Reasonable Questions for Unreasonable Times Part 1a

Below are questions Glenn Beck asked on his TV show. I am going to attempt to answer them.

• Our unfunded liability for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid is close to $100 trillion. Is there any way to pay for these programs without bankrupting America? No, not really. I myself would not have created these socialistic programs in the first place. They should be made optional. Social Security is a ponzi scheme. It depends on the elderly dying off and the young making a lot of money. The gov't should encourage people to save their money for when they need it in their old age by cutting taxes and making a non-taxable "old age" savings account like IRAs.

• We are in so much debt, why spend more borrowed money on cap-and-trade and health care programs before we stop the flow of red-ink? We shouldn't. Congress should live within a budget like all families do or should. You don't spend money you don't have. Congress is like a compulsive gambler. If you give the gambler more money to get out of his debt the more money he will gamble away. His debt increases. Unless he recognizes he has a problem, he will continue his gambling ways. That's Congress. The American public does not help either by enabling Congress. Both Congress and the public has got to have discipline. Congress has got to stop waste full spending and the public has got to stop signaling to Congress it does not need anymore wasteful pgms. Or any program at all until America is in the black.

• The stimulus package funneled billions of dollars to ACORN. How does giving billions of dollars to ACORN stimulate the economy? It doesn't. You just get more ACORN employees that's all. All ACORN is is a political community agitator organizer for the Left. You can make an educated guess why they got the money.

• If it was so important for congress to pass the stimulus bill before they even had time to read it why has only a fraction of the stimulus money been spent 6 months later? Because they were in such a hurry to write it and to pass it they did not have time to read and comprehend it. Now they decided to read it.

• Bush said he had to abandon free market principles in order to save them, how exactly does that work? I have no idea, but what he did smacks of socialism. Obama has taken that idea to another level. The free market is not perfect because people are not perfect. But neither is gov't or the for that matter the justice system because they are composed of people. So how does one imperfect system make another perfect? It can't.

• Why won’t members of Congress read the bills before they vote on them? Either they don't want to be bothered with reading them or they put total trust in the person creating the bill. Or both. Neither excuse works.

• Why are citizens mocked and laughed at when they ask their congressman to read the bills before they vote on them? Because the congress is arrogant and full of themselves.

• Was the cash-for-clunkers program meant to save the earth or the economy? Did it accomplish either? Could be both. But I think to save the earth more. On the cars.gov FAQ it states you have to buy a fuel efficient vehicle to decrease CO2 emissions and to reduce oil dependence. If the program was to save the economy it didn't work because more people bought foreign cars more than domestic. I don't believe it saved the earth either.

• How did Van Jones, a self-proclaimed communist become a special advisor to the president? I don't know. The White House won't even answer.

Making Congressional Bills Less Complex

The health care bill coming out of the House it way too long. Over a 1000 pages? Are you kidding me? This are my ideas how to make them shorter.

First, if the bill is over five pages the lawmakers that sponsor it has to write the bill by hand in either pencil or pen. Heck, use a crayola I don't care. But they have to write it by hand using in their own hand. I don't want no ghostwriters writing it. Or no staff writing it. If Congressman X sponsors a bill then I want to see that Congressman's handwriting. No one else. Only one person should write the bill. If more than one person sponsors a bill then the sponsors have to get together to decide who's going to write the bill. If writer doesn't want to use cursive then he can print it. It doesn't matter to me. The founding fathers wrote the Declaration of Independence and Constitution by hand using a freakin' quill dipped in ink! (Yea, I know they had no choice. They didn't have typewriters or a computer.)

Second, once the bill is written it has to be examined by a independent team or panel of handwriting experts. If the panel determines that the any of the rules in the first part are violated then the bill invalid. Otherwise the read next paragraph.

Third, after the bill is validated by the handwriting panel then all the sponsors' peers has to read it in its entirely. Not only do they have to read it but sign a letter saying they have read and understood the bill. And then give a summary of the bill in their words. What I mean by peers is if you are a representative for example then your fellow representatives have to read the bill.

Or the sponsors do a walk through of the bill. Explaining line by line what the bill does to all of his peers. Then the sponsors peers can ask questions of the bill if they want. Both the walk though and attendance of the walk through is mandatory. When I went to college me and my fellow computer scientists had to give walk throughs of their computer programs. If it is good enough for programmers it is good enough for Congress.

What's the point of my idea? To slow down the process of making huge complex laws. If you have to write the bill by hand then your hand will get tired if it is too long. If you have your peers read it you better not make it too long or they'll will get ticked off at you. Or if you choose the walk through option you're voice will go out if the bill is too long.

Will Congress ever do this? Probably not. But I can dream. Keep in mind Congress not only makes laws for you but for themselves too. So, they are not going to make it rough on themselves.

Am I being mean? Maybe. But what is worse is to have a complex bill that is vague and no-one understands that is forced upon the constituents.

One final thought. If cars were built like bills are made no-one would ever buy a car. The complexest programs ever made are computer operating systems. And even they don't work all the time. But at least they are tested and updated. Can you say that about bills passed in Congress?

The Four Horsemen of America's Economic Apocalipse

Below I believe are the four legislatures that can wreck America's economic future if they are passed:

1. ObamaCare. Also known as socialized medicine. It's pretty simple economics why this won't work. It hasn't worked in Canada and England and it won't work here. Canada and England even has less population than the U.S. You offer health care "free" you will get shortages. Supply and demand. If you have too much demand (people in need of medical help) and not enough supply (doctors, nurses, medical equipment) to meet the demand, you will get a shortage. America is in debt and doesn't have enough money to pay doctors decent wages and not enough money to buy state-of-the-art medical equipment. Medical equipment businesses may initially sell equipment to the gov't but as soon as they don't receive their money (like the car dealers who haven't received their money from the gov't in the cash-for-clunkers pgm which ends today) they will stop selling equipment to the gov't and make something else. Again shortages. Taxes will have to be raised to pay for the medical resources. Either the income tax or the gov't might tax ingredients it deems unhealthy like sugar, saturated fats, cholesterol, salt, etc. The powers-that-be will use America's health as an excuse to do it. This will hurt the economy even more by causing inflation.

2. The Cap-and-trade bill. Or as some call it "cap-and-tax." This is how it works according to Conservapedia:

   In a "cap and trade system," a regulating authority (the government) sells permits to companies for the right to emit pollutants. As with all costs of business, this additional cost would be passed on the consumer. A company may emit pollutants up to the permitted amount. Should a company find they routinely under-pollute, these permits may be sold back to the regulating authority or sold to other companies.

   Each source can design its own compliance strategy to meet the overall reduction requirement, including sale or purchase of allowances, installation of pollution controls, implementation of efficiency measures, among other options. Individual control requirements are not specified under a cap and trade program, but each emissions source must surrender allowances equal to its actual emissions in order to comply. Sources must also completely and accurately measure and report all emissions in a timely manner to guarantee that the overall cap is achieved. [read more]

   Italics added by me. When Spain passed this stupid legislature its electricity and energy increased by 31 percent. That will happen here. Even Obama had to admit that "electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket." His words. Heritage.org did an analysis of the bill. Below is some of what they discovered:
   • Gasoline prices will rise 58 percent (or $1.38) above the baseline forecast, which already contains price increases;
   • Electricity prices will rise 90 percent;
   • A family of four can expect to pay $1,241 more for energy costs per year;
   • Including taxes, a family of four will pay $4,609 more per year;
   • Job losses will be nearly 2.5 million;
   • The national debt will rise an additional $12,803 per person.
   If that does not make you cringe you can read more of the article. Why do we have to have this legislature? To try to control a gas that all animals exhale out.

3. The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). Also called Card check. Basically this is employees voting if they want a union or not without a secret ballot. Think of it in this way: It would be like if you voted for a political candidate while the candidate looked over your shoulder. That wouldn't be right. That can lead to intimidation. Not "free choice" anymore is it? Why should unions care if you vote to join a union or not if unions are popular. It's because they are not. Union membership is dropping. In a March Rasmussen poll only nine percent of non-union workers want to join a union. According to an Heritage.org article:

   The EFCA applies only to workers covered by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which does not cover government employees, agricultural workers, the self-employed, or railway or airline workers. The Act also excludes supervisors. Still, the EFCA would disenfranchise 105 million American workers, which encompasses more than two-thirds, or 68.8 percent, of the American workforce. [read more]

   Even liberal George McGovern and an ex-labor union leader does not support card check. McGovern and the ex-union labor union leader are not alone in their opinions. 30% say it’s okay to form a union without a secret vote, 52% disagree according to a July Rasmussen poll.

4. Finally, Amnesty. If you just let all the illegals be legal that will cause high unemployment, and put a drag even more on the health care system (illegals are covered in the House ObamaCare bill). Not to mention it will give incentive for even more illegals to come over here. Inflation will rise because now you have to pay them minimum wage, health benefits, etc. I understand why they are coming over here. Mexico has low wages, high unemployment, and deadly drug gangs. It's like a storm that follows low pressure systems. America is the low pressure system. The Left wants amnesty because they want to increase labor membership. They really don't care about the individual lives of illegals coming over here. They just see the numbers.

So, how can the four horsemen be stopped? Vote for any politician that will reverse the four legislatures. God help this country if any of the four passes.

The Psychology of Town Hall Meetings

More actually this blog is about the reactions of people in town hall meetings to Obamacare.

There is a psychological theory for what the people in the town hall meetings (and most of America including myself) is feeling it is called Reactance Theory. When you perceive you're freedoms are threatened or lost you react--hence the name. Makes sense doesn't it?

How do you react when you're freedoms are threatened? You get angry. You get frustrated. You can even attack whatever is causing you to lose your freedoms. The more you value a particular freedom that is threatened--the more you will react. The more freedoms you lose the more you will react. This theory is describing exactly the psychological dynamics going on in town hall meetings.

People are reacting to losing their choice of doctor, medicine, etc. If you don't like your doctor you can choose another in a free market system. If a medicine isn't working or you don't like the side effects you can choose another medicine. Under socialized health care the gov't makes those choices for you. You may get another doctor or may not. Same with the medicine. You may not get a second, third, etc. opinion. So, because of not having those choices, naturally according to the theory they are confronting Congressmen. What does Congress and the Left do? Say the town hall gatherers are being misinformed without giving any details of the plan themselves. These Congressmen and Obama say trust us, we won't do you no wrong. Here's a message to Congress and Obama: Do not treat the American people like children! We are adults and treat us as such. We are more informed than you would like to believe.

Not only can a single person threaten your freedom or take it away like a kidnapper but so can a gov't--even worse so because you can attack a kidnapper. How do you respond to a gov't once an oppressive law is made? America's founding fathers knew this well. That's why America has the Bill of Rights--too keep the gov't from oppressing its people. Like a wise man once said when a gov't fears its people you have freedom. When people fear their gov't you have oppression.

Also, keep in mind that health care is one of the basic needs of a person. You never want to restrict the basic needs (food, water, shelter) of a person or else they will react. Having a person wait in line for a drivers license is one thing. Having them wait while they are in pain or needing a life-saving operation is a totally different thing. Don't mess with basic needs.

Missile Defense Budget Could Open Vulnerabilities, Report Warns

From NTI.org (Aug. 13, 2009):

The Obama administration's proposal to emphasize battlefield missile defenses over systems for intercepting strategic ballistic missiles would save the nation money while potentially making it more vulnerable to future attack, says a report published yesterday by a Washington-based defense think tank (see GSN, June 2). [read more]

What Obama administration doing makes sense from their world view. Obama (and most libs) think that if America disarms so will the rest of the world. Well, maybe and maybe not. Every country has its own agenda. It's possible that that friendly countries may disarm. I'm not worried about friendly countries though. I am more worried about the dangerous countries like Iran and N. Korea. They will do whatever is in their best interest. And that doesn't include America.

Obama thinks that America is source of the world's problems (he keeps apologizing for America) and our enemies will happily disarm if we be nice and disarm. It doesn't work that way. A bad man with a knife approaching you will still cut you if you put down your weapon. Having wrong perceptions during a crisis can decrease your chance of survival. Thinking you caused the bad man being bad is not only stupid but can get you killed. Even if you made him mad at you--the criminal still has free will. He can choose not to harm you.

Just like the potential victim in the above scenario putting down his weapon won't make him safe, cutting military defenses in a dangerous world does not and will not make a country safer. But it can make a country less safe.

Obama's Email Controversy

Is it possible that Obama is collecting the emails for a mailing list? I mean people have received unsolicited emails from his advisor David Axelrod. When asked about this his press secretary could not answer the question whether or not the Obama administration was sending out those emails. The answer is either is yes, no, or I don't know but let me look into the matter. But Robert Gibbs (I am sorry this guy is a bonehead--he is the worst press secretary I've seen) acted like a pinhead. This suggests three possible scenarios: 1) The Obama gang is keeping Gibbs in the dark, 2) Gibbs knows but is protecting Obama's behind, or 3) Gibbs did not understand the question. You choose which three. I seriously doubt Gibbs did not understand the question.

I remember reading in a computer magazine article (I'm sorry I forgot the name of the magazine) the author claimed Obama was a spammer. This might be true. I remember a caller on the Rush Limbaugh said he went to a gov't website to get help with his mortgage. Later on he got phone calls from almost every mortgage lawyer in the country. And now I read that the White House is using chain emails to counter the "lies" about Obamacare. Keep in mind Obama and his crew are not adverse to using computer technology. Obama uses a Blackberry to communicate.

If the White House does not care about people's names and emails then why do you have to forward the email to the White House? Couldn't you just say my friend/brother/sister says this about Obamacare without naming names? What he could have done to get people's take on Obamacare is to use a contact form like the general "contact us" form on the White House.gov site. I noticed on that form your name and email is required. But a form could be made that did not include either one. That would make snitches people less nervous about giving Obama info about his health care system. Keep in mind according to law the White House has to save any correspondences it has with anyone as a matter of public record.

Programming a Teleportation Device

In the movie "The Fly" the main character (played by Jeff Goldblum) built a matter transportation ie teleportation device. The device he hoped would teleport a person from booth A to booth B or vise versa. It works perfectly for animals so he uses himself as a guinea pig. He enters booth A and turns the device on. Unbeknown to the main character a fly flies into booth A at the same time. The computer that runs the teleporter gets confused because there is only supposed to be one animal at a time in a booth. So, it combines the DNA of the main character with that of the fly. And then the scientist is teleported by the computer. Slowly the main character turns into a fly. Hence the name of the movie. A pretty disgusting ending in my opinion.

The main character may have been a brilliant inventor but he was a dumb programmer. If you are going to build a device that teleports you from point A to point B or from point B to point A you have to have some safeguards. If a telepod as it is called in the movie have two or more objects in it don't teleport and let the teleportee know there is something else in the telepod with him or her. Or even better yet have the computer teleport just the person and ignore the other object or person. If that object is another person that person has to wait his turn.

Another issue is if both telepods are occupied at the same time. This is not covered in the movie by the way. The computer does not do any teleportation. It has to wait for the receiving telepod to be empty. It could even tell one of the teleporterees to leave his or her pod. For instance it could tell whoever entered the pod last, to leave because the other person has the "right of way." If both teleportees entered the pods at the same time (which would be really rare because the computer could be programmed to measure the time to the nearest millisecond) then it could randomly choose a person to teleport. There could be a signal light in the pods to indicate what state it is. If a green light is on then you can teleport to the other pod. If a red light is on then someone else in the other pod and is about to be or is teleporting to that pod. If no light is on then the teleporter is not working.

It could be possible to have telepods in a network where you could teleport to any pod in the world. You just enter the position of the receiving pod.

I know the teleporter was just a plot gimmick. After all the movie was called "The Fly" not the "The Teleporter." I just thought the concept was interesting.

They could remake the movie call it "The Gnat" or "The Flea" or even "The Ladybug." Although the having the main character turn into a ladybug would not have been so gross. How about the "The Cockroach?". That would be disgusting too.

Assertive Training for Conservatives

Below is from Daniel G. Amen's book Magnificent Mind at Any Age (2008). The tips weren't exactly for conservatives but for anyone trying to be assertive in their life. I copied these tips for conservatives because it's the Left that tends to be angry all the time and demeaning. Although since the Left argues from an emotional point of view some of these tips may not work.

1. Do not give in to the anger of others just because it makes you uncomfortable.
2. Do not allow the opinion of others to control how you feel. Your opinion, within reason, needs to be the one that counts for you. Work on knowing what you think and believe.
3. Say what you mean and stick up for what you believe is right.
4. Maintain self-control. Being angry, mean, or aggressive is not being assertive.
5. Be kind, if possible. But above all be firm in your stance.

Obama is Watching You

The title of this blog sounds ominous doesn't it? Then again... On the White House.gov blog there is this message:

There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.

Mr. President since you did not apparently read your own bill how would you know what is fishy or not? I have looked at the bill. It is long and full legalese. I almost went brain dead. Two, who are these people spreading "rumors" about the bill you are talking about? Could they possibly be the same people polled who don't like ObamaCare? According to Rassmussen Reports 53% now oppose congressional health care reform. Then these same people show up to town hall meetings and ask honest questions and get ridiculed and dehumanized by you and people in Congress. Saying they are faking anger and being told to show up by the RNC. The powers that be should have more respect for people they are supposed to represent. They are not royalty--even though that how they think of themselves.

I just wonder what Obama is going to do about with that list of dissenters. Possibly a hit list? Who knows. Redstate.com comments that what Obama is doing, asking people to snitch, could be against the law. You know possibly an infringment against free speech. Maybe instead of flag@whitehouse.gov it should be bigbrother@whitehouse.gov. Just a suggestion.

In other related news, on the Cars.gov website was this message:

“This application provides access to the DOT CARS system. When logged on to the CARS system, your computer is considered a federal computer system and is the property of the United States Government.

“Any or all uses of this system and all files on this system may be intercepted, monitored, recorded, copied, audited, inspected, and disclosed to authorized CARS, DoT, and law enforcement personnel, as well as authorized officials of other agencies, both domestic and foreign.”

Emphasis added by me. Isn't that nice. Actually, a Constitutional watchdog brought this to the attention to that rascal Glenn Beck (Glenn you got to stop exposing what the gov't is doing. They don't like that!) He mentioned it on his TV and radio show then the message was changed by the White House to be less unnerving. The question is even though the message is less frightening is the gov't still going to do what the message said?

Let's just do this. Replace the stars on Old Glory with a hammer and sickle or if you wish Obama's logo. Rename the United States of America, United Socialist States of America. Put in Government or Obama We Trust on all paper currency. That should do it.

While we're at it let's annex Mexico to save the illegals from coming over to America since we are going include them in ObamaCare anyway. After all we are just one big continent right?

Meet Obama's Czars

If you ever wondered who Al Capone's bosses Obama's czars (sounds like we are in Soviet Union doesn't it) are, well check out the list below:

1. Border Czar: Alan Bersin. As Secretary of Education and district head under Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Bersin took little action against the numerous illegal immigrants in schools under his supervision. Yea, Bersin sure sounds qualified like a drunk doing brain surgery.
2. Car Czar: Steven Rattner. He previously served as a reporter for the New York Times, advocating liberal approaches to economics, and is expected to continue to endorse such positions during his tenure as czar. As a czar, Rattner is not accountable to anyone except President Obama, and his responsibilities are similarly nebulous. Now, doesn't that make you feel all nice and warm.
3. Drug Czar:Gil Kerlikowske. Kerlikowske ran two small police departments in Florida, then became chief of police in Buffalo, N.Y. in 1994. He became Seattle's police chief in 2000 and brought the city's crime rate to a 40-year low, despite a resurgences in youth and gang violence. Kerlikowske has maintained a national profile, paying special attention to gun control, immigration and electronic data mining of private records.
4. Economic Czar: Paul A. Volcker
5. Energy and Environment Czar: Carol Browner. A lobbyist hired by President Barack Hussein Obama as energy czar and was the Environmental Protection Agency administrator in the Clinton Administration. She is also the former head of the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation. She has years of experience with environmental issues and takes an extremist viewpoint on Global Warming.
6. Government Performance Czar: Jeffrey Zients. A management consultant recently appointed as Chief Performance Officer, for Government Performance Czar in the Obama Administration. His role is to "promote technological innovation in government" (what's the point of that?), though his precise responsibilities are somewhat unclear. Zients was previously the Secretary of Technology in Virginia.
7. Great Lakes Czar: Cameron Davis. Selected by Environmental Protection Agency head Lisa Jackson, her responsibilities will include coordinating a number of federal agencies on issues relevant to Great Lakes, including invasive species, polluted harbors, sewage overflows and degraded wildlife habitat. Ms. Davis is one of a number of environmental czars, joining Chuck Fox, charged with directing cleanup of the Chesapeake bay. Prior to her appointment, Ms. Davis served as the head of the liberal environmentalist organization Alliance for the Great Lakes.
8. Green Czar: Van Jones. Was an admitted radical communist and black nationalist leader.
9. Health Czar: Nancy-Ann DeParle. She has been a tireless advocate of socialized medicine for many years.
10. Homeland Security Czar: John Brennan. He served in the administration of George W. Bush, where Brennan has generally used strong means to ensure the safety of Americans, and was an architect of the interrogation techniques criticized by many liberals.
11. Intelligence Czar: Dennis Blair. A retired four-star admiral. As intelligence czar, Blair has pledged to end the use of enhanced interrogation techniques (no more loud rock music) and work closely with the FBI.
12. Pay Czar: Kenneth R. Feinberg. He is changed with setting the salaries of officials at many companies which benefitted from the Bush and Obama administration's bailouts in 2008-9.
13. Regulatory Czar: Cass R. Sunstein. Sunstein has little background in regulation, and his appointment appears to have been motivated by his ties to Obama through the University of Chicago law school.
14. Science Czar: John Holdren. Professor Holdren has advocated multinational population restrictions, including mandatory abortion in the United States. Worse yet, in a book (Ecoscience) that he wrote in 1977, he advocated subtly poisoning the water supply with "sterilants."
15. Technology Czar: Vivek Kundra. He previously worked under the administration of Tim Kaine, the governor of Virginia, and, like many other Obama appointees, for Obama's 2007-9 presidential campaign.
16. Urban Affairs Czar: Adolfo Carrion, Jr. He previously acted as Borough president of the Bronx, where he was criticized for his actions following a large March 7, 2007 fire.
17. WMD Policy Czar: Gary Samore. Samore was previously a high-profile negotiator for the Clinton administration, where his policies towards North Korea are widely accepted to have been largely unsuccessful.

Well, that's all the czars except for the Cyber Czar. Obama has not picked anyone for that yet. A lot of the czars could be combined like for instance the Great Lake Czar and Green Czar could be part of the "Environmental" Czar. Some of the "technology" czars can be combined. I believe he has more czars than any president before him. Keep in mind the czars are only accountable to Obama and no-one else.

In full disclosure I should say that the words in italics are mine and not Conservapedia.com where I got the info from. A thanks to them for that info.

Driving Distractions

What's the difference between a passenger talking to you while driving a car and talking on a cell phone? I mean both are distractions to the driver. The only difference I can think of is with a cell phone you don't have both hands on the steering wheel. If a passenger sits next to you and talks to you then you might get the urge to turn toward him to reply back. It's only natural. That's conversational etiquette--to face someone you are talking to. Then what about hands-free cell phones?

Let's face it any activity that takes away your attention away from driving can be bad. Talking to a passenger, talking on a cellphone, daydreaming, etc. all can be bad.

One other thing to think about. Even a sneeze during driving can be dangerous while driving. Your eyes close briefly. So, if you having a sneezing attack don't drive until its over or CRASH!

By the way, I am not saying any of the above should be banned. All I am saying is that just focusing on the cell phone or texting for that matter is not the issue.

The Car Crash Scenario

Imagine this scenario in the near future under Obamacare: You are driving your GM car and you lose control and crash into a tree. Your Onstar contacts a gov't Onstar agent (because the gov't now owns GM). While you are in your car injured the bureaucratic process starts (the agent looks up the info about you):

• If you are a Congressman, the President or his wife, an illegal alien, or even a friend of the President no problem. You will get care.
• If you are an elderly person--no care. After all you are going to die pretty soon, so you are not worth the cost.
• If the car sends a signal to the agent that you weren't wearing a seatbelt--that will count against you.
• If you were talking on your cell phone--not good for you.
• If the agent sees in your online medical file (everything medical will be on that file) that you are overweight--not good.
• If your file says you have an incurable disease--not good. You're going to die soon so why spend the money on you.
• If the agent finds out you were listening to Rush Limbaugh or any Conservative radio talk show before the crash--not good. (Okay, I'm being silly. Then again...)
• If there are any anti-Obama or anti-big gov't bumper stickers on your car--not good.
• If there are any anti-Obama or anti-big gov't books in your car--not good.

  One other thing...

• If the tree you hit is on the endangered species list and you hurt it--definitely not good.

Keep in mind this scenario is pure "fiction."

The Ten Commandments According to Obama

I wish I could take credit for the following commandments but I can't. The list comes from The Patriot Update website:

1. Thou shalt have no God in America, except for me. For we are no longer a Christian nation and, after all, I am the chosen One. (And like God, I do not have a birth certificate.)
2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, unless it is my face carved on Mt. Rushmore.
3. Thou shalt not utter my middle name in vain (or in public). Only I can say Barack Hussein Obama.
4. Remember tax day, April 15th, to keep it holy.
5. Honour thy father and thy mother until they are too old and sick to care for. They will cost our public-funded health-care system too much money.
6. Thou shalt not kill, unless you have an unwanted, unborn baby. For it would be an abomination to punish your daughter with a baby.
7. Thou shalt not commit adultery if you are conservative or a Republican. Liberals and Democrats are hereby forgiven for all of their infidelity and immorality, but the careers of conservatives will be forever destroyed.
8. Thou shalt not steal, until you've been elected to public office. Only then is it acceptable to take money from hard-working, successful citizens and give it to those who do not work, illegal immigrants, or those who do not have the motivation to better their own lives.
9. Thou shalt not discriminate against thy neighbor unless they are conservative, Caucasian, or Christian.
10. Thou shalt not covet because it is simply unnecessary. I will place such a heavy tax burden on those that have achieved the American Dream that, by the end of my term as President, nobody will have any wealth or material goods left for you to covet.

How to Drive a Liberal Crazy

Or if you want how to mess with a liberal's mind. You might think to yourself how can you drive someone crazy if they are already in that state (especially if they are on the far left). Good question. Well, you still can try. Here are the ways (although not all the ways):

• Call them Liberals. They like to go by the name Progressives to hide their real agenda.
• Don't use their political-correct labels for things. Use the old un-politically correct names. For example, the Left calls jungles rain forests now. You still the label jungle. Undocumented workers should be called illegal immigrants--the old term, etc.
• Make up funny politically-correct names. For instance, call dead people breathing challenged people.
• When asked about if you support gay marriages say you are always in favor of happy marriages, or
• When asked if you support gay marriages say sure you see nothing wrong with a lesbian marrying a gay guy.
• Ask a liberal if they support group, tri-ads, polygamy, or polyandry marriages. If they don't then accuse them of them being a bigot. After all if you change the definition of marriage then just about anything goes.
• Ask a pro-choice person what he or she thinks of a woman aborting a homosexual baby. Is the woman a homophobe?
• Ask a pro-choice person if a woman can sacrifice herself for her unborn baby? After all isn't that a choice she has?
• Ask an animal rights militant to imagine this scenario: If an endangered predator is to about to kill an endangered prey do you kill the endangered predator to save the endangered prey?
• When asked if you in favor of water-boarding you reply that you have nothing against surfing.
• Tell a liberal that your favorite form of torture is tasers and cattle prods.
• When asked about the death penalty say they should bring back the guillotine.
• Ask a Obama worshiper if Obama can fail. Not that he will or won't.
• Tell someone on the Left who believes in man-made global warming that it is called by the elderly especially AARP. The elderly like it warm you know.
• Tell a gun control fascist that when firing a gun your firing hand should not be shaky. After all you want to hit your target.
• Tell a liberal that you're a militant like our founding fathers were. Then quote Thomas Paine's remark about gov't being an "necessary evil."

If the Liberal looks at you perplexed, gets mad, or calls you names then you have succeeded in your quest.

Miscellaneous Thoughts Part 13

• The difference between a conservative and a liberal is that a conservative throws a life line to a drowning person. A liberal jumps in the water and drowns himself to have empathy with the drowning person.
• You think Barack Obama used a teleprompter to do his vows at his wedding?
• You never want to see an energetic upbeat funeral director.
• Mob rule is like a wildfire. It is unpredictable. Being out of control it can be dangerous even destructive.
• If a polygamist or polyandrist has an affair is he/she really cheating on his/her spouse? I mean couldn't the "cheater" use the excuse he/she was just "test-driving" another spouse? I don't know I am just asking.
• I was watching a show about the Incas on TV. The show said the Incas thought without human sacrafice the sun would stop rising. Isn't that a funny belief?! What a second. Some people think today we can control global warming by sacrificing the free market system. Hmmm...
• If a president or Congressman says a Congressional bill has a time limit and an optional clause in it, read the bill yourself. If it doesn't have either one then it will be whatever is missing. If no time limit then it is eternal. Social Security was supposed to be optional and temporary.
• Gov't should not be requesting people too spend or save for that matter. What the people do with their money legally is none the gov't's business. They do not know individual circumstances.
• The government competing against the private sector is like an elephant competing against an ant. The gov't has all the power and money to make it hard on a business if it wanted too.
• Obamacare in a nutshell: Your health insurance company on steroids. At least if you don't like your health insurance you can drop them and get another. You cannot drop Obamacare. You have no choice but to sign-up. And since it is a gov't pgm it will last forever.

Russia, China, Brazil Push for New Global Currency

From Money News.com (July 7):

ROME -- China, Russia and Brazil will use this week's G8 summit in Italy to push their view that the world needs to start seeking a new global reserve currency as an alternative to the dollar, officials said on Tuesday. [read more]

And Barry Obama nods his head in agreement. Not!? Can you say New World Order? I wonder what will be the motto on the global dollar: In Big Gov't We Trust? Nah, that's too many words.

In other news, Algore said "It is the awareness itself that will drive the change, and one of the ways it will drive the change is through global governnance and global agreements." The awareness Gore is talking about is global warming, er I mean climate change. Isn't that nice.

Suing Doctors under Obamacare

If America has universal health care (God forbid) then that means the doctors and other people in the medical community are now gov't employees because the gov't is now paying their salaries. So, if a surgeon screws up during surgery and you want to sue him you have to go to and only to the US Court of Federal Claims to file a complaint which will cost you by the way $250.

Something to think about especially when doctors will be underpaid, overworked and not having enough tools to do their jobs properly. Not to mention having very little control over their practice. Talk about bedside manner being shot to hell.

Group Warns Obama Administration on Nuclear Deterrent

From NIT.org (July 6):

WASHINGTON -- A think-tank report issued last week warns the Obama administration against rushing into reductions to the U.S. nuclear deterrent in a follow-on agreement with Russia to a major arms control treaty (see GSN, July 1).

The report, U.S. Nuclear Deterrence in the 21st century: Getting it Right, was issued Wednesday by the New Deterrent Working Group, a panel of experts sponsored by the conservative Center for Security Policy.

"What this report asks the administration to do ... is 'Don't get caught up in a moment; don't go for arms control for arms control sake. Think about not only the world today, but of the world tomorrow,'" Paula DeSutter, a working group member who served in the State Department during the Bush administration, said at the document's roll-out event at the National Press Club. [read more]

This report is pretty much a no-brainer. Yea, King Emperor (can't seem to get it right) President Obama is gung-ho to unarm America when the rest of the world is not unarming (like N. Korea). Makes sense to me like dropping a brick on your foot. Here is another quote from the article:

"The administration is rushing to take major, unexplored, high-risk actions" to achieve that goal, Robert Monroe, a former director of the Defense Nuclear Agency, said without elaborating. "It's one thing to have a visionary goal ... but it's quite another to take drastic actions to reach that visionary goal; actions which may well make today's problem's far worse and expose us to much higher risks."

Are you listening Obama? Probably not. He is rushing into disarming America, like he is rushing into universal health care, and global warming mandates, sorry I mean climate change or whatever it is being called nowadays. Both universal health care and climate change mandates will destroy this country's economy. But Obama knows all. Or at least he (and his followers) thinks he does.

The Border Fence Argument

The argument that a border fence is useless because illegal aliens will find a way around it is a weak argument. You can use the same argument about not having a firewall on your computer. After all a hacker will just find a way around it. Or not lock the windows and doors on your house because a burglar will just break in anyway. Come on! Anything is better than nothing. There is no perfect solution.

If a border fence or wall (or even the National Guard on the border) makes it hard for the illegal aliens to come across is good. An obstacle is an obstacle. At least the Cubans have to build a raft or some flotation device to get over to America.

Obamacare Rationing Choices

Under Obamacare the question how will health care be rationed (and it will be rationed)? Here's my idea how different groups of people will stand in line to get their health care (from first to last):

• Obama's family, friends and staff
• Biden's family, friends and staff
• The various secretaries (like Secretary of State) etc. and their staff
• Congress and their staff (always remember the powers that be always take care of themselves first.)
• The Supreme Court
• The elite Left (eg Labor Union bosses, movie stars, etc.)
• Women and minorities*
• Young people*
• Middle aged people*
• Old people*
• The terminally ill*
• Fetuses
• Pets (Canada has health care for pets. PETA may lobby to move pets ahead of fetuses or even ahead of the elderly.)

What this could mean is that more elderly people will be running for Congress, so they can move up the line.

If you are a Liberal (er a Progressive) and are part of the * group, you get to move ahead the line. I don't know what political persuasion fetuses or pets are.

Also, the terms "young", "middle age" and "old" will be defined by a gov't created health board.

Enjoy your health care while it lasts!

Empathetic Supreme Court Judges

Imagine this scenario: An umpire for whatever reason (the reason doesn't matter) calls the same baseball player (and only that player) safe on every call no matter if he is safe or not. Like I said the reason does not matter. The baseball player and umpire could be friends, they could be family, the umpire could have been paid off. The reason does not matter. The umpire is not upholding the rules of the game. Even if the player was having a bad day the umpire has to uphold the rules. The rules make the game fair to both sides.

When a Supreme Court Judge makes a ruling he or she has to follow the laws of the Constitution just like the umpire has to follow the rules of a baseball game. Supreme Court judges cannot create their own laws just like the umpire cannot create rules of the game. That's anarchy. A judge has to treat the parties involved impartially and fairly. Justice is blind after all. He cannot and must not take sides.

When Obama talks about emphatic Supreme Court judges what does he mean? Emphatic to who? Women and minorities? Is that fair? Judges should not let their emotions or personal experiences rules them.

When your a district judge being emphatic could be alright. For instance not letting a terrified child be in the same court of law with its attacker. If this case the guardians of the child could represent the child's interest. Even then a district court judge has to stay within the guidelines of the law.

God and Liberalism

In Dean L. Overman's book A case for the existence of God (2009) he talks about why would an all powerful God allows evil to exist. He gave an analogy of a parent to a child. Why would a good parent allow a child to ride in an automobile? After all the auto may get into an accident and harm or even kill the child. A parent could be overprotective and not allow the child in the car at all. But then this would not be fair to the child. You can expand this analogy to not letting the child cross the street or ride his/her bicycle. Again this would not be fair to the child.

This is what God has done. He has given us free will to decide between good and evil. He also have given us a mind to make (hopefully) wise decisions. To be totally good we would have to have no free will and be completely programmed by God. He wants people to experience life even if it is dangerous.

What's this have to do with the Left? Most on the Left believe in big gov't control. They want the citizens of America to be totally protected by gov't. Not safety-nets or guard rails. Totally regulated. After all to the Left people are like little children who have to be always protected and told what they can and cannot do. I'm not talking about just morals mind you but being dictated in everything in people's life. Therefore the Left cannot understand why a God would not interfere in the life of man to protect him. After all that's what they think government's main role is. To protect mankind in every aspect of his life. Big Gov't = An all-power God. Why need a god when you have big gov't.

Saudi 'Killer Chip' Implant Would Track, Eliminate Undesirables

From Fox News.com (May 15):

German media outlets reported last week that a Saudi inventor's application to patent a "killer chip," as the Swiss tabloids put it, had been denied.

The basic model would consist of a tiny GPS transceiver placed in a capsule and inserted under a person's skin, so that authorities could track him easily.

Model B would have an extra function — a dose of cyanide to remotely kill the wearer without muss or fuss if authorities deemed he'd become a public threat. [read more]

Talk about George Orwell's 1984 on overdrive! Then again this device is what an oppressive gov't (like Iran, N. Korea, Venezuela, etc.) would love to have. And if the Saudi gov't suspects you of being a homosexual they could implant that chip in you. Once they think you're a homosexual--you're dead. Good thing the chip was denied.

On a side note, Venezuela's dictator is making a $14 cellphone for the people of Venezuela. You know because they lack cell phones and he wants to listen in on their conversations. Then again I could be wrong about that.

Oops! Pirates Captured After Threatening Wrong Ship

Fox News.com on May 4 reported that a bunch of Somalia thugs pirates had mistaken a French naval ship for a merchant ship. The French ship hid its identity by sailing in the sun. Then it had its support helicopter fire warning shots at the pirates. The so-called pirates then promptly surrendered.

Gotta love that! I love it when the bad guys screw up. It's too bad the French naval ship did not just sink the three boats but oh well.

IBM's 'Watson' to Take On 'Jeopardy'

From PCMag.com (April 27):

IBM said Monday that it plans to produce "Watson," a computing system designed to parse questions intelligently and respond in the manner in which it was intended.

The goal? To knock off human contestants in "Jeopardy," in much the same way IBM's "Deep Blue" computer beat Garry Kasparov in chess.

Watson will be forced to interpret the question, process puns and other word games, search through its database and determine the correct answer, all within less than a second -- the reaction time of "Jeopardy" players. The machine will not be connected to the Internet, but will have to parse its own database of content. [read more]

Interesting. If this works it will be a big milestone for AI.

IBM could write a similar program for the "Wheel of Fortune" game although a little bit trickier. They could program the computer to know the frequency count of letters and use its knowledge base to "guess" the phrase. The tricky part is that IBM would have to build a robot to spin the wheel or have a person do it.

One of these days computers are going to take over tech support. The electric companies already has automated systems that respond to your voice commands over the phone. At least mine does.

The DREAM Act in the 111 Congress

The DREAM Act has been reintroduced in both the House (H.R. 1751, by Rep. Howard Berman (D-CA)) and the Senate (S. 729, by Sen. Dick Durban (D-IL). Several cosponsors of the legislation have referred to the DREAM Act as a "narrow" proposal to deal only with the children brought here illegally by their illegal-alien parents. Unfortunately, the facts belie that claim. Here are the essentials of what the bills would do:

• They retroactively repeal the federal ban on in-state tuition for illegal aliens, so individual states would decide whether to grant this subsidy to illegal aliens at the expense of U.S. citizens and legal residents.
• They require DHS to award amnesty to every illegal alien claiming to meet minimal criteria: 1) present in the U.S. for the last five years; 2) a U.S. high school diploma or GED, or admitted to a U.S. institution of higher learning; and 3) of good moral character with no more than 2 misdemeanor convictions.
  • The Senate version also requires that amnesty applicants be under 35 years of age and not be subject to a final order of removal or exclusion.
  • Neither version requires specific documentation or other proof that amnesty applicants actually meet these minimal criteria.
• Once an alien files an amnesty application, he or she cannot be removed from the United States for any reason until the application is fully processed and a final decision to grant or deny amnesty has been made.
• All amnesty applications go to the front of the line for processing, thus bypassing millions of people around the world who have applied to come to the United States the right way.
• In order to deny any amnesty application, the federal government has the burden of proving an illegal alien's ineligibility for amnesty.
• There are no numerical limits to the amnesty and there's no end date for the application process.
• Amnestied aliens are required to complete two years of college or military service during their first six years of legal residence, but DHS can waive the requirement or grant additional time to comply for those who do not.
• At the end of the six years, amnestied aliens can apply for citizenship and petition to bring their extended relativesóincluding the parents who brought them here illegallyóto the United States.
• Amnesty beneficiaries are eligible for certain federal student loans and work-study programs.

Hat tip to NumbersUSA.com for this info. Notice there is nothing in this bill about border control. With the Swine Flu about to be pandemic according to the WHO it is now more important to get control of the border. Who knows who is crossing the border with that disease or any other disease. Not to mention drug gangs and terrorists that could cross over too. No, just about every politician is catering to the Hispanics like they want diseased people or dangerous people in their town. It's about safety and law and order.

The Home Builder-Economy Analogy

The following analogy is taken from Meltdown (2009) by Thomas E. Woods Jr. The author says this a summary of what the Austrian theory says:

Imagine a home-builder who believes he has 20% more bricks than he actually has. He will build a different kind of house than he would if he had an accurate count of his brick supply. (Assume he can't buy any more.) The dimensions will be different. The style may even be different. And the longer he goes without realizing his error, the worse the eventual reckoning will be. If he finds out his error, only at the very end, he'll have to tear down the whole (incomplete) house, and all those resources and labor time will have been squandered. Society will be that much the poorer.

The economy is like the home builder. Forcing interest rates lower than the free market would have set them makes economic actors act as if more saved resources exist than actually do. Some portion of their new investment is malinvestment---investment in lines that would have sense if the saved resources existed to sustain and complete them, but which do not make sense in light of current resource availability.

An adept analogy. Basically information affects what your actions are. Incorrect information or beliefs will take you down the wrong path.

Here is what the author says should be done about the current economic crises:

• Let the big companies go bankrupt. It's capital equipment doesn't disappear. Someone will come along and buy them and run the business.
• Abolish Fannie and Freddie. These are zombie companies according to the author.
• Stop the bailouts and cut gov't spending.
• End gov't manipulation of money.
• Let's have a debate about whether the Federal Reserve (Fed) is helping or hurting the economy.
• The Fed should abolish its Term Auction Facilities and return to making loans at its discount window only to its traditional customers. Interest rates should be allowed to float.
• End the monopoly money.

Good ideas. I like the zombie term for Fannie and Freddie. Basically they are companies run by the gov't. In other words they are in between a free-market company and a gov't agency. Weird. I think the Fed does more harm than good, because there is a lot of power to control the economy. And power corrupts. This is the same reason I am anxious about having a National Sales Tax--it would allow the gov't too much power to control how much you save and spend.

N. Korea Threatens S. Korea

From UPI.com:

SEOUL, April 22 (UPI) -- North Korea warned South Korea against joining a U.S.-led anti-proliferation program during talks Wednesday in Kaesong, a North Korea border city.

The North Korean delegation at the meeting said South Korea's joining of the Proliferation Security Initiative would lead to an inter-Korean "confrontation," officials told the South Korean news agency Yonhap.

South Korea's Unification Ministry spokesman Kim Ho-nyon confirmed the issue was raised. Previously, Pyongyang has warned joining the anti-proliferation campaign would be considered a "declaration of war." South Korea said it still intends to join the initiative. [read more]

Scary. Add to this N. Korea resumes its nuclear operations and they tested a missile that could reach Hawaii. Then N. Korea warns of a second nuclear test. This dangerous N. Korean dictator has to be taken seriously.

The question is if a war happens between the two Koreas will Japan get involved and be an ally with S. Korea. Japan feels threatened by that crazy dictator of N. Korea too. Japan not too long was thinking about what their constitution would allow to protect itself from N. Korea.

Chinese spies may have put chips in US planes

From India Times.com (April 17):

WASHINGTON: The Chinese cyber spies have penetrated so deep into the US system — ranging from its secure defence network, banking system, electricity grid to putting spy chips into its defence planes — that it can cause serious damage to the US any time, a top US official on counter-intelligence has said.

“Chinese penetrations of unclassified DoD networks have also been widely reported. Those are more sophisticated, though hardly state of the art,” said National Counterintelligence Executive, Joel Brenner, at the Austin University Texas last week, according to a transcript made available on Wednesday. [read more]

And The Great Appeaser Obama administration is worried about right-wing extremist groups (you know the ones who support third-party candidates) doing terrorist attacks? Geez.

Israel Preparing for Attack on Iran, Officials Say

From NTI.org (April 20):

The Israeli military is increasing its readiness to conduct air strikes on nuclear sites across Iran, should the new government in Jerusalem decide such action is necessary, the London Times reported Saturday (see GSN, April 17).

"Israel wants to know that if its forces were given the green light, they could strike at Iran in a matter of days, even hours," a high-level defense official said. "They are making preparations on every level for this eventuality. The message to Iran is that the threat is not just words." [read more]

Israel as a nation has a right to self-preservation. I don't blame them for preparing for an attack. What you do if you lived next to a crazy, dangerous dictator who wants to see your nation destroyed?

If Israel defended itself I am afraid that other nations would say the attack was unwarranted and just wanted to start a war. Then these countries would attack Israel. Even the Bible states this in so many words:

The Russian leader then "devise an evil plan" and marshal Iran, Libya, and these other countries to form a military coalition to surround Israel and try to destroy her (Ezekiel 38:10)

Thoughts and Stats on Guns

First here are some stats on gun laws from a Wikipedia article:

• New Jersey adopted what sponsors described as "the most stringent gun law" in the nation in 1966; two years later, the murder rate was up 46% and the reported robbery rate had nearly doubled.
• In 1968, Hawaii imposed a series of increasingly harsh measures, and its murder rate tripled from a low of 2.4 per 100,000 in 1968 to 7.2 by 1977.
• In 1976, Washington, D.C., enacted one of the most restrictive gun control laws in the nation. Since then, the city's murder rate has risen 134% while the national murder rate has dropped 2%.
• Among the 15 states with the highest homicide rates, 10 have restrictive or very restrictive gun laws.

And here are some gun stats around the world:

• Violent crime accelerated in Jamaica after handguns were heavily restricted and a special Gun Court established.
• While having a large amount of civilian owned guns, Norway has a low gun crime rate.

And here are some things to think about:

• OJ Simpson, Lizzy Borden (the OJ Simpson of her time--she wasn't convicted either) and the killer of the Moore family in Villisca, Iowa in 1912 never used guns in the commission of their crime. Simpson used a knife, Borden used an axe, and the killer of the Moore family who never was caught also used an axe.
• Most serial killers (like Jack the Ripper) don't use guns when they kill. If memory serves me right the only serial killer to use a gun was Son of Sam.
• Schools that put up signs that read "no guns allowed" will not stop a crazy nut with a gun. It's like sending a signal to all the unbalanced killers--come on inside we are unarmed.

I respect anyone who owns a gun. Our founding fathers put the right to bear arms in the Bill of Rights because they were afraid of an oppressive gov't. Remember for a dictator to keep the population oppressed all he needs to do is control the press & keep everyone illiterate, make everyone poor, and ban all firearms. If the Jews during Hitler's time had guns maybe there wouldn't have been a holocaust.

Earth Day

This being Earth Day I would like to share some interesting environmental facts I learned. The Economic Times.com website (April 18) reports that:

SYDNEY: New analysis has indicated that contrary to the belief that there is large-scale melting of ice over most of Antarctica, ice is actually expanding in a large portion of the continent. [read more]

And from the Scientific American.com website:

California regulators, trying to assess the true environmental cost of corn ethanol, are poised to declare that the biofuel cannot help the state reduce global warming.

As they see it, corn is no better – and might be worse – than petroleum when total greenhouse gas emissions are considered. [read more]

Not mentioned in the article above is that corn-based ethanol produces as a by product in automobiles is formaldehyde (embalming fluid) and acetaldehyde! Isn't that nice?

Did you know that the co-founder of Earth Day (Ira Einhorn) murdered his girlfriend and put the body in a trunk he kept in his apartment? It's true. Also, the Unabomber and Son of Sam killer were environmentalists.

What? Were you expecting Earth Day advice? Okay, here they are:

• Put on some green clothing in honor of Earth Day. Wait a sec. I'm thinking of Saint Patrick's Day. Oh, I know. Go wear some recyclable earthy clothes. You know clothes that have natural patterns like leaves, flowers, squirrels, acorns, etc.
• Go drive a SUV to a natural park and enjoy the outdoors.
• Go outside and kill a deer. Just be sure not to insult it. They have feelings you know. I better not see you torture it. Remember to tenderize it after killing it. It makes it tasty.
• Plant a tree. They make good baseball bats and furniture.
• Buy one of those mercury-filled GE compact light bulbs. Just don't drop it. It might break and then you'll breathe in those toxic mercury vapors. Be sure to follow EPA guidelines when you clean up the mess. Your supposed to recycle those light bulbs by the way when they stop working. I've seen on TV that Apple Computers stopped using mercury in their laptops. Also, a lot of countries have banned mercury used in medical thermometers. Though they are still used in meteorological thermometers. But don't let that stop you. Remember you are saving the environment.
• Go hug a tree. Just be sure it isn't poison oak.
• Go hug a polar bear like that woman in Germany at a Berlin zoo tried to do. She's got no brains spunk!
• Pet a porcupine.
• Finally, as citizens of earth we must do our part in controlling the magnetic fields of earth, the solar activity of the sun, the tilt of the earth, volcanoes, and cloud cover. After all these effect global warming er I mean climate change.

How's that? Happy Earth Day everyone!

Mitigating Factors in Global Warming and Weather Patterns

Here is a list of factors in global warming and weather in general:

1. CO₂ uptake by plants
2. CO₂ release of plants (decomposition)
3. Likelihood of methane release from permafrost and ocean sediments due to warming
4. Temperature influences on the ability of the ocean to sequester CO₂
5. How the atmospheric particles interfere with sunlight reaching earth
6. How clouds effect daytime and nighttime temperatures
7. What effects cloud formation (including atmosphere particles)
8. Solar cycles (sunspots, etc.)
9. Reflectivity of ice versus ground and changes in earth's ice coverage over time
10. Impact of melting ice on ocean salinity and resultant changes in ocean currents
11. Volcanic activity
12. Shorter-term weather oscillation data (La Nina, El Nino)
13. Tilt and orbit of the earth

Note everything in bold face mankind can not make and can not control. Especially, items 8), 11), and 13). Even the non-bold face items will be hard to control.

Source: Lies, Damned Lies, and Science (2009) by Sherry Seethaler.

Talking with the "Moderate" Taliban

The Obama administration believes that it can talk with "moderate" members of the Taliban. Really? Are they going to have seances? Because most moderate Islamofascists are dead. Or too scared to talk. Next to killing Americans and Jews, moderate Muslims are next on the list to kill. Especially ones who are apostates--who became non-Muslim.

In his book The Case for Democracy. (2006), Natan Sharansky talks about three groups of people in an oppressive or what he calls a fear society: true believers who believe in the official ideology of the society; dissidents who are ready to challenge, to speak openly, and to be punished for it; and double-thinkers.

When the Soviet Union existed dissents were sent to jail or were sent to "re-education" camps to become true believers. This where the term to be "politically correct" comes from. Natan Sharansky was a dissident and he was sent to jail. In the Taliban, Al Quada, Hamas, etc. they do not bother to re-educate you--they just kill you.

Of the three, I believe double-thinkers has the most members. A double-thinker is someone who is not a true believer but is too afraid to speak openly against the fear society. I believe this the group that Hillary was referring too. The trouble is to turn them into a dissident you have to get them away from the fear society, make them a brave dissident, and re-locate them back into the society. Good luck on that one. If double-thinkers were brave to begin with they wouldn't be double-thinkers but dissenters. Not that double-thinkers are cowards, but it is hard to be brave in an oppressive society. Especially when you could lose your life.

Finding moderate Taliban is going to be really hard. You be better off killing the true believers then the moderate Muslims (double-thinkers) can be themselves.

Tax Day

Today is the day where Americans gamble their income away. Not gambling at a casino but sending a check to the IRS. Who knows where it goes after that. You might as well throw your money out of a helicopter. You have a better chance of knowing where that money is going.

When a parasite lives off a host it takes enough food from the host without killing it. Because if the host dies the parasite dies. Gov't might take a lesson from the parasite. Don't kill off the private sector. The income stops if it does.

Here are some interesting notes about taxes:

• To get the Great Pyramid built, the Pharaoh King Khufu told anyone who helped build the pyramid they would have to the option not to pay any taxes while building the pyramid. Or they could get a wage. Historians are debating which it was. Makes you wonder what the ancient Egyptians taxes were. [read more]
• Quran 9:29, "Fight those who do not believe until they all surrender, paying the protective tax in submission." Sounds like Mohammad was a gangster. A protective tax? Isn't that extortion?
• Legend has it that Lady Godiva rode naked on her horse to protest her husband's oppressive taxes. Evidently just talking to him did no good. Even then men and women had communication problems.
• Before the Revolutionary War, the colonial government had only a limited need for revenue, while each of the colonies had greater responsibilities and thus greater revenue needs, which they met with different types of taxes. Those were called the good old days. [read more]

And here is some interesting quotes about taxes (these people sound like militia men especially that Heinlein dude, and that Paine guy):

• He who builds a better mousetrap these days runs into material shortages, patent-infringement suits, work stoppages, collusive bidding, discount discrimination--and taxes. -- H. E. Martz
• If you make any money, the government shoves you in the creek once a year with it in your pockets, and all that don't get wet you can keep. -- Will Rogers
• When there's a single thief, it's robbery. When there are a thousand thieves, it's taxation. -- Vanya Cohen
• Be wary of strong drink. It can make you shoot at tax collectors... and miss. -- Robert Heinlein
• What at first was plunder assumed the softer name of revenue. -- Thomas Paine
• We are told that this is an odious and unpopular tax. I never knew a tax that was not odious and unpopular with the people who paid it. -- John Sherman
• Intaxication: Euphoria at getting a refund from the IRS, which lasts until you realize it was your money to start with. -- Author unknown, from a Washington Post word contest

You can also read my blog from 2007 on taxes. It discusses the Flat Tax and the Fair Tax + some other stuff.

The ACLU Agenda

I am for socialism, disarmament, and ultimately for abolishing the state itself as an instrument of violence and compulsion. I seek social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class, and sole control by those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal. --- ACLU founder Roger Baldwin

• All legal prohibitions on the distributions of obscene material--including child pornography--are unconstitutional.
• Pornographic outlets can locate wherever they please--whether next to churches or day-care centers or near residential neighborhoods.
• Tax-funded libraries should not restrict access of children to pornography on the Internet.
• Parents should have no legal recourse when it comes to shielding their children from exposure to hard-core pornography.
• The military cannot enforce even the most basic codes of conduct--such as discipline for disrespectful behavior toward a superior officer.
• The military cannot stop open displays of homosexual behavior within its ranks.
• Parents cannot limit their children's exposure to, or participation in public school classes and assemblies, any topic--except Orthodox Jewish or Christian teachings---that violates the family's core religious and moral beliefs.
• Public schools cannot observe recognized religious, historical, and cultural holidays such as Christmas, Easter, or Hanukkah, despite hundreds of years of American tradition.
• All legislative, military, and prison chaplaincy programs should be abolished.
• All criminal and civil laws that prohibit polygamy and same-sex "marriage" should be done away with.

Scary, but true. An interesting book. Source: The ACLU vs. America by Alan Sears and Craig Osten. (2005)

War on Terror and the Politically Correct

It seems that the politically correct crowd has run amok again. The "War on Terror" phrase has been replaced with "Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO)." Huh? That makes no sense. What freakin' bureaucrat thought that up? Here's a Wikapedia definition of the word "contingency":

In philosophy and logic, contingency is the status of propositions that are not necessarily true or necessarily false. [read more]

Is that helpful? In other words, the phrase OCO is just doublespeak. Someone thought "War on Terror" was offensive to the Islamofascists (oh, I am sorry did I offend them?) Then somebody on Hannity thought "War on Terror" was too general. Fine, I can maybe see that point. So, here are my suggestions:

• War on Islamic Terrorists
• War on Militant Jihadists
• Fight against Islamic Fascism

Oops! I used the word "war." I'm bad. That same person who said "War on Terror" was too general, and thought it should be changed to "War on Al Queada." That's too narrow. It does not include any other Islamofascist group (like the Wahabbists, Hamas, etc.), and it does not include any future ones either.

Then you have the words "enemy combatant" removed from military documents. Come on! Okay, fine. Here are my suggestions for those words:

• Passionate Muslims with Tendencies to Explode
• Muslims with Explosive Personalities
• Rival Warrior
• Muslims who Disagree with Swords

Okay, I was having a little fun with terms.

Here's the overlooked point. The militant jihadists don't care what we call them. It's just war to them. Being nice too them won't make them change. It just makes you dead. It's not like they are having a bad day or being moody. This is their culture. It's what they do.

Oh did you hear? The Freedom Tower is being now called "One World Trade Center." Isn't that just peachy? Like the Islamofascists are offended by the word "Freedom." Then again maybe they are. But I don't think the words "One World" would make them ecstatic. Probably, "Islamic Trade Center" would be better.

Is me or is the words "One World" a little bit spooky? As in One World Government? Nah, I am just being paranoid.

AIG and the AIC

If you look at the bar graph on the Open Secrets website you will see that up to the year 2000, AIG gave both political parties in the Arrogant Incompetent Congress (AIC) equally. This makes sense because if both parties more or less share power equally a corporation wants to hedge its bet. Only in the year 2002 did AIG gave more money to the Republicans than to the Dems. After that year only the Dems got more bribes--er I mean contributions more than Republicans.

Who got the contributions? In 2008 including the House and Senate, 54 Dems got contributions, and 38 Republicans got contributions. Here are some of the people that got bribes contributions from most to least:

Barack "the Messiah" Obama	$104,332
Chris Dodd	$103,900
John McCain	$59,499
Hillary Clinton	$37,965
Mitt Romney	$20,850
Joseph "Hair plugs" Biden	$19,975
Rudolph Giuliani	$13,200
Dick "Turban" Durbin	$11,000
Charles Rangel	$9,000
John Edwards	$7,850

Some of the top receivers were people in the presidential race. Again, AIG was hedging their bets. If the AIC is going to make AIG execs return their bonuses, shouldn't any person on the incomplete list above return their money they got from AIG? Makes sense to me.

The Political Observations of Will Rogers

Will Rogers was a well-loved political humorous in the 1920's. Here is a sample of his observations. All these observations come from a book called The Best of Will Rogers by Bryan Sterling (1979):

• The bad part about our whole structure of paying our congressmen is that we name a sum and give 'em all the same, regardless of ability. No other business in the world has a fixed sum to pay all their employees the same salary. If some efficiency expert would work out a scheme where each one would be paid according to his ability, we would save a lot of money.
• If we could just send the same bunch of men to Washington for the good of the nation, and not for political reasons, we could have the most perfect government in the world.
• This new senator says he is going to use "common sense" in the senate. That's what they all say when they start in. But then, if nobody don't understand you, why, you naturally have to switch.
• We all joke about congress but we can't improve on them. Have you noticed that no matter whom we elect, he is just as bad as the one he replaces?
• Politics and self-preservation must come first, never mind the majority of the people in the U. S. A legislator's thoughts are naturally on his next term more than on his country.
• Never blame a legislative body for not doing something. When they do nothing, they don't hurt anybody. When they do something is when they become dangerous.
• Senators are a never-ending source of amusement, amazement, and discouragement.
• A president only tells congress what they should do. Lobbyists tell 'em what they will do.
• A politician is just like a pickpocket; it's almost impossible to get one to reform.
• Don't take politics serious, it's just another American racket.
• What this country needs is more working men, and fewer politicians.
• In 1612 some wise guy decided that he would like to live off the other Virginians instead of off the forest, so they called him a politician.
• There is very little dignity, very little sportsmanship, or very little anything in politics. It's only: Get the Job and Hold It!

What he said back then is still rings true today. For more quotations from Will Rogers you can go to BrainyQuote.com and The Quotations Page.com.

Robot achieves scientific first

From FT.com (April 2):

A laboratory robot called Adam has been hailed as the first machine in history to have discovered new scientific knowledge independently of its human creators.

Adam formed a hypothesis on the genetics of bakers’ yeast and carried out experiments to test its predictions, without intervention from its makers at Aberystwyth University.

The result was a series of “simple but useful” discoveries, confirmed by human scientists, about the gene coding for yeast enzymes. The research is published in the journal Science. [read more]

There was an AI program called Bacon written in 1987 by two computer scientists (Patrick Langler and Gary Bradshaw) that made scientific discoveries using experimental data.

Evidently, the chief creator who made the robots must have a god-complex: He named the robots Adam and Eve. He says: "Adam is a prototype. Eve is better designed and more elegant." Women around the world smile.

Black Cars are Banned

At least in California if regulators get their way. From Wards Auto.com (Mar. 24):

If California regulators get their way, auto makers may soon be forced to rewrite a cliché from the Ford Model T era and start telling customers they can have any color they want as long as it isn’t black.

Some darker hues will be available in place of black, but right now they are identified internally at paint suppliers with names such as “mud-puddle brown” and are truly ugly substitutes for today’s rich ebony hues. [read more]

The regulators want to ban the color black on automobiles because they want to decrease "man-made" global warming. Black colored cars are warmer in the interior in the summertime than white color cars because black colored cars absorb more heat than white color cars (scientifically that is true). Therefore when driving an automobile in the summertime with a black finish you will put your air conditioner more often than with a white color car so the theory goes. Putting on your air conditioner makes your car use more gas. You see where this is going hopefully.

Here's a question: How much more gasoline is used with black colored cars verses light colored cars? That needs to be answered. Also, the sun's rays come through the windows too increasing the interior temperature (probably more than any black paint). This is the greenhouse effect. That factor needs to be eliminated, not to mention the heat of the engine. So those two factors need to be controlled to get an accurate reading.

There is another issue: On cold days driving a black car would be nice because you would want the interior to be warm and would never use the air conditioner. I know California probably does not have many cold days, but if this stupid measure gets implemented in other states (17 other states follow California's regulations according to the article) that do have cold weather people will get upset. They might get upset anyway if their color options are limited.

Finally, what about houses that use black colored roofs? Wouldn't their interiors be warmer than lighter colored roofs? Thus using more air conditioning increasing "man-made" global warming? Something more to be controlled.

By the way, this is not an April Fool's joke. I wish it were, but it's not. The real joke is those regulators. But nobody will be laughing.

U.S. bill seeks to rescue faltering newspapers

From Reuters.com (March 24):

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - With many U.S. newspapers struggling to survive, a Democratic senator on Tuesday introduced a bill to help them by allowing newspaper companies to restructure as nonprofits with a variety of tax breaks.

Under this arrangement, newspapers would still be free to report on all issues, including political campaigns. But they would be prohibited from making political endorsements.

Advertising and subscription revenue would be tax exempt, and contributions to support news coverage or operations could be tax deductible. [read more]

Ah, those poor, poor newspapers. It seems the gov't is bailing out every business now--which is what newspapers are. Could it be that people are getting their news online at various news sites for free like I do? If you read one newspaper you are limiting yourself news wise. Newspapers are not making money because they are not getting subscribers and advertisers. Mainly subscribers because advertisers will only advertise if there are enough subscribers to the paper. There has to be someone to see the advertisement or else the ad does not work. Newspapers can do what the New York Times did--find someone to borrow from. New York Times found a wealthy Mexican investor to make it stay afloat. No negative stories about him I guess.

As for the part they will be prohibited from making political endorsements--they'll get around that. They can do that by running stories positive for a politician and throw one or two stories that are negative against the politician for good measure and bury them in the back pages. Or they can have a reporter do a story about a politician and slam him/her then the paper can say the reporter's view is not our own.

Note that newspapers can't endorse a politician but the bill doesn't say anything about endorsing an issue like gun control, etc. I would rather have newspapers be factually accurate as possible. That's more important to me. Being bias one way or another just goes along with the territory.

Again this is not Congress' responsibility. It might even violate the Freedom of the Press right. What is next? Having TV news go nonprofit? NBC News ratings aren't very good. If that happens then Fox News could go nonprofit too. Wouldn't that make the Left happy. I wonder if the bill passes how many newspapers will be nonprofit and have the gov't tell them what they can and can't do.

Geithner Asks Congress for Broad Power to Seize Firms

From Washington Post.com (March 24):

Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner [tax cheat] today told Congress the administration will seek unprecedented power to seize non-bank financial companies whose collapse could jeopardize the economy, a move Geithner said would have allowed the government to bail out insurance giant American International Group at a far lower cost to taxpayers. The government at present has the authority to seize only banks. [Darn! That's not enough power! Obama thinks to himself.] [read more]

Yes we can take over most of the economy! Can you say Hugo Chavez? I don't hear about people flocking to Venezuela (other than far-left celebrities) since Chavez got into power. Let's call this broad power what it is (even though Dems don't want to admit it): Socialism. What is the exit strategy? When does the gov't takeovers stop?

The Banking Queen, Barney Frank says we need a system like FDIC for all financial services. Swell. Who's next? The insurance companies? (Wait a second. I forget they are villains.) The pharmaceutical companies? Again the villains. Oil companies? Nope. Then again the Left could take over those companies and them into their image. Makes you feel all warm and fuzzy don't it? Not that I want any of those companies to be bailed out. I don't want any company to have special treatment from the gov't. It is not their responsibility.

I noticed in the video that the wacky far-left group Code Pink was in the background with their signs. How sweet. You can always count on them to get attention.

Democrat senator trying to stop clean power effort

From One News Now.com (3/21):

Nineteen companies have submitted applications to build solar or wind facilities on a parcel of 500,000 desert acres, but Sen. Dianne Feinstein said Friday such development would violate the spirit of what conservationists had intended when they donated much of the land to the public.

Feinstein said Friday she intends to push legislation that would turn the land into a national monument, which would allow for existing uses to continue while preventing future development. [more]

So much for alternative energy. Then again the Dems are in the back pocket of the envirofascists. According to the article this land is for benefit of the public, but isn't clean energy benefiting the public too?

I always see environmentalists put on TV ads about solar energy, but when a company actually tries to develop solar energy a bonehead senator shuts it down. Don't make sense. Conservationists say solar and wind technology would hurt the desert tortoise. I don't see how. The desert is already a harsh place. I would think the tortoise has more important things to worry about like predators. Heck you cannot even touch or harass (don't call a tortoise "slow poke"--it hurts their feelings) a desert tortoise or you'll get in trouble.

Feinstein said there are other deserts for solar and wind facilities. Sure right until those deserts are off limits too.

Having Veterans Pay For Their Wounds

The American Legion was ticked (and that's an understatement) that Obama was thinking about having veterans pay (or their insurance companies pay) out their pocket for their injures incurred during service of their country. Obama said he thought this would save money. Not bailing out failed companies would save money. Then he thought let Medicare pay for their injures. Yea, that is a brilliant idea. Not! Nonetheless. Now he has changed his mine because of the outrage of the American Legion and most probably most of the American people. I am outrage to say the least. Obama is the troops Commander in Chief. That thought should not even be in his mind. Veterans put their lives on the line in service of their country. The president (and yes even the Congress) should be looking out the troops and veterans best interests. Paying for their injures is the least the gov't can do our veterans. I guess we now know what Obama's priorities are.

McCain had a good idea. He said let the veterans pick their own doctors and then the gov't would reimburse the doctors.

Think about this issue in this way. The veterans and active troops work for the gov't. The gov't is the employer. Any injury an employee has on-the-job should be payed by the employer. No different for the gov't. It's that simple.

Coatings that 'self-heal' in sun

From BBC News (March 12):

Scientists have devised a coating that when scratched heals itself upon exposure to sunlight.

The secret of the material lies in using molecules made from chitosan, which is derived from the shells of crabs and other crustaceans.

In the event of a scratch, ultraviolet light drives a chemical reaction that patches the damage. [more]

The article said the coating works on car paint. Just imagine the possibilities. Self-healing wallpaper, sunglasses, Saran rap, upholstery, etc. It is almost as if it's alive like skin.

The Rules of the Game

These are UN diplomacy rules as told by Michael Soussan in his 2008 book: Backstabbing for Beginners. My Crash Course in International Diplomacy.

1. The truth in not a matter of fact, it is a product of consensus.
2. Never get stuck with the buck.
3. The assistant to your enemy is your friend.
4. Even the paranoid have enemies.
5. Always be more polite than your enemy.

The first rule could fit the climate change alarmists. It is no wonder the UN is so screwed up.

Virtual Reality Headset

From DailyMail.co.uk (March 5):

A virtual reality helmet that recreates the sights, smells, sounds and even tastes of far-flung destinations has been devised by British scientists.

The device will allow users a life-like experience of places such as Kenya's Masai Mara while sitting on their sofa.

They can also enjoy the smell of flowers in an Alpine meadow or feel the heat of the Caribbean sun on their face. [more]

Cool! This is the first time, according to the article, the manufacturer was able to simulate smells in a VR device. I just hope the manufacturer doesn't simulate toxic smells like smoke. Firemen who using the helmet don't need to smell smoke. They might need to know if it is in a building but not need to smell it. Also you don't want the other inputs of the helmet to harm the user either. This is just common sense.

It would be a good idea if the user was allowed to control the input of the helmet. That is to allow the user to turn off the sense of smell or hearing or whatever.

If it comes to a point that VR is indistinguishable between real life and virtual life there should be a "VR" symbol in the simulation so the user can know what is real and what is not.

59% Still Believe Government Is the Problem

From Rasmussen Reports.com (February 26):

In early October, as the meltdown of the financial industry gained momentum following the collapse of Lehman Brothers, a Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 59% of U.S. voters agreed with Ronald Reagan that “government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.” [more]

To a conservative like me this makes intuitive sense, and to over 50% of the American people it makes sense too. Gov't can only make things worse by getting in the way of the economy. You can't run an economy from the top down. There are too many variables too keep track of--namely people. Ask any person in the social sciences. Predicting what people will do is tricky. That is why there are so many schools of thought in psychology.

Then there is the issue of power. As Lord Byron put it succinctly long ago: Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. He was right back then, and is still right today. People are imperfect. Even if they intend to do good, they can screw up and still do bad. Multiply that by 10 for gov't. Utopia on earth is a myth.

There is a reason America has the Bill of Rights. It is to protect America from its own gov't--not the other way around. The Founding Fathers knew about gov't who had absolute power over its citizens and abused that power. Thomas Paine had it exactly right when he said: "Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one." Bingo.

Along the same line of thinking: 73% Trust Judgment of People More Than Politicians. It's too bad the Left don't trust the judgment of people. They are just too obsessed with gaining power and holding on to it.

Japanese: U.N. Man-Made Global Warming Theory Like 'Ancient Astrology'

From Newxmax.com ( February 25, 2009):

Japanese scientists have made a dramatic break with the United Nations’ view on man-made global warming with a report asserting that “this hypothesis has been substituted for truth.”

Three of the five researchers involved in the report disagree with the view of the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that recent warming is due primarily to industrial emissions of greenhouse gases, and say it is instead driven by natural cycles.

Among the points made in the report:

• CO2 emissions began to increase significantly after 1946 and are still rising. Therefore, according to the IPCC, global atmospheric temperatures should continue to increase. However, temperatures stopped increasing in 2001.
• The global temperature increase up to today is primarily a recovery from the “Little Ice Age” that earth experienced from 1400 to 1800. This rise peaked in 2000.
• Global warming and the “halting of the temperature rise are related to solar activity.

[more]

Darn those Japanese global warming denyiers and their report! Oh, I'm sorry it's not "global warming" anymore--that's the old term. It's now called "climate change" because after all the world is getting colder. Climate change, huh. Isn't climate change just another name for the seasons?

In the article it said, "since 2003, the number of global warming lobbyists has risen by more than 300 percent." Wow! That's a lot of lobbyists. But that what happens when money influences science--science always loses. And since science is about discovering the truth--the truth looses out too. I know scientists have to make a living, but there is a line that should never be crossed. And that line is distorting or making up facts to fit a theory. If a scientist does that then any theory he devised cannot be trusted. He has ruined his reputation.