November 2004 Archives

I found this speech, What would a truly libertarian society look like? and thought you might enjoy it. It gives a good look into the mindset of a Libertarian. Views on business, government, drugs and so on, it addresses a lot of subjects and gives a wonderful view of how the world could be.

The bad news is that it is a bit too idyllic. I respect their vision, and I must say it really appeals to the Conservative in me. But a true Libertarian society is about as likely to happen as a true Communist society. Just for the record, even the "Communist" countries, (USSR, China, Cuba, et. al.) are/were only at the Socialist stage, none have ever made that last step into true Communism.

Government is not going anywhere. And even benevolent governments rule through fear. That's part of their job. It is precisely that fear that keeps people from breaking the law.

Taxes are a necessary evil to run the government. We found out by experience with the Articles of Confederation that you can't just ask for taxes.

I agree we are going after the "War on Drugs" backasswards, but it is a necessary action. Most of the drugs that are illegal are that way for very good reasons. They called this stuff "junk" back in the 60's for a reason. I admit that the sentiences for minor offenses are way too harsh and the seizures are just way over the top. Massive reform is needed.

Read it. I don't think it will ever happen, but it is a rather wonderful ideal to strive for.

I am on multiple message boards, most of which relate to Warhammer 40k. On a lot of these are kids who do not take the effort to spell very well. They use IM and other shorthand which drives me crazy. For me, it casts doubt on them as to how well they can truly spell.

Here is an article, Spelling: A Lost Art, that presents a wonderful, simple way to learn how to spell out the English language.

Teach it to your children, and they will become better spellers and readers.

Well, Air America might be viable after all. A lot of people (including me) predicted that they would fold either after the election or by the end of the year when the venture capital ran out. Well, according to the website, they say that they have 41 stations, plus XM and Sirius.

I am surprised, but pleasantly so. I think it is wrong for only one force to be on the air. I hope they continue. It should be a requirement for every Conservative to listen to them at least one day a week. To listen to only opinions that agree with yours is to turn your mind into a pillow. It is precisely the refusal of Liberals to listen to opinions other than their own that isolates them from reality.

Right now and I am listening to "Unfiltered," and they have "Ask A Vet." They are talking to a man who was severely injured in Iraq. He made a statement that "The vast majority of Iraqis want us there." One of the hosts said, "We have to agree to disagree on that." Just goes to show you how they are. They take their own opinion over the statement of someone who has been over there and seen what has gone on with his own eyes.

It never stops.

I found this article, The first shot in the war on political correctness and thought you'd like to read it.

It covers the roots of PC, and it's future should we fail to stop it.

Many have said that we're in the midst of a culture war, a war between those of liberal beliefs and those of conservative beliefs. This is most likely the case and the 2004 presidential election was evidence of that. While traditionalism, in the form of conservative votes, won out in the presidential, congressional and many state and local elections, political correctness is detached from the will of the voters and is encroaching on the very sovereignty of our nation. It is encroaching through the vehicles of our courts and our schools courtesy of organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Education Association.

These two groups are merely the most visible spear tip of likely dozens of such groups, all bent on changing this into a "social democracy," a nice word for a Socialist state.
PC goes beyond the hyphenated American labels, it extends into removing God from every vestige of our society and teaching Socialist values over those of Personal Responsibility. And they are correctly starting with our youth. That was how missionaries did their job, they taught the children in the missionaries language, which drove a wedge between the children and the parents with their belief systems and traditions, the missionaries superimposed their beliefs upon the culture that they had invaded.

Well, now it is being done in reverse. They are doing their best to remove God from every last nook and cranny of our society, sterilizing the beliefs of our Founding Fathers and taking another step towards a Godless society.

Who will stand with me in this most noble of endeavors? For if we do not fight this evil, this direct attack upon our nation, her heritage and her principles, we should not be surprised if Khrushchev was correct and our country falls without a shot being fired in her defense.

The time to act is now. [emphasis mine]

Which side are you on?

I post dated a couple of entries for Thanksgiving because I didn't have the time, I had to go into work early. They have been posted and are now available for consumption (yes, I know it's a pun).

It is always important to know our history, because without a past we cannot move forward. We have nothing to build on to become greater.

In a related vein from the next story, Is Declaration of Independence unconstitutional?.

This separation of Church and State has gone too far. Just for the record, one more time, the idea of the separation of Church and State was in a personal letter from Thomas Jefferson to a friend. The phrase was scratched out. But activist judges who want to ban God from everything but church hang their hat on it everyday.

If activist judges paid as much attention to the public writings of Jefferson, Adams, Lay, et.al (i.e. The Federalist) they would have entirely different views on every contentious issue today, outside of abortion, which was not even conceived of in those days. But they pay attention to what they like and ignore what they don't. Like a four-year-old.

I believe it was Jefferson who said, "Our system of government is meant for a moral and just people. It will not work any other way." And when you look at just about every ruling made by activist judges, you will see those rulings in direct opposition of any morality outside of pure hedonism.

Our moral fiber is being ripped apart stitch by stitch when we are ordered to ignore our morality. To force such change before we are ready is to destroy in some way who we really are. The Right is far more tolerant of Homosexuality and Abortion, for example, than the Left thinks. It does not mean we should be forced to immediately embrace these subjects with open arms. We are willing to accept these and other subjects in some ways, but you will have a fight when they are forced upon us.

All societies change, for change is inevitable. But change can happen while remaining a God-fearing, moral and just people. Perhaps it is our society of instant gratification that makes some of us want everything right now.

All I know is things would go a lot smoother if changes like these were not forced upon us.

You know, I have spent a fair amount of this blog vilifying Liberals. And, the saying goes, the plural of anecdote is data.

So here is another point of data to show just how 'tolerant' the self-proclaimed party of tolerance really is. Liberals have a distorted view of tolerance.

Once, about four years ago, I found myself being tailed late at night by a car I didn’t recognize. I was by myself, it was around 11 p.m. in my hometown, a city with enough violent crime to make a person more than a bit wary.

I saw the guy’s headlights in my rearview mirror, noticed he was fairly close to me and had been for a few miles. I was on my way to shoot some pool with friends, and decided to turn off the main road, mostly to convince myself he wasn’t really following me. He followed.

[...]

"Did you guys hear?" one of them laughed. "John tailed some idiot with a Bush-Cheney sticker on his car all the way here."

The story got a hearty laugh from my whole group of acquaintances, all liberal. It was a good joke, played on some abstract conservative, retold in the utter certainty that there were no such abstract creatures in the room.

I glared straight at John and said something along the lines of "Yeah, that was me, and that was real liberal and accepting of you," adding a few sailor-approved flourishes worthy of a man who would threaten a young woman with physical harm because of her political beliefs.

The very idea of tolerance is to accept that there will be people who will have opinions that differ from yours and to accept that fact. Villanizing, degrading and despising said different opinions is not part of the tolerance package. Tolerance means the civility to agree to disagree, without hate or malice, something that Liberals lack.

While our loony Right holds the same view of a lack of tolerance for different opinions, that fringe of the Right does not control, nor is representative of the rest of us. Not true of the Left. For the last several years, the Liberals have moved farther and farther Left, thinking they are moving closer and closer to mainstream America, when they are moving farther and farther away. Liberals are becoming more and more divisive, spiteful and hateful. There is no possibility for meaningful or realistic compromise with them.

I don't like this. I want a Democrat Party that is devoted towards the good of the country, patriotic as all get-out and willing to give a little to get a little. I don't see that in today's Blue Party.

It's a shame. Until they realize what they have been doing and change course, they will get less and less power until they either wise up or end up completely out of power.

I do not rejoice in this. Yes, it is true that with all three branches of government under Republican control, we can implement our agenda with impunity. That's what bothers me. Democrats are merely a third leg to us now and that is not how it should be.

But then again, Democrats don't play by the rules either. So I guess it's a wash overall.

Now is the time for Democrats to begin the introspection, examining their ideals and comparing them to the majority of America. They have to see where things do not fit and to take steps to correct the errors.

Liberals will remain out of power until they do.

While you all are spending time with your families, I am getting to spend time with the people who I work with, the mentally ill. This is for all of those who don't have a family to go to when the holidays come around.

My time with my family will come later, right now I've got people who don't have anybody to work with right now.

Count your blessings. Some people don't have any.

From Geoff Metcalf.com, The historically correct version of Thanksgiving.

And so, as beefy gladiators chase a pigskin down the field in Miami or Detroit, we settle into our living rooms, loosen our belts, wave off a second helping of pie, and remind the little ones this is the day we echo the thanks of the Pilgrims, who gathered in the autumn of 1621 to celebrate the first bountiful harvest in a land of plenty.

That first winter in the New World had been a harsh one, of course. Half the colonists had died. But the survivors were hard-working and tenacious, and - with the aid of a little agricultural expertise graciously on loan from the Wampanoag, the Narragansett, and the Mohegan - were able to thank the Creator for an abundant harvest, that second autumn in a new land.

The only problem with the tale, unfortunately, is that it's not true.

Oh, the part about the Indians graciously showing the new settlers how to raise beans and corn is right enough. But in a November, 1985 article in "The Free Market," monthly publication of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, author and historian Richard J. Marbury pointed out: "This official story is ... a fairy tale, a whitewashed and sanitized collection of half-truths which divert attention away from Thanksgiving's real meaning."

The problem with the official story, Mr. Marbury points out, is that "The harvest of 1621 was not bountiful, nor were the colonists hardworking or tenacious. 1621 was a famine year and many of the colonists were lazy thieves."

In his "History of Plymouth Plantation," the governor of the colony, William Bradford, reported that the colonists went hungry for years because they refused to work in the fields, preferring instead to steal. Bradford recalled for posterity that the colony was riddled with "corruption and discontent." The crops were small because "much was stolen both by night and day, before it became scarce eatable."

Although in the harvest feasts of 1621 and 1622 "all had their hungry bellies filled," that relief was short-lived, and deaths from illness due to malnutrition continued.

Then, Mr. Marbury points out, "something changed." By harvest time, 1623, Gov. Bradford was reporting that "Instead of famine now God gave them plenty, and the face of things was changed, to the rejoicing of the hearts of many, for which they blessed God." Thereafter, the first governor wrote, "Any general want or famine hath not been amongst them since to this day." Why, by 1624, so much food was produced that the colonists actually began (start ital)exporting(end ital) corn.

What on earth had happened?

After the poor harvest of 1622, writes Bradford, "they began to think how they might raise as much corn as they could, and obtain a better crop." And what solution was decided upon? It turned out to be simple enough. In 1623 Gov. Bradford simply "gave each household a parcel of land and told them they could keep what they produced, or trade it away as they saw fit."

What? Wasn't that the American way from the start?

Not at all. The Mayflower Compact had required that "all profits & benefits that are got by trade, working, fishing, or any other means" were to be placed in the common stock of the colony, and that, "all such persons as are of this colony, are to have their meat, drink, apparel, and all provisions out of the common stock."

A person was to put into the common stock all he could, and take out only what he needed - a concept so attractive on its surface that it would be adopted as the equally disastrous ruling philosophy for all of Eastern Europe, some 300 years later.

"This 'from each according to his ability, to each according to his need' was an early form of socialism, and it is why the Pilgrims were starving," Marbury explains.

Gov. Bradford writes that during those terrible first three years "Young men that are most able and fit for labor and service" complained about being forced to "spend their time and strength to work for other men's wives and children." Since "the strong, or man of parts, had no more in division of victuals and clothes, than he that was weak," the strong men simply refused to work, and the amount of food produced was never adequate.

In historian Marbury's words, Gov. Bradford "abolished socialism" in the colony, "replacing it with a free market, and that was the end of famines."

In fact, this lesson had to be learned over and over again in early America. "Many early groups of colonists set up socialist states, all with the same terrible results," Marbury notes. "At Jamestown, established in 1607, out of every shipload of settlers that arrived, less than half would survive their first 12 months in America. Most of the work was being done by only one-fifth of the men, the other four-fifths choosing to be parasites. In the winter of 1609-10, called 'The Starving Time,' the population fell from 500 to 60.

"Then the Jamestown colony was converted to a free market, and the results were every bit as dramatic as those at Plymouth. In 1614, Colony Secretary Ralph Hamor wrote that after the switch there was 'plenty of food, which every man by his own industry may easily and doth procure.' He said that when the socialist system had prevailed, 'we reaped not so much corn from the labors of 30 men as three men have done for themselves now.' "

They say those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. Sadly this was a lesson the people of Russia had to learn all over again - at the pain of equally devastating starvation and penury - in our own century. By the 1980s, when the discredited and bloodstained rulers of Russia finally threw up their hands and allowed farmers to raise private crops and sell them for profit on a mere 10 percent of their lands, once again more crops were produced on that 10 percent of the land than on the 90 percent devoted to "collective agriculture," the system under which - as the bitter Russian joke would have it - "We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us."

Yes, America is a bounteous land. But the source of that bounty - and the good fortune for which we annually gather to give thanks - lies not merely in the fertility of the soil or the frequency of the rains - for there is hardly a more fertile breadbasket on the face of the earth than the Soviet Ukraine.

No, the source of our bounty was the discovery made by the Pilgrims in 1623, that when men are allowed to hold their own land as private property, to eat what they raise and keep the profits from any surplus they sell, the entire community becomes one of prosperity and plenty.

Whereas, an economic system which grants the lazy and the shiftless some "right" to prosper off the looted fruits of another man's labor, under the guise of enforced "compassion," will inevitably descend into envy, theft, squalor, and starvation.

Though many would still incrementally impose on us some new variant of the "noble socialist experiment," this is still at heart a free country with a bedrock respect for the sanctity of private property - and a land bounteous precisely because it's free. It's for that we give thanks - the corn and beans and turkey serving as mere symbols of that true and underlying blessing - on the fourth Thursday of each November.

God bless America - land of the free.

Socialism fails every time it is tried, simply because there is no motivation for anyone to succeed. If we are going to receive a share of the profits without work, we would rather accept a starvation amount than get up and work. But when the profits or losses are our own and if we don't work we get nothing, then we are the hardest workers on the planet. Such is the wonders of capitalism.

By the President of the United States of America, a Proclamation.

Whereas it is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favor-- and whereas both Houses of Congress have by their joint Committee requested me to recommend to the People of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many signal favors of Almighty God especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness.

Now therefore I do recommend and assign Thursday the 26th day of November next to be devoted by the People of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being, who is the beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be-- That we may then all unite in rendering unto him our sincere and humble thanks--for his kind care and protection of the People of this Country previous to their becoming a Nation--for the signal and manifold mercies, and the favorable interpositions of his Providence which we experienced in the course and conclusion of the late war--for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty, which we have since enjoyed--for the peaceable and rational manner, in which we have been enabled to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national One now lately instituted--for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed; and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and in general for all the great and various favors which he hath been pleased to confer upon us.

and also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech him to pardon our national and other transgressions-- to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually--to render our national government a blessing to all the people, by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed--to protect and guide all Sovereigns and Nations (especially such as have shewn kindness unto us) and to bless them with good government, peace, and concord--To promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the encrease of science among them and us--and generally to grant unto all Mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as he alone knows to be best.

Given under my hand at the City of New York the third day of October in the year of our Lord 1789.

George Washington

It seems that there are only two articles that I want to comment on today, and they both concern mental health. I am also having trouble today, so if I seem a bit incoherent, that's why.

This article, Homeless on the Range, brings up a sore spot in my psyche.

The homeless are homeless for one reason: They are unable to support themselves, either financially or physically. A homeless person suffers from mental illness, a drug habit, or even both. Cases where mentally ill people have "self-medicated" by using illegal drugs are too numerous to mention.

In most cases, you can't keep these people in care homes. They are too out of control in their behavior to be housed with other people.

Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of mentally ill people who are able to live on their own, and even be able to support themselves in some way. But there are many who are not. The lucky ones live in good, clean care homes. The unlucky ones don't. The really unlucky ones are the people who live on the streets.

It is impracticable to forceably house these people, and that is the only way to keep a roof over their heads. These people cannot or will not take the medications necessary to stabilize their condition so that they approach normalcy.

There are no easy answers to this problem. The money and facilities to house these people are limited, and the people who would use these resources are certainly greater than any we could provide. And short of forceably imprisoning those who don't want to go, there is not a lot we can do to help those who do not want to help themselves.

I have lived like that, been part of the mentally ill homeless. During the first couple of years of my illness, I spent more time on the streets than I spent at home. I would have a psychotic episode, and either leave or get thrown out, and live on the streets for 4-5 days before I could come home again. Then 2-3 days later the process would repeat. I have slept under bridges in the cold of winter, on the steps of the library when the mosquitoes were in full bloom, wandered the streets wondering where I would be or sleep next.

The only solution for me was to move away from my family. I am still in contact with them, but only as a visitor, not as a husband and a father. But until things external to me change, this is the best I can ever hope to be.

This story, Texas Cuts Mental-Health Services, talks about how Texas is using triage to better preserve what little mental health resources it has.

The only mistake in the story that I see is they listed Bipolar Disorder and Manic Depression separately, when in fact they are the same illness, just under old and newer names.

I do not like this, but you have to admit that someone with Obsessive-Compulsive disorder or other similar mental health issues are not the same potential danger to society as someone with schizophrenia. A line must be drawn somewhere, and Texas has drawn it. You can either give the right people the right amount of care, or everybody a substandard amount of care.

I am a danger to society if I am not monitored closely. People like me need first priority in monitoring and psychological care if the general public is to remain safe. I wish I didn't, but I do.

I am truly sorry that everybody can't get the level of care that they need.

From Candorville, by Darrin Bell. Enjoy.

Here's an interesting article: Liberals' Racism Exposed.

This article brings to light what most Blacks don't want to know.

The majority of African-Americans oppose same-sex marriage, Democrats support it. Democrats preach higher taxes, while African-Americans benefit from lower taxes. African-Americans support smaller government and states' rights, while the Democratic Party has whittled away at local government and urged the surrender of the most basic aspects of our lives to the federal government for decades.

So, then, if the Democratic Party opposes African-Americans on almost every issue, then why does the black vote continue to be the cornerstone of the party? The answer is affirmative action.

Affirmative Action is just a way to use Blacks as tokens. By counting Blacks as numbers instead of qualified people, they are reduced from being qualified people to a showcase of how "diversified" the company is racially.

Condi Rice is hated for a variety of reasons. One, she has her own mind instead of toeing the Democrat party line. Two, she got to where she is because she worked at it and never took an affirmative action quota. She is her own person, beholden to no one except who she wants to. She should be the culmination of the Black dream, how far you can get without the crutches of affirmative action. But because she isn't a Democrat (who would never have allowed her this spot in the first place) she isn't 'Black' and never knew what it was like to be poor and Black.

Well, I've got some news for you folks. She grew up poor in the South in the 50's and she knew the little girls killed in the Birmingham Church Bombing. The only thing that kept her family from getting hung or burned out of their home by the KKK was Daddy's shotgun. She's had more of the "Black experience" than most of you could stand.

Condi for Prez in 2008.

This will kill TiVO. Is 'Fair Use' in Peril?

I think the opening paragraph says it all:

Do you like fast-forwarding through commercials on a television program you’ve recorded? How much do you like it? Enough to go to jail if you’re caught doing it? If a new copyright and intellectual property omnibus bill sitting on Congress’s desk passes, that may be the choice you'll face.

You can be sure with cable companies offering Internet service through their cable system, that someone won't come up with a VCR that will send an email to the appropriate people should you FF through the commercials.

The technology is already here, they just have to put it together.

Here's more intrusion, and some advice. BE REALLY CAREFUL IF YOU OWN A COLOR LASER PRINTER. Government Uses Color Laser Printer Technology to Track Documents.

It seems that there are invisible coded dots on your pages that contain enough information that you can be tracked. Which is hint #1. If you're going to do something unlawful with that printer, don't send in the warranty registration card.

You may think that it's just the counterfeiters that need to be worried. If you print ANYTHING that worries the government, and soon that could be anything, they can trace it back to you just like a license plate.

Don't say I didn't warn you.

For all of the people who tout Canada as Health Care Heaven, they ignore the little grotesque man behind the curtain. The reality behind the big shiny that everyone sees.

The Government of Canada is the sole purveyor of health care in Canada. Every doctor works for the government and cannot accept payment from anybody else but the government.

That day is coming soon for us as well. When You Won’t Be Able to Find a Physician documents what will happen when you hit 65.

That day is coming. The closer you are to age 65, the sooner it is coming.

You have to begin planning for this now. The care that you will receive is going to resemble the Post Office.

When you are over 65, a physician who accepts any Medicare patients is not allowed to accept payment from you if you are under Medicare. It’s a felony if he does. The only exception is if you’re covered by your employers’ policy.

Because hospitals charge high prices to uninsured people, but accept Medicare payments or insurance company payments for 20 cents on the dollar, if you aren’t under Medicaid, you can get ruined. Why does the government allow this dual pricing practice? Simple: the bureaucrats know that this forces everyone under Medicare/Medicaid at age 65.

Insuring yourself against a catastrophic illness with a high-deductible ($5,000) coverage would be affordable, but it’s not possible. Private insurance companies do not cover people older than age 64.

It also comes up with a interesting fact that I knew about, but I was a little off.

The fact is, the largest single medical expense of your life will be your last six months of life. About two-thirds of everything you will spend on hospital and physicians’ care will be spent in those final six months. (This, according to the Blue Cross/Blue Shield man in our congregation.) So, Medicare will bust the fiscal system as more old people start dying. The expenses have only just begun.

I thought it was only half.

Read the rest of the article, and do everything in your control to stay healthy. You may not be able to afford being sick tomorrow.

I found this, The High Value Of Economic Freedom and I thought it was interesting.

It says 24 of the top 26 states in the matter of economic freedom are red. While the bottom 7 are all blue.

Economic freedom is measured by how much the state and local government interferes in a businesses' business. From onerous taxes, to burdensome regulations, it is the blue states that restrict the American dream by and large.

But per capita income is higher in Colorado, the second-ranked state, than it is California. And Virginia, third on the list, has a per capita income almost identical to that of the Golden State.

It's more than dollars, though. Regulation, taxation, the size of government, spending on public programs — all part of how economic freedom is defined — do have an impact on prosperity. Large incomes are offset, for instance, by high taxes.

California is a high-tax state where income is lost to the diminished economic freedom. The authors call this the "oppression tax" and it hits Rhode Island (ranked 47th) the hardest. No. 50 New York is also hit hard, which negatively affects its high per capita income.

What this study of the states is teaching is the same lesson we learned at the international level: The more a government interferes in the economy, the more difficult it is for the economy to prosper.

This lesson is unfortunately lost on too many policy-makers across the world and in state capitals in this country. That's why Rhode Islanders can lose $3,607 (13.17%) of their incomes every year to the oppression tax, Hawaiians $2,963 (11.36%) and New Yorkers $2,441 (7.45%). Somebody just doesn't understand — or, for political reasons (think blue states) simply refuses to.

We, of course, generalize. A few do get it and as a result, government is trimmed in some places, which brings economic freedom that in turn promotes prosperity. What could be wrong with that?

Nothing is wrong with getting out of the way and letting businesses prosper. Of course, regulation of industries to make sure they are not negatively impacting the environment and such is not being onerous. That is taking care of the environment. But being repressive in regulations to obtain a "pristine" environment is.

As with all things, a balance must be reached.

This is an interesting article, The Myth of the Working Poor.

I discovered an interesting fact about a year ago. If you want to be successful, there are three things you must do:

• Finish High School.
  
• Don't have a child before you get married.
  
• Don't have a child before you are 20.
  

If you break any one of these rules, you have an 80% chance of ending up in poverty.

A 4% chance if you obey the rules, an 80% chance if you break the rules. Pretty impressive difference, eh?

The American "underclass" is by and large people who broke these rules and condemned themselves to poverty.

But it is more than that. It is a lack of motivation to succeed. Without this fire, a want to do better and move up in the world, nothing external will help.

Government assistance is a negative reward. It gives you free money to do the wrong thing. A 16 year old mother of two quickly learns that the more kids she has, the more money she gets.

You can't government program people out of poverty. You could just pay them $50k a year in assistance and it wouldn't help in the least bit. These people would still live in the worst part of town, fouling their own nests, getting drunk and high every day. I see these people every day I drive my routes through Memphis. I see litter in the streets, boarded up houses and apartment complexes, people with nothing to do but sit on the porch all day and drink 40's.

I also see the clean neighborhoods as well, where the grass is cut, the streets are clean, all the houses are lived in and so on. These are the people who work hard.

We will never run out of poor people. That is a fact. There will always be a group of people who do not perform. You can't have a right side of a bell curve without a left side. Short of some kind of Utopia it will always be there.

I am not saying we should not care for those in need. But I am not in favor of blindly supporting the lazy. They should be introduced to the same freedom most of us face, the freedom to starve. It is that very incentive that makes us perform and do better.

Well, it seems that free speech, appropriately held in high regard in our universities, isn't so free after all. Rutgers Forces Students to Protest Against the First Amendment.

Like an earlier entry of mine that talked about students defacing SUV's as part of a class project, this one also involves a radical teacher forcing the students through a "class project" to infringe upon the free speech of others.

This is why I'm glad I never went to college. My Conservative views would have put me into the minority and would have frustrated me to no end. Faced with professors who force their views on you and expect you to toe the party line in order to pass, my non-conformist streak would have come out wider than the Mississippi.

I don't take on views just because someone else wants me to. My views are reached by a steady process of thought and consideration. I instantly shy away from ideas that sound good right off the bat. Perhaps it's my cynical nature. In any case, I don't take on views without a lot of thought.

Do you?

If you read one article this year, this is it: Addiction to porn destroying lives, Senate told.

Pornography is a soul killer. It not only degrades the women who are depicted into objects instead of people, it destroys the soul of the person who looks at it.

Mary Anne Layden, co-director of a sexual trauma program at the University of Pennsylvania, said pornography's effect on the brain mirrors addiction to heroin or crack cocaine. She told of one patient, a business executive, who arrived at his office at 9 a.m. each day, logged onto Internet porn sites, and didn't log off until 5 p.m.

Porn is the biggest money maker in the business. It outranks every other money making business on the Internet and even outranks all the income of all the professional sports combined.

It is sickening, both in its production and it's usage.

I must admit, when I was younger I, too, had a significant problem with this stuff. I still fight the temptation every day. You, me and our children are only a couple of clicks away from a porn site. And even a lot of the most innocent URLs are porn sites.

A couple of years ago, I was trying to find the website of a local museum and typed in the obvious URL. I certainly got an eyeful with that website! Even the front page was pretty graphic.

Don't get involved with porn. Please.

I found a long letter today, from one of our troopers in Iraq. It's a little too long to post, but I thought this one part was important.

Daily I am experiencing what Marines do when Marines deploy. We work hard.

We train hard. We eat. We sleep. We rollout on missions. We laugh when we see how what we said is misquoted or taken so far out of context by some members of the media that our thoughts are no longer resemble any facsimile to the truth. We rollout on missions.
Several of the Marines in our detachment are huge Eagles fans. Of course, since my roots are in Detroit, I had to place a bet on the Lions' game. The evidence of the loss was inscribed on my hand and kept there for a week. We read. We watch DVDs. We e-mail home when we can. We try to do physical training. We look forward to care packages. We miss our loved ones, desperately, desperately. We rollout on missions. We follow the news as we can. (There was a fair representation of the Red Sox faithful in the chow hall in the wee hours of the morning watching the last game and the riddance of
"the curse.") We listen closely for mortar fire. We seek shelter from it. We rollout on missions. We plan missions. We take sniper fire. We attend briefings. We attend meetings. We clean weapons. We rollout on missions and we miss our loved ones.

I wanted to bring this up because we are asking our troops to move mountains. It is important to know that they are working 24/7 to create something that is worth the blood of their buddies.

I, for one, wish I was young again. I would enlist in the Navy again in a heartbeat and serve again and again. I miss the military life every day. You don't get the kind of camaraderie in an office setting than you do when you're confined to your office for six months and unable to see your family. You don't have to depend on every shipmate to pull their load to keep everybody alive.

Godspeed, our troops.

I'm following up on yesterday's post on the American Communist Liberation Union. Pentagon Recruiting Could Suffer After Boy Scout Decision.

Read it, it's important. But I'm in the middle of an attack and can't comment on it. It's taken all I have just to sit here and complete this post. Sorry.

In a followup to this post, Blake Douglass is continuing to stick firm to what he believes in and all I can say is, "Good for him!"

Yearbook Shots.

Blake Douglass, a 17-year-old student at Londonderry High School, is about to take his high school to court over their refusal to allow him to wear a shooting vest and hold an open shotgun over his shoulder in his senior picture. Douglass, a longtime hunter and skeet shooter, said he simply wanted to honor his hobby. It's seems reasonable enough, especially in light of the fact that the school has allowed every other manner of prop to be displayed in other students' senior portraits, from musical instruments to cars.

If you look at my previous post, you will see that it is a tasteful picture, certainly nothing offensive about it. But like the article says, the principal has watched Bowling for Columbine one too many times.

The kid is sticking to his gun and I am proud to see him do it. Keep the good fight up Blake, and I hope you win.

Well, either the Canadian government is very good with its fiscal policy, or the citizens are just paying too much taxes. Budget surplus swells to $8.9B

Me, I'm inclined to think that Canadians are overtaxed and the greedy government doesn't want to give it back. Anyway, this is what you get when you have a socially Liberal government, dedicated to "womb to the tomb" kind of socialized care. Overtaxed and underserviced.

If you're one of those people who get out of bed early on Sunday mornings to watch systematic acts of destruction, have I got a website for you.

Implosion World shows you buildings and other structures imploded by controlled explosions. It's Bart Simpsons profession when he grows up, so it can't be all bad!

The American Communist Liberation Union (Known as the American Civil Liberties Union) has struck another great blow against America.

They have gotten the US military to stop sponsoring the Boy Scouts and their gatherings on military land.

I can't say it any better than this:

If you take the ACLU and other extremists supporting its agenda at their word, you have to believe this fight is about "tolerance."

They maintain they oppose the Boy Scouts because of their "intolerance" for people who don't embrace their values. And, in the name of "tolerance," the ACLU and those who consider the Boy Scouts "subversive," have no tolerance for the Boy Scouts – or anyone else who disagrees with them.

The ACLU is never going to change. It is an anti-American organization. It is a group that seeks to destroy all that makes America a unique experiment in freedom. It is an organization in league with all of America's enemies. It is an organization that hates God, hates what is right, decent and morally upright. It is an organization in league with the Devil, as far as I am concerned.

And the ACLU is an organization that needs to be isolated, exposed for what it is, recognized for what it is and destroyed if necessary.

They call the Scouts "subversive," but what does a scout swear to do?

A Boy Scout pledges to be trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean and reverent.

A Boy Scout vows to keep himself physically strong, morally straight and mentally alert.

It's that kind of moral standards that make this country great. I believe it was Hamilton in the Federalist Papers that said words to the effect, "This Constitution is for a moral and religious People. It will not work otherwise." And you can look at Liberia to prove it is the people that makes the document work, not the other way around.

The ACLU is a threat to the way of life that has made this country into what it is today. If they can destroy the foundation of what makes us a good and morally-based people, then they will have destroyed everything that means to be an American.

I, for one, am taking a public stand in favor of the Boy Scouts. I like what they stand for. Even though I have never been a Scout or involved with the organization (as a father of five girls), I consider their goals and objectives beyond reproach.

I guess it's time to add me to the enemies list. I support the Boy Scouts – unequivocally, unabashedly, unashamedly. The Boy Scouts personify the kind of world in which I would like to live and raise my family.

If this is the new dividing line in our society, let the barricades be erected. I'm not retreating – not another inch.

Who's with me?

I am. Are you?

You and I have discussed this point before. WW II Flashback: 'Terrorists' Kill 1,000 Americans in Postwar Germany.

The article start off thusly:

The president declared victory over a year ago, but terrorists continue to pick off U.S. troops and even American civilians at the rate of three per day.

The maniacal dictator may be long gone, but his hard-core followers continue to wreak havoc across the land, with the interim government seemingly powerless to stop the mayhem.

Back home, the press takes an increasingly pessimistic tone, with some of the most prominent news organs pronouncing the U.S.'s postwar strategy an abject failure.

Iraq 2004? Not exactly.

Try Germany 1946, in the first year after World War II.

Most, if not all history books do not cover the years of terrorist attacks that took place in post-war Germany. When former SS officers formed the 'Werewolves' and set off to bring back the Third Reich by throwing the invaders out of Germany.

On Monday North detailed the little-known truth about the post-World War II U.S. experience to ABC radio host Sean Hannity:

"From May 8, 1945 until June 1946, over a thousand Americans and their dependents were killed by German terrorists," he explained, while discussing his new book, "War Stories II: Heroism in the Pacific."

So, how did the U.S. eventually quell the violence?

"General Eisenhower went to [interim German leader] Konrad Adenauer, the guy we hand-picked to run the new government," said North. "And he told him, 'You either stop this or we'll get a new guy to run this country.'"

Adenauer promptly contacted the Wermacht and told them to take care of the problem at all costs, using former SS troops if necessary.

"It wasn't pretty," said North. "There were no trials - nobody was brought before tribunals or anything like that. The German army just went out and took care of it. And the killing stopped."

Added North, "I think that's probably what's going to happen in Iraq."

That is what must happen in Iraq. The American Army and Marines can only help, what is needed now are Iraqis that are willing to stand up and take control of their country and their lives, even if some have to make the ultimate sacrifice to do so.

The good news is, they are doing it. The bad news is we aren't getting out of the way and letting the Iraqis kill terrorists. The average citizen must rise up and say 'Enough!' and dime out the intruders, and I ain't talking Americans. The residents of Fallujah are learning the folly of following terrorists.

...Are just too stupid to draw breath correctly.

From Fox News:

A Pennsylvania woman who was struck by a train has sued the rail company — for failing to warn her that trains travel on railroad tracks.

Patricia M. Frankhouser filed suit on Nov. 4 seeking damages in excess of $30,000 from Norfolk Southern Corp. (search), according to the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.

Last January, Frankhouser was hit by a train as she walked along railroad tracks in her hometown of Jeannette, Pa., a southeastern suburb of Pittsburgh.

Amazingly, she came away from the encounter with only a broken finger, some cuts and, according to the lawsuit, "pain."

Apparently, however, the incident was traumatic enough for her to hire a lawyer.

"Defendant's failure to warn plaintiff of the potential dangers negligently provided plaintiff with the belief she was safe in walking near the train tracks," Frankhouser's suit asserts.

It goes on to state that Norfolk Southern, based in Norfolk, Va., should have posted signs warning passersby "of the dangers of walking near train tracks and that the tracks were actively in use."

Nowhere in the filing does it say whether Frankhouser heard the train coming, why she failed to get out of the way or even whether she was walking alongside or in between the rails.

Either this woman is extremely stupid, and/or just looking for some quick cash. And the attorney isn't that bright either, taking a case like this. He better have gotten cash up front.

This reminds me of a TV court case where this woman was suing for damages. She was in an automatic car wash when it stopped halfway through the cycle. She got out of her car, in the car wash, in high heels, and then was surprised when she slipped and fell on the wet and soapy floor. She was suing to for the owner to put up a sign to the effect that wet and soapy floors are slippery. The judge did a double take on this woman, just about called her an idiot and threw the case out.

There are things that you should know when you are six years old. You usually discover them the hard way (wet floors are slippery, etc.) and others are pointed out to you.

You forget them at your own peril.

I've been fighting suicidal ideation for a couple of weeks now and it's pretty bad today. I might not even go into work.

I get strong impulses to stick a gun in my mouth and pull the trigger. It's not that I want to, there is no reason for me to do so. But still the images and impulses to hurt myself are there.

Locking me up in the hospital will do no good, as there is no medication that can do something about this. If they lock me up, they would have to keep me there permanently, and there is no facility like that anywhere near here to do that.

I have to will myself out of these thoughts, and some days that hill is steeper than others. Today it's damn near vertical.

Don't worry, I don't have a gun, nor any other way to kill myself. About the only thing that I could do that is close is to walk in front of a bus, but I've done that before and survived. Several years ago I walked out into traffic while in the middle of a psychotic episode and got hit by a car. I broke my wrist, my leg and ended up with six stitches in my head. Not something I want to go through again.

So I guess I'll whimper and scream for the next hour or so and see if I can go into work.

See you later.

I got to watch this happen on Meet The Press yesterday, Carville Cracks Up on 'Press'.

He literally ended up with egg on his face, splattering it all over himself, his wife and Tim Russert.

Claiming dislexia, he got the numbers right, just backwards. If you didn't see it, follow the link, just to see the picture.

I want to bring this article to your attention, Lock and Load.

This article pulles out "do it for the children" to emotionalize the issue, and only partially puts things in perspective. At least the author accuratly portrays the number of child deaths from firearms, I will give him that. But he doesn't give a couple of the higher causes of death that are higher to show how low firearm deaths really are in the scheme of things.

The author also brings out all of the tired old "if we did it like this no one would get hurt" kind of things. Stuff like chamber indicators (which show when there is a round in the chamber), magazine disconnects and other "childproof" mechanisms.

He also thinks "smart guns" are the answer, and they're not. Anything that could prevent a child from firing the weapon will also prevent the parent from firing it in the moment of need.

The answer to the problem is to gunproof the child, not childproof the gun. When my son was 4 years old, I had him gunproofed. he could look at my guns anytime he wanted. We talked about the rules of firearm safety, and he could read a sign that I put up at his eye level that said the rules he needed to know:

1. A gun is always loaded.
2. Keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to fire.
3. Do not point a gun at anything you do not want to destroy.
4. Be sure of your target and what is behind it.

Then there are Eddie Eagles rules:

If you see a gun, Stop! Don't touch it! Go tell an adult!

Teach these rules to your children and you won't have to worry about them and guns.

In a related story, I found this: Armed and Determined.

It's the story about armed citizens in Virginia, and it is an interesting read.

Van Cleave believes that every citizen should have the right to carry guns virtually anywhere, at any time, with no background checks, mandatory training or any other interference from government. "If I do something wrong with a gun, put me in jail," he said. "If I don't, leave me alone." [emphasis mine]

While I agree with his statement, I think there should be s certain level of testing done. Here in Tennessee you have to qualify with the gun that you will carry. I like to know that you are able to hit what you aim at, at least under calm conditions. Background checks to make sure you don't have a criminal record or mental health problem is essential. But once you have the weapon, you should be able to carry it wherever your little heart desires.

That being said, a responsible armed citizen will not purposefully put themselves in situations requiring the use of their weapon. The use of deadly force is always a last resort. You use it when you are outumbered, can't escape and you must protect others.

As I have always said, it is better to have and not need than to need and not have. Your life and your family depends on the proper and judicious use of whatever weapon you have on you, even if it's just your fists. But it is much better when you have a firearm.

Here you go. Toying With Terror.

Here you have an extremist lawyer, who violates her own word in order to help out a violent terrorist.

And the damning words come right from her mouth.

"I believe that entrenched institutions will not be changed except by violence," she testified. "I believe in the politics that lead to violence being exerted by people on their own behalf to effectuate change."

And though she said that she doesn't support "wanton massacres" — of the kind perpetrated by her client and those who follow him — nevertheless, "you can't always single out the combatants from the noncombatants."

I talked about people like that in this post, Violent and hateful.

There are always going to be people who's first response to a problem will be a violent solution. These people must be locked up and kept there. They have no place in civilized society, I don't care if they are Right or Left wing, they need to stay away from us regular folks.

It seems that what is good for the goose is not good for the gander. ACLU: Hijack Prevention Measures Are Unconstitutional.

It seems that an ACLU official was on his way to a racial profiling seminar when he was stopped and asked to provide his ID and ticket. He was detained until he produced same.

Now he is screaming about "unfair treatment." I guess it's okay as long as it's the other guy who gets stopped.

I am against the racial profiling as it stands. The way it is right now is you can only look at 2 Middle Eastern men before you must pick on a little old lady. When little old ladies start hijacking aircraft, I am all for profiling them. But until normal citizens can go armed for self protection on board aircraft, we will just have to go after ME men, as they were about 90% of the people who have hijacked aircraft in the past.

What we have in place now is worse that useless, it's stupid.

The bad news is, I keep forgetting. I remember about this every day, but there is no excuse.

Operation Air Conditioner is a good and worthy cause to deliver needed air conditioners and heaters to servicemen and women in Iraq. You can also send them other supplies like boots and whatnot.

If you say you support the troops, I urge you to contribute all you can to this noble and worthy cause.

If they had a graphic bar, I would post it as part of my website.

Donate now, please.

This is straight out of A Perfect Day. Doctors Group Opposes Mandatory Mental Health Tests for Kids.

If passed, this would be an abomination and a catastrophe. These psychologists would be working essentially on a commission basis. And every kid is going to have something that sticks out psychologically. And they will want to 'treat' it, even though it will probably correct itself as the child matures and grows up. Can you imagine how much you will stunt the development of a child by telling him he has a mental illness?

But here's the part that I see in every program:

Once created, federal programs are nearly impossible to eliminate. Anyone who understands bureaucracies knows they assume more and more power incrementally. A few scattered state programs over time will be replaced by a federal program implemented in a few select cities. Once the limited federal program is accepted, it will be expanded nationwide. Once in place throughout the country, the screening program will become mandatory.

That kind of "progress" always worries me. It is the progression from a country that honors freedom and independence above all else to a nanny state, where citizens fight for a suck at the governmental teat.

And than you have this:

Soviet communists attempted to paint all opposition to the state as mental illness. It now seems our own federal government wants to create a therapeutic nanny state, beginning with schoolchildren. It’s not hard to imagine a time 20 or 30 years from now when government psychiatrists stigmatize children whose religious, social, or political values do not comport with those of the politically correct, secular state.

That is the road we are heading down right now people. We need to stop this and stop this hard. Contact your representatives and let them know how you feel about this bill. Most importantly, tell them this, from the article:

American parents must do everything they can to remain responsible for their children’s well-being. If we allow government to become intimately involved with our children’s minds and bodies, we will have lost the final vestiges of parental authority. Strong families are the last line of defense against an overreaching bureaucratic state. [emphasis mine]

I would like to point out that the last sentence that I have there in italics, has been under attack since the "Great Society" has been underway. The systematic stigmatization and destruction of the nuclear family has been underway since the 60's, and I hate to tell you this folks, but they are winning. Traditional nuclear families have been in the minority for about 8-10 years now. Instead of a married couple, the majority is now an unmarried couple or a single parent household. Such is the state of the country.

On Wednesday, I told you about a very important gun vote in Illinois with this entry.

I just wanted to tell you that the veto was overridden in the Senate. The House has yet to vote. Illinois Senate Overrides Veto of Self-Defense Bill.

Let's hope it passes the House by a similar margin.

Well, I guess the fat man isn't done singing yet. Michael Moore is planning a sequel to Fahrenheit 9/11. Moore to Shoot 'Fahrenheit' Sequel.

I am quite sure that the sequel will be even more radical than the original, as the Nov 2nd election has sent Moore apoplectic. I will be chock full of misinformation, distortions, and outright lies.

But that's not unusual for this guy.