emergency? I would think twice about it. I mean if you have to sew up your own wound and get in trouble for doing that who needs the hassle. You could stay home and do your own suturing.

Two words: Obamacare anyone?

Fourteen Defining Characteristics Of Fascism

These 14 characteristics are by Dr. Lawrence Britt.

1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottoes, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights - Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

4. Supremacy of the Military - Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.

5. Rampant Sexism - The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.

6. Controlled Mass Media - Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

7. Obsession with National Security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

8. Religion and Government are Intertwined - Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.

9. Corporate Power is Protected - The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

10. Labor Power is Suppressed - Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.

11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.

12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment - Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption - Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

14. Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

These fourteen characteristics are pretty good. I notice the doctor has left-leaning bent though. Notice characteristic three where he mentions scapegoating communists and socialists. This might be cause he never looked at countries like Cuba, China and other Marxists regimes. Oh, well. A dictator will always escape goat a group if he perceives a threat to him or his regime.

He also mentions continuing nationalism in characteristic one. China, Cuba, and Venezuela don't have nationalism? Almost every country has nationalism which is basically love of your country. Nothing wrong with that. I don't care if the Iranians love their country. That does not scare me. I crazy leader who wants to start WW III does. Hitler did not start WW II because he loved his country. He started WW II because he was power hungry megalomaniac.

Almost every one these fourteen characteristics can be applied to any communist/Marxist/socialist government. After all fascism, communism and Marxism limits liberty. As the econlib.org website put it for fascism:

The fascist leaders’ antagonism to communism has been misinterpreted as an affinity for capitalism. In fact, fascists’ anticommunism was motivated by a belief that in the collectivist milieu of early-twentieth-century Europe, communism was its closest rival for people's allegiance. As with communism, under fascism, every citizen was regarded as an employee and tenant of the totalitarian, party-dominated state. Consequently, it was the state's prerogative to use force, or the threat of it, to suppress even peaceful opposition.

Movement Action Plan

This action plan was created by Bill Moyer in 1987 for leftist radicals. As Glenn Beck has stated on his show the TEA Party may be in stage five of this plan. Click on the chart to see the words easier.

The Planks of the Nationalist Socialist (NAZI) Party of Germany

The following planks below were adopted by the Nazi Party in Munich on February 24, 1920. Ask yourself what ideology does this sound like the most?

We ask that the government undertake the obligation above all of providing citizens with adequate opportunity for employment and earning a living.

The activities of the individual must not be allowed to clash with the interests of the community, but must take place within its confines and be for the good of all. Therefore, we demand an end to the power of the financial interests.

We demand profit sharing in big business.

We demand a broad extension of care for the aged.

We demand... the greatest possible consideration of small business in the purchases of the national, state, and municipal governments.

In order to make possible to every capable and industrious (citizen) the attainment of higher education and thus the achievement of a post of leadership, the government must provide an all-around enlargement of our system of public education... We demand the education at government expense of gifted children of poor parents...

The government must undertake the improvement of public health by protecting mother and child, by prohibiting child labor - by the greatest possible support for all clubs concerned with the physical education of youth.

We combat the... materialistic spirit within and without us, and are convinced that a permanent recovery of our people can only proceed from within on the foundation of The Common Good Before the Individual Good.

If you said this sounds more like the Left--especially the far Left then you are right. Progressives say that conservatives are Nazi's in their ideology. Really? Name me one conservative that wants profit sharing in business. And after all the word "socialist" is in the word Nazi.

Whether it is fascism, socialism, communism, or statism they all have one thing in common: control and restricting liberty.

The Art of Compromise

In Ayn Rand's book Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal she lists three rules about comprising. Any conservative politician running for office (or anyone for that matter who has principles) should read these rules.

1. In any conflict between two men (or two groups) who hold the same basic principles, it is the more consistent one who wins.

2. In any collaboration between two men (or two groups) who hold different basic principles, it is the more evil or irrational one who wins.

3. When opposite basic principles are clearly and openly defined, it works to the advantage of the rational side; when they are not clearly defined, but are hidden or evaded, it works to the advantage of the irrational side.

She gives an example of the Republicans compromising with the Democrats about big gov't. I am paraphrasing her point, but if the Dems want big gov't and the GOP wants big gov't lite--it is the Dems that will win because they are more consistent about their big gov't principles.

Be Careful What You Want

In 1917, the Russian peasants were demanding: "Land and Freedom!" But Lenin and Stalin is what they got.
In 1933, the Germans were demanding: "Room to live!" But what they got was Hitler.
In 1793, the French were shouting: "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity!" What they got was Napoleon.
In 1776, the Americans were proclaiming "The Rights of Man" -- and, led by political philosophers, they achieved it.

No revolution, no matter how justified, and no movement, no matter how popular, has ever succeeded without a political philosophy to guide it, to set its direction and goal.

Source: Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal (1966) by Ayn Rand.

America's Ruling Class -- And the Perils of Revolution

An interesting article written by Angelo M. Codevilla in The American Spectator. This six page column is about how there are two classes in America (or at least this is how Washington sees the country): The Ruling Class and the Country Class. The Ruling Class thinks of itself as "the best and brightest while the rest of Americans are retrograde, racist, and dysfunctional unless properly constrained." The "rest of America" is of course by definition the Country Class. Think elitism.

Some people think term limits for Congress is a good idea. I don't know. But the real problem is the culture in Congress that this article alludes too. No matter who you put in power they will be exposed to that culture. Unless they have very good self-control or just maybe an individualist nature they will be drawn into the Ruling Class' trappings. They will want to be one of the "cool" people--not an outsider. Changing that culture especially the attitude in the culture will be almost impossible.

Hat tip to the Rush Limbaugh show for bringing this article to my attention.

One note. This article parallels my Stereotypes of The Left blog entry on October 2006. Mr. Codevilla article is more flushed out than mine though.

An Illegal Immigration Plan

Below is what I consider a good plan for illegal immigration.

First, put up a wall or a fence or even the National Guard on the border to help out the border control to stop any terrorists or criminals with felonies. We have to screen these risky people out.

Second, fine heavily any business that hires illegal aliens. This will help stop the flood of illegals and it might make the illegals here leave the country. At least will diminish the economic incentive for coming here.

Third, do away with the "anchor baby" law. This law says if an illegal alien gives birth to a baby here then that baby automatically becomes legal. This law was implemented when America had black slaves. Slavery is not illegal, and no other country has this outdated law.

Finally, if you want to become a citizen of this country you have to give at least five different reasons why you like or love America. I think that's fair. When you apply for a job the interviewer asks you why you want to work for the company. Besides we have enough people in this country that don't like this country like the POTUS.

That's the plan. The first two parts should be implemented concurrently if possible.

Salary and Private Property

What's the difference between capping salaries and limiting the number of products a person can own (like Jay Leno's cars)? It's a trick question. There is no difference--both are private property. So, why should the powers-that-be have the right to cap anyone's salary in the private sector? Think about it. Congress does not put any ceiling on their salary. It raises automatically. All they have to do is not to vote for the raise. Also, President Clinton raised the POTUS salary during his term.

Why Dictators Don't Like the Bill of Rights Part 2

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. This would prevent any dictator from having an official enter a person's house without a warrant if the dictator thought a person or business was a threat to the regime ie wanted to overthrow it. The official could just barge into the residence and have a look around.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. A dictator would laugh at all of this. And if the gov't is totalitarian then the concept of private property does not exist. Your life, liberty, and property is at the whim of the dictator. 

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense. Again a dictator wold laugh at this. A speedy trial? An accused gets a trial as long as the regime wants it to be. You are lucky if the regime gives you a defense attorney. 

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. Civil cases are trivial to a dictator.

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. No excessive fines? No cruel and unusual punishment? Where's the fun in that! And as for no excessive bail? What does bail mean? Actually, if the crime is a local matter and not related to the state a dictator probably wouldn't care either way.

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. Rights would be whatever the dictator says they are. 

States and People The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Again any rights are whatever the dictator says they are.

Why Dictators Don't Like the Bill of Rights Part 1

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. Dictators don't like this right because they want to control the dominant religion of the country they rule over or they want to outlaw the religion. Why? Because the religion might not support their plans for the country like the Catholic church in Poland not supporting Communism during the Cold War. China suppresses Christianity and other religions for this reason.  The only religion a dictator would allow is a religion he can control or that supports his regime. Germany does not have freedom of religion as a side note. I am not stating they are a dictatorship--just giving you a comparison.

...or abridging the freedom of speech,  or of the press. Dictators don't want no-one criticizing him or his regime. Dictators don't want outsiders knowing his plans for the country especially when they are not good plans. If people talked about his plans or criticize them or if the press reported what he was up to then the people could rebel. That's why dictators like to control the press and suppress speech. England by the way does not have freedom of speech. I am not saying they are a dictatorship--just stating an interesting side note.

...or the right of the people peaceably to assemble. If the people get together and form associations or clubs they can learn what each other thinks about the regime. This could lead to rebellion and a possible overthrow of the current regime. Anyway, this is what a dictator could think. They tend to be paranoid. 

...and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Dictators don't care about any grievances from the people. Sort of like America's Congress especially those on the Left.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Dictators don't want rebellion, and they really don't want people rebelling with guns! That could be disastrous to the regime. England does not have the right to bear arms.

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. A dictator wouldn't care about this unless he used it as a way to prevent a rebellion. You have soldiers loyal to the regime in a house they can suppress any potential rebellion and also report back to the regime any activities in the house.

There is also a possible downside to this plan. The homeowners could persuade the soldiers to rebel against the regime. President Lincoln suspended this right temporarily during the Civil War.

 

Collectivized "Rights"

The following is an excerpt from Ayn Rand's article by the same name written in June 1963:

A group, as such, has no rights. A man can neither acquire new rights by joining a group nor lose the rights which he does possess. The principle of individual rights is the only moral base of all groups or associations. Any group that does not recognize this principle is not an association, but a gang or a mob. The notion of "collective rights" (the notion that rights belong to groups, not to individuals) means that "rights" belong to some men, but not to others---that some men have the "right" to dispose of others in any manner they please---and that the criterion of such privileged position consists of numerical superiority.

What she said back then is true today as it was back then. This passage was taken by the way from her book The Virtue of Selfishness.

Congressional Reform Part 2

One, pass a law that says a Congressperson has to read and comprehend a bill before voting on it. This just makes sense. None of this "we must pass the law so we know what's in it" bull crap.

Two, have the Congress work three to four months of the year. They can choose what months they want to work. The rest of the months they cannot pass any laws and they are not paid. This would help reduce the deficit. If a Congressperson cannot survive on three to four months pay well then they can get regular jobs like the people they represent. Maybe just then they'll think twice about passing a stupid bill if the bill affects them too. Also, it's good for them to interact with their constituents. The Founding Fathers never meant for Congress to be separated from the people they represent. They never meant them to be elitists.

Finally, how about this idea. Repeal the 17th amendment and go back to the first part of Article I Section 3. This will bring the Constitution closer to what the Founding fathers meant it to be.

Also, see my previous Congressional Reform blog entry for other suggestions.

Miscellaneous Thoughts Part 17

• The customer is always right unless you belong to Big Labor.
• Remember to never throw a lighted stick of dynamite in front of golden retriever.  
• If you're tired of life's ups, downs & crazy turns maybe it's time to get off of the roller coaster.
• I felt sorry for a man who had no hat. Then I met a man who had no head. 
• Given a choice between completeness & consistency in a formal system since you cannot have both according to Godel's Theorem. I choose consistency. Having an incomplete system won't drive you nuts.
• Life's a journey. Just don't take a wrong turn & get lost. 
• If everyone shows up late for a meeting then does that mean no-one showed up late?
• Change is not always good. There is such a thing as bad change. For instance, making a wrong turn and driving off a cliff while driving home is bad change. 
• Drinking and voting don't mix. You might vote for something or someone by accident you did not mean to vote for.
• On life's journey be sure to stop and smell the flowers. Just be sure to check for bumblebees on them before you smell.

Obama to be given the right to shut down the internet with 'kill switch'

From the Daily Mail (June 18):

President Obama will be given the power to shut down the Internet with a 'kill switch' in a new law being proposed in the US.

He would be able to order popular search engines such a Google and Yahoo to suspend access their websites in times of national emergency.

Other US based Internet service providers as well as broadband providers would also come under his control in times of a 'cybersecurity emergency.' Any company that failed to comply would be subject to huge fines.

Critics of the new law, which has been proposed by former presidential candidate Joe Liebermann, said it would be an abuse of power to let the White House control the internet. [read more]

This bill is over-kill. The Emperor would use this switch when the country is under a cyberattack like another country hacking into the US companies. But the question is who is going to determine how severe the emergency is for the 'kill switch' to be flipped? The gov't of course. Or maybe a gov't commission like the one created to handle the oil spill in the Gulf will determine when the kill switch is flipped. That really makes me feel better. Not!

Keep in mind this the same administration that said "never let a good crises go to waste." A cybersecurity emergency would of course be a crises.

Obama's Health Executive Order

From White House.gov Obama issued another executive order. Any highlights are by me. Below is condensed version of the order.

EXECUTIVE ORDER

ESTABLISHING THE NATIONAL PREVENTION, HEALTH PROMOTION, AND PUBLIC HEALTH COUNCIL

Section 1. Establishment. There is established within the Department of Health and Human Services, the National Prevention, Health Promotion, and Public Health Council (Council).

(a) The Surgeon General shall serve as the Chair of the Council, which shall be composed of:

(1) the Secretary of Agriculture;
(2) the Secretary of Labor;
(3) the Secretary of Health and Human Services;
(4) the Secretary of Transportation;
(5) the Secretary of Education;
(6) the Secretary of Homeland Security;
(7) the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency;
(8) the Chair of the Federal Trade Commission;
(9) the Director of National Drug Control Policy;
(10) the Assistant to the President and Director of the Domestic Policy Council;
(11) the Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Indian Affairs;
(12) the Chairman of the Corporation for National and Community Service; and
(13) the head of any other executive department or agency that the Chair may, from time to time, determine is appropriate.

Sec. 3. Purposes and Duties. The Council shall:

(c) provide recommendations to the President and the Congress concerning the most pressing health issues confronting the United States and changes in Federal policy to achieve national wellness, health promotion, and public health goals, including the reduction of tobacco use, sedentary behavior, and poor nutrition;

Sec. 4. Advisory Group.

(b) The Advisory Group shall be composed of not more than 25 members or representatives from outside the Federal Government appointed by the President and shall include a diverse group of licensed health professionals, including integrative health practitioners who are representative of or have expertise in:

(1) worksite health promotion;
(2) community services, including community health centers;
(3) preventive medicine;
(4) health coaching;
(5) public health education;
(6) geriatrics; and
(7) rehabilitation medicine.

Section 6.

(c) contains a list of national priorities on health promotion and disease prevention to address lifestyle behavior modification (including smoking cessation, proper nutrition, appropriate exercise, mental health, behavioral health, substance-use disorder, and domestic violence screenings) and the prevention measures for the five leading disease killers in the United States;

I am not sure why the Secretaries of Agriculture, Labor, Transportation, Education, and Homeland Security (this one is really odd) are there. And why is the EPA and FTC included in the membership? Only departments not included is the IRS, CIA and FBI. Notice the Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Indian Affairs. What is with the Left and the Indians? 

Not sure what "health coaching" entails. Hey fatso quit eating so much! Exercise more! Something like that?

Lifestyle behavior modification? Don't like the sound of that. Appropriate exercise? The gov't is going to decide how much exercise you should get? Shouldn't that be between your doctor and you? Oh, I am sorry. I forgot. Obama knows better than any doctor. 

Hat tip to WND.com for this information.

Bribing Candidates

Just because it's been done in the past or "that's the way Washington works" does not mean you can continue the tradition of bribing candidates from running for an elected office. It's wrong then and it's wrong now. And politicians wonder why the American public is fed up with Washington? There should be investigations when this happens. You can't bribe policemen and you definitely shouldn't bribe politicians.

The Left says the Right has done the same thing. That might be true, but if you get caught speeding or rolling through a stop sign and telling the policeman other people do it and don't get caught won't work for an excuse. He'll just tell you, you are the one that got caught this time. 

Political bribery should never be done. Period. 

The Power Triangle

On the Sociopathic Style website (sounds like a fun website doesn't it?) it talks about The Power Triangle. The triangle has the components: The Victim, The Rescuer, and The Villain. The relationship is in balance as long as The Victim is powerless and needs The Rescuer. 

Once The Victim stops being a victim, The Rescuer is not needed anymore. This is where the Rescuer becomes The Villain. The once rescuer starts to now shame, diminish, and blame The Victim for The Rescuer's woes. In other words, The Rescuer now perceives The Victim as The Villain and him/her as The Victim now. 

What's interesting is if you substitute Big Gov't politicians (Progressives) for The Rescuer the have a similar situation. Progressives try to convince the voters they cannot live without Big Gov't. For those voters who believe this are The Victims. All the rest who don't believe this are turned into villains. Independence is the enemy of the Progressives.