Highlights of Rand Paul’s Obamacare Rant

With the implementation of Obamacare, doctors will soon be required to use roughly 122,000 [my emphasis] new medical diagnostic codes to inform the federal government of injuries sustained by Americans.

The new codes include classifications for “injuries sustained from a turtle,” “walking into a lamppost” and “injuries sustained from burning water skis.”

312 new codes for injuries from animals; 72 new codes for injuries just from birds; 9 new codes for ‘injuries from the macaw.’

Injuries sustained from a turtle.

A code for … walking into a lamppost. There’s also a code for ‘walking into a lamppost, subsequent encounter.’

A code for injuries sustained from burning water skis.

[read more]

Senator Paul asks physicians around the country if they have ever seen injuries from a macaw. No one has.

As for turtles, he jokes that they are of course dangerous, but why have two codes for them? Your doctor has to inform the gov’t if you have been struck or bitten by a turtle.  Turtles can be dangerous if you let them. And because they are so slow they can sneak up on you quietly. Watch out for them. While you think they are being harmless munching on their lettuce or whatever they are eating, they are planning your demise. As the saying goes, a turtle’s hit is worse than it’s bite.

Rand Paul says this about the gov’t: “Your government just wants to take care of you. They don’t think you’re smart enough to make these decisions.” Duh. My thoughts exactly. The gov’t thinks its citizens are like Homer Simpson or worse like cows.

What Conservatives Are For

On April 22, 2013, Senator Mike Lee (R–UT) addressed an audience at The Heritage Foundation outlining a conservative vision of a free society based on American first principles. Two institutions lie at the core of American freedom, said Lee: free enterprise and civil society. American-style freedom brings people together, while big-government policies divide people into interest groups and turn citizens into dependents. Lee flatly rejects the liberal claim that conservatives oppose progress, and he makes the case that elected conservatives must do a better job of presenting the conservative vision to the American public.

Here are this four key points:

1. The conservative vision of American freedom depends on free enterprise and civil society; the great obstacle to realizing this vision today is government dysfunction.
2. A new conservative reform agenda should center on three basic principles: equality, diversity, and sustainability.
3. Equality means everyone plays by the same rules with no more preferential policymaking. Diversity is another name for federalism. The federal government makes too many mistakes because it makes too many decisions. Most of them it doesn't have to make - and therefore shouldn't. The states, however, should.
4. Once we eliminate policy privilege and restore policy diversity, we can start ensuring policy sustainability. When the federal government stops doing things it shouldn't, it can start doing the things it shouldn't and do them better.

[read more]

The real-life tricorder

 

From the dailymail.co.uk (May 23):

The tricorder, a medical device that scan patients in seconds, originally shot to fame in Star Trek - but now a California firm has made it a reality.

The Scanadu Scout can measure your heart rate, temperature, blood oxygen levels, respiratory rate, blood pressure, ECG and emotional stress - just like Spock's handheld gadget.

It can be placed on the user’s forehead and within ten seconds uses Bluetooth to send the results direct to their smartphone after an array of sensors and a camera scan the patient.

It is also able to store previous results meaning that patients can track changes in their vital signs.

'The Scout puts your body’s information where it belongs: in your hands,' the firm says.

'Share it with your doctor and others to take health conversations – and discoveries – to a new level.' [read more]

Health discoveries to a new level? Hmmm. Don’t know if that sounds good or not. Discovering something about your body is usually not a good thing. Although, hypochondriacs would love this device.

Somebody commented that it needs to monitor blood sugar and hormone levels. Maybe in the next version.

I wonder if this gadget will be required when it gets fully developed and the Unaffordable N0-Care Act (Obamacare) kicks in. The gov’t could want all of its citizens to upload their health data using this device to a national database. Good for Scanadu (they make a lot of money) but not so good for the consumer.

How police can find your deleted text messages

From money.cnn.com (May 22):

Smartphone forensics experts can retrieve just about anything from any phone. Police will often seize and analyze phones for evidence of things such as indecent photos and videos, what calls were placed when and to whom, browser history, calendar events and explanations of a suicide or murder.

All of that can be uncovered whether or not a user deleted it from their phone.

"It makes it much, much harder, but wiping a phone doesn't always mean you can't get the data," said Courtney Lancaster, forensic analyst with IT consulting company TCS, at the CTIA wireless industry trade show in Las Vegas.

Forensic analysts have dozens of tools that allow them to access many layers of data on a device.

A so-called "physical" analysis can typically retrieve deleted information that is hidden deep within a smartphone's memory. When a photo is saved, for example, the device's operating system will typically store variations of that image in several different locations -- a thumbnail view may still be available even if the original isn't. [read more]

If computer forensic experts can look at a PC’s contents why not a smartphone’s contents? Both are basically computers. You have the right tools you can just about analyze any computer or smartphone.

Small Businesses Startups and Job Growth

The Kauffman Foundation has done extensive research on job creation. Kauffman Senior Fellow Tim Kane analyzed a new data set from the U.S. government, called Business Dynamics Statistics, which provides details about the age and employment of businesses started in the U.S. since 1977. What this showed was that startups aren't just an important contributor to job growth: they're the only thing. Without startups, there would be no net job growth in the U.S. economy. From 1977 to 2005, existing companies were net job destroyers, losing 1 million net jobs per year. In contrast, new businesses in their first year added an average of 3 million jobs annually.

When analyzed by company age, the data are even more startling. Gross job creation at startups averaged more than 3 million jobs per year during 1992-2005, four times as high as any other yearly age group. Existing firms in all year groups have gross job losses that are larger than gross job gains.

Half of the startups go out of business within five years; but overall they are still the ones that lead the charge in employment creation. Kauffman Foundation analyzed the average employment of all firms as they age from year zero (birth) to year five. When a given cohort of startups reaches age five, its employment level is 80 percent of what it was when it began. In 2000, for example, startups created 3,099,639 jobs. By 2005, the surviving firms had a total employment of 2,412,410, or about 78 percent of the number of jobs that existed when these firms were born.

Source: The last chapter in John Mauldin’s 2011 book Endgame: The End of the Debt Supercycle and How It Changes Everything.

Startups are fragile. It’s hard enough getting and retaining customers and trying to be better than your competitors. Then I read that start-ups are prime targets for cyberattacks. Geez.  And when gov’ts over-regulate and over-tax the start-ups it doesn’t make running a business any easier. More obstacles to overcome.  Then when they grow, the gov’t punishes them unless they do business with the gov’t—ie crony capitalism.

Is There a Moral Basis for Capitalism?

From FEE.org (August 1983):

The contemporary indictment of capitalism usually takes two basic forms. First, there is the economic indictment. Those who make the attack from this perspective argue that capitalism is not viable because it is afflicted with insurmountable contradictions which result in a permanent state of crisis, or problems which can only be temporarily resolved by palliatives. Second, there is the moral indictment. Capitalism, according to this view, is the exploitation of man by man, the profit motive and the rule of money supreme, with an inevitable cruel injustice everywhere manifest.

The claim that capitalism provides the best economic structure for man’s moral development, long a virtual article of faith in American life, is met with derision these days by politicians, journalists, university professors, and theologians. Clergymen daily rage with indignation against the “evils” and “injustice” of the competitive market. Capitalism is, so we are told, “intrinsically immoral.” “Soul dead, stomach well alive,” was Thomas Carlyle’s estimate of the market system, and all the cultured despisers of commercial civilization are in hearty agreement.

The critics are right when they demand that our economic system rest on a firm moral basis. If it can be shown that it does not, then we should abandon it immediately and seek to establish a more just order. At the outset, however, important distinctions and clarifications must be made. Arthur Shenfield calls attention to one of the most vital, viz., “the economic system called capitalism is a system of relationships. It is a composition of markets, and markets are by definition systems of relationships, not purposive bodies. It follows that we can apply the tests of morality to capitalism only by considering the behavior of individuals who operate within it, not as a system capable in itself of being moral or immoral.”

It is Shenfield’s contention that since capitalism is “a system of relationships it cannot be moral or immoral in the sense that a purposive group can be . . . .” He denies, however, that such a system is morally neutral. “If its essential characteristics on balance positively nurture or reinforce moral or immoral individual behavior, it is a moral or immoral system in its effects.”

Economic freedom is born and thrives only in nations or communities where reverence for all human life is widely held to be a supreme value, where the personal safety of the neighbor and his family is generally regarded as inviolably sacred, and where compassionate individuals, acting either alone or through voluntary associations, are encouraged to offer substantial assistance to the poor and needy. This differs radically from the command society of socialism, whose adherents are frequently found not only approving but actively promoting violence, terrorism, and the destruction of the middle class. In such societies (and this would include the Welfare State) “compassion” is institutionalized, and becomes a monopoly of the state.

The seventh commandment, “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” teaches us, as does the ninth commandment, that contracts must be honored and double-dealing scorned. “The historic link between the biblical idea of binding covenants and the Western idea of binding contracts,” writes Gary North, “is obvious enough.” The very idea of contracting for joint benefit presupposes a high level of moral integrity and faithfulness on the part of all the parties engaged in the transaction.

In socialism the paternal state seeks to vitiate the necessity for the sanctity of contracts by substituting its omnipotent controls and decrees. Opportunity for moral development and the growth of trust between free men is thereby suppressed.

The right of private ownership is based on the eighth commandment, “Thou shalt not steal.” According to the Westminster Shorter Catechism, this commandment requires “the lawful procuring and furthering the wealth and outward estate of ourselves and others.” The commandment forbids “whatsoever doth or may unjustly hinder our own or our neighbor’s wealth or outward estate.” The eighth commandment “means that the Bible countenances private property—for if a thing is not owned in the first place it can hardly be stolen.” [read more]

Just as I thought. God’s a capitalist. (Just joking! Then again…)

Variations, Stability, and the Economy

Variations also act as purges. Small forest fires periodically cleanse the system of the most flammable material, so this does not have the opportunity to accumulate. Systematically preventing forest fires from taking place “to be safe” makes the big one much worse. For similar reasons, stability is not good for the economy: firms become very weak during long periods of steady prosperity devoid of setbacks, and hidden vulnerabilities accumulate silently under the surface—so delaying crises is not a very good idea. Likewise, absence of fluctuations in the market causes hidden risks to accumulate with impunity. The longer one goes without a market trauma, the worse the damage when commotion occurs.

Source: Antifragile. Things That Gain from Disorder. (2012) by Nassim Nicholas Taleb.

It’s too bad the powers-that-be don’t learn the lesson above. They think and fear the “crises” will last indefinitely so they have to do something anything to prevent the crises from getting worse. But it does get worse when they interfere with the economy. That’s why the Great Depression wasn’t just a normal depression. The economy will self-correct in its own time. It’s non-linear.

Then there are those leaders who are just control freaks and love regulating the economy to death. Or near death.

The author lists what he calls people who have “skin in the game”: citizens; merchants, businessmen, artisans; entrepreneurs; laboratory and field experimenters; gov’t of city-states; writers. Those who have no skin in the game: Bureaucrats; consultants, sophists; business (my input: if businesses keep their entrepreneurial spirit they would be better off I think); corporate executives (with suit); theoreticians, data miners, observational studies; centralized gov’t; editors.

Mr. Taleb has a suggestion to deter “too big to fail” and prevent employers from taking advantage of the public:

A company that is classified as potentially bailable  out should it fail should not be able to pay anyone more than a corresponding civil servant.

He has a point. If you take money from the government don’t expect there won’t be any conditions or strings attached. If it is a loan and you pay back the loan then the strings should go away. Then that of course that means less power for the gov’t. Because if there are conditions then fewer businesses won’t go to the gov’t for money. Hence, no crony capitalism.

Finally, toward the ending of chapter 24 he has these thoughts:

       But the good news is that I am convinced that a single person with courage can bring down a collective composed of wimps.

       And here, once again, we need to go back into history for the cure. The scriptures were quite aware of the problem of the diffusion of responsibility and made it a sin to follow the crowd in doing evil---as well as to give false testimony in order to conform to the multitude.

The Fiscal Cost of Unlawful Immigrants and Amnesty to the U.S. Taxpayer

From Heritage.org (May 6):

Executive Summary

Unlawful immigration and amnesty for current unlawful immigrants can pose large fiscal costs for U.S. taxpayers. Government provides four types of benefits and services that are relevant to this issue:

• Direct benefits. These include Social Security, Medicare, unemployment insurance, and workers’ compensation.
• Means-tested welfare benefits. There are over 80 of these programs which, at a cost of nearly $900 billion per year, provide cash, food, housing, medical, and other services to roughly 100 million low-income Americans. Major programs include Medicaid, food stamps, the refundable Earned Income Tax Credit, public housing, Supplemental Security Income, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.
• Public education. At a cost of $12,300 per pupil per year, these services are largely free or heavily subsidized for low-income parents.
• Population-based services. Police, fire, highways, parks, and similar services, as the National Academy of Sciences determined in its study of the fiscal costs of immigration, generally have to expand as new immigrants enter a community; someone has to bear the cost of that expansion.

The cost of these governmental services is far larger than many people imagine. For example, in 2010, the average U.S. household received $31,584 in government benefits and services in these four categories.

The governmental system is highly redistributive. Well-educated households tend to be net tax contributors: The taxes they pay exceed the direct and means-tested benefits, education, and population-based services they receive. For example, in 2010, in the whole U.S. population, households with college-educated heads, on average, received $24,839 in government benefits while paying $54,089 in taxes. The average college-educated household thus generated a fiscal surplus of $29,250 that government used to finance benefits for other households. [read more]

All that money for future Democrat voters. What a waste. Maybe there should be provision that says for illegal immigrants: You can’t vote for 20 years until you make yourself legal. And from the Blaze.com (May 10), it looks like there is a biometric ‘national id system’ tucked inside the immigration bill:

The section in the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act called “Identity Authentication Mechanism,” which describes a “photo tool,” is what has some on alert.

The section states that an employer hoping to hire an individual would need to verify the identity of the said person “using the photo tool.” Such a tool would be developed and maintained by the Secretary of State allowing employers to “match the photo on a covered identity document provided to the employer to a photo maintained by a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services database.” [read more]

Nice. Real nice.

EU Proposes Now Controlling…Seeds

From The Blaze.com (May 8):

The European Commission is proposing legislation that would have the government regulate what can be planted to its “tested, approved and accepted” list of seeds. Some worry the legislation, in addition to being over-regulation by the government, would lead to less biodiversity and that it could set a precedent that could someday criminalize the average gardener planting so-called banned seeds.

According to the European Commission, the Plant Reproductive Material Law seeks to update existing legislation by cutting down 70 pieces of law to five and reducing “the red-tape on processes and procedures for farmers, breeders and food business operators (producers, processors and distributors) to make it easier for them to carry out their profession,” the press release stated.

The commission believes its package modernizes and simplifies rules “guiding the operation of the food chain” in the best interest of protecting health.

“The package responds to the call for better simplification of legislation and smarter regulation thus reducing administrative burden for operators and simplifying the regulatory environment. Special consideration is given to the impact of this legislation on SMEs and micro enterprises which are exempted from the most costly and burdensome elements in the legislation,” the press release stated. [read more]

This is all about control. Yea, I know the EU is regulating seeds to “protect” the health of the general population. So, they say. They know best, I guess. Well, nearly 43,000 people signed a petition saying “don’t tread on my seeds!” To be fair the seed Nazis EU made some concessions:

• Home gardeners are now permitted to save and swap unapproved seed without breaking the law.
• Individuals & small organizations can grow and supply/sell unapproved vegetable seed - as long as they have less than 10 employees.
• Seedbanks can grow unapproved seeds without breaking the law.
• There could be easier (in an unspecified way) rules for large producers of seeds suitable for organic agriculture etc, in some (unspecified) future legislation – maybe.

See, the EU is a nice bureaucracy after all. Instead of confining you to a small box they’ll confine you to a medium sized box.

Texas Doctor Sues U.S. Over Obamacare

From Bloomberg.com (May 7):

A Texas doctor sued the U.S. over President Barack Obama’s health-care reforms on claims the U.S. Supreme Court overlooked when it upheld the Affordable Care Act last year.

Steven Hotze of Houston claims the law, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, violates the U.S. Constitution’s origination and takings clauses, which weren’t part of arguments before the Supreme Court. The high court upheld the act by a 5-to-4 vote.

Hotze’s suit, filed today in federal court in Houston, targets the “shared responsibility payment” business owners will be required to pay the U.S. under the act if they choose not to provide government-approved minimum health coverage for their workers. That penalty kicks in on Jan. 1.

“Obamacare has become a redistribution of wealth scheme, where people are compelled to pay money to other people,” Hotze’s lawyer, Andy Schlafly, said in a telephone interview. “The government isn’t allowed to order one private party, a business owner, to pay money to another private party, an insurance company.” [read more]

Good for this doctor. More doctors should do this. It is a wealth redistribution scheme and a power trip.

The article had to admit the doctor is president of Conservative Republicans of Texas like that mattered. Which it doesn’t. The law is unconstitutional and it doesn’t matter who fights it. If the doctor had been a democrat would Bloomberg.com mentioned that? Probably not.

Key Things to Take Away From Wednesday’s Benghazi Hearing

1. There were multiple stand-down orders, not just one.* Special operations forces were told, twice, by their chain of command not to board aircraft to Benghazi to rescue the Americans then under attack. The U.S. deputy diplomat, Greg Hicks, testified that the military commander, Lt. Col. Gibson, had his team ready to go twice
2. Whistleblower ‘Effectively Demoted’ After Questioning Benghazi Talking Points. ^* Hicks told members of Congress that he has been “effectively demoted” from his position as deputy chief of mission shortly after he questioned United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice’s explanation that the Benghazi attack was the result of a spontaneous protest sparked by a YouTube video.
3. Benghazi Witness Told Not to Speak With Congressional Investigator Alone.^ Hicks on Wednesday also revealed that he was told by Obama administration officials not to talk with Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) unsupervised.
4. Who Is Lt. Col. Gibson?^ Benghazi whistleblower Gregory Hicks repeatedly brought up a man by the name of Lt. Col. Gibson. Other than the fact that he was a Special Operations Command (SOC) Africa commander, we don’t know much else about him.
5. State Department Official Fingered Terror Group Day After Attack.^ During the House Oversight Committee hearing on the Benghazi attack, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) read from an email sent by Beth Jones, the acting assistant secretary for Middle Eastern affairs at the State Department, to Benghazi whistleblower Gregory Hicks and other top administration officials. In it, she fingered Ansar al-Sharia, a radical Islamic terror group, as the perpetrator behind the attack after the Libyan government speculated that they might be ex-Gadhafi forces.
6. Hicks testified that Ambassador Stevens traveled to Benghazi to fulfill one of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s wishes.* Despite the fact that security was worsening in Benghazi for months leading up to the 9-11 attack, Clinton wanted to make the post there permanent.
7. Clinton was briefed at 2 am on the night of the attack, was never told that a movie had anything to do with the attack by those on the ground in Libya, yet blamed the movie anyway.* Hicks also testified that he was shocked when Ambassador Susan Rice blamed a YouTube movie for inspiring the 9-11 attack.
8. “The YouTube movie was a non-event in Libya.” * Hicks directly testified that the YouTube movie, for which a man remains in jail, was not in any way relevant to the attack in Benghazi. Why Obama, Clinton, Rice et al blamed that movie for the attack remains an unanswered question.

Sources: *7 Things We Learned from the Benghazi Whistleblower Hearing.

                 ^Here Are the 5 Key Things to Take Away From Wednesday’s Benghazi Hearing

This is starting to sound like a cover-up to me. As for who issued the stand-down order that would be the POTUS.  That’s what former ambassador Rep. Ann Wagner said. If that’s true (no reason to doubt her) why wouldn’t Obama try to send help to the embassy? Because it wasn’t important to Obama try to rescue those people in the embassy. Maybe, he thought something would go wrong and he would get blamed. I don’t know. It didn’t concern him. Also, keep in mind Libya was his “baby” and made people to believe he had Al Qaeda on the run. 

From the Blaze.com (May 10);

Then, the talking points used by Ambassador Susan Rice on the Sunday shows on the weekend after the 9/11/12 terror attack in Benghazi underwent at least 12 edits –  including revisions by the Obama administration’s State Department — new emails obtained by ABC News show. Those revisions included scrubbing all references to an Al Qaeda-affiliated group and all references to previous CIA warnings about a terror threat. [read more]

If this isn’t a cover-up then I don’t know what is anymore.

Chinese Hackers Infiltrate US Army Database, Compromise Safety Of Thousands Of Dams

From ibtimes.com (May 2):

Chinese hackers have infiltrated a sensitive U.S. Army database that contains information about the vulnerabilities of thousands of dams located throughout the United States. The hacking of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ National Inventory of Dams (NID) has raised concerns that information gathered in the attack could help China carry out a cyberattack on the national electrical power grid.

An unauthorized user traced to China hacked the NID database in January but wasn’t discovered until sometime in April.  [read more]

The article doesn’t state if the hacker was from the gov’t or not, but it doesn’t matter. China not only ignores its hackers (as long as they are not hacking into China’s computer systems), but probably condones and encourages these hackers. China is not America’s friend. And China doesn’t respect the US since Obama has been in office (actually neither has any country really for that matter). It’s a good thing that the Army Corps was able to stop the hack pretty quickly. What about next time?

Talking about Chinese hackers, here are some headlines from Newsmax.com about China hacking America:

Jun. 2, 2011 - US Investigating Google Claim of China Hacking

Jan. 19, 2012 - Suspicion Grows China Hacked US Govt Emails

April 29, 2012 - Rick Perry Eyes 2016 Run; China Hacks US Fighter Jet Plans

Feb. 6, 2013 - Rupert Murdoch: Chinese Are Still Hacking the WSJ

May 7, 2013 - Pentagon Report Blames Cyberattacks Directly on Chinese Government

New adverts 'could track your eyes' in supermarkets

From the BBC.co.uk (April 30):

An advertising system which is able to track your eye movements while you shop has been created by researchers based at Lancaster University.

The Sideways project uses software to locate faces and eye movements of shoppers captured on camera.

It could allow for video screens which change adverts depending on what you look at in a shop.

The team told the BBC they hoped the technology would be in use in shops within five years.

The technology can also be used to allow people to use their eyes to control content on screens, such as scrolling through items on a list.

"The system uses a single ordinary camera that is placed close to the screen," explained senior researcher Andreas Bulling. "So we don't need any additional equipment.

"The system detects the faces of people walking by and calculates where the eyes are relative to the eye corners." [read more]

Interesting technology. Kind of creepy though. This technology is similar to the personalized advertising technology in the movie Minority Report. Is this an example of life imitating art?

Obama admin. could have “reacted and responded” to the Benghazi terrorist attack

From The Blaze.com (April 29):

The U.S. government had the ability to “react and respond” to the Benghazi terrorist attack and could have had forces on the ground before the second wave of the assault began, a special operator with knowledge of the response told Fox News in an exclusive interview. Due to the explosive nature of his allegations, the special ops member asked to remain anonymous.

“I know for a fact that C 110, the EUCOM CIF, was doing a training exercise, not in the region of northern Africa, but in Europe. And they had the ability to react and respond,” he told Fox News.

The C 110 is a 40-man Special Ops force capable of rapid response and deployment, a group trained specifically for an event like the Benghazi attack, Fox News reports. The unit was training in Croatia on Sept. 11, 2012, just 3.5 hours away from Benghazi.

“They would have been there before the second attack,” the anonymous special operator said. “They would have been there at a minimum to provide a quick reaction force that could facilitate their exfil out of the problem situation.” [read more]

There were no help for the Benghazi ambassador and the other people that got killed because of Obama’s narcissism--Obama didn’t care to help out. That’s right I said it.  Either he felt that if he did help out something might go wrong and he would get the blame or he didn’t want to offend any Muslims or he just didn’t care. You choose.

I am not sure but I think an attack on embassy is almost like an act of war.

Common Core’s “English Language Arts” Appendix B

Common Core’s English Language Arts & Literacy [pdf] in History/Social Studies, 
Science, and Technical Subjects doesn’t sound too bad, but there are some “interesting” or peculiar topics that make me go “hmmm.”

First is, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/U.S. Department of Energy.
Recommended Levels of Insulation.  Really? You are going to make students read this? Now, if you want to read this as an adult. Fine, okay by me. “Enjoy” yourself. But students? If one had a suspicious mind one would think Common Core is trying to convert the students into environmentalists. Or even believers in big gov’t. Before you know it teachers will be telling students to have their parents follow this advice. You know for the sake of the planet. 

Next is, Calishain, Tara, and Rael Dornfest. Google Hacks: Tips & Tools for Smarter  Searching, 2nd Edition. Okay, I have nothing against this book or Google for that except Google isn’t the only search engine on the internet. For example, there is Bing, Yahoo!, Ask, Dogpile, DuckDuckGo (never heard of that one?), or even Blekko (another one you might not have heard of), etc. Okay, if you have to have search tips in a book, Yahoo! was the only other search engine that had a search tip book. (I actually checked on Amazon.com). Google actually has search tips on its website. Dharmesh Shah (don’t know him) has an “12 Quick Tips to Search Google Like an Expert” entry on his blog. So, you don’t even have to buy the Google Hacks book. Bing.com also has it own tips and tricks webpage. 

Then there is, U.S. General Services Administration. Executive Order 13423: Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy,  and Transportation Management. More exciting reading. Not! Why make any student read this? Unless you’re trying to have them believe that over-regulating is a good thing. See what Big Gov is doing to for you!

Also, there is Ray Kurzweil’s “The Coming Merger of Mind and Machine.” Scientific American Special Edition January 2008. I have read this guy’s books. He’s an interesting writer. Basically, what he wants to do is in the future to have it so a person can upload his mind to a computer. Basically, this is a kind of immortality. You would have to have really good protection from viruses, worms, and other malware. Also, you would have to protect against cosmic rays and EMP attacks. Not sure if this technically feasible.

Finally, there is Atul Gawande’s “The Cost Conundrum: Health Care Costs in McAllen, Texas.” The New Yorker June 1, 2009. Guess what this is a plug for? You guessed it—Obamacare. There is even a quote from Obama saying that health care costs are threat to this nation’s balance sheet.

Economic Freedom and Christianity

                                                                      IEF                     F. House             % of Christians

Hong Kong	89.3	Partly free	10.0
Singapore	88.0	Partly free	14.6
Australia	82.6	Free	67.4
New Zealand	81.4	Free	53.5
Switzerland	81.0	Free	79.3
Canada	79.4	Free	70.3
Chile	79.0	Free	100.0
Mauritus	76.9	Free	32.2
Denmark	76.1	Free	98.0
United States	76.0	Free	78.0

 

IEF = Heritage’s Index of Economic Freedom.  F. House = Freedom House.org. The percentage of Christians state comes from Nation Master.com.

 

If you notice most countries that have Christian majorities have the highest economic freedom. Almost all the countries that have Christian majorities except for Mauritus are completely free. Hong Kong is a mixture of local religions. If China takes over Hong Kong its freedom measurements will be zero or close to zero. Singapore is predominately Buddhist. Mauritus is predominately Hindu.

The United States should be number one on the economic freedom scale—not 10! What happened?! Oh, never mind. I know saying America should be #1 sounds bad to some not from America, but that’s my American patriotism coming out. Not that I begrudge any country having economic or any kind of freedom. It would be a better world if most countries did.

The Freedom House website isn’t too bad. Except it doesn’t rate countries for gun rights. Okay, you can’t have everything.

If you’re curious Iran’s IEF score is 43.2 and Freedom House says of course they are not free.  North Korea’s IEF score is 1.5 (wow!) and Freedom House says N. Korea is not free. Duh! How about Russia? It’s IEF score is 51.1 (not bad) and Freedom House says they are not free.

The Arms Trade Treaty

In November 2009, President Obama endorsed the UN’s Arms Trade Treaty aka The Small Arms Treaty. This is what the POTUS said:

We welcome agreement to negotiate an Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) and urge that transfers of all conventional weapons be subject to the highest possible standards, so that they do not contribute to regional instability or support violations of human rights. We support the UN Program of Action to prevent, combat, and eradicate the illicit trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in all its aspects.

We are convinced that working together in the area of non-proliferation, disarmament and arms control, and cooperating with all our partners, will significantly contribute to a safer world. [read more]

On the surface it sounds okay--controlling illicit trade of small arms. But what this treaty will really do is make the 2nd amendment null and void.

This month the US Senate voted against the ATT 53-46 (this margin should be wider I think like no-one for the ATT. I know I am hoping. But I love and respect the Bill of Rights. It’s the conscience of America.)

So, who are senators who voted for the ATT? Except for two senators who were independents all were Democrats. You know the usual suspects: Harry Reid, Barbara Boxer, Patrick Leahy, Charles Schumer, Dick Durbin, Jay Rockefeller, etc.

Obama and the senators who voted for the ATT support the UN strongly at the least or support a world gov’t at worst. That’s why it’s important to vote for senators who support the constitution. Keep in mind to reverse any UN treaty that is passed is by passing a constitutional amendment or have the other signatories (which can be quite a lot) let America out of the treaty. If the other signatories are benefiting from the treaty do you think they would let America out of it? I doubt it.

As for Obama himself he told a guest on Hannity that if Obama had it his way (if not for that pesky document called the Constitution) he would out law guns. I kid you not. Not just the so-called assault weapons mind you but all guns. Then again he tells Sarah Brady that “I just want you to know that we are working on it [gun control]. We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.” So, it’s not that surprising. I am sorry, but I don’t trust Obama. That’s sad to say about any president.

I don’t know why the US is still part of the UN. The UN is not a friend of America. You have a “human rights” expert from the UN say Boston deserved the bombing attack.  Maybe America can start its own association with other countries call it “Friends of Liberty” or something like that. Have Israel, Canada, Great Britain, Australia, and other democracies join the association. Again I am dreaming. For that to happen you would need a POTUS that is not an UN advocate. Heck, I would like a POTUS that is an advocate for America. 

Obama’s Plan to Destroy America Hatched at Columbia Says Classmate

From The Blaze.com (April 19):

President Obama and I were college classmates at Columbia University, class of ’83. I know all too well how mindlessly leftist the students and faculty of that institution can be, and Barack Obama is certainly no exception. My time at Columbia made it crystal clear: leftists always believe they are morally superior. While they publicly state that their mission is to save the world from prejudice, patriotism, racism, greed, and inequality, they are, in fact, hostile and resentful towards anyone who has achieved self-made success through American values.  It is in this cesspool of intolerance that Obama and his Marxist cronies hatched their plan to destroy our country.

There are two things you need to know about Obama at Columbia University. First, he was Pre -law and a Political Science major- just like me. I thought I knew everyone studying Political Science during my four years at Columbia. Not Obama. I never met him, never saw him, never even heard of him. Strange.

Same major, same career path, and graduated on the same day– where was he? Was he busy attending communist party meetings? No need to guess. In his autobiography he proudly admits attending Socialist Party meetings at Cooper Union in downtown Manhattan. He also admits publicly in his own book to not wanting to meet or befriend anyone at Columbia who wasn’t black, Hispanic, gay, or a Marxist professor. His words- in print. So it’s possible he was so busy attending communist meetings and trying to avoid guys like me (white, straight, a guy who loved America) that our paths never crossed. Unlikely, but possible.

You see political science students at Columbia were taught a detailed plan designed by two former Columbia professors named Cloward and Piven to bring down “the system,” destroy capitalism, and turn America into a socialist state. We discussed it in class, wrote about it, and debated it outside class. It was a hot topic of discussion around the halls of Columbia for four years. [read more]

Obamacare: Death Warrant for Some

From the Independence Sentinel.com (April 19):

The government is going to regulate doctors’ pay under Obamacare and it will be based on the patient’s worthiness.

My doctor’s new patients will be young and healthy because he will be paid by his success rate with each patient.  He will get paid far less for patients who do not improve. How can he take people who can’t be cured, who will continually grow sicker or who are elderly? He has to make a living.

He is going to be paid in bulk. Patients who come back for the same problem will be included in the one-time bulk rate.

His pay will depend on patient report cards. Personalized care is out, government one-size fits all healthcare is in.

What person will go into medicine now? How will this help the doctor shortage?

What doctor will want the obese patient or the patient who smokes or drinks? It is now the government’s business. Patients will be tracked and some will be deemed unworthy of more extensive care because of their habits. That is what happens when the government is in charge. It already happens in the UK.

Beware the BMI! Patients will be subject to random BMI checks as CVS recently did with their employees. CVS was criticized but they are merely following Obamacare guidelines. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recently recommended mandated counseling sessions for obese people and if they don’t comply, they will pay for it with inferior treatment services. [read more]

And when the doctors turn away patients who will get the blame? Obama? The federal gov’t? No, on both counts. The patients, especially the l0w-information patients, will blame the doctors. Saying the doctors don’t care about them. (That’s why there is patient report cards.) And Obama will validate the patients feelings making sure the doctors get blamed—so he or the gov’t won’t.

The reason the gov’t is using a “success rate” to measure the patients isn’t because the gov’t really cares about patients getting well. The success rate is being used to justify Obamacare. The gov’t then can point to a “good” (good being defined by the gov’t) success rate and say “Look Obamacare is working. People are being cured and getting well.” If the gov’t and the lame-stream-press doesn’t report the “success rate” then it is because the success rate is low.

The Saudi National Saga

From The Blaze.com (April 22):

• A Saudi national originally identified as a “person of interest” in the Boston Marathon bombing was set to be deported under section 212 3B — “Security and related grounds” — “Terrorist activities” after the bombing.
• As the story gained traction, TheBlaze’s Chief Content Officer Joel Cheatwood received word that the government may not deport the Saudi national, originally identified as Abdul Rahman Ali Alharbi.
• Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano refused to answer questions on the subject when confronted by Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-SC) on Capitol Hill.
• An ICE official said a different Saudi national is in custody, but is “in no way” connected to the bombings.
• A congressional source, however, says that the file on Alharbi was created, that he was “linked” in some way to the Boston bombings (though it is unclear how), and that documents showing all this have been sent to Congress.
• Key congressmen of the Committee on Homeland Security request a classified briefing with Napolitano.
• Fox News’ Todd Starnes reports that Alharbi was allegedly flagged on a terrorist watch list and granted a student visa without being properly vetted.  Sources close to the investigation also told him the Saudi is still set for deportation.
• New information provided to TheBlaze reveals Alharbi’s file was altered early Wednesday evening to disassociate him from the initial charges.
• Sources say the Saudi’s student visa specifically allows him to go to school in Findlay, Ohio, though he appears to have an apartment in Boston, Massachusetts.
• Sources tell us this will most likely now be kicked from the DHS to the DOJ and labeled an ongoing investigation that can no longer be discussed.

[read more]

Is this another cover up like Benghazi? It’s starting to sound like it.  Glenn Beck said this on his radio show yesterday:

“Wednesday at 5:35 p.m. the file is altered  This is unheard of, this is impossible in the timeline due to the severity of the charge….You don’t one day put a 212 3B charge against somebody with deportation, and then the next day take it off.  It would require too much to do it.”

That 3B charge is a serious charge. It means the gov’t knows that the person with that kind of charge is a known terrorist.