Patients' medical records go online without consent

From Telegraph.co.uk (March 9):

Patients’ confidential medical records are being placed on a controversial NHS database without their knowledge, doctors’ leaders have warned.

Those who do not wish to have their details on the £11 billion [$16.47 billion] computer system are supposed to be able to opt out by informing health authorities.

But doctors have accused the [British] Government of rushing the project through, meaning that patients have had their details uploaded to the database before they have had a chance to object.

The scheme, one of the largest of its kind in the world, will eventually hold the private records of more than 50 million patients. [read more]

The article goes to say the database is not hacker proof. What else is new. I read somewhere that 1 in 3 businesses in the US don't use firewalls. It's probably worse than that for the gov't.

That kind of database would eventually come to America if ObamaCare is passed.

A Weak Argument for Making Health Care Mandatory

A guest on The O'Riley Factor made this argument to Bill O'Reilly about why Americans should be forced to purchase health insurance. Actually, more likely you'll have three choices: purchase health insurance, pay a fine if you don't, or go to jail. That's the choices in the House bill. What might happen is if you don't purchase health insurance is that the gov't will just deduct the fine from your bank account without your permission. I mean if they are going to make you pay for health insurance they could just as easily make you pay for the fine if you don't. The gov't will get their money from one way or another. The Congress will not have to pay any fine. They will be allowed to opt out of their own system. It's too bad Congress don't extend that courtesy to the rest of America. But I digress...

The argument the guest used is this: When you live in a city or town you pay taxes for use of the police department or fire department even when you may never need them. The argument is weak because if you are renting an apartment then you don't pay any property taxes. Or if you are just visiting you don't pay property taxes. The renter and the visitor may actually have the need of both departments. If the city is using some sort of sales tax then the citizen could buy outside the city like online to avoid the sales tax. Or if a citizen gets too fed up with the taxes he can move to somewhere else. If you have mandatory health insurance where do you go to escape that? Yes, both are required in both scenarios but one scenario you have even less choices. 

One other point about the argument. Comparing the fire department and police department to ObamaCare is an insult to the departments. At least firemen and the police work well when allowed to do their jobs. I don't think you can say that about any universal health care. Also, I don't believe there is any person on the Left that has exempt themselves from paying property taxes where they live. 

Iran, North Korea Seen Collaborating on Rocket Launchpad

From NTI.org (March 8):

Iran appears to have worked with North Korea in preparing a new rocket launchpad under construction east of Tehran, an independent defense analysis firm asserted Friday (see GSN, June 12, 2009).

Iran seems poised to do additional work on the launch site, located near the city of Semnan, the group IHS Jane's stated. With about 30 feet in additional scaffolding, the facility could be used for the Middle Eastern nation's recently announced Simorgh space launch vehicle, Agence France-Presse quoted the organization as saying.

"The development of the Semnan facility and the Simorgh SLV both demonstrate the likelihood of collaboration with North Korea in Iran's missile program," the group said. "The platforms seen on the new gantry tower resemble those seen on the gantry tower at North Korea's new launchpad at Tongchang. A drainage pit [560 feet] directly in front of the pad also mirrors one at Pyongyang's new west-coast launch site. [read more]

Iran and N. Korea sure aren't intimidated by Obama that's for sure. When Reagan was president countries feared and respected him. Not with this administration sadly.

The article goes on to say that Iran on Sunday started building a new type of cruise missile that could eliminate objects as heavy as 3,000 tons. Nice. To put that amount of tons in perspective, that's almost the same weight of the Titanic.

Terrorists Could Use Drones, Expert Says

From NTI.org (March 3):

No fewer than 40 nations are seeking to develop or acquire unmanned aerial vehicles [(UAVs)], which raises the specter that the proliferation of the technology could enable extremists to obtain the drone aircraft and use them in a terrorist attack, according to the latest issue of Newsweek (see GSN, July 17, 2009).

Drones have already been used by extremists. In 2005, the Lebanon-based group Hezbollah flew an unmanned surveillance plane into Israel.

An assessment by the U.S. Air Force recently found that UAV systems would be "an ideal platform" for deploying biological, chemical or radiological "dirty bombs," the unconventional weapons most likely to be acquired by terrorists, stated P.W. Singer, head of the 21st century Defense Initiative at the Brookings Institution. [read more]

Scary, but not surprising. The militant Jihadists could fly one of those UAVs from the Mexico's border into the US or even from Canada's border.

A Pro-Choice Conservative

No, I am not saying I am an abortionist. What I am saying is this:

1. I believe that every American has a right to choose his own medical practitioner.
2. Every American should be able to choose and buy there own medical insurance across state lines like all other insurances.
3. Every American has a right not to buy any insurance if he does not want to.
4. You have the right to pay out of pocket for your medical bills if the medical practitioner and/or hospital allows this option. This agreement is between you and the medical professionals--no one else.
5. What medical procedures and medicine is strictly between you and your doctor if you pay the bills yourself.
6. You should be able to opt out of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Every gov't program should be optional. If it is a worthwhile program then people would naturally contribute to it.
7. No-one should be coerced or intimidated to join a labor union.

Financial Advisors and Liberalism

In the book I am reading called How To Smell A Rat. The Five Signs of Financial Fraud (2009) by Ken Fisher, the author tells about one of the biggest red flags that your financial advisor could be a scam artist is that he has custody of your assets. In other words he has total control of your stocks, bonds, etc. You should control what you want to buy, sell or hold. It is just way too tempting for the advisor to be another Bernie Madoff.

What does this have to do with liberalism? Think about it. Take Social Security for example. The government has taken over saving for your retirement. It has not completely taken over for saving for you though. The money left over from your paycheck you can still save, but when it involuntarily takes a percentage out of your paycheck you have no idea what happens to that money. And no control of what the gov't does with it. The federal gov't is your financial advisor for your retirement. The same could be said about Medicare and Medicaid.  Doesn't that make you feel nice and warm? And if Obama and the Dems have it their way it will be the same for health care. Total control of that too. 

What are the other signs of financial fraud you may ask? One, if the returns are consistently great. Two, the investment strategy isn't understandable, is murky, flashy, or "too complicated" for him or her to describe so you easily understand. (That sound like ObamaCare to me!) The third sign, your advisor promotes benefits like exclusivity, which don't impact results. Finally, you didn't do your own due diligence, but a trusted intermediary did. In other words, let the buyer beware. Don't count on others doing the checking for you. Like gov't agencies. 

Just Say No

Imagine your are a passenger in a car. The driver is heading toward a cliff. You and the driver's death is eminent. What do you do? Say nothing and let the driver just drive off the cliff? Or do the common sense thing and yell, "Stop the car and turn around! You are driving off the cliff!" Of course, you could also jump out of the car and save yourself but for this thought experiment let's say you can't do that for whatever reasons. 

You could also grab the wheel and steer the car around after yelling to stop the car if the driver doesn't stop the car. The driver will of course get mad at you and accuse you with interfering with his driving. His anger will continue until he sees the cliff he was about to go over. 

If you substitute the car for America, Obama for the driver, and the Republicans or any congresspeople who are opposing Obama's agenda as the passenger then you have the situation in this country now. The Left accuse the Republicans of just saying no. I hope for this country they keep saying no to Obama as long as he is not looking out for the country's welfare. Someone has to say no. Someone has to yell, "Stop the car!" even if they get criticized and mocked for it.  The Right should come up with alternatives too. And they have. That's the "grabbing the wheel" part of my analogy.   If Obama is not going to look out for the country, someone in Congress better. That's their duty. Because the car is heading right for the cliff. 

To sum up, countrymen should not let their fellow countrymen destroy the country's economy or the founding principles of the country.

How World Leaders Can Lose Power

This is what I learned about how world leaders can lose their power when I took a Cultural Anthropology course in college:

1. Loss of prestige of established authority, often as a result of the failure of foreign policy, financial difficulties, dismissals of popular ministers, or alteration of popular policies.

2. Threat to recent economic improvement.

3. Indecisiveness of gov't, as exemplified by lack of consistent policy.

4. Loss of support of the intellectual class.

5. A leader or group of leaders with charisma enough to mobilize a substantial part of the population against the establishment.

In democratic countries like America if the citizens don't like the leader they can vote him out of office. If you examine the polls about Obama he looks like he has the first three conditions. Not sure about condition #4. If you mean college professors and the lame stream media he still has their support. But I don't think that really matters so much anymore. If the lame stream media doesn't support him anymore that could cause trouble for him. As for condition #5, I haven't seen a charismatic leader yet. Maybe Sarah Palin.

In autocratic countries like Iran, China, and Venezuela a revolution has to happen. Then the leader either gets exiled or gets killed.

Code Defends Against 'Stealthy' Computer Worms

From ScienceDaily.com (Feb. 4):

Self-propagating worms are malicious computer programs, which, after being released, can spread throughout networks without human control, stealing or erasing hard drive data, interfering with pre-installed programs and slowing, even crashing, home and work computers. Now a new code, or algorithm, created by Penn State researchers targets the "stealthiest" of these worms, containing them before an outbreak can occur.

"In 2001 the 'Code Red' worms caused $2 billion dollars worth of damage worldwide," said Yoon-Ho Choi, a postdoctoral fellow in information sciences and technology, Penn State. "Our algorithm can prevent a worm's propagation early in its propagation stage." [read more]

Interesting. Hope the code works.

Feds push for tracking cell phones

From news.cnet.com (February 11):

Even though police are tapping into the locations of mobile phones thousands of times a year, the legal ground rules remain unclear, and federal privacy laws written a generation ago are ambiguous at best. On Friday, the first federal appeals court to consider the topic will hear oral arguments (PDF) in a case that could establish new standards for locating wireless devices.

In that case, the Obama administration has argued that warrantless tracking is permitted because Americans enjoy no "reasonable expectation of privacy" in their--or at least their cell phones'--whereabouts. U.S. Department of Justice lawyers say that "a customer's Fourth Amendment rights are not violated when the phone company reveals to the government its own records" that show where a mobile device placed and received calls. [read more]

The article does not state why the Obama administration wants to track cell phone locations. For national security for instance? Who knows. It's good to see the ACLU concerned about this issue. At least they are being consistent.

On a side note, your cell phone can still be tracked even when it is off.

Pentagon Looks to Breed Immortal ‘Synthetic Organisms,’ Molecular Kill-Switch Included

From Wired.com (February 5):

The Pentagon’s mad science arm may have come up with its most radical project yet. Darpa is looking to re-write the laws of evolution to the military’s advantage, creating “synthetic organisms” that can live forever — or can be killed with the flick of a molecular switch.

As part of its budget for the next year, Darpa is investing $6 million into a project called BioDesign, with the goal of eliminating “the randomness of natural evolutionary advancement.” The plan would assemble the latest bio-tech knowledge to come up with living, breathing creatures that are genetically engineered to “produce the intended biological effect.” Darpa wants the organisms to be fortified with molecules that bolster cell resistance to death, so that the lab-monsters can “ultimately be programmed to live indefinitely.” [read more]

This sounds like a SyFy movie script. I hope that "kill switch" doesn't fail. Any complex weapon or even tool should be an open system. That is the user should be able to control it. Or else you could possibly have a nightmare scenario. Think Frankenstein.

British intel: Breast implants may hide bombs

From Freep.com (Feb. 5):

WASHINGTON, DC -- British intelligence agencies have reportedly monitored terrorist communications bragging that women suicide bombers have already undergone surgery to hide explosive bombs in their breast implants.

"You could certainly put a liquid of any kind in a saline device, and a gel implant theoretically could be opened and replaced with a different type of gel," said Maryland plastic surgeon Dr. Craig Person.

"I believe that any liquid in a breast implant, or any gel with a silicone-type of implant would be hard to detect with a body scanner," Person told 9NewsNow. [read more]

Actually, that is pretty clever of the terrorists. Who would think of checking the breasts for explosives? And if the scanning devices don't detect the explosives then what? What will be next explosives in women's buttocks?

I just hope the terrorists keep failing in their homicide bombing attempts. But hope is not enough. All it takes is just one successful attack.

Since militant Jihadists don't respect woman they would have a woman explode rather than a man anyway.

Democrat Questions to Republicans

Here are the questions that Democrat senate candidates are supposed to ask their Republican opponents. If a Republican answers "no" to any of the questions then the Dem is to make his or her "primary opponent or conservative activists know it." My answers follow the questions.

• Do you believe that Barack Obama is a U.S. citizen? Yes, of course. Any conservative that believes he isn't is just giving ammo to the Dems and Obama. Republicans should stick the issues and Obama's ideology. Don't take your eye of the ball, guys. Obama has enough baggage that you don't have to bring his citizenship up.

  
  

• Do you think the 10th Amendment bars Congress from issuing regulations like minimum health care coverage standards? The 10th Amendment basically says whatever law is not in the Constitution is left up to the states or the people. Health care is not in the Constitution. Does that answer the question? What would be helpful is to pass a law that says people can shop for health insurance across state lines like you do for other insurances.

  
  

• Do you think programs like Social Security and Medicare represent socialism and should never have been created in the first place? Yes, on both accounts. Let's see now. Social Security is where you take from the young and give to the old. Isn't that wealth redistribution ie socialism? I know you get part of your money back when you withdraw money from Social Security (well, all those born after 1964 do. Everyone else is screwed. You see, Social Security is nothing but IOUs from the government.) In my opinion, it was created because FDR thought people did not know how to save money. In other words, they are stupid. Most progressives like FDR think like that. And like all progressive government programs they are mandatory. After all parents (the progressive lawmakers) cannot let their children (taxpayers) make hard decisions for themselves. They are not just mature enough. And they never will be.

  
  

• Do you think President Obama is a socialist? Hmmm. During a speech he said in so many words he wanted to "radically transform this country." He mentioned in one of this books he likes to hang out with Marxist's professors during college days. He's hired during his presidency people from the far-left. His administration has taken over GM and the banks. Oh, yea. He's mentioned he wants a universal health care system. Is his ideology on the far-left? Probably. Is a socialist? Not totally, but he has socialistic tendencies.

  
  

• Do you think America should return to a gold standard? Probably not. What we need is accountability and transparency in the Federal Reserve. They yield a lot of power. They control not just the interest rates, but the discount rate and the federal funds rate. The Federal Reserve also controls the required reserve ratio. In an old Heritage.org lecture (March 1, 1987), Heller, H. Robert thinks the world should explore the use of a "commodity price index" for price stability.

I am surprised the Dems are not asking "Do you listen to the Rush Limbaugh radio show?" since they got Rush on their minds a lot. Or "Do you listen/watch to Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck?" Or "Have you ever attended a Tea Party event?" Or even "Do you think Sarah Palin is intelligent?"

All these questions are meant to be gotcha questions.

Al-Qaeda Remains Intent on WMD Strike Against U.S., Report Says

From NTI.org (Jan. 26):

The terrorist organization al-Qaeda continues to work to acquire weapons of mass destruction to use in a large-scale terror attack on the United States, according to a report released yesterday (see GSN, Jan. 20).

"Their WMD procurement efforts have been managed at the most senior levels, under rules of strict compartmentalization from lower levels of the organization, and with central control over possible targets and timing of prospective attacks," according to former high-level CIA official Rolf Mowatt-Larssen (Rolf Mowatt-Larssen, Harvard University Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs report, Jan. 25).

The report came even as a congressionally mandated panel issued a "report card" saying the federal government has not done nearly enough to prepare the United States for an act of biological terrorism (see related GSN story, today). [read more]

If America keeps treating terrorists as common criminals, and not doing enhanced interrogation then another attack could happen. God forbid that ever happens.

Right to Work Key For Economic Recovery

From the National Right to Work Committee's newsletter:

From July 1, 2008 through July 1, 2009, a net total of more than 339,000 Americans moved from forced-unionism states to Right to Work states.

And since April 1, 2000, there has been a net transfer of nearly five million Americans to Right to Work states.

And multi-year data supplied by the Statistical Information Service (SIS) of the IRS show that tax filers who move to a Right to Work state consistently report higher adjusted gross incomes than do tax filers moving out of a Right to Work state. [read more pdf]

I am not against or for anyone who wants to join a union. That's a personal decision. But if you are pressured or coercised to join a union that's a different story. That's similar to what what happened in the old Soviet Union. You were forced to be a Communist. You did not have the right to choose to join or not.

Developing Your Political Intuition

Or if you prefer how not to be conned by a politician. This advice is from my own thoughts and from a Portfolio.com article. Although their advice is for business situations it can be applied to politicians too.

1. Beware of any politician that pits one group of Americans against another group of Americans. For instance pitting the wealthy against everyone else. Or scapegoating banks, oil companies, etc. This is an old technique that only benefits the politician and ends up hurts everyone else. 
2. Beware of any politician that won't state what his/her beliefs are. Or won't state where he stands on the issues. The candidate wants you to project your beliefs on him. 
3. Beware of any politician that uses meaningless or ambiguous slogans or terms. For example, "Change we can believe in", "Vertical politics", "Economic justice", "Climate change" to name a few. Question what these terms mean.
4. Distrust any candidate that uses personal attacks instead of debating the issues. The candidate does not know the issues or cannot defend his position. So, they try to shut down the debate. The personal attack is the last refuge of a person who has lost the argument. Negative political ads are okay as long as they are true. No candidate will put up an ad that puts him in a bad light. It's just human nature.
5. Be leery of any politician that is arrogant or egotistical. They have a tendency not to listen to their constituency. They also have a tendency to be oppressive.
6. Distrust any candidate that says they will fulfill all your needs with no or little cost to you. If they do there will be a big cost. Or they won't fulfill it at all. They don't really care about your needs. They just want want your vote. 
7. Beware of any candidate that tells you what you want to hear whether or not the candidate believes what he/she is saying. Again, they are trying to get your vote. But if they believe what they are saying that is different. Ronald Reagan said America was a shining city on a hill. It made Americans feel good about their country, but President Reagan believed it.
8. Watch when what they say does not match their body language. Both should be in sync with one another. If both are not then they are being deceptive. 
9. Distrust any politician relies too much on emotional/psychological appeals rather than trying to use a logical argument to persuade you. They are attempting to manipulate you. Plus you cannot argue against an emotional appeal. How do you argue with someone who says I love rainy days?

10. Distrust any politician that does not have faith in an individual's judgment. Ask yourself why is this politician's judgment is any better than yours? He can make a mistake just as well as you can. He or she is not your parent. (This point kind of goes along with point 5.)

11. Distrust any politician that blatantly disregards the Constitution. These politicians think they are above the law of the land. They think the Constitution is a "living document" and can write any law irregardless if it Constitutional or not.

The Fort Hood Report: Why No Mention of Islam?

It seems political correctness has entered the military again. In the report about the Fort Hood terrorist attack there was no mention of the Hasan's religion. For that matter not even his name. The report mentioned the names of various slipups by Army officers though. That omission is just plain crazy. The Pentagon did not want to offend the Muslim faith. Really?  Are they afraid of being accused of profiling?

It's all about motive. Every police officer knows that when understanding a criminal. Along with means and opportunity of course. No different with terrorists. In this case Hasan's militant Jihadism was his motivation. For a militant Jihadist if you are not a Muslim then you are the enemy. Period. You cannot overlook that. And if the military ignores that motivation I fear another attack could happen in the military. 

Health Care as a Right

Sen. Harry Reid believes (and other Liberals believe) that health care is a right. Then under socialized health care I should be able to sue the gov't if I feel I don't get good service under that plan. Correct? I mean no service even the gov't can take that right away and interfere with my right to health care.

I believe that health care is not a right. It's not in the Constitution and not even in the Declaration of Independence. Americans have a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. They also have the Bill of Rights.

What socialized medicine (ObamaCare) does do is interfere with your right to liberty. You don't have the choice to pay the doctor out your own pocket. You have to choose an insurance company or go with the gov't plan. Or you go to jail. Your right to life and pursuit of happiness will probably be interfered with too especially if you have to wait in line months at a time for medical service.

Mysterious New 'Dark Flow' Discovered in Space

From Space.com (Sept. 2008):

As if the mysteries of dark matter and dark energy weren't vexing enough, another baffling cosmic puzzle has been discovered.

Patches of matter in the universe seem to be moving at very high speeds and in a uniform direction that can't be explained by any of the known gravitational forces in the observable universe. Astronomers are calling the phenomenon "dark flow."

The stuff that's pulling this matter must be outside the observable universe, researchers conclude. [read more]

I know this blog entry is old, but I only heard of this phenomena in October 2009 issue of Popular Science. No-one knows for sure why the phenomena is happening. One theory is that a parallel universe is causing the motion.

Order of Succession

If the Annointed One (Barack Obama) dies during his term in office this is the order of succession according to the Constitution:

1. Vice President: Joe Biden. Does not fill me with confidence, although he maybe less radical than Obama.

2. Speaker of the House: Nancy Pelosi. Yikes! 

3. President pro-temore of the Senate: Robert Byrd. This former KKK has his name plastered on almost every building in W. Virginia. Uh, no thanks. 

4. Secretary of State: Hillary Clinton. Hmmm. If Hillary could rig it so that Obama, Biden, Pelosi, and Byrd could be in a plane at the same time and have it go down somewhere over an ocean then she could be President. Did I just write a plot for a political novel?

5. Secretary of the Treasury: Timothy Geithner. Like this country needs is a "new world order" person. Not too mention he did not pay his taxes.

6. Secretary of Defense: Robert Gates. Of the whole bunch so far, he's good.

7. Attorney General: Eric Holder. He called America a "nation of cowards."

8. Secretary of the Interior: Ken Salazar. 

9. Secretary of Agriculture: Tom Vilsack. 

10. Secretary of Commerce: Gary Locke. 

11. Secretary of Labor: Hilda Solis. She's for amnesty and open borders. No thank you. 

Obamanopoly

Let's all play Obamanopoly! The following cards and spaces are from Glenn Beck's book Arguing with Idiots. The cards in blue are made-up by me.

Community Organizer cards:

• BANK ERROR IN THEIR FAVOR. PAY $500.
• CHRYSLER. From sale of stock you get nothing.
• You are "too big too fail." Keep this card for 5 turns.
• If you got a loan from the government and can't pay it back, the government now owns your business after buying up your common stock. You lose the game.

Change cards:

• Advance token to the nearest railroad and pay the government twice the amount to which it is otherwise entitled. Don't expect anything in return.
• Employee Free Choice Act cripples your business. Pay $200.
• You forgot to choose a health care plan for an employee of yours when the employee does not choose for himself. Pay $700.
• If you have a "too big too fail" card then you can get a $100,000 loan from the government.

READING RAILROAD. Price: n/a. This railroad was nationalized, and is not for sale.

INCOME TAX. Player with the most money pays 70% to player with the least.

ELECTRIC COMPANY. Price: $150 Plus $500 carbon tax.

BOARDWALK. Price: $400 (Free for low income families).

The Wind-it Generator

From PopSci.com (July 7):

Soon the hum of high-voltage electric towers will come from the electricity they produce, not just what they conduct. The Wind-it, a design by French architects Nicola Delon and Julien Choppin and engineer Raphael Menard, inserts a vertical turbine inside the towers. Large wind farms need lots of land; Wind-it could be installed anywhere along the 157,000 miles of high-voltage aboveground wires in the U.S. The turbines also plug right into the grid, saving the cost of stringing cable to remote areas. The inventors are currently looking for an industrial partner to turn their scale model into a 330-foot-tall tower, which their computer simulations suggest could generate up to a megawatt of electricity—enough to power 400 homes. “The Midwest needs new power lines,” Menard says, “and because the towers will cross high-wind fields, it could be perfect for Wind-it.”

Now, I am not a wind-energy zealot, but if you are going to harness wind-energy this is not a bad way to do it. It uses existing technology (those electric towers--you don't have to build those huge wind turbines) and because you don't have to build those turbines you don't need lots of land to place them. I applaud the cleverness by the engineer and architect. Although, they should have the turbines the same color of the towers so it isn't so obvious that the towers are using wind-energy. Just a suggestion.

Government Bureaucracy in Action

The following list below is from Glenn Beck's book Arguing with Idiots. Interesting book. His Adventures in Capitalism cartoons are funny.

• Up to 12 different agencies are responsible for administrating more than 35 food-safety laws.

• There are 541 clean air, water, and waste pgms spread out over 29 agencies.

• 40 different pgms aimed primarily at job training are administrated by at least seven different federal agencies.

• 50 different pgms to aid the homeless are administrated by at least eight different federal agencies.

• Nine different agencies operate 27 teen-pregnancy programs and 11 agencies administer at least 90 early-childhood pgms.

Now, doesn't this list above fill you with confidence that the gov't can run health care effectively and efficiently?

We can't account for the lack of warming at the moment

Below is excerpts from an email correspondence of October this year from one climatologist to another:

Kevin, But what you said was "we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment". Now you say "we are no where close to knowing where energy is going".

Tom.

Hi Tom > How come you do not agree with a statement that says we are no where > close to knowing where energy is going or whether clouds are changing to > make the planet brighter. We are not close to balancing the energy > budget. The fact that we can not account for what is happening in the > climate system makes any consideration of geoengineering quite hopeless > as we will never be able to tell if it is successful or not! It is a > travesty! > Kevin

>>> The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the >>> moment and it is a travesty that we can't. The CERES data published >>> in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even >>> more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is >>> inadequate.

Kevin

Man-made Global Warming in Doubt

Below are portions of one of those hacked emails from Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia. The email dated October 1996 is from an environmental writer Fred Pearce to climate researcher Briffa Keith: 

For climatologists, the search for an irrefutable "sign" of anthropogenic warming has assumed an almost Biblical intensity. The leading figures of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), claim that, in all probability, they have seen it. Last summer [ed: 1996], the IPCC's scientific working group, chaired by former UK Meteorological Office boss Sir John Houghton, concluded that "the balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate". But it is like the "balance of evidence" suggesting BSE causes CJD. The judgment is far from "beyond reasonable doubt". The case remains "not proven".

Few investigators doubt that the world has warmed recently. Nor that the enhanced "greenhouse effect" of pollution from gases such as carbon dioxide, will warm the planet. But in the past five years, climate researchers have growing increasingly aware of how little they really know about the natural variability from which they must pick out the "signal" of human influence.

The models' error was not, perhaps, too surprising. As Barnett points out, they do not include vital "forcing" mechanisms that alter temperature, such as solar cycles and volcanic eruptions. Nor can they yet mimic the strength of the largest year-on-year variability in the natural system, the El Nino oscillation in the Pacific Ocean, which has a global impact on climate.

Nonetheless, the findings should serve as a warning, Barnett says, that "the current models cannot be used in rigorous tests for anthropogenic signals in the real world". If they are they "might lead us to believe that an anthropogenic signal had been found when, in fact, that may not be the case."

Is Global Warming Unstoppable?

ScienceDaily (Nov. 24, 2009):

In a provocative new study, a University of Utah scientist argues that rising carbon dioxide emissions -- the major cause of global warming -- cannot be stabilized unless the world's economy collapses [my italics] or society builds the equivalent of one new nuclear power plant each day. [read more]

I like the word "provocative." Any theory I guess that questions global warming or as it is called now climate change ideology is heresy. I serious doubt CO₂ emissions are the major cause of global warming. My bet is still on that yellow star in the sky called the sun.

Then the author of the article has to mention the "global warming deniers" using the scientist's theory for their own purposes. Again, I guess you can't question science anymore? Science is about finding the truth. If you can't question a scientist's methodology or theory to find a kernel of truth then you don't have science anymore. You have a cult.

More on the House Health Care Bill

Section 552 says there will be an excise tax of 2.5% on medical devices. Yea, another tax. This country needs another tax like it needs another "stimulus" bill.

The bill requires the employer to give his/her name, date, and employer identification number to the following gov't people: the Health Choices Commissioner, the Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and the Secretary of the Treasury. Also, the employee has to give his/her name, address, and TIN to those same gov't people. What the social security number isn't good enough for id purposes? (See Sect. 412 (a)(3))

The employee has 30 days to choose if (s)he wants socialized medicine or his employer's private health plan. No other choice. If the employee does not make a choice then the employer chooses the one with the lesser premium. (Sect. 412 (c)(1) & (2)) If the employer does not pick a plan for the employee then he is fined $100 a day until he does. (Sect. 806)

If an employer has an annual payroll of more than $750,000 then he has to contribute 8% of the average wages of his employees. Otherwise, if the employer has an annual payroll of less $500,000 annual payroll he does not have to contribute anything. In between the two amounts is a progressive rate up to 6%. (Sect. 413)

If the Commissioner thinks you are not covered properly then you have to pay 2.5% of your gross income. (Sect. 59B)

ObamaCare and Individual Differences

In any bureaucracy, individual differences are for the most part ignored. This is done for efficiency and so that every one is treated the same way. People are classified according to what group you are in. Socialized medicine is no different. Even worse, because the bigger the bureaucracy the more individual differences are ignored.

For example, let's say a person has a deadly genetic defect that runs in his/her family. This genetic defect causes an aggressive form of stomach cancer. First, the person has to be screened for the mutant gene. Then if the person has the mutant gene has to have surgery done or medication has to be given. In socialized medicine the person has to wait to be screened if the test exists. The wait could kill the person if (s)he gets the cancer. If (s)he is lucky to be screened then (s)he would have to wait for the operation or drug if she is found positive for the gene.

What could be worse is if the system decides the person is not worth the screening because the mutant gene is really rare.

When you go see your private doctor (s)he can look at your individual differences. Then make a diagnose and a prescription that fits closely to your individual bodily make-up. The examining and diagnosing can take time especially if the medical condition is unknown or complex to the doctor. The prescription can even take time if there are more than one option for the patient and the options are about equal. The patient would have to decide what to do. Under socialized medicine examining and diagnosing time is not under the doctor's control and prescription option would not be under the patient's control.

Obama's Plan for Gov't Takeover of Banks

The following steps below are taken from Dick Morris & Eileen McGann's book Catastrophe:

1. Get all banks and financial institutions to take TARP money.
2. Even if they want to give the money back, don't let them.
3. Because they're getting government money, make them obey federal regulations.
4. Make all banks pass a "stress test," allegedly to assure their financial solvency. 
5. After eliminating the stress test, make banks raise more capital, again, supposedly to assure solvency.
6. When the banks can't raise more capital by selling more stock, make them swap the preferred stock they gave the gov't in return for TARP money for common stock. This exchange lets them wipe the debt to the gov't off their balance sheets, but it gives the feds stock that entitles them to vote on company management (which preferred stock does not).
7. Use the voting power of the common stock to dictate how to run the banks.
8. Use the leverage of the banks to control the economy.

Like Dick Morris says and I agree these are steps to socialism. Any bank or financial institution that takes TARP money is a fool. They are asking to be a puppet. But I can understand if they are desperate. After all they are "too big to fail" or so we are told. Maybe that is the plan. Set up a situation (ie oppressive regulations) where a big corporations (eg Big Oil, Big Pharma, etc.) have a hard time succeeding economically. Once they start failing, declare them "too big to fail." Then offer them a "TARP" deal. Then follow steps 2) through 8) above. Also, if you make the corporations enemy of the people then you can get away with the oppressive regulations and say you are doing it for the "good" of the country. 

Everyone in Britain could be given a personal 'carbon allowance'

From Telegraph.co.UK (Nov. 9):

Everyone in Britain should have an annual carbon ration and be penalized if they use too much fuel, the head of the Environment Agency will say.

Lord Smith of Finsbury believes that implementing individual carbon allowances for every person will be the most effective way of meeting the targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions.

It would involve people being issued with a unique number which they would hand over when purchasing products that contribute to their carbon footprint, such as fuel, airline tickets and electricity. [read more]

This global warming or climate change (whatever it is called now) mania is way out of control. God help America if it comes here. I agree with the economist Ruth Lea in the article this definitely is Orwellian. 

Storm Chasing with a Horse and Buggy

According to the National Association of Storm Chasers and Spotters website the first storm chaser was U.S. Weather Bureau climatologist Isaac Cline. In 1900 he road a horse and buggy down a Galveston, Texas beach as he nervously observed the increasing surf and winds. He was trying to spot a hurricane. 

So, I started thinking. How good would a horse and buggy be chasing tornadoes? I would think it would not be very effective. 

First, the horses would be spooked and probably would not be willing to chase after a huge swirling cloud of wind. Chasing tornadoes is not natural behavior for horses--or for people either for that matter. But somebody's gotta do it. I don't think a person could train horses to chase a tornado. They would just look at the trainer and think he's plain crazy. 

Second, the horses, the buggy, and even the storm chasers could be hurt. Not just from being sucked up by the twister (the buggy would probably weigh less than an average car), but being hit by flying debris like rocks, limbs, cows (I refer the reader to the Twister movie. The best tornado movie second to The Wizard of Oz. Got to love the tornado footage in the beginning of that movie), and chickens. Not too mention any hail knocking storm chasers and horses on the head. Ouch! Those suckers can get quite large. 

Finally, a horse and buggy just can't go as fast (about 8 - 10 mph) as a car. Plus, it cannot back up if a tornado comes right toward a person. The storm chasers would have to get out of the buggy, unharness the horses so they can escape (you wouldn't want them to be sucked up by the tornado would you?), and run for their lives. 

The above reasons is probably why storm chasing did not really get started in the 1950's. The cars were faster than the horse and buggy. Plus, they offer protection. I suppose they could have chase storms in the 1930's with the first cars but they would have been slower than the cars in the 50s. But with the cars in the 30's, a person did not have to worry too much about hail damage. The cars were mostly metal. Although, you did have to crank them up in front. 

The Fort Hood Attack

I agree with what Col. Ralph Peters said in his New York Post column that this was a terrorist attack. Not just someone who had a breakdown or went crazy. The attack was definitely not caused by combat stress reaction. The attacker never was in combat. That diagnoses is just plain stupid. Look at the facts we have now. Hasan yelled out "God is great" in Arabic when he shot those soldiers. He said was Muslim first, then American. He called homicide bombers heroic on his Facebook page. Getting rid of his personal possessions and going to a strip joint too suggested an attack of some sort. Those two actions were also done by the 9/11 terrorists. The 9/11 terrorists were preparing to get their virgins and I believe so was this militant Jihadist. He thought he was going to die. Add to this fact he tried to contact Al Qaeda. It does not matter if they did not reply. Plus, on his business card he put the initials "SOA." SOA stands for Soldier of Allah. This attack is not related to Islam? Really?

This terrorism should never had happened. Thanks to the Left the military has become a political correct mess (the terms "War on Terror" are not allowed in military documents anymore. Geez!). Diversity is one thing, but allowing someone who is so dangerous is another. You DO NOT screw around with the military. It is not a social experiment. These brave soldiers put their lives on the line to defend this country. Getting shot at in battle is one thing. Getting shot at by a fellow soldier stateside is another thing all together.

To prevent this from ever happening again a thorough background check should be done on every Muslim in all branches of the military not just the Army. Any militant Jihadist should be kicked out. The POTUS Barack Obama could issue this directive. He is the commander-in-chief of the military. The question is would he do it. My guess is no. Would this directive be profiling? Possibly. Is this racism? No. It's a security measure. You want to know something. Any Muslim who is a militant Jihadist probably wouldn't care if was kicked out. He might miss the money though. 

H.R. 3962 (Affordable Health Care for America Act)

I have read the 1990 pages bill and here is what I learned not in any particular order with comments by me. Yes, my brain is still intact from reading the bill. It did not melt. All italics are mine.

• SEC. 330. ENROLLMENT IN PUBLIC HEALTH INSURANCE OPTION BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, Members of Congress may enroll in the public health insurance option. Why is the section necessary? I mean if the bill so good why would any member of Congress not enroll in the bill? Also, notice the executive and the judicial arms of the gov't are not included in this section. One undeniable fact of life is the powers-that-be always take of themselves.

• INSUFFICIENT FUNDS.If the Secretary [of Health and Human Services] estimates for any fiscal year that the aggregate amounts available for payment of expenses of the high-risk pool will be less than the amount of the expenses, the Secretary shall make such adjustments as are necessary to eliminate such deficit, including reducing benefits, increasing premiums, or establishing waiting lists. Reducing benefits and increasing premiums sounds like an insurance company to me. As for waiting lists, that sounds like the Canadian health care system.

• CONTENTS OF ALTERNATIVE MEDICAL LIABILITY LAW. The contents of an alternative liability law are in accordance with this paragraph if---(B) the law does not limit attorneys fees or impose caps on damages. That should make the personal injury lawyers happy. No wonder you don't hear them protesting.

• SEC. 2537. MEDICAL-LEGAL PARTNERSHIPS. (1) awarding grants to, and entering into contracts with, medical-legal partnerships to assist patients and their families to navigate health-related programs and activities. Another bone to the lawyers. I guess the socialized health care will be so complex the everyday person can't understand it.

• There are a bunch of offices such as the OFFICE OF WOMEN’S HEALTH (no office of men's health?), and the OFFICE OF INDIAN MEN’S HEALTH. There is a whole section dedicated to Indians. No offense to Indians but why are they singled out?

• There is a Health Choices Commissioner. Think Health Czar.

• Employers are supposed to supply health info to their employees and encourage health screenings. Employers cannot mandate their employees to participate in the "health education" pgm but can entice them as long as it does not interfere with the Health Care Act. As it says in the bill "such reward is not tied to the premium or cost-sharing of the individual under the health benefits plan." The screening results are kept confidential. That is you know, the screener knows, and the Secretary (read the gov't) knows about your results.

• SEC. 223. HEALTH BENEFITS ADVISORY COMMITTEE. Nine members who are not members of the gov't who are appointed by the President. Nine members who are not members of the gov't who are appointed by the Comptroller General of the United States. Such even number of members (not to exceed 8) who are Federal employees and officers, as the President may appoint. Each member serves a term of three years. On this committee are very experts in the health, insurance, and business community. There are even experts in "racial and ethnic disparities." Whatever that is.

• There are two registries: The National Medical Device Registry and the National Registry for Effective Programs.

• There are regulations on restaurants and vending machines (see Sec. 2572).

• The payments for the health care pgm are deducted automatically from your paycheck. (See page 1577 line 23)

• Retiree Reserve Trust Fund

All in all this bill is one bureaucratic mess with a crap load of subsidies. If you want to know how bureaucracies work you can read Moore's Laws of Bureaucracy. It's very interesting and enlightening reading.

Miscellaneous Thoughts Part 14

• I believe private citizens should buy their own health insurance just they do for auto and life insurance. It's not the responsibility of the gov't or for that matter your employer.
• You never compromise with irrational people, stubborn people, and evil people.
• Experimenting with the occult especially Ouija boards and séances is like randomly picking out strangers in a phone book to call. You may get a nice decent person or or may get a psychopath with caller id. You never know.
• A person without a conscience is like an automobile without breaks. Sooner or later he/she will go out of control and hurt him/herself or someone else.
• What's worse than fainting goats would be fainting horses or cows. They could get hurt or land on someone or a smaller animal. A fainting hamster would be weird albeit fun to have.
• I think there should be a separation between business and gov't like there supposedly a separation between church and state that the Left keeps bringing up.
• I sometimes believe the motto of the Left (especially the far Left) is: See no truth, hear no truth,...
• Conservative Derangement Syndrome: (noun) The irrational obsessive hatred of Conservatives by the Left. Derives from Bush Derangement Syndrome.
• Either Obama did not know about his radical appointees & did not vet them, or he knew about them being radical and agreed with their philosophy. There are really no other options. If I had to choose which option was Obama's mindset, I choose the latter one. Obama said if you want to know what he believes look at the people who surround him.
• Under ObamaCare I wonder how living wills and Do Not Resuscitates (DNRs) will be treated. Will living wills be invalid especially the Five Wishes you want your doctor and family to know? How about DNRs? Will everyone be required to have a DNR especially if you are elderly?

Are the Left Control Freaks?

Below is the list of traits of control freaks taken from an ehow.com article. The question is how close do these traits fit the Left.

1. You insist on running the show and calling all the shots. Definitely true. The Democrats in Congress have shut out the Republicans from any input in any bill. LBJ ran the Vietnam war in this manner.

2. You are skilled at manipulation and intimidation, and work extremely hard to keep everyone and everything around you in check. This one fits too. Obama has been trying to intimidate Fox News and now the US Chamber of Commerce. He has demonized the insurance business. Rush Limbaugh and other conservative talk show hosts have been demonized by the Left. Big Labor wants the card check legislation. Black conservatives get persecuted by black liberals. The drive-by-media or what I call the Obama fan club made fun of people just protesting ObamaCare. As for manipulation, majority of the Left in Congress are trial-lawyers. Trial lawyers know how to manipulate language to try to get the jury to vote their way. Then there is Obama with all the doctors wearing white coats in the Rose Garden.

3. Wise in your own eyes, you believe that your wisdom and advice is far better than that of everyone else you meet, and you're always prepared to dispense it freely. In other words, arrogance. Obama definitely is arrogant as are most of the Left. He and the Left think that all government programs are good and if you don't want them then you just don't know what's good for you. Like some Leftist said on a talk show about ObamaCare "just drag the people to it."

4. Only your input is valid. You enjoy expressing your opinion in conversations and meetings, but hate it when other people follow suit. This follows from trait three. Arrogant people only love their opinions. They don't care about other people's opinions because other people are beneath them. Look at the politicians from the Left who preach ObamaCare at town hall meetings. They don't want the participants to ask questions. Just to listen to them.

5. You discourage the input and feedback of others, and feel threatened by it. The Left feel threatened by input and feedback because they are scared that the other people's input will be better than their input. They really don't want people to criticize their pgms because they fear that people might discover their gov't pgms aren't that good and sometimes are just plain crap. If you know in your heart and mind that your opinion is right or the truth then you don't have to force people to accept it. You just have to persuade them that it is right. Coercion and trickery only come from the insecure.

6. Instead of using your imagination to come up with creative solutions to problems, you spend more time daydreaming about the worst that could happen. Yea, the Left tend to be pessimistic. Global Warming is going to flood and burn up the earth. Everything is a crisis with the Left.

There are ten traits in all of a control freak, so it looks like the Left fits most of these traits I listed.

Experimental Russian ICBM Would Violate START, Senator Says

From NTI.org (Oct. 27):

U.S. Senator Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) accused Russia last week of testing a new ICBM that, if deployed, would violate the terms of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, the Washington Times reported (see GSN, Oct. 26).

Russia has successfully tested the ability of its RS-24 ICBM to deliver up to three independently targeted warheads, according to former Assistant Secretary of State Paula DeSutter (see GSN, Nov. 5, 2008).

"That would be illegal for the Russians to deploy under START. So why are they testing it?" Kyl asked in an Oct. 19 Senate floor address. [read more]

I am getting the feeling that world leaders are thinking Obama is a weak leader. Or at least not taking him seriously.

Questions about Islam

Glenn Beck says we should speak without fear, question boldly, and hold to the truth. Well in this entry I will try to do the first two. It's too bad Muslims cannot do that as well without fear of their life.

1. Why didn't Muhammad pick a successor since he did not have a son with all his wives. Surely he knew he wouldn't live forever. He could have said if I die without a son then this person will be the next messenger. That would have prevented the Sunni-Shia rift that exists in Islam.

2. If Islam is a religion of "peace" then why does it have honor killings, homicide bombings, fatwas, chopping off your hand if you steal, etc. All of which are condoned by the messenger Muhammad. Jesus never condoned violence. The worst thing He did was to knock over tables.

3. Why cannot Islamic countries coexist with other religions? Why do these countries have to have non-Muslims pay a tax when they live in their countries?

4. Why does Islam force believers to hold to a strict practice of praying five times a day, giving a percentage of money to the poor, etc. Christianity only requires a person to belief in Jesus as the savior.

5. Moderate or modern Muslims say Islam can coexist with democracy then why is there few democratic Islamic countries? Turkey is one, and possibly Iraq.

6. If moderate Muslims do not support militant Muslims then why do they not speak out against them? Fear could be an excuse but why don't moderate American Muslims speak out against them?

7. Why does Islam disrespect and oppress Muslim women? I disagree with Glenn Beck. Muslim woman cannot change the structure of Islam internally. Islam is way too sexist for that too happen.

8. Why is Islamic countries so worried about non-Islamic proselytizing? Why do most countries kill other religious believers proselytizing? Is their religion that weak?

9. Why did Allah say several times in the Koran that he was the "greatest deceiver."

10. Islam and Christianity has their versions of the Apocalypse. Muslims believe that the Mahdi will come and all the world will be converted to Islam. The question is who will be good guys and who will be the bad guys? Hint: See the previous question.

Am I being disrespectful of Islam? Maybe, but every fact here is true about the religion. Even Muslims know that. Christianity has had its issues, but I believe those issues did not stem from Jesus himself but from corrupt gov'ts, politics and twisting what the Bible says.

Iran Helped Syria Acquire WMD, Missile Technology

From NTI.org (Oct. 26):

Iran has reportedly helped broker Syrian purchases of missile and WMD technology from North Korea, the U.S. Congressional Research Service said in a report published this month (see GSN, Oct. 30, 2008).

"Iran purportedly has acted as an intermediary with North Korea to supply Syria with various forms of WMD and missile technology," states the report, Iran: U.S. Concerns and Policy Responses. [read more]

So much for Obama's Nobel peace price.

Obama and His Appointees

Either Obama did not know about his radical appointees & did not vet them, or he knew about them being radical and agreed with their philosophy. There are really no other options. Either one does not say anything good about who Obama is. If I had to choose which option was Obama's mindset, I choose the latter one. Obama said if you want to know what he believes look at the people who surround him.

California appears poised to be first to ban power-guzzling big-screen TVs

From LaTimes.com (Oct 14):

Reporting from Sacramento - The influential lobby group Consumer Electronics Assn. is fighting what appears to be a losing battle to dissuade California regulators from passing the nation's first ban on energy-hungry big-screen televisions. [read more]

If California bans big-screen tvs what will stop them from banning other energy-hungry electronics? Nothing. The more power you have the more power you want. It's an addiction. And if you can rationalize the power away you will always continue abusing it.

U.S. blocks N.C. city's nonpartisan vote

From The Washington Times.com:

KINSTON, N.C. | Voters in this small city decided overwhelmingly last year to do away with the party affiliation of candidates in local elections, but the Obama administration recently overruled the electorate and decided that equal rights for black voters cannot be achieved without the Democratic Party.

The Justice Department's ruling, which affects races for City Council and mayor, went so far as to say partisan elections are needed so that black voters can elect their "candidates of choice" - identified by the department as those who are Democrats and almost exclusively black. [read more]

So, according to the Justice Dept. black people are confused on who to vote for if there are no party labels. Hmmm. I don't know but that sounds like racism to me. The Justice Dept. is saying that black people are stupid and cannot decide on their own. If the Obama administration can do this to Kingston, N.Y. then they can do this to any city. The precedent has been set. Never mind this Justice action might violate the Constitution.

What candidates could do is register themselves as party "A" and party "B" just to dare the admistration to do something about it.

S.773 Cybersecurity Act of 2009

From Open Congress.org:

This is comprehensive legislation designed to address our nation's vulnerabilities to cyber crime, global cyber espionage, and cyber attacks. It would establish a new Cybersecurity Advisory Panel within the White House and stream-line the cybersecurity effort through all levels of government. The bill also calls on the Department of Commerce to establish and maintain a clearinghouse on information related to cybsecurity threat and vulnerability information to public and private infrastructure deemed "critical" by the President. The Secretary of Commerce would be given access to this information "without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access." The bill would also give the President new authority to "declare a cybersecurity emergency and order the limitation or shutdown of Internet traffic to and from any compromised Federal Government or United States critical infrastructure information system or network." [read more]

This legislation is sponsored by Senator John Rockefeller. Cybersecurity is major concern. Chinese civilians on May 4, 2001 crashed the whitehouse.gov site by doing a distributed denial-of-service attack (DDoS). The US intelligence community thought it was the Chinese gov't doing this but it wasn't. It was actually Chinese teenagers doing this for patriotic reasons. The Chinese gov't did not order this done but it did not discourage this behavior either.

If the President Bush's Homeland Security Act made critics nervous I wonder what they think of this bill. On the Open Congress site only 3% supported the bill.

Shutting down a major portion of the internet seems like overkill to me. Something has to be done, but that? Maybe recognizing and blocking DoS attacks would be better. Yes, recognizing malicious attacks like this is tricky but not impossible. Also, gov't sites should use firewalls, anti-virus pgms, and have hard to guess passwords on their websites too. Gov't sites are notoriously bad about internet security.

Sabotaging ObamaCare

There is a way to sabotage bad healthcare legislation. A Congressional member can append a line on a bill that says essentially: This bill applies to all US citizens. No exemptions. What that last line will do is have whatever healthcare legislation that is passed apply even to the Congress, the Executive power, and the Supreme Court. Since the three powers are US citizens they have to be included. The saboteur should not say a word about this to anyone unless the bill becomes law. If it does become law then no-one read the bill. Keep in mind the POTUS does not have line item veto power. So, even Obama cannot remove the line. If it passes then the saboteur can go on Fox News and other news venues and announce he found that inclusion line. That way everyone is aware that even the power-that-be are not exempt.
Now there might will be exemptions in the bill. Like exempting the Congress and the Executive power and Big Labor. But if there is a "no exemption" line in the bill that will override any exemptions or at least cause problems in implementing the bill.
It is up to the saboteur if he or she wants to out him/herself. If the saboteur does that then he won't be trusted by his colleagues again and will be criticized by the press. But he might just be loved by the majority of the American people. A politician that had guts to do the right thing. Outing himself is a decision he will have to make.
It will definitely be a self-sacrifice because the saboteur will be covered by the same bill. But that's the price he has to pay.

Scientist: Cap and trade will hurt Earth

From WorldNetDaily.com (10/9):

Carbon dioxide emissions are good for Earth and don't cause global warming, a noted geologist and best-selling author is warning Congress.

Leighton Steward, author of "Fire, Ice and Paradise," is storming Capitol Hill to convince senators that a cap-and-trade energy bill could harm the environment by reducing the Earth's CO₂ levels, according to U.S. News & World Report.

"I'm trying to kill the whole thing," he said. "We are tilting at windmills."

Steward, member of a nonprofit group called Plants Need CO2, plans to meet with several lawmakers this week. [read more]

I hope he succeeds. That is a very bad bill. What he says makes sense. People and other animals breathe out CO₂ and plants and trees consume it and produce oxygen. CO₂ is noxious to us but not to plants. It is their food. You can say it is a complementary relationship. We need them and they need us. If you remove CO₂ the plants and trees die. If they die then we are screwed. The envirofascists just don't understand.

If you want to remove CO₂ the right way it's easy: Just plant more trees and any green-leafy plants.

The Self-managing, 'Unbreakable' Internet?

ScienceDaily (2009-10-06) -- High-powered internet applications typically need teams of experts to maintain them. Not any more, say European researchers who have built a system to create applications that manage and fix themselves. [read more]

Interesting. That sounds like what living organisms do.

Doctors For and Against ObamaCare

The doctors for ObamaCare are shown below:

Seems a lot of doctors supporting universal health care right? They look nice in their white coats. Everyone here raise your hand if you donated to Obama's presidential campaign. In total 150 showed up. Pretty good head count. Forty of the 150 were from Doctors For Obama America. That's an organization for socialized medicine.

Now, look at the two photos below. These photos are taken from the Million Med March that was held on Oct. 1. These are doctors against ObamaCare. Never heard of this march? That's because it did not get a lot of press coverage. It is estimated that 200 doctors showed up for this protest. Notice in the photo on the right, there is no-one wearing white coats. What's with that? Like doctors wear their white coats outside of their practice all the time. Sure, right. So, it seems according to the photos there is about the same amount of doctors for (minus 40) and against socialized medicine or if you prefer the government public option.

Bin Laden's Book List

Since Osama Bin Laden recommended Jimmy Carter's book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid I started speculating what other books he would recommend and here's the list:

1. The Quran
2. Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler
3. The Myth of American Exceptionalism by Godfrey Hodgson
4. The Camel, Its Uses and Management by Major Arthur Glyn Leonard
5. I Hate George W. Bush Reader: Why He's Wrong About Absolutely Everything edited by Clint Willis
6. Cave Animals by Francine Galko
7. The Satanic Verses by Salman Rushdie
8. Sex Tips from a Dominatrix by Patricia Payne
9. The Complete Infidel's Guide to the Koran by Robert Spencer
10. Cave Decorating by Osama Bin Laden

All these books by the way are real except for the last one. Some of these books of course Bin Laden would never read or even recommend for that matter.

The Olympic Commitee Rejected Obama

Or if you don't like that title how about "The Olympic Committee Wanted Obama to Fail." Sound better? This is pure and simple racism from the Olympic Committee. Where's is the national hemorrhoid Jimmy Carter's comment on this decision? After all Chicago was in the selection process before Hillary Clinton dropped out of the presidential race (can't blame President Bush on this decision). Maybe the committee wanted McCain for president. It couldn't be about anything else could it?

I mean surely the committee ignored the man-child messiah President Obama's negative remarks about America. Surely they could ignore Obama always apologizing for America. Not to mention Obama and his wife relating the Olympics to themselves when they were trying to convince the committee why the Olympics should be in Chicago. Narcissism anyone? Nah. The Olympic committee should have been mesmerized by Obama's charm and charisma like the rest of the world. Chavez sure likes Obama. It was racism even though Brazil's population is over 50% black people.

Sarcasm aside. Obama lost because him going there was overkill. If you remember Chicago was eliminated right off the bat. Wasn't his wife and Oprah enough? Couldn't he stay home and you know concentrate on growing the economy and winning the war in Afghanistan? Him going there was nothing but Obama repaying a favor to the Chicago powers-that-be in my opinion. We helped you out and now it's your turn to help us out. That sort of thing.

Only the committee itself knows why it did not pick Chicago. Unless someone asks the committee we will never know what the reason for their decision was. Here's an idea. Maybe the Obama Fan Club (the drive-by-media) could ask the members of the committee to find out why. Then again maybe the media does not really want to know why.

A Short Course on Political Power

Those who have been once intoxicated with power, and have derived any kind of emolument from it, even though but for one year, never can willingly abandon it. They may be distressed in the midst of all their power; but they will never look to anything but power for their relief.
-- Edmund Burke

Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
-- Lord Acton

The second quote is well known, but not the first. Power corrupts people because people are imperfect. Most major religions and any good psychological school knows that people are imperfect and will always be imperfect. Examine this syllogism: Man is imperfect. Gov't is composed of men. Therefore gov't is imperfect. This syllogism will always be true. Of course if you think mankind can be perfected, then you'll probably think gov't can be perfected. And that is a dangerous idea to have. That's what the Soviet Union thought. The so called "New Man." Well, neither man or gov't can be perfected. It is a delusion. We can be better moral smarter people but not a perfect people.
The first quote is just saying that power can be an addictive drug. The more you have the more you want. The more you have the more you think you are god-like. Your ego gets bigger. You also become paranoid. You become obsessed with who has power and who doesn't have power that wants to take your power away even if they don't want to. Hitler killed a supporter because Hitler got paranoid that the supporter was becoming more popular than him. And get this. The supporter was giving speeches praising Hitler.
Abraham Lincoln said this about power: Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power. Power is about what you do too another person. It can be for good or for evil. Or as William Hazlitt put it: The love of liberty is the love of others; the love of power is the love of ourselves. Actually, "love of ourselves" maybe the wrong way to put it. Being narcissistic is a better term. Sociopaths are narcissistic people with no conscience who get their kicks out of controlling people. Show me a brutal world dictator and I'll show you a sociopath. You know why Satan was tempting Jesus? It was because he was trying to find out how human He was. To see if Jesus could pass up ultimate power or not. Jesus did not fall for the Devil's trick though like most politicians would.

The worth of men consists in their liability to persuasion. . . . Civilization is the maintenance of social order, by its own inherent persuasiveness as embodying the nobler alternative. The recourse to force, however unavoidable, is a disclosure of the failure of civilization, either in the general society or in a remnant of individuals. Thus in a live civilization there is always an element of unrest. For sensitiveness to ideas means curiosity, adventure, change. Civilized order survives on its merits, and is transformed by its power of recognizing its imperfections.
-Alfred North Whitehead

Persuasion is hard. I took a class in it in college. There are several theories of how to persuade someone. All of them involve giving the person a choice to act. Coercion leaves a person no choice to act. True leaders don't need coercion. Using reason, listening, respecting free will, and trusting their fellow country men is all they need. Finally, a warning from founding father John Adams:

Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. The jaws of power are always open to devour, and her arm is always stretched out, if possible, to destroy the freedom of thinking, speaking, and writing. Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the People, who have... a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge, I mean the characters and conduct [italics are mine] of their rulers. There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free 'government' ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty. Liberty cannot be preserved without general knowledge among people.

Gee, he sounds sort of like Glenn Beck. Hmmm...

Indoctrination of Children

The below is from a Wikipedia article on Soviet Propaganda:

We must make the young into a generation of Communists. Children, like soft wax, are very malleable and they should be molded into good Communists... We must rescue children from the harmful influence of the family... We must nationalize them. From the earliest days of their little lives, they must find themselves under the beneficial influence of Communist schools... To oblige the mother to give her child to the Soviet state - that is our task."

Is this what the Left is doing to children in schools? I am not talking about turning them into Commies but maybe socialists? I mean substitute Communist with Socialists you don't get much difference.

On Glenn Beck's show and then on The O'Reilly Factor I seen a video of a teacher having her kindergarten class sing the "Mmmm, mmm" song. They would praises Obama and then go "Mmmm, mmmm, mmmm." If they would have added "good" at the end of the "mmmm" part they would have the Campbell's soup song. Exactly what does this song have to do with any kind of learning? The Left say this is cute and there is nothing wrong with what the teacher did. I wonder if they would have said that if instead of Obama the students were singing the praises of Bush. Probably not. No teacher should be having their students sing the praises of any president. Discuss their presidency yes, but not make up a song to them.

Then I seen a video of a Leftist "teaching" kids about how the gov't works. The Leftist said it is the responsibility of gov't to take care of its citizens. She wasn't talking about from military attacks. She was talking about the gov't being the parent, and the citizens being the child. She did not use the terms "parent" and "child" but I am sure that is what she meant. Then this person said pillow manufacturers put a neural-toxin in pillows and the gov't puts over 50% of the federal budget in the military. Both facts are wrong. By the way this video was funded by the far-left Tides Foundation.

One last example. I was the local news some months back and they showed a school teacher having her grade school kids march around carry signs saying "Health Insurance for Kids." The newscaster thought this was cute, but it made me nauseous. Exactly how is this educational? That is pure indoctrination. Those kids just wanted to take a field trip.

Nowadays if I was a parent I would be weary what the schools are teaching my kids. It might not be what you want them to be taught.

Thoughts on Universal Health Care

1. If America has Obama Care will the Hippocratic oath still apply? I mean doctors will no longer be working for themselves but the state so will the gov't change the oath or no longer use it?

2. Under Obama Care will the doctor-patient confidentiality contract still apply? Or will gov't be included in that contract. After all gov't will be approving/denying all the drug prescriptions and medical procedures a person has.

3. You can sue the gov't under the Federal Tort Claims Act. Under this act the gov't agency that is sued has six months to respond. You might want to think about that if America has universal health care.

4. Under Obama Care there is no second opinion. The only opinion that counts is the government's opinion.

Reasonable Questions for Unreasonable Times Part 4

• Why do we need a civilian force? We don't need one.

• Who is posing a threat to us? The jihadists but no-one domestically as bad as they are. Yes, there are radicals who want to change the structure of America. But that is what democracy is about. You can vote out the bums.

• Who will this "force" be made up of? According to a Wikipedia article it will contain middle school students, high school students, & college students. He will also create various corps like Americorps and the Peace Corps.

• Who is the real enemy? Anyone who disagrees with his policy.

• Does the president know of a coming event? If not, who builds an army against an unrecognized enemy? I don't know. As for the second question no-one who is sane.

• Why won't the media get off their butts and look into these radicals in the White House? And into this civilian army? Because they adore the president still and don't see a story. Also they're philosophy is too much aligned with the White House. You aren't critical with your friends as much as your enemies.

Reasonable Questions for Unreasonable Times Part 3

1. Why does the FCC have a diversity "czar"? So there can be affirmative action in radio stations & TV stations.

2. Who is Mark Lloyd and how does he plan to "balance" the airwaves? He is the FCC diversity "czar." By restoring local and national caps on the ownership of commercial radio stations, ensuring greater local accountability over radio licensing, and requiring commercial owners who fail to abide by enforceable public interest obligations to pay a fee to support public broadcasting according to a Newsbusters.org blog.

3. Will he bring back the Fairness Doctrine or worse? Worse. The FCC would rescind any stations' broadcast licenses that would violate this thug's czar's rules.

4. Cass Sunstein once said he wants to balance the Internet; is that next? Could be. Sunstein calls for popular or partisan websites to be forced to carry links to opposing viewpoints according to a Techliberation.com article.

5. Will broadcasters who leave the airwaves be allowed to go to satellite or Internet without government regulation? Good question, probably not. If broadcasters go to the Internet then they we be bound by Sustein's rules. If they regulate private websites then could then presumably regulate satellite providers.

6. Is there any place (that has a mass audience) where the government won't regulate free speech? In a church. But even that is regulated. If a minister endorses a political candidate or expresses political views then the church may lose its non-profit status. Also, university professors and motivational speakers may not be regulated.

7. Why does it seem every member of the Obama advisory team hates capitalism, unless those companies (like G.E.) are in bed with the administration? Because Obama's team are radical leftists and they don't hate companies who share the same philosophy as they have or companies that want gov't assistance.

8. If Lloyd has his way, stations who don't comply to the governments definition of the "public interest" will have to pay a massive fine --- that helps support public broadcasting:

   What will be the definition of "public interest"? It's whatever the gov't defines it to be.

9. Why should it be balanced? Because it's public airwaves? (Well, there are public roads that go by my house and I don't count how many Republicans and Democrats are driving on them) Funny. Or counting how many Republicans and Dems who walk on the sidewalks. The airwaves don't have to be balanced. If you don't like what you hear or see turn the medium off or switch to another station.

Reasonable Questions for Unreasonable Times Part 2

• Who is "surrounding" the President in the White House? Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel who was on the board of Freddie Mac while they misreported their net income in 2000 by 30.5%. He was the one that made the comment, "A crisis is a terrible thing to waste; they are opportunities to do big things." When asked about the Town Halls this is what senior advisor Valerie Jarret said at a question-and-answer session:

  They are trying to scare people, elderly people, and I am ticked. It's what we are fighting against, but they underestimate the American people. and media is not focusing on the productive debates we are having, it's not just raucous. we need retail help from you all.

  The "you" she is talking about is far left groups.

• Do any of the President's advisers have criminal records? If you mean senior staff, no. Van Jones, the Green Czar was arrested twice.

• Are the President's advisers working to better the country or their own ideals? Better their own ideals. Unless you think making the country into a socialistic state is a good idea.

• Who are the anti-capitalists in Washington? According to US Chamber of Commerce these are some House members that got low scores: Nancy Pelosi (26), Henry Waxman (26), Maxine Walters (21), Jessie Jackson, Jr. (28), Steny Hoyer (32), Barney Frank (25), The number in parens is the average score. Some Senate member with low scores: Chris Dodd (32), Dick Durbin (34), Tom Harkin (37), John Kerry (38), Harry Reid (37), Charles Schumer (36), Harry Reed (36), Robert Byrd (32). If you noticed everyone I named is a Democrat. I did not deliberately look for Dems. I was just looking for names I recognize, then the score. Also, Obama got an average score of 32. Biden's average score was 36. Hillary Clinton's score was 46. These scores were when they were senators.

• What roles do they have in crafting bills? Congress always has a role in crafting bills. Obama and Biden has influence too.

• What was "STORM"? What happened to the founders, where are they now? STORM stood for Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement. It was a communist revolutionary organization founded by now Green Czar Van Jones.

• What qualifications must one have to be a Presidential adviser? Trustworthy, knowledgeable in his/ her field, & pro-American.

• What is the difference between a community organizer and a community activist? A community activist takes on community issues. A community organizer organizes communities for social causes. A community activist can be a community organizer too to accomplish his/her goals.

• Do the czars have power? Yes, too much power.

• Should a communist have the ear of the President of the United States? No, because they are anti-democracy and anti-capitalistic.

• What role did the Apollo Alliance play in crafting bills? The group claims it influenced the "stimulus" package. It is an alliance of business, labor and environmental groups. Those groups have lobbyists. It is not too far fetched to think the Apollo Alliance has lobbyists too.

• Does the President know the co-founder of the Weather Underground is a board member of the Apollo Alliance? I think he might be talking about Jeff Jones. Jones is a director of the New York State Apollo Alliance. He might know about him.

• How many people in the administration are connected to the movement for a democratic society? Van Jones.

• What role does George Soros play... CONSTITUTIONALLY? None whatsover.

Reasonable Questions for Unreasonable Times Part 1b

• Did President Obama know of Van Jones’ radical political beliefs when he named him special advisor? Don't know. If Obama didn't know he should have known. Then again if he did know and was alright with Van Jones' beliefs that tells a lot about Obama's beliefs. Obama said in so many words, judge me on the people I surround myself with.

• The Apollo Alliance claimed credit for writing the stimulus bill—why was this group allowed to write any portion of this bill? Because they have connections to Congress. Two of the founders are Democrat congressmen. Basically this group is an alliance of big business, labor unions, and environmental groups.

• If politicians aren’t writing the bills and aren’t reading the bills, do they have any idea what these 1000 page plus bills actually impose on the American people? No, and if they did know they don't care.

• If the ‘public option’ health care plan is so good why won’t politicians agree to have that as their plan? Because they know it isn't good and politicians always look out for their best interests.

• If town hall meetings are intended for the politicians to learn what’s on our minds—why do they spend so much time talking instead of listening? Because they don't want to learn what's on our minds. They want the town hall participants to shut-up and not ask any questions. Just absorb and agree with what they are saying.

• Politicians are refusing to attend town hall meetings complaining, without evidence, that they are scripted. Does that mean we shouldn’t come out and vote for you since every campaign stop, baby kiss and speech you give is scripted? Good one Glenn. He has a point. I mean they are accusing the town hall participants of doing what they do most of the time.

• Why would you want to overwhelm the system? To create a chaos and fear in the American people. Then you try to convince them that gov't intervention is needed to solve the crisis.

• Is using the economic crises to rush legislation through congress what Rahm Emanuel meant when he talked about "not letting a crises go to waste"? Probably. That way you hope people are so wrapped up in their personal lives they are not paying attention to what is going in the gov't.

• What are the czars paid? What is the budget for their staffs/offices? As for the first question Glenn Beck answers that on czar page. Most salaries are unknown, and some are not paid at all. As for the budgets of the czars, who knows. Obama does not list any czar salary or budget on the White House website. So much for transparency.