Monday, November 14, 2011

Does Climate Change Make Us Dumber?

Not if you successfully completed the 7th grade…

Is “Climate Change” real? You bet it is! Want proof? Look out the nearest window. See any dinosaurs? Good. Almost certainly, climate change figured into the extinction of most, if not all of the dinosaurs. We’ve all been told that when the “thunder lizards” walked the Earth, the entire world was a warm, tropical paradise, with giant ferns, palm trees, giant bugs…you get it. Is the entire world that way today? Sure you didn’t see any dinosaurs? Okay—just checking. The dinosaurs really are extinct. Did the dinosaurs cause the “Climate Change” that effected their demise? Did their cars do it? Their aerosol deodorant? Their air conditioners?  Doubtful. So can we agree that “Dinosaur-made Climate Change” never took place? Great! In that case, I have good news for you! THE SKY IS NOT FALLING!

To keep this short, and easy to read, let’s break it all down this way: The Earth’s atmosphere is a closed system—moist, warm air doesn’t continue to rise until it’s lost in outer space. It’s all trapped within the Troposphere (the first of four layers comprising our atmosphere, where all “weather” takes place). Every drop of water that existed on the Earth’s surface since the year dot, is still here. Every drop ever consumed by any human or animal was and still is excreted, and evaporates back into the atmosphere where this natural distillation process purifies and recycles it. Water in lakes, streams, ponds, lawns and yes, even the ocean evaporates on a warm day—the warmer the day, the greater the rate of evaporation. The warm, moist air rises in the atmosphere until it reaches a much chillier elevation, at which point the water vapor, condensing as it cools, freezes into vast masses of ice crystals, which we call clouds. Because the Earth’s surface is unequally heated (half of the earth is always bathed in sunshine, and warming as long as the sun shines, while the other half is dark, and cools during that time that the sun isn’t shining), there are always warm “thermals” rising from the surface, which, as the warm air rises above an oncoming cloud bank, it "pushes" it back towards the earth's surface melting the ice crystals which fall back to Earth as rain. Yes, it’s true that there are regions of the planet that are presently going through a drought, but there are regions elsewhere which have plenty of rainfall—more than people living there are glad to see. Granted, this is probably a temporary condition, as all climate cycles have thus far proven to be. Temporary, perhaps on a geologic scale, but temporary nonetheless. It won’t be the end of the world, just as it wasn’t when the ice ages came and went, or when Britain became too chilly to grow grapes (during the 1500’s), or when Greenland ceased to be green.

Too, if the polar ice caps were to suddenly melt, as predicted by politician-turned-pseudoscientist, Al Gore, you can likewise bet that NYC will NOT be flooded to a depth of 20 feet, as Gore contends. Not even 20 inches. In fact, as anyone who DIDN’T sleep through a 7th grade science class will patiently explain to those who did, when water freezes, it expands. When frozen water (ice) melts, it CONTRACTS. The polar icecaps are not floating in the air above the ocean, they’re sitting on the bottom of it, with only a tiny area (in proportion to their total size) sticking out above the water. Just as a glass of ice water doesn’t flood your house when the ice cubes melt in the glass, the polar icecaps won’t flood NYC. Oh, yes—almost forgot. Every June, or July, we hear about the Arctic (not Antarctic) icecap melting around the edges. Ever heard what happens around November or December? No? Well, it all refreezes. Just like small lakes do in temperate zones. Freeze in the winter, melt in the summer. The Antarctic icecap is the same way. Because it’s south of the equator, the seasons are opposite those of the northern hemisphere. There, summer starts in December, and winter begins in June.  This isn’t anything new, caused by “Global Warming”—a fascinating account of early exploration of the South Pole—called “South” chronicles Sir Ernest Shackleton’s voyages to the Antarctic around the turn of the LAST century. One of the first automobiles ever commercially produced was taken down there to see how it would function in the extremely cold, snow and ice-packed environment (it didn’t). The point here is, that he failed on two of his trips to arrive early enough during the Antarctic summer, when the ocean was clear. On those occasions, his ships were trapped in the ocean ice that formed while they were traveling MANY miles out from land. They had to wait for Spring to melt the ocean sufficiently for the ship in one case to make it back to civilization. On the other occasion, the ice crushed the ship, and his expedition had to survive on an iceflow for the entire winter, never making it to Antarctica. Wasn’t pretty.

 “They” forget to mention any of this in global warming circles, just like the “Ozone Hole”. When was the last time you heard anything about that? Well, I’ll just fill you in, then. In 1954, when the Ozone Hole was first discovered, real scientists (not “scientists” on grant money) studied it, and learned that the Ozone Hole opens and begins to grow around the Winter Solstice, and continues to do so until it finishes opening fully at the time of the Summer Solstice Then it begins to gradually close up—closing entirely by the Winter Solstice, when the cycle begins anew. Every year. Acid Rain? Remember that? It was killing all of the lakes in the nation. When was the last time you heard anything about that? How about Sulfur Dioxide which was proved to “cause” “Acid Rain”? Know what happened? Scientists discovered that Sulfur Dioxide is a major component of the exhaust from vehicles equipped with catalytic converters. Vehicles without catalytic converters, not so much. Well, environmentalists weren’t going to stand for the abolition of catalytic converters no matter how “harmful” to the environment they might be. Not that they ever were, of course. Thus, like the Ozone Hole, the catastrophe of Acid Rain and Sulfur Dioxide fell off of the front pages of newspapers, forever. Trust me, ten years from now, you won’t even remember man-made global warming. There’ll be a new cause among rabid environmentalists, and their sociopathic, pandering friends in Washington eager to get their hands on more of your money.

We must bear in mind, if the National Weather Service admits it cannot predict the weather with any accuracy beyond 10 days, what makes any of us think that politicians can predict the weather a hundred years from now? How about their paid flunkies who call themselves “scientists”--and receive annual grants in the tens of millions of dollars to study “Climate Change”-- or bureaucrats who enforce “regulations”? How can anyone predict the weather a century from now? Do you believe that a “scientist” receiving millions of taxpayer dollars to study “Man-Made Climate Change” would ever say, “No such thing…” and give back the grant money? Would you? If man doesn’t understand weather well enough to accurately predict it more than a week and a half out, can man--who only occupies about 13% of the Earth's surface really claim to be the cause of “Climate Change” any more than the dinosaurs were? Could he really do anything about it even if he were? Doubtful.

         The Gun Show 

             What is it?

A “loophole” in a law is a flaw in the wording that enables a creative “interpretation” to permit breaking the law in some unanticipated way.

When the Brady Bill was being negotiated in both houses of congress, a proviso added to the bill specifically exempting the transfer of privately owned firearms to eligible buyers from the requirement of a pre-purchase background check being required.

Why did they do this?

Because private individuals are given no access to the NICS background check system and would be unable to perform the necessary investigation into the potential buyer’s history.

Such transfer could be performed by a licensed gun dealer, however , the law cannot force the licensed dealer to do the background check for a private buyer, nor, if he does perform the background check for the private buyer, could he be required to do it for free. In fact, he could charge WHATEVER he wanted. The holder of the firearms license isn’t in business to lose money by helping a private owner to compete with him by selling his used rifle for $100 less than a new one that the dealer has in stock. All the licensed dealer has to do is price his background check fee high enough to drive up the cost of the privately owned rifle until it’s more expensive than a new one. Then, the buyer would simply abandon the private seller, and buy the new one from the gun shop.
Private owners of guns would find themselves unable to sell their weapons to anyone but a licensed dealer, and dealers would be under no obligation to pay fair market value, they could pay as little as they wanted, and the seller would have no choice but to sell their $1000 rifle for pennies on the dollar, or turn it into the local police for free.

So, what’s the solution?

If the government really wanted to address this issue—and I’m not suggesting that they should--all they’d have to do is grant private sellers access to the NICS system. Because the seller—licensed or not—doesn’t see any confidential information, or learn the details surrounding the rejection of a buyer, there’s no good reason for denying access to the NICS system to private sellers. The federal government simply doesn’t want to. The truth is, the government isn’t really concerned about guns “falling in to wrong hands”, its only concerned with exercising greater control over access to guns by ANYBODY but government.


I Didn’t Shoot Anybody!
So Why is The Loss of MY RIGHTS Even Under Discussion?
In the once-free country in which I grew up, we punished the guilty, not the innocent. It was a constitutional republic. One’s constitutionally recognized rights were sacrosanct, and no bureaucrat, or congressional bloodsucker, and certainly not any unidentified individual with nothing to produce but forged identification occupying the white house had ANY authority to take ANY of our rights away.

Hell, in those days, anyone caught entering the white house with forged ID was detained by the US Secret Service.

But that was a long time ago…

Today, the public school system teaches kids that we live in a “democracy”, and those rights can be snatched away if your congress critter is ordered to do so by a “majority” of fans of Brittney Spears, or Lady GaGa—people who find the Kardashians and Justin Bieber “interesting”. People whose knowledge of history/politics/world events/the US Constitution is limited to what they learn about these subjects as they watch “Dancing with the Stars”. 

Well, boys and girls, NOBODY has any authority to vote away or take away any of your rights. But, if they think you’re sufficiently “dumbed down” to the point of not realizing this, they’ll happily keep you in the dark. And, one by one, every one of your rights that seem to tie the hands of government, will be “voted” away, until one day, the only right you have left is the right to cringe and grovel at the feet of any jackbooted government thugs who smash down your door in the middle of the night to “ask a few questions”. 

I’m truly sorry that a maniac flipped out and killed those kids and adults at Sandy Hook. I can’t undo any of that. I am tired of seeing myself, my friends and family, and every one of the rest of the 80 or so million gun owners in this country demonized every time a lunatic or a gang member kills someone.

In Albuquerque, where I live, the public school system created its own police department. The officers are trained and certified at the same academy as our city police. We have gangs here. We have mentally ill people, too. We DON’T have gun control—beyond what the federal government has saddled every state with—and, more importantly, we DON’T have school shootings.  

So. If the President’s life is so precious that he’s continually surrounded by bodyguards heavily armed—with “assault weapons” (at taxpayer expense), and our Congress men and women and their counterparts in the US Senate are entitled to constant armed protection—with “assault weapons” (at taxpayer expense), why don’t ALL schools follow the example of Albuquerque, and provide armed police to each campus. While many taxpayers bristle at the idea of spending MILLIONS of dollars on “security” for elected officials going on vacation (at taxpayer expense, of course), I don’t think ANY taxpayer would mind seeing their money spent securing all of the nation’s schools, and protecting our nation’s children.

There is a petition at the President’s website posted by concerned citizens, asking (why anyone would have to ask is beyond me)  the President to protect our 2nd Amendment rights. If you care about freedom please go there now and sign it. I did. Many do not because they’re “afraid” they’ll be placed on “a list”. Trust me, if you’ve EVER bought a gun from a dealer after 1968, you already ARE on a list, because you filled out the form 4473, with all of your identification information. You showed a VALID ID. You’re on the list. Now it’s time to Cowboy Up and tell the government you want your constitutional rights respected and retained—WITHOUT FURTHER INFRINGEMENT.

Sign it now—tomorrow may be too late.


Never kick a fresh turd on a hot day!

No less an illuminary than Harry Truman himself once advised: “Never kick a fresh turd on a hot day.” Guess no one ever said that in Hawaii—or Kenya, or wherever Barack Hussein Obama is actually from. 

In singling out Sheriff Joe Arpaio in Maricopa County for a little executive abuse from the white house for his determination to rid his county of illegal aliens, it looks like Mr. Obama really stepped in  it. His attacks on Arpaio, through his little friend Eric Holder (of Fast and Furious fame), only led to the massive investigation of Mr. Obama (if that’s his real name) which turned up quite an interesting collection of false ID being used by the president. His birth certificate is a fake. His Selective Service Card is a fake. His Social Security Number was issued to someone who was born in 1895, and lived in Connecticut. He spent a considerable amount of his own money to seal all records of his education, including transcripts, theses or even evidence of attendance and graduation. State Department documents relative to his pre-presidential international travel—and his mother’s—have “disappeared”. Hmmm… 

Who the hell is this guy? 

Does anybody really know him? Is that his real name? Where was he born? Did he really attend any of those ivy-league universities? Did he actually graduate from any of them? Maybe instead of puckering up every time he turns his backside toward the press, they should start seriously investigating this guy. Forget about the “thrill” that may run up their legs, and find out why the most powerful man on Earth has hidden his identity—and his entire past-- from the American people. Before it’s too late. 

Thanks to both houses of Congress, this guy has given himself the authority to direct the Army to arrest and detain—indefinitely—any US citizen the president “suspects” of having ties to terrorists or terrorism. Suspects. No charges need be filed, no attorneys present, no family contact, and detention may not even be within the US. The enabling legislation is called the National Defense Authorization Act, and was co-crafted by America’s favorite RINO, John Mc Cain. Remember that when you see his name on a ballot. 

Now, Obama has Congress crafting the Enemy Expatriation Act. This fun piece of legislation will give the president the authority to rescind the US Citizenship of those he “suspects” of having ties to terrorists or terrorism. No word on whether Mr. Obama will at least have the common decency to bestow Kenyan citizenship upon those Americans he excommunicates from America—and has the Army detain indefinitely. 

Neither of these laws could possibly be constitutional, unfortunately, Supreme Court Justices are little better than politicians themselves, and are appointed by presidents based upon their political orthodoxy rather than understanding of the US Constitution. If the US Supreme Court could decide that the USA Patriot Act was constitutional, is it hard to believe that the NDAA and Enemy Expatriation Acts will likewise be found “constitutional”? 

Why aren’t the talking heads giving more than a few moments of discussion on these two pieces of legislation? Why is no one on talk radio addressing this? Hannity gave a few moments to it as it was being drafted by having one of its proponents call into his show. Rush gave it about 5 minutes a week or so after it’s adoption, and that was it. Are they afraid? Should they be? Would the president have them detained by the Army for informing the public about these laws? Since no one can really say just who our president is, no one can really predict what he’ll do with this new, dictatorial power. 

I used to believe that the people frightened of FEMA camps were crackpots. Now I wonder. The sites shown online—and I can’t be sure these are genuine, because I don’t live near any of them—seem to show double rows of chainlink fence around them, and razor wire on top. If these are camps for refugees from events like Hurricane Katrina, why all the fences and razorwire? They look more like maximum security prisons. Might they be intended for housing all of the “terrorists” the president has the Army detain? Is a terrorist anybody who opposes, or disagrees with Mr. Obama? Is this where they will be “disappeared” to as opponents of the late Idi Amin were "disappeared" in Uganda?

Are You Dumber Than a 5th Grader?

Or have bread and circuses eaten everyone's brain?

Lately, there’s been much discourse over the “constitutionality” of what’s been euphemistically named “Obamacare” and it’s apparent requirement that religious organizations and church-related operations provide insurance services that run counter to the beliefs and practices of the employing organizations’ religious orthodoxy. That’s not all—the Defense of  Marriage Act, which limits the institution of marriage to one man and one woman has been struck down in a federal court as having been “unconstitutional”. Some bloggers, have charged that the Constitution itself is at fault—that it’s anti-christian. This is not true. 

The Constitution isn't religious or anti-religious--it's basically an enunciation of the very limited powers of the federal government to control or "govern" individual citizens, leaving the bulk of governing to the individual states according to the needs/desires of the voters/taxpayers. In this way, citizens who find the manner in which their state legislators solve the problems of their state to be somehow deficient, can vote them out, or remove them via referendum. That many people choose to live an immoral, or atheistic life is between them and God. Unfortunately, far too few people have actually read or studied the US Constitution--and don't really know just what it says. Such people think the federal government actually has far more powers than those granted by the people or the states via the Constitution. It's not for the state or federal government to judge or punish sins. That right and power is exclusively God's. We each choose the path that we walk, and only God can fairly judge us. 

One HUGE problem as I see it, is that the federal government has been grabbing more and more power since the Civil War, and we—as a people--have never really opposed it. Mostly, I think, due to the fact that average Americans aren't now, nor have they ever been paying attention to what's going on in the Federal Government or how it interfaces with them . Originally, I think most Americans had a little too much faith in their elected officials, and being busy with operating farms and other small businesses, let our government govern itself. The government wasn't really bothering them, and, there was no instant access to information as we enjoy today. A newspaper, if a daily rather than a weekly, was still slow to receive dispatches from what’s now called “The Beltway”. Later, as inventions such as radio and television developed and brought a little more immediacy to current events and political developments, people were able to gain a little more insight into what their elected officials were up to—but really remained in the dark about some of the more sinister workings of both houses of congress as well as the white house. 

Today, thanks to the internet, we enjoy up-to-the-minute access to info on what’s up in The Beltway as well as the the world at large. Radio talkshow hosts use the web to research topics for daily interactive discussion with listeners. Blogsites and newsgroups cover every political, scientific, social development with discussion pro and con among their readers. How can anyone in modern society not see what’s been going on? Well, boys and girls, that’s easy to explain. The average American listens to music on the radio, rather than talk shows, if they go online it's to watch sports or other entertainment, ditto television. Entertainment seems to have eaten the average American’s brain. To Wit:

 6 months ago, our Dear Leader announced that he has the legal right to order the execution of Americans, without trial, and that only he and Atty General Eric Holder know what secret law so empowers him. He and Holder refuse to disclose the law, for reasons that should be obvious. New Year's Eve, while most Americans were drinking and drugging and whoring, Dear Leader signed the National Defense Authorization Act, which empowers him to order the military (not the US Marshall's Service) to arrest and detain--INDEFINITELY--any American citizen that the prez SUSPECTS of being a terrorist or having ties to terrorists or terrorism (Bill Ayers and HIS friends excepted, of course). Citizens so detained will face no charges, no judge or prosecutor, nor must any charge be proven against them. They may be held until the prez orders them to be executed, I suppose. While Obama did state that he would "...never detain any US citizen indefinitely..." he failed to point out that at his request, Congress is working on the "Enemy Expatriation Act", whereby the prez will give himself the authority to rescind the US citizenship of anyone SUSPECTED of being a terrorist or having ties to terrorists or terrorism (Bill Ayers and HIS friends again excepted, of course). That way, once detained by the military, one could have his citizenship revoked, thereby making him NOT a US citizen, enabling Dear Leader to hold him indefinitely without violating his "solemn" vow.

On March 16 of this year, Dear Leader issued an Executive Order entitledNATIONAL DEFENSE RESOURCES PREPAREDNESS--an amended versions of a 1950's vintage EO intended to enable the govt to take necessary steps to recover from a nuclear attack. In this newly-amended document, the govt has the authority to seize all food (in the field, in the warehouse, in the grocery store or in your house), as well as all agricultural equipment, all water--potable or not, all fuel, whether used for heating, transportation or cooking, all vehicles, all medications and medical devices in time of emergency OR NON-EMERGENCY. Bad time to be a "prepper", I guess.

February of 2010, the Dept of the Army created a training manual (INTERNMENT AND RESETTLEMENT OPERATIONS FM 3-39.40) for US troops instructing them on how to intern large numbers of US citizens, for, among other things, "reeducation". This was only very recently (and VERY temporarily) available for download by civilians. It should still be searchable on the web. Re-education camps aren’t new. The last time I read of such camps was right after the communists of North Vietnam took over South Vietnam. After killing everyone in the south observed to wear eyeglasses, the communists then hunted down and killed all people identified as having been teachers. The rest of the people of the south were interned in “Re-education Camps”, to introduce them to the “new way of thinking”. All told, some 7.5 million people were killed in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia following the communist takeover.

 All of this against the backdrop of his producing a completely false birth certificate, a forged Selective Service Card and using a Social Security number said to have been issued to someone born in 1895. Truth be told, we don't even know if Obama is his real name. Never mind where he was born, just who the hell IS this guy? What are his true intentions? Has he destroyed the economy through incompetence, or according to plan? Is our new perceived weakness throughout the world what happens when naïve,  liberal rose-colored glasses meet night vision scopes of our old cold war enemies, or is there some other reason? Why has he agreed to dismantle the bulk of our nuclear weapons, as Russia, China, North Korea and Iran increase their stockpiles? Russia’s Vladimir Putin threatened to attack any missile defense system we agreed to install in NATO member countries to keep Iran from nuking the world. Dear Leader’s response? "This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility." And, lest we forget, Dear Leader just handed over a number of islands in an oil-rich region off the coast of Alaska to HIS apparently dear friend, Vladimir Putin.


If only these subjects had been addressed on "Dancing with the Stars", or "American Idol" or even "Are you Smarter than a 5th Grader?", the average American might have expressed sufficient outrage to their Congress critters, introducing THEM to a “new way of thinking…FREEDOM”, and compelling them to stand up to the president, possibly heading some of this off...

At this point, it's probably too late to turn any of this around. 

See you all at the FEMA camp!

ADDENDUM: In the weeks following this initial posting, the Department of Homeland Security has purchased 460 million rounds of .40 cal hollowpoint ammunition, along with over 200 million rounds of 5.56 NATO. Per the Geneva Convention, hollowpoint ammunition may not be used against enemy soldiers in wartime. These are clearly intended for use against civilians...

Note to reader: Don't take my word--or any other blogger's word for anything--you should search the web (via Google, Yahoo, Bing or other engines) for each of these subjects, and read for yourself what the truth of the situation is. Better hurry, though-discussions of limiting our free access to the internet have already begun in The Beltway...

So, is this hope, or is it change?

NEWS FLASH: President Obama has halted the practice of Government freebies like pens, coffee cups, etc in a move certain to reduce the federal budget by several hundred dollars a year!
Mr. President, since you’re in a mood to slash government spending, I’ve got a couple of ideas for additional cuts that might save even more money!

Bureaucracies: Sure got a lot of them, don’t we? Why? It couldn’t be a “make work” program for the cronies of elected officials, could it? You know, a guy who seems to come out of nowhere--oh, like maybe campaign-contributor Goldman-Sachs, and shazam! Next thing you know, he’s earning outrageous money to head up an agency that performs the same task others are probably already doing. Lucky thing he “knows” somebody on Capitol Hill that owes him a favor! For example: There are at least 4 Federal Law Enforcement Agencies that perform roughly the same job. BATFE, FBI, DEA and U.S. Marshal’s Service. I suggest that the FBI can recognize drugs, illegal firearms (you know, machine guns and rocket launchers), bombs and already serves their own warrants. The FBI hiring standards are among the highest, accepting only college graduates (unlike BATFE, whose headman back in the 1990’s, one John Magaw, was only a HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATE. Can you say “WACO”?), and so far as anyone knows, The FBI has never provided Mexican drug lords with any firearms .You could incorporate all four agencies under one umbrella and end (in this particular case) the quadruplication of everything—from bureaucratic hierarchies, infrastructure, cars, computers, stationery and bloated government benefit/pension plans. You could let 75% of the management and half of the work force go, and again, put us on the path to solvency. Yes, a lot of good people presently employed by the federal government would be unemployed, and though it may seem unfair at first blush, it really isn’t. It was unfair of the federal government to burden the taxpayers with its own growth to the degree it has, when the Constitution’s enumerated powers granted to it have no provision for most of the alphabet soup of agencies added since the 1930’s under the auspice of FDR and his leftist crew.

Land management: At last look, the US Government claimed ownership to about 40% of the land within the 50 states. Owned in the form of Office buildings, parking garages to serve those buildings, Courthouses, Military Bases, National Forests, National Monuments, National Parks, “Wilderness”, Wildlife Corridors, World Heritage Sites (deeded over to the UN, I understand), etc. The Constitution states that the Government may only have enough land for necessary Government offices, dockyards and magazines (munitions storage facilities). All other land “ownership” by the federal Government is unconstitutional. Managing all of this unconstitutionally owned land costs taxpayers a fortune, in National Park Service and US Forest Service offices, union payscale for rank-and-file personnel as well as salaries for various levels of management , outrageously expensive benefit packages, vehicles, computers, phones, uniforms and more. And still, our forests are poorly managed at best. Look at the horrendous fires over the past decade. I know Al Gore has successfully peddled his scam that the culprit here is “climate change” (with the “planet” being saved only by taxpayers paying even MORE taxes to government), but anyone who didn’t sleep through high school science classes (and doesn’t presently hold any elected office) already knows that these fires are caused by allowing excessive undergrowth to remain, and dead trees to accumulate. Lightning and human error cause this tinder to catch fire, and destroy our forests. So, I’ve got a better idea. How about ceding these lands over to the states in which they’re physically located, and let the taxpayers in those states decide how to use the lands, lumber, firewood and any other resources within? It’ll save the nation much-needed revenue and provide jobs for residents of those states (many of the same federal workers could stay on as STATE employees, since they most likely already reside in the state, anyway). The states can easily quash any frivolous lawsuits filed by “environmentalists” in STATE district courts, once the federal Government relinquishes its unconstitutional jurisdiction.

Endangered Species: Since every endangered species is located in a sovereign state of the union or a foreign country, just how does the federal Government justify its jurisdiction? This is simply more costly and unnecessary duplication of efforts/expenses. Each state already manages and protects its own endangered species as well as game animals and habitat, and doesn’t need meddling from Washington Bureaucrats to muck up the works. Foreign species? Can’t the countries in which these critters are found draw up their own laws to protect the man-eating, disease carrying vermin they consider to be “endangered” and bleed their own taxpayers to cover the costs? Don’t want them imported into the US? We don’t need and can’t afford a bloated, agenda-driven (and, I might add, heavily armed) US Fish & Wildlife Service to further bankrupt taxpayers. Give a list of endangered species to US Customs. Control of imported commodities is already their job and they do a GREAT job. I speak from experience here, as a guy who used to import wildlife in the early 1970’s.

And what ABOUT the Federal Reserve? Ron Paul notwithstanding, the Federal Reserve is a rather curious invention of Washington and its well-heeled banking cronies, dating back to just before WW 1. My understanding is that it isn’t and wasn’t “federal” at all. Although it’s owned by private investors (mostly foreigners, I believe) every dollar bill printed and coin minted by the US Treasury Department is essentially produced under license by the Federal Reserve. In fact, every bill is marked “Federal Reserve Note” because each bill is just that, a note. You know, a loan document. Each bill printed at the US Mint is technically a loan which taxpayers must repay to the Federal Reserve Bank, PLUS interest. Adding insult to injury, we as taxpayers must pay income tax on every dollar that touches our hands to support the very government that gave us this parasitic banking system. If we figure interest @ 3%, and tax @ 15%, each dollar the Federal Reserve “lends” us costs taxpayers $1.18. Please bear in mind, the cost for the US Treasury Dept. building, the union-scale wages for the personnel who do the actual work, the paper, ink, the printing presses, cutters and packaging machinery are already paid for BY American taxpayers over and above the $1.18. THE WAY IN WHICH THIS IS STRUCTURED, IT WOULD BE MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO EVER PAY OFF THE NATIONAL DEBT, UNLESS ONE USED FOREIGN CURRENCY TO DO IT. If we used dollars to pay this debt, we’d owe taxes and interest on each and every one of those, too. Plus, we’d have to pay the same government workers to print, cut and distribute these “loan document dollars”.  It would be an endless snake-swallowing-its-own-tail cycle, that would only end one way. Wouldn’t be pretty, either. How about this: AUDIT the Federal Reserve Bank, and make sure it’s even solvent in the first place. My guess is, it’s not. The above-reproach management of this thoroughly-protected-from-oversight institution has probably been milking its own vaults for years, and it may be tottering on the edge of bankruptcy itself. Then, the Obama administration could do what it’s done with other banks. CLOSE IT DOWN--AND DON'T BAIL IT OUT. Once the taxpayers are no longer supporting this leech of an organization, there might be some hope of eventually paying off the national debt--if government were forced to spend within its means, that is.

Why do we pay 25% of the United Nations’ operating budget? What am I getting from that collection of America-hating communists, third world dictators, religious fanatics and crooked, murderous kings that’s worth this kind of money? Maybe a better question is what are YOU getting out of it? If we are to remain a member-country of the UN (and mind you, I’m definitely not advocating that we do), how about we pay the same amount as every other country? There are about 100 member countries if I recall correctly, how about we pay 1% of the operating budget? You know, our fair share…

Obamanomics: Gimmes or Gotchas?

Social Security, Medicare and Entitlements

In the national dialog, our elected officials have begun to blur the distinctions between “entitlements”, Medicare and Social Security. They have a reason for this, and as secrets go, it’s not really all that “secret”.

First, let’s end the confusion caused by calling Medicare and Social Security “entitlements”. They’re not. In fact, there’s a HUGE difference between Medicare, Social Security and Entitlements. Govt. has been stealing money out of every paycheck issued since the 1930’s for Social Security, and since the 1970’s for Medicare. We were forced into “contributing” to these funds, under penalty of prison (or death, should we resist arrest for “tax evasion”), but, they forced us into this for our “own good”. In this way, we are able to “retire” on Social Security and not be forced into poverty when we’re too old to work (LOL), and Medicare was our “guarantee” we’d never have to choose between buying a can of dog food for dinner, and paying for our life-saving medication.
 Washington’s dirty little secret is 
that none of the money paid into these programs exists anymore. It’s all been squandered on pork projects geared to get career politicians endlessly re-elected. Now, if Washington wants to return every nickel taken from us up to this point for both of these Ponzi schemes, and then abolish both of them, because they’re too expensive, GREAT!  I’m sure I’m not alone in having NEVER wanted to be forced into contributing to these programs in the first place.

 Entitlements(under what Constitutional authority do these even exist?) are absolutely free to the recipient. Want Welfare, Food Stamps, Subsidized Housing, WIC Checks, Medicaid, SSI? If you have a pulse, you’re qualified! You don’t have to “contribute” anything, you only have to demonstrate the requisite level of poverty. You’re certainly not required to even look for a job, and, God forbid, anyone should suggest that you be tested for use of illegal drugs, and if you test positive, should be denied access to the apparently bottomless pockets of the American taxpayer.  No one should ever be forced to "waste" their own money on food, and then have to make do without their street drugs, right? Hell, you don’t even have to be a US citizen, or even legally in the country in order to receive “entitlements”. Alright, Mr. or Ms. Liberal Democrat, RINO and country club, old school checked pants Republican,  I know what you’re thinking right now—“Hey, Leonard, I thought you were supposed to be a Christian! Aren’t Christians supposed to help feed and comfort the poor?” You’re absolutely right. We are. Because any liberal (and most RINOS) will tell you the Constitution clearly states: “…there shall be a separation of church and state…” I need go no further than reiterating this very argument. The Government isn’t Christian (or Jewish, or Moslem, or Buddhist, or Shintoist, Daoist or any other “ist”) and is therefore required to NOT feed and comfort the poor. That would, however, be intellectually dishonest. Anyone that has actually read the Constitution will point out that it says no such thing. It says “…Congress shall make no law respecting any establishment of religion, nor prohibit the free practice thereof…” It’s the only place in the entire document where religion is mentioned. Christians do feed and comfort the poor, however. You can’t name a Christian church that doesn’t do this. I’d be willing to bet you can’t name a synagogue, mosque or temple that doesn’t, either. All a poor person has to do is go to their house of worship, and ask. If they don’t worship anyplace, then, perhaps, they should re-assess their relationship with the Almighty. If nothing else, they could pretend to worship someplace, just so they can take advantage of the kindness and generosity of the legitimate worshippers. I’m sure that many recipients of “entitlements” (not all) are already accustomed to telling whatever lies they deem necessary in order to con others into or out of something; cash, a meal, drugs, parole, whatever. It won’t require any kind of a learning curve or challenge to their innate laziness, and will certainly ease the burden on the taxpayers forced to fund these unconstitutional programs.

 While we’ve touched on the subject of entitlements and those who are illegally in the country, and before we move onto to other items, STOP pretending that the children of illegal aliens are American citizens. The US Supreme Court dealt with this in their 1898 decision, U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, held by a vote of 5-4 that a child of two legal resident aliens is entitled to birthright citizenship BECAUSE both parents were in the country LEGALLY at the time of the child’s birth. 

I know that it’s politically impossible after over 70 years of entitlements to cut them off entirely, but how about cutting off illegal aliens from this entitlement “gravy train”? As a nation, we’re broke! We simply can’t afford to continue with this lunacy. It wouldn’t be all that complicated to fix, either. Don’t have social workers commit “racism” by asking an applicant whether or not they are citizens. When you print the new entitlement application forms, add a line just above the signature line that reads (in as many languages as you like) “I acknowledge that it is a felony for anyone not legally in the US to receive on his/her own or anyone else’s behalf, any publicly funded “benefit” or any proceeds thereof. The penalty for violation of this is 5 years in a federal prison.” Of course, we’d have to find elected officials with the testicular fortitude to pass such a law…

SUNDAY, JUNE 3, 2012

No comments:

Post a Comment