He Who Controls The Information Controls The World

After a few back and forth emails with editors and staff of the Dallas Morning News over the last couple weeks regarding two different topics, I have come to the conclusion the only way America can survive is for moderate conservatives and independents to become more involved in owning the primary sources of information.  That means buying major media networks.  We already know all but Fox are controlled by liberals, but we may not truly understand how pervasive throughout the industry the extreme far left's control is.  Apparently most editors and columnists seem to swallow the Obamacrat bullshit hook, line and sinker.  Instead of people like the Koch Brothers lavishing campaign contributions on conservative candidates, the money might be better spent buying up controlling interests in influential newspapers and television networks.

One big problem with the media is that they typically phrase the headlines and soundbites in favorable terms for the Democrats, when reading the details reveals more problematic and unfavorable interpretations.  Unfortunately many people don't read the details, and the broadcast media often doesn't mention them.  Even the Wall Street Journal is not immune from this misleading habit.

For example, today's WSJ (4/15/14, page A3) has a headline that reads "Narrower Deficit Now Seen for 2014".  Reading the details tells us the CBO lowered forecasts for the 2014 deficit due to reductions in military spending (a really bad idea) and falling future cost projections associated with ObamaCare.  But the details also mention the deficit is expected to begin rising again in 2016 and continue growing for years due to rising health care costs, and the ratio of government debt to GDP is already at the historically high level of 74% and continuing ever upward.  By the way, the headline for the same story in the Dallas Morning News was "Deficit shrinking - for now", at least a bit more honest.

Another headline for the same day on page A4  of the WSJ reads "Health Premiums: Slower Rise Seen", one of the reasons for the narrower deficit mentioned in the paragraph above.  The headline for the same story in the DMN (4/15/15, page 7A) was a similarly misleading "CBO: Cost of health insurance subsidies to drop".  Of course the details tell us that the CBO still expects insurance premiums to continue rising over the next decade, they are just starting out lower than expected.  Furthermore, premiums are only one aspect of the cost of health care to Americans.  Premiums may be less than expected, but they are still higher than they were for individuals who do not receive government subsidies.  Even more important, deductibles are higher than under old plans so the total cost of health care will be going up even faster for individuals whose insurance does not pay anything until they cover the deductibles. 

In addition, experience with ObamaCare over the next several years is more than likely to indicate that the number of people under the age of 30 who sign up will be less than expected, which will drive premiums up at an even faster rate.  On top of all that, the CBO projects that 31 million people will still be uninsured in the US in 2024 when the point of the whole thing was to make sure everyone was covered.  Obviously the newspapers and television news reporters need somebody with a little more integrity writing the headlines and the soundbites.

More Hogwash From Napoleon

Barack Obama has built his presidency on racial warfare (blacks and browns against whites), class warfare (non-taxpayers against taxpayers), and gender warfare (women and LGBT's versus men).  Of course that is a generalization.  There are crossovers among the groups.  But looking at the statistics of party preference profiles it could easily be argued that Obama's war is against white married men over the age of 30 who have jobs or are retired.  In other words, the folks who were primarily responsible for building the world's dominant economic engine of prosperity and the defenders of freedom of the last hundred years.

This year the Democrats major theme for the fall elections is the demand for equal pay for women.  No one disagrees with that premise if all things are equal.  But it is interesting they have chosen this theme since income discrimination for reasons of race or gender has been illegal in America since the Equal Pay Act of 1963.  If the argument has any basis in fact then why don't they go after the violators of the law rather than propagandize the issue?  Could it be because this is another bogus issue the Democrats are promoting to buy votes from the freeloaders, the uneducated and the clueless?

The primary fallacy of their argument is that they compare apples to oranges.  Equal pay can only realistically be measured if two people are doing exactly the same job, have been doing it for the same length of time, putting in the same number of hours, and achieving equal results.  The surveys don't come even close to measuring that.

The useless and irrelevant surveys conclude that on average women are paid 79% of what men make.  But the fact is that historically women have worked fewer hours than men and have taken more time off from their careers.  Furthermore, women have traditionally worked in lower paying occupations.  All of that is certainly rapidly changing, but won't show up in the statistics overnight.  However, it won't take long.  57% of college students today are female, and women under the age of 30 in metropolitan areas already make more money than men.  The revolution is well underway.  That is neither a good thing nor a bad thing.  It is just recognition of reality.

Women are now CEO's of such Fortune 500 companies as IBM, Hewlett Packard, Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, PepsiCo, DuPont, Campbell Soup, Xerox, Yahoo and more.  They are also becoming more involved in politics as the number of women elected to office has grown substantially at the state and local levels as well as nationally.  Anyone actually involved in private enterprise already knows that more and more women are taking the top jobs and earning the big bucks.  Of course no one in the Obama regime may be aware of that since none of them spent any time in the private sector.  If they are aware, then the Democrats are again attempting to lie their way into office by focusing on issues that no longer exist.  If that's the case, some things never change.

Unchallenged Bullshit

The outrageous audacity of Barack Obama never ceases to amaze.  Yesterday he held a news conference pompously declaring victory in the Health Care War by claiming 7.1 million people have signed up for ObamaCare as of March 31.  Did anyone notice yesterday was April Fool's Day?

Of course Obama doesn't disclose how many of those folks had to sign up because they lost their previous coverage because of ObamaCare.  Never mind that Mr. Obama promised that would not happen.  Those folks are most likely now paying substantially higher medical costs, which Mr. Obama also promised wouldn't happen.  Many people who were newly eligible for Medicare due to the new rules switched from previous policies and have been counted in the sign-up for ObamaCare.  It will also be interesting to see how many who signed up actually pay for it once they see the price.

Even when not necessarily lying, Obama seriously bends the truth.  The only credible measurement of ObamaCare's success is to find out the increase in the number of Americans now covered by health insurance that weren't prior to ObamaCare.  I would suspect that number is considerably less.  In fact, I bet that number is closer to zero than 7.1 million.

Given Barack Obama's actions to date in his presidency of routinely spitting on the graves of our founding fathers and his presidential predecessors, one can't help but wonder how long we have until he changes the Declaration of Independence to the Declaration of Dependence.

Nerf Balls

Sorry.  Can't help myself.  I know I said in the last blog I was probably done.  But it seems like as long as Obama is running things in America there are just too many geopolitical issues that demand a comment.  Besides, as Hoser (My wife's cousin who played hockey in college, thus the nickname - hoser, hosehead, i.e., Canadian) reminded me of the famous words of Bluto Blutarsky in a comment to the last Slugzilla, "was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor"?

The biggest issues of the day involve the Russian activities in the Crimean region of the Ukraine.  So to start off, make no mistake and let me be perfectly clear (a phrase borrowed from a certain megalomaniac when he is about to tell the world something he has no intention of following through on, but in this case is a statement of fact rather than an announcement of a toothless threat).  Vladimir Putin is a bad guy.  But, it is kind of humorous for Barack Obama to label Crimea's new legislature's vote to secede from the Ukraine as illegal when Obama himself routinely violates our Constitution to impose his ideological agenda on us.

Furthermore, it is not like Crimea has been a long time loyal province within the Ukrainian territory.  Crimea has been a constitutionally recognized self-governing autonomous region since the Ukraine became an independent nation in 1991.  As far as I can tell, the Ukraine as a nation with anywhere near its present borders never existed before 1922, when it was formed as one of the first republics of the USSR, and even then it didn't include Crimea until it was annexed in 1954.  Prior to that time the territory of present day Ukraine was comprised of  independent states controlled by ethnic groups such as Tatars and Cossacks or neighbors such as Poland, Lithuania, Crimea and Russia.  From 1721 through the first World War the Russian Empire claimed significant parcels of the region, but the borders kept changing.

The first time Ukraine became an independent nation was for three years from 1919 to 1922 following World War I and prior to the formation of the USSR.  The next time it was independent was in 1991 upon the dissolution of the Soviet Union.  In other words, the Ukraine has existed as an independent nation for a total of only 26 years.  Since 1991 it has been comprised of 24 provinces and one autonomous republic - Crimea.

As mentioned, Crimea did not even become part of the Ukraine until 1954 when it was transferred to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic from the Russian Soviet Socialist Republic by Nikita Khruschchev, a native Ukrainian.  I am old enough to remember Khrushchev.  He never came across as a particularly bright guy.  Perhaps handing Crimea to Ukraine was a bad idea.  58% of Crimeans are ethnic Russians and 77% claim Russian as their native language.  It seems the people of Crimea have had very little voice in choosing their allegiance.  Maybe they should be given that choice.

Yes, the Russians under Putin are becoming more belligerent and dismissive of international law.  That is what happens when you have the Western World abdicate its responsibilities and depend on the US for security against aggression, followed by the election of an American president who is an incompetent wimp.  We should expect potential adversaries throughout the world to continue to show their fangs and gain more global power and influence at the expense of Western countries.  Until Americans and Europeans pull their heads out of their asses and understand the way the world works, it will continue to become a much more dangerous place.  But the Russian actions in Crimea may not be the place to justify an aggressive response.

Western countries are screaming that the Russians are violating international law.  Yes, the Russians did sign an agreement in 1994 where they agreed that in exchange for Ukraine's decision to give up the nuclear weapons it inherited during the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Russia affirmed it would respect Ukraine's independence and sovereignty and the existing borders.  They also agreed to refrain from the threat or use of force against Ukraine's territorial integrity or political independence.  But why would anyone trust any agreement Russia signs.  They violate every one.

Of course in reality one has to question whether there is such a thing as rule of international law, particularly when multiple violations are underway around the world all the time.  Think Syria, Iran, North Korea, Somalia, Nigeria, Sudan, and on and on.  Perhaps the most egregious hypocrisy is when the biggest violators of human rights such as China, Cuba, India (the caste system still exists), and that paragon of virtue, Venezuela, all have seats on the UN Human Rights Council.  And Russia is not the only country that unilaterally violates treaties it signs.  In his first year in office Obama reneged on a deal that had been signed the year before to build a missile defense shield in Poland to defend Europe against long range missiles launched from the Middle East or Russia.  That was the beginning of our allies learning to not trust us.

For Barack Obama, warning the Russians about breaking rules is like living in a glass house and throwing stones, except in the international arena Obama throws nerf balls.  So far in every region of the world where mere creampuffs have kicked sand in his face, he has yet to do anything.  The whole world knows he has no intention of backing his bluster up.  He always falls back into the Obama Shuffle - talk tough and pretend the other side capitulates as they continue to do whatever they damn well please while moving on to the next big lie.  After all, the empty threatener did tell the Russians he would be more flexible his second term.

What the hell are opponents supposed to think, that Pee Wee Herman will suddenly turn into Audie Murphy?  On top of that, do we really have the capability of backing up threats?  Europeans spend barely enough on defense to build a scarecrow, and naturally the Democrats are doing what they do best - gut our military.  Obama's record in foreign policy for five years has been nothing but a combination of Jimmy Carter and Roseanne Roseannadanna,

In some circumstances secession may not be a bad idea.  Some issues are irreconcilable.  Conflict to maintain lines on a map may not be worth the bloody battles that result.  For example, once before in America history society became so divided that half the country tried to secede.  One out of every 25 Americans were either killed or horribly wounded in our civil war to preserve the union.  Out of a population of 31 million, 750,000 died and 500,000 were wounded.  For those who survived, nearly every family was profoundly damaged by the carnage.  All for what?  So a few politicians could maintain their power?  Slavery was already a failing institution throughout the world as the United States was one of the last Western countries to abolish it.  Slavery was primarily an agricultural phenomena, and the Industrial Revolution was already under way.  Slavery in America was on its way out.

So was the Civil War really worth it?  For some reason there seems to be a societal stigma on questioning the necessity of the Civil War.  Why is that?  What did the Civil War really accomplish?  150 years later most African-Americans still claim to be victims and that white people owe them entitlements and reparations.  Some issues persist in the minds of many long after they have ceased to exist.  Actually, separation of people with different backgrounds and interests is not necessarily a bad thing.  Coercive domination by claiming intellectual, cultural and moral superiority only creates lingering hatred and enmity that never goes away.  Maybe it wasn't a good idea to let the British and the French determine the fate of the Ottoman empire after World War I either.  Perhaps the Middle East wouldn't be in such turmoil today.

I have no idea how events in the Ukraine will turn out.  You certainly can't count on the Russians to run a fair election in Crimea.  Of course you can't trust the Democrats to run a fair one in the US either, not with ACORN and unions involved.  It is too bad that in all their self-proclaimed brilliance the current leaders in Washington had no clue the world is still a dangerous place.  There is little question that the proper response to the Russian move in Crimea is complicated, but it is certainly not worth brinksmanship.

At some point, however, the West is going to have to stand up to the belligerents of the world and let them know they have gone far enough.  Unfortunately, it is never a good idea to make that stand from a position of weakness.  We are the only country in the world that has the capability to create strategic and tactical superiority.  But the Democrats think other things are more important and are determined to make us vulnerable.  Hopefully we won't find out the hard way that you don't pick fights unless you are sure you have superior offensive and defensive firepower, not just rough equivalence.  Otherwise you will see the nukes fly.  That will most definitely not be a good thing.  The Russians have more than we do.

The Final Battle

The Democratic Party today is built on a mountain of lies.  The greatest lie being told to the American people is that Democrats are the moderates and Republicans are the extremists.  If this Democratic Party and its leaders are moderate, then so were Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin and Mao Tse-tung.  The Obama regime is doing its best to unilaterally gain control of everything in America - our commercial and industrial base; the distribution of information through the media; the educational system; health care; our individual behavior - all while silencing the opposition.  If that is not the definition of autocratic dictatorship, what is?

For the American dream to survive that has to change.  We must take the country back from the charlatans who know how to lie, cheat and steal to get elected but are clueless about what economic philosophy and policies create prosperity.  We must cast out the snake-oil salesmen who are adept at reading grandiose but unworkable plans off a teleprompter, but are totally void of common sense and illiterate in mathematics.  We must get rid of arrogant con men with no experience in the real world and elect leaders with knowledge, integrity and competence.

Unfortunately, the chances of any of that happening are slim and none.  The guilty are in charge of the process and not about to give it up.  Most elected officials and political appointees can't manage a port-a-potty, let alone a vast bureaucracy.  They have no clue how to create efficiencies or cut unnecessary costs.  No wonder government spending is out of control.  And any reformer with some integrity and competence who does come along is vilified, ostracized and beaten to a pulp by the major media storm troopers.  We have reached the point of no return, unless we somehow manage to make substantial meaningful reforms to our electoral process.

The most obvious and important reform would be the implementation of term limits.  Everyone knows the majority of Americans are in favor of term limits.  The current system of unlimited terms for both the Senate and the House allows congressmen and women to spend their entire time in office campaigning for the next election, i.e., lying about their accomplishments and demonizing their opponents rather than doing the jobs they were elected to do.  They do not read the legislation they vote on and depend on their huge staffs and the most generous lobbyists to determine which way to vote to further their own interests, not their constituents.

The only viable option to enact term limits is to rely on Article V of the Constitution, which provides for the right of the legislatures of two-thirds of the states to call a convention for the purpose of proposing amendments to the Constitution.  Amendments produced at the convention would become law if ratified by three-quarters of the states.  It certainly would not be easy since Washington would unleash the full fury of its media attack dogs, but it is the only way to bypass the inert and irresponsible members of the Congressional club.

Furthermore, in my humble opinion, each elected official including the president should be limited to one term in the office they are elected to serve.  Six years for the president, eight years in the Senate and four years in the House of Representatives would give each enough time to influence legislation and provide the proper representation their constituents deserve rather than wasting time and money by constantly campaigning for re-election.  Perhaps half way through the term each elected official should face a vote of confidence from his constituents to let them know if the voters are satisfied with his or her performance.  If they don't get a favorable vote of at least 40%, they're gone.  Each person would have a potential 18 years in elected office if they were competent enough to make it all the way from the House through the presidency.  There are more than 315 million people in America, more than enough to come up with 536 fresh faces every few years.  In fact, it wouldn't hurt to limit Supreme Court Justices to one twenty year term.  They are not infallible either.

Another reform that makes a lot of sense would be to introduce certain requirements to be eligible to vote in national elections.  Democracy works only when the people voting for their representatives possess a basic education as well as an understanding of our system of government and the ramifications of the important issues those elected officials will be debating.  Perhaps folks who have no idea who or what they are voting for other than what a favorite television talking airhead or popular celebrity tells them should not be voting.  People who do not take the time to understand the issues and each candidate's position are doing the country a great disservice if they step in the voting booth.  Voters should focus on the substance of a candidate's knowledge, experience and competence, not personal popularity or skill in reading from a teleprompter.

A diploma from an accredited American high school or the equivalent would not be too much too ask in order to be eligible to vote.  Nor would requiring a voter to be a U.S. citizen for a minimum of five years and to maintain residence during that time.  That would ensure that only those who have a genuine and vested interest in the policies of our national government are allowed to influence it.  And how anyone could oppose a photo ID card to be eligible to vote is beyond comprehension.  Democrats tell us some don't have the opportunity to obtain a photo ID and are therefore deprived of voting.  Bullshit!  Photo ID's are required for everything from opening a bank account and driving a car to using a credit card and applying for welfare.  Only those who are intent on cheating by getting illegal immigrants, felons, dead people and pets names past the voter registrar could oppose a photo ID.

Campaign finance reform is a must if Americans are to have free and fair elections.  A basic underlying principle of democracy is that no one should be able to buy an election.  Buying an election is what happens when special interest groups are allowed to spend unlimited amounts to promote their narrow, selfish interests at the expense of the general public.  Money should not be the determining factor in public policy.  Lobbyists should not have the ability to legally bribe congressmen and women to support the lobbyists cause.

The state primary system in America is an absurd travesty.  Usually only a small percentage of eligible voters participate, typically the most rabid, extreme and radical from each party.  That means the nut cases often determine who the party's standard bearers will be.  The national conventions are nothing more than ultra-expensive, over-indulged, gluttonous, drunken orgies that cater to incumbents and national party leaders.  Focusing on qualifications and policy rather than pomp, propaganda and celebrity worship would produce better national leaders.

It wouldn't hurt to have more than two political parties participating in our system of government.  Voters need to have multiple choices to choose from, not just bad and worse.  We must grow out of the mindless blind faith to a particular party and focus our attention on the quality of individual candidates.  The majority of democracies in the developed world have four or more parties that have meaningful participation in government.  The more viewpoints involved in political debate would create more responsive and effective government.  No one party could dominate the debate and railroad their agenda into law.  Rational discussion and compromise would result in coalitions between parties forming on each individual issue to produce legislation more in the interests of the general public.

The founding fathers, and historically most Americans, strongly believed in liberty, justice, national security, private enterprise and free markets.  Government requiring us to live our lives as it demands and taxing us to implement unworkable programs and policies that we don't want is not liberty.  Bailing out those who are responsible for financial and economic collapse at the expense of those who suffered the consequences is not justice.  Unilateral disarmament while our adversaries grow stronger is not national security.  Government imposing layers of rules and regulations on commercial and industrial enterprises is not capitalism.  We are headed in the wrong direction.  We need election reforms that allow the informed, the competent and the conscientious to choose the leaders we send to Washington, people who will represent our interests rather than their own.  But I am not going to hold my breath waiting for that to happen.

There is a reason the majority of us who have been around a while aggressively oppose this president and his policies.  Wisdom is gained through experience.  In the past that meant something.  But now the younger generations, racist minorities and lots of brainless women would rather believe the empty promises of an ideologically driven totalitarian and his media brainwashing machine than recognize reality.  We may not have gulags, political prisoners, re-indoctrination camps, or convenient disappearances yet - as far as we know.  After all, the 'progressives' have only been in charge for five years.  But this is how it starts.

Finally, I think it is time for me to give up and remove myself from political commentary.  One thing there is way too much of in this world is unsolicited advice and opinions.  I am part of the problem.  Besides, it is a waste of time.  As long as any moron who doesn't have a clue is allowed to vote, and with no term limits nor any accountability for the corrupt cretins that are in office, we're screwed.  If Americans want to allow the Democrats to destroy our country, then so be it.  The country elects the people it deserves.

The Big Whopper

The claim that Republicans shut down the government last fall over ObamaCare is an audacious, premeditated, contrived lie being shoved down American's throats by the Democratic Party controlled media propaganda machine.  Apparently this lie has been blindly accepted by most of the public.  In reality, Barack Obama and the Democrats were responsible for the shut down because they refused to even negotiate, let alone compromise, with Republicans on legislation that everyone should have known would have disastrous consequences for American citizens.

Obama unilaterally granted extensions to big business, exemptions to Congress, and instructions to ignore the law to insurance companies, but would not postpone a disaster that everyone but Obama himself and the Director of HHS saw coming.  Yet somehow Republicans are vilified for proposing to do something that clearly should have been done.  The American media is not just brain-washing the public, it is erasing all brain cells, turning the public into zombies.

Maybe it is time to stand back and give the Democrats the rope to hang themselves by letting them proceed with their destructive policies rather than allowing them to twist the facts and accuse Republicans of being obstructionists.  The American public needs to learn the hard way who is truly responsible for America's moribund economy, high unemployment, dysfunctional education system, deteriorating morals, and yes, the huge gap in income inequality.

In a perfect world all legislators who want to preserve American values and sustain freedom and prosperity would be obligated to fight to the death against the Democrats and their policies that hurt Americans rather than help them.  But that doesn't work when the majority of the voting public does not understand the consequences of those policies.  It is most likely a losing battle to fight both the lies of the Democrats and the reinforcement of those lies by the Democrat controlled media.  Obviously it is impossible to underestimate the intelligence of the American people or overestimate the power of the liberal media.

Reality For Conservatives

In America today, any politician who runs on the platform of the religious right will find it difficult to win a national election.  In most states they will struggle to win a statewide one.  Even if someone sneaks through and wins office they will be totally ineffective since they will be isolated, marginalized and ignored.  Face it, conservatives have lost the gay rights and abortion wars.  The world changes.  It is time to move on.  There are more important battles to fight.

If anyone wants to have a vote in restoring conservative values to America, they must vote for the candidate that stands for limited government, individual rights, fair justice, personal responsibility, free markets, private enterprise, maintenance of a strong national security - and personal choice regarding gay rights and abortion.  Today a vote for a politician who panders to the religious right is effectively a vote for the most liberal candidate in the race.  So is refusing to vote at all because the most conservative candidate is not conservative enough.  Hopefully it won't take those who want to preserve a strong and prosperous America many more lost elections to figure this out.

Gay rights and women's rights to abortions are no longer major issues.  Private enterprise versus government control of the economy is a major issue.  Free choice versus government determined allocation of goods and services is a major issue.  Redistribution of income versus rewarding innovation and productivity is a major issue.  Maintaining strong national security versus capitulating to adversaries is a major issue.  Government control of the distribution of information versus censorship is a major issue.  Teaching our children the true history of the United States versus indoctrinating them with politically correct bullshit is a major issue.

The leadership of the Democratic Party today is intentionally destroying what took our forefathers over 200 years to build.  The majority of Americans don't want that to happen.  I believe the Republican party best represents the political beliefs of most Americans, but they have an anchor attached to their ankles dragging them down into irrelevance.  The religious right needs to wake up and get with the program or form their own self-serving, insignificant private club.  The stakes are too high to remain chained to the irrelevant.  We must preserve the United States of America and what we mean to ourselves and the rest of the world - freedom, justice, security and prosperity.

The Democratic Party is controlled by ideological extremists that are highly successful in hoodwinking the voting public into thinking they are moderate.  A segment of the Republican Party is also controlled by extremists, and they are alienating a substantial portion of the voting public.  Perhaps it is time for the moderates in the Republican Party to form a new party that represents the true center of American politics.  That is where most voters exist.  Otherwise, we will end up known as the generation responsible for destroying what our prior generations built, and our children and grandchildren will justifiably never forgive us.

Money For Nothing

Barack Obama's latest announced quixotic crusade is to dictate income equality.  Who would have ever believed that Napoleon the Pig would jump out of the pages of Orwell's 'Animal Farm' and land behind the desk in the Oval Office?  The most contemptible creatures are those who promise to improve the lives of everyone while working to improve only their own - fictional characters like Napoleon the Pig and real ones like Barack Obama.  Does anyone really think Obama gives a shit about income equality?  As usual, it is nothing more than an attempt to buy votes and improve his popularity rating.  Ironically, income inequality has increased in America at the fastest rate ever under Obama's reign.  That is not an anomaly.  It is a product of his agenda.

The fact is that income inequality is not necessarily bad.  It provides the incentive for people to work hard to get an education and get a productive job.  Education and innovation result in the  accumulation and enhancement of the base of knowledge that is the foundation for creating new products and generating progress (caveat - the jury is still out on whether or not video games represent progress).  Productive jobs lead to affluence and prosperity that improves standards of living.  Without rising living standards, civilization stagnates and remains stuck in a condition of survival of the strongest or the wealthiest, which is as far away from fairness and equality as one can get.

Certainly every society must have a system of safety nets that provides for access to food, shelter clothing and basic medical care for those truly in need.  But it should not make dependence on government an acceptable or comfortable lifestyle.  It is not the duty of society to provide money for cell phones, high definition flat screen televisions, abortions, birth control pills, sex changes, drugs, alcohol, downloading rap songs, pimped out cars and a life of leisure.

There is no question that many people in America make outrageous amounts of money while not really earning it, particularly those in the financial sector who often make money by taking advantage of others.  Personally, I believe it would be a good idea to raise marginal tax rates on those making more than half a million dollars a year.  But it is insane to blow up capitalism and destroy the human work ethic, a system that has produced the greatest prosperity in the history of the world, just because it has a few flaws.  The goal is to raise living standards for all, not punish those who generate progress.  The only way to do that is to accelerate economic growth through private enterprise and free markets, not income redistribution.  Income redistribution just drags everyone down to the lowest common denominator, except those privileged few at the very top dictating what is good for us. 

Isn't This What The American Revolution Was About?

In my personal opinion, Congressman Paul Ryan is one of the few members of Congress who has any credibility and integrity.  Yesterday on one of the Sunday morning programs he said the main obstacle to passing legislation is that Republicans simply do not trust Barack Obama to implement the laws once passed.  The direct quote is, "We have an increasingly lawless president who is actually doing the job of Congress, writing new policies and new laws without going through Congress.  Presidents don't write laws, Congress does.  And when he does things like he did in health care, delaying mandates that the law said were supposed to occur, that's not his job.  Here's the issue that all Republicans agree on: We don't trust the President to enforce the law."

Those comments are not political rhetoric.  Barack Obama has earned that distrust.  On January 27 through an Executive Action he raised the minimum wage paid on federal contracts.  He did not consult Congress or request enabling legislation.  Prior to that he had already unilaterally instructed the Justice Department to stop enforcing immigration laws, federal welfare laws, drug laws, and the federal Defense of Marriage Act.  He routinely violates the Constitution by suspending, delaying, and waiving laws he is charged to enforce.

Nothing has been more outrageous than the changes he repeatedly tells his agencies to make to the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare), which he ramrodded through Congress without a single Republican vote.  One year waivers from compliance with ObamaCare to businesses with 50 or more employees; over-riding the decisions of states to not establish insurance exchanges; granting a special exemption to members of Congress and their staffs even though the law required them to be covered under ObamaCare; telling private insurance companies to disobey the law when he found out it required them to cancel millions of policies in force.

Barack Obama's disdain of the law is apparent to everyone who is paying attention and not drinking his Kool-Aid.  His supporters claim all presidents have issued Executive Orders.  Almost true.  All but one have.  But Executive Orders have always been used to implement law, not create or change laws - until now.  If a president of any country regularly ignores the law to do anything he damn well pleases, soon everyone else will too.  Then there is no real law, and those in power at any level of society can act arbitrarily to commit any crimes and punish any opponent they want and get away with it.  Americans fought a bloody revolution to rid themselves of such tyranny.  One man with a forked tongue sitting in the Oval Office and his deputized agents are working hard to reinstitute that tyranny on the American people.

Assault on Capitalism

Capitalism is under attack around the globe.  It is being condemned not only by the traditional dictators and autocratic regimes one would expect but also by folks who should know better, from the Pope in Rome to America's communists disguised as Progressives disguised as Democrats.  They argue that capitalism is unfair because it creates inequality among the people in a society.  Yes it  does.  Capitalism is guilty as charged.  The opportunities and incentives capitalism offers do invite the creative and productive among us to gain economic and social advantages.  Is that really a bad thing?

Barack Obama has called income inequality "the defining challenge of our time".  No argument from me.  It is one of the most serious issues that confront Americans today.  But as ever, Obama denounces a situation that his policies make even worse.  Raising the minimum wage is one example, a policy that will cause more of those at the low end to lose their jobs.  Constitutionally questionable mandates routinely generated by Obama's politically correct henchpersons at federal agencies (i.e., Environmental Protection Agency, National Labor Relations Board, etc.) prevent jobs from being created.  So do increasingly costly regulations and paperwork for small business, as does the administration's war on fossil fuels and its campaign against right to work laws.  And of course, ObamaCare and its higher costs of medical insurance hits the middle class the hardest, the very folks he claims to champion.  Obama probably even knows all this, but he also knows the anti-business rhetoric and inequality sound bites appeal to the uneducated, uninformed and unindustrious when it comes time to vote.

It is ironic that income inequality in America has increased at the fastest rate ever and reached its most extreme under a progressive president whose stated goal is to redistribute income from the rich to the poor.  But he and his co-conspirators are not playing Robin Hood by taking from the rich.  They are taking money from the vast middle class and redistributing it to the lower income and unemployed to buy their subservience.  And they are redistributing it to themselves and the super wealthy to increase and lock in their power.  Who benefitted most from the financial sector bailouts, the stimulus programs and the Fed's Quantitative Easing?  We are witnessing the Beltway - Wall Street Complex taking total control at the expense of everyone else.

The income gap has continued to grow ever since liberal policies creating the welfare state and government dependency began to permeate society more than eighty years ago.  The programs continue to expand at the same time the problems they were created to resolve grow ever larger.  Liberals can never point to any success their programs have achieved.  Fifty years ago Ronald Reagan noted that if socialism is supposed to work, shouldn't Democrats be able to point to some successful progress?  Yes they should.  But they don't.  The evidence of the results of the programs always indicate they make the problems worse.

Democrats always blame America's social problems and income inequality on Republicans.  American voters never seem to remember that Democrats have controlled the presidency 56% of the time the last 80 years, the Senate 73% of the time, and the House of Representatives 70%.  Furthermore, Democrats have controlled the presidency, the Senate and the House all at the same time 35 of those years while the Republicans have controlled all only 10 years.  Yet the welfare state grows without producing any victories against the problems.  Which party is bullshitting the American people?

It does not take a rocket scientist to understand that redistribution of income destroys economic progress as it kills the work ethic and eliminates the incentive to innovate, compete, boost productivity, and even pursue an education in order to improve standards of living for individuals and their families.  It increases dependency on government, stifles creativity, punishes ambition, and extinguishes hope and opportunity.  Only in feudal societies did the masses of people have nearly equal living standards, and their lives were miserable.  The gap between the serfs and the royalty was infinite because the serfs had nothing.  Modern productive capitalism is essential in creating a vast middle class that can achieve and enjoy prosperity and affluence.  Economic growth is what generates rising living standards, not government handouts.  Government bureaucrats do not produce economic growth.  Private enterprise does.

The biggest change in America in my lifetime is that socialism has become respectable while traditional American values have been rejected.  It has occurred under the radar screen, apparently metastasizing in educational institutions, popular media editorial offices, government dependent community organizations and among public service employees.  It has happened while the economically productive members of society were busy working in the private sector to support their families.  It was suddenly sprung upon the rest of us when an ideologically driven pied piper named Barack Obama arrived on the political scene to direct the change.  Even Karl Marx, the progenitor of socialism, declared that socialism is only a transitional stage between capitalism and communism.  That is where we are heading under Obamaism.  History has shown us that prosperous democracies don't last forever.  We are now experiencing the reasons why.

Mayday! Mayday! Mayday!

Does anyone who still supports Barack Obama ever read the real news?  Anyone who still believes that Obama has not been an unmitigated disaster as president is either seriously out of touch with reality or unable to handle the truth.  There can only be two conclusions to draw from the evidence gained from his five years in office.  He is either a clueless incompetent buffoon in way over his head, or a dedicated Marxist ideologue actively working to turn America into a communist dictatorship.  Either way America is rapidly losing altitude and headed for disaster.

It is undeniable that Obama's disastrous foreign policy is causing us to lose credibility everywhere in the world.  Islamic tyrants ignore and laugh at Obama's threats while they continue to massacre their own people.  The Russians are gaining influence at our expense in Eastern Europe and throughout the Middle East.  China is gaining influence at our expense in Asia and Africa.  Marxist autocrats are dominating Latin America.   Even the few allies that remain know they can no longer trust us.

Domestically, our economy has limped along for five years at less than half its average growth rate, and nearly a quarter of the typical rate recovering from a recession.  Jobs remain scarce and many people have quit looking for them.  Our exploding national debt is piling oppressive burdens on future generations and has rendered America insolvent.  Our educational system is turning out idiots no matter how much money is thrown at it.  Our society is now as polarized as it was just before the Civil War more than 150 years ago.  And perhaps most frightening, our national security forces are being emasculated.  We are becoming the 90 pound weakling the bully's of the world will look forward to beating up on.

So which one is he - the inexperienced, incompetent pretender or the devious, dedicated Marxist.
The indicators pointing to Obama's being an inept snake oil salesman arise from the evidence that his idea of being president is nothing more than using teleprompters to give grandiose speeches promising free everything to friendly audiences and then going off to play some golf.  He isn't really interested in the details of the job.  He is only interested in the power.  We have a president who is clearly a narcissistic sociopath who believes he can do no wrong.  He lives in a fantasy world where all his initiatives are enlightened triumphs and any problems can be blamed on someone else.  Unfortunately, under this supposition, his excess of arrogance and impudence combined with lack of experience, competence and understanding of how the world works has America in a nose-dive that may be unrecoverable.

For example, Obama's latest lunatic action is to declare a campaign to substantially increase the federal minimum wage.  Obviously he and the rest of the Democratic Party are economic illiterates.  Can they not understand that any business that pays minimum wage has only two choices if they are required to pay a higher one?  They will either have to raise prices to cover the higher costs, meaning sales and revenues will decline as some customers refuse to buy the product at the higher price, or they have to lay off workers to keep from having to raise prices, increasing unemployment and creating more dependency on government.  Neither is a favorable result.  Why is that so hard for liberals to understand.

Then again, maybe Obama and the progressives understand all too well since their goal is to create more dependency on government in order to get the votes of the folks who like the government freebies paid for by someone else.  Creating class warfare is the best way to incite a revolution.  The best way to ignite class warfare is to create a common enemy by convincing the people that the bad guys are taking advantage of them by not playing fair.  After all, the scam he and the progressives depend on to win elections is to claim they are political moderates while Republicans are obstructionist extremists taking advantage of society.

The facts of course prove otherwise, if anyone cares to notice.  Obama and his politburo are the most extreme left wing ideologues to ever gain power in America, and it can be argued they are trying to turn us into a totalitarian Marxist state controlled by them.  The Obama administration routinely ignores the law, disregarding our individual liberty and freedom of choice in the process.  It is dictating our required personal behavior and confiscating our income to spend as it sees fit.  It is using its control of the Senate, federal agencies and captive major media networks to stifle and eliminate any opposition to its ideological agenda.

Perhaps Barack Obama is America's first anti-American president.  If that is the case, then we are in deep shit.  The well of taxpayer dollars will soon run dry, chaos will ensue, and there will be a lot of unhappy Americans with guns.  That is not a future anyone wants for us or our children.  If American voters cannot figure out this political grab for absolute power, Barack Obama may become our last president and our first supreme dictator.

Sold Down The River

Barack Obama and John Kerry claim to have secured a deal with Iran that supposedly curtails Iran's nuclear program and ends their quest to produce nuclear weapons, in exchange for easing sanctions on Iran's economy.  The Brooklyn bridge is again for sale.  Israel and Saudi Arabia, those most effected by the pact, have formally registered their informed skepticism that the agreement does no such thing.  Iran President Hassan Rouhani himself says the agreement allows them to continue enriching uranium while Obama and Kerry say it doesn't.  Iranians are celebrating in the streets of Tehran as they cheer the agreement as a big victory over the Great Satan.  And of course the average American citizen as well as anyone outside the inner circle of the Obama administration is not privy to the details of the agreement.  Even Democrats in Congress are against it.  Certainly this giveaway could have nothing to do with Obama's need to deflect attention away from the disastrous consequences of ObamaCare, could it?

Americans must ask themselves three things -
1.  Do you trust the Iranian government?
2.  Do you trust the American government?
3.  Do you really believe anything the Obama administration says, particularly in view of the evidence that everything they say is a self-serving lie?

If your answer to any of those questions is yes, then you are without any doubt a certifiable moron.

The Pied Piper Of Politics

Barack Obama has turned lying into an art form.  The only time he is not lying is when he is not talking.  As far as anyone can tell, that is never.  Obama has so refined the practice of lying that in politics it has now become acceptable.  Even many of his supporters know he is lying but they don't care.  In fact, even when they know it is a lie they pretend to believe it anyway.

Obama draws lines in the sand and then says he didn't.  He said during his first campaign there would be no lobbyists in his administration, when of course there are dozens.  He said he would make government more open and transparent, when it is anything but.  He claimed Fast and Furious was begun under George Bush, when it didn't start until 2009.  He says no civilians are killed in Middle Eastern drone strikes, when human rights groups prove otherwise.  He lied about the NSA spying scandals, on both US citizens and our foreign allies, thereby violating our privacy and poisoning relations with our friends.  He lied about how few jobs would be created by the Keystone Pipeline.  He lied about Benghazi.  He lied about the IRS scandal.  What hasn't he lied about?  When has he ever told the truth?  To Barack Obama, winning is all about claiming false credit and diverting deserved blame.  He avoids accountability like the plague, which for him it would be.

His biggest lie of all is about ObamaCare.  He said if you like your current doctor and your current health plan you can keep them.  Thousands have already found out differently.  He claims ObamaCare will provide better health care at a lower cost for all.  It will do neither of those.  He said there is no widespread evidence that ObamaCare is hurting jobs, when more than 300 companies have already announced eliminating jobs and cutting hours due to ObamaCare.  Now he says he didn't know the launch of the program would be such a disaster.

Actually, none of that matters to Obama.  Providing affordable health care is not the program's objective.  ObamaCare is another welfare program designed to redistribute money from the working middle class and young people to minorities, labor unions and public employees.  That is because minorities, labor unions and government employees depend on bigger government, which he promises to deliver.  And it makes just about every health care issue effecting women free, thereby buying the female vote.  Younger generations, who are major financial victims of the legislation, also vote for him because they are either too indoctrinated in the liberal educational system or too inexperienced in dealing with political bullshit to know any better.

In  2012 only 39% of white people voted for Obama, while over 80% of minorities did - including 93% of African-Americans.  58% of union members voted for Obama, a number which includes most public employees.  55% of women voted for Obama, while only 45% of men did.  Interestingly, as people advanced in age the less likely they were to vote for Obama, while 60% of those under the age of 30 voted for him.  Obviously there is something to be said for maturity and experience.  Maybe the voting age should be raised to 30.  Oh, and by the way, 45% of those with income above $50,000 voted for Obama while 60% with income under $50,000 did.

It is a complete waste of time to debate Obama supporters.  They aren't listening.  All they contribute to the conversation is the Obamacratic Party line lying points.  It is hard to believe how far gone they are until you read a few of their uninformed, hate-filled responses to editorials and commentaries in newspapers and magazines.  Their vitriol is off the charts.  Their "facts" are fictitious.  They don't want to be confused by the real facts or deal with reality.  They are totally indoctrinated in the cult of Obama, and are as close-minded as madrassah trained terrorists.  They can't handle the truth.  They have their heads so far up Obama's ass they can't pull them out.  Bursting their bubble could be apocalyptic.  America will be lucky to survive three more years of this insanity.

Time To Admit A Mistake

Many people voted for Barack Obama because he convinced them that he would improve our relations with foreign countries.  After five years in office he has destroyed them.  He has shriveled in a corner while Vladimir Putin has become the new world leader.  He has lost all influence in the Middle East.  He has let France - yes, France - become Western Civilization's most vocal defender of global human rights.  Now he has trashed our relations with our friends in Europe due to the NSA's spying on European leaders.  Yes, every country spies.  But tapping the cell phones of your most faithful supporters in world affairs?  That is inexcusable.

Here in America Obama has presided over the most sluggish economic recovery in modern times with persistent high unemployment and lack of job opportunities.  He has created a massive new unaffordable and ineffective entitlement program that the majority of people don't want.  His presidency is by far the most damaging and the worst failure in American history.  Bet even after five years his supporters still refuse to acknowledge that any of this is Obama's fault.

I suppose one could argue it is not all his fault, that it really is the fault of a political party that put an inexperienced, naïve, polarizing, egocentric, left wing radical who lies every time he opens his mouth in front of a teleprompter or a microphone as their presidential candidate, one that once elected the party unanimously continues to support in Congress.  This argument would indicate our situation is the fault of the Democratic Party, not one man.

Perhaps to an even greater extent it is the fault of more than 70% of the American people, the nearly 30% who voted for him and the 40% who didn't vote at all.  They were either too gullible in believing an obvious snake oil selling con man or too disinterested in the future of our country to care about it.  You folks know who you are.  The country would be a lot better off if you would admit it, and we could end his and his party's destruction of our country now instead of 3 years down the road when the damage will be much worse.

Rejecting the Democrats does not mean one has to become a Republican.  My personal preference is neither political party.  I consider myself an independent.  But I suppose the best label for me would be Anti-Obamacrat.  The Obamacrats are not our parents Democrats.  The sooner today's knee jerk Democrats realize that the better off we will be.  The Obamacrats are killing us.

Turn Out The Lights

For years Congress has had the lowest approval rating of any public or private institution in America.  That is because the same old farts in both political parties have been there doing nothing at best and serious damage at worst for a long time.  It is undeniable that America cannot afford the entitlements we already have - social security, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment benefits, food stamps, etc. - let alone the massive new one called ObamaCare.  Yet we carry on with business as usual as many Americans refuse to acknowledge the situation by sending the same people back to Washington who are responsible for it.  A year ago the Republicans finally send some young guys with principles and ideas to try and restore sanity to the process of governing and they are cut to shreds by the old guys and crucified in the media.  Somehow the old guard and the media pundits blame the new guys as the ones causing problems, and the public buys it.

The president, the Congressional establishment and the pinko media were able to convince the people to ignore that fact that the revolt of the rookies was caused by a massive new entitlement that nearly everyone knows has no chance of achieving its stated objective of better health care for all at a lower cost.  This is legislation that has a direct impact on 20% of the economy, that very few elected representatives had read, and was passed by the Democrats without a single Republican vote so members of Congress "could find out what was in it".  It was also opposed by the majority of the American people.  It is and will continue to be a monumental disaster.  Beyond that, the people continue to ignore that the President of the United States has assumed dictatorial power to create laws and exempt his cronies from them.  Clearly we are living in the Twilight Zone, getting closer and closer to the day when everything goes permanently dark.

Obamaism

"A house divided against itself cannot stand".  Abraham Lincoln said that in 1858, two years before he became president.  One hundred and fifty-five years later we have again become irreconcilably divided, all due to the actions and rhetoric of one man named Barack Obama.  At no other time in our history have we had a president who tells us every day that winners of elections can do whatever they damn well please and losers shut the fuck up.  At no other time in American history have we had a president who absolutely refused to work with the opposing party to negotiate on legislation.  In America it has always been the responsibility of the president to work for all the people, not just those who voted for him.  In Barack Obama's case less than 3 in 10 eligible voters did vote for him, and that undoubtedly included some people who were dead, ineligible to vote, and voted more than once.

Over the last three months Barack Obama has been quoted as saying, "The one unifying principle in the Republican Party is making sure that 30 million people don't have health care".  And "In order to achieve this they are willing to tank the entire economy".  And "The Republicans promise economic chaos if they don't get their way."  And "The Republicans desire to actually plunge this country back into recession - all to deny the basic security of health care to millions of Americans".  And "Republicans want to default on the debt to cause a world-wide financial crisis".  And "You have never seen in the history of the United States the threat of not raising the debt ceiling being used to extort a president or a governing party", when in fact that is exactly what a rookie Senator named Barack Obama did in 2006 to attempt to defund the Iraq war.

Obama is not saying that in his opinion a deep recession, a global financial catastrophe, or people losing health care coverage would likely be the result of Republican policies.  He is saying those are the Republicans goals.  He is saying Republicans are mean and evil monsters intent on making fellow Americans suffer.  The previous three sentences and the prior paragraph were culled from an article in the Wall Street Journal by Karl Rove.  No matter what anyone may think of Karl Rove, the last paragraph and a half are part of the public record and therefore indisputable.

Let's assume you are a Democrat, or more accurately today, an Obamacrat.  Have you ever heard Republicans demean your intelligence and integrity by saying such things as "Because of your opposition to school choice and charter schools you obviously don't want children to get a decent education"?  Or "Because of your support for ObamaCare you evidently want to inflict on the public a health care system that subjects citizens to higher costs, long waits for substandard medical care provided by an unfamiliar physician, and reliance on government health panels to approve needed medical procedures".  Or "You clearly want future generations to live in poverty by burdening them with massive debt, high unemployment and unavailable job opportunities".  Or "Your goal is for all of us to die in a nuclear holocaust because you are unilaterally dismantling our defense capabilities".  In other words, you intentionally want to destroy our country.

What would you think if you constantly heard Republicans saying these things?  Would these provocative accusations inspire you to change your opinions?  I seriously doubt it.  It would just piss you off.  But this is what anyone who disagrees with our president has to put up with every day.  Could anything be more polarizing?  I am not even a Republican and it pisses me off.  I am an independent.  I don't agree with many Republican positions on the issues either.  But I adamantly disagree with most of the Obamacrat policies, and therefore strongly object to the arrogant bully's condescending lectures and inflammatory rhetoric.

Obama said if he negotiated with the Republicans it would mean the Republicans would get everything they want and the Democrats would get nothing.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  The Republicans wanted to postpone the implementation of ObamaCare for one year and make it applicable to Congress and the Congressional staffs.  That was it.  There was nothing in the Republican proposals about what they really want, such as reducing taxes, reforming Medicare and Medicaid, increasing defense spending, rationalizing welfare or approving the Keystone Pipeline.  For Obama his rhetoric was all just his standard operating procedure, more malignant slanders about throwing old people under the bus, eating the children, and exploiting the poor.  He lies deliberately with impunity, and no one from his major media propaganda machine ever objects, calls him out or holds him accountable.

The recent budget agreement ending the government shutdown naturally has been proclaimed by the groveling talking heads of his in-house media as a total victory for Obama and the Obamacrats.  But was it really?  Is it a victory when for the foreseeable future we will continue on the road to oblivion with political business as usual, having to argue over the same issues every few months?  Obamacrats will continue to demean, vilify and slander Republicans with outrageous lies.  The illusionists of the Obama controlled major media networks will continue to call the Republicans doctrinaire and obstructionist, even though the Republicans were the ones that submitted proposal after proposal to reach a budget compromise that Obamacrats refused to even consider.  We now know without a doubt that Obamacrats will never stop the growth in unaffordable entitlement programs no matter how much damage they are doing to the future of the country.  That is because it buys them votes.

So who is the obstructionist here?  If Barack Obama and Harry Reid would have agreed to any of the minor changes to the law Republicans requested then the government shutdown would not have occurred.  These were changes that should have been made, particularly in view of Obama's unilateral actions to delay the employer mandate, grant over a thousand wavers to his financial backers, and in light of the fact that it wasn't ready to be implemented as has been proven by its disastrous launch.  The only thing that held America hostage was Obama's monumental ego.  Any attempt to get Obamacrats to act in a responsible and rational manner is always met by vitriolic name calling and a refusal to consider opposing opinions.  That is not the way a government based on separation of powers is supposed to work.

Obamacrats love to say the Republicans dogmatic pursuit of unrestrained capitalism and heartless social policies are the reason we have unsatisfactory economic growth, inadequate health care, high unemployment, homelessness, income inequality, etc., etc., etc.  What a crock of bullshit.  Social security has been with us for nearly eighty years.  Medicare and Medicaid have been in existence for nearly fifty years.  They are all now out of control and growing at unsustainable rates.  Unemployment insurance, free food, public welfare for the indigent, and other income security programs have been around for years.  Government rules and regulations have expanded exponentially to handcuff and straightjacket private enterprise and job creation.  Where is the heartless social policies and unrestrained capitalism Obamacrats incessantly complain about?  Massive government bureaucracies and unmanageable entitlements programs have created our problems, not over-indulged capitalism or inadequate social safety nets.

ObamaCare is not only another unaffordable entitlement, it is also the one that is most unjustifiable.  Social Security is probably necessary since most Americans are not capable of planning ahead to adequately save for their own retirement.  Medicare and Medicaid serve a useful purpose, but would be more effective if merged into one program that provides basic care for the indigent and universal insurance for catastrophic injuries and illnesses that are too expensive for all but the extremely wealthy to afford.  Basic health care services should rely on free market competition among insurance companies to offer affordable insurance for the ordinary and routine medical care people need.  We don't need and can't afford ObamaCare.  We need the current health care industry to be privatized, restructured and rationalized.

The Democratic Party used to believe in the traditional American foundation of democracy, capitalism, individual rights, personal responsibility, and equal opportunity.  But they have now morphed into the Obamacratic Party, populated with Obamacrats believing in Obamaism.  They no longer believe in democracy.  They believe in one party rule.  They no longer believe in individual liberty.  They believe in monitoring and controlling citizens behavior.  They no longer believe in justice for all.  They believe in favoring special interests and ethnic groups to buy their votes.  They no longer believe in private enterprise and free markets.  They believe in government control of economic activity, including federal subsidies for favored industries and financial supporters.  They no longer believe in capitalism, where incentives for personal gain lead to creativity, innovation, economic expansion and widespread affluence.  They believe in redistributing income from the productive middle class to those dependent on government, including the special interest groups who need government funding to promote their agenda.  And apparently Obamacrats no longer believe in a socially unified nation that stands for equal rights and opportunity for all.  They now believe that anyone who opposes their policies and actions must be demonized, marginalized, humiliated, denigrated and silenced.

One thing I have learned over my nearly 65 years is that the way something is perceived in the present is often not the way it is perceived in the future.  As already mentioned, the national media painted the Republicans in general and the so-called tea party in particular as the big losers in the government shutdown fiasco.  Personally, I think the biggest losers were the establishment Republicans.  They have been outed as nothing more than Obamacrats Light, supporters of big government and advocates of political business as usual.  A lot of these fat and happy dinosaurs may find themselves out on their butts next November.

Perhaps over the long run the biggest loser in the shutdown debacle will be the Obamacrats themselves.  November 2014 is still more than a year away.  More and more independents are realizing every day that we cannot sustain big government and political business as usual.  Maybe some folks who call themselves Democrats will become enlightened and realize the Obamacrats are not who they thought they were.  Perhaps they will toss a few of the entrenched, obstructionist oligarchs of their party out on the street as well.

Regardless, there remains a very large segment of the population that will not forget the tactics of demonization and the malicious names they have been called by the president of their country just because they do not kiss his ass and endorse his policies.  He has polarized America beyond reconciliation.  Either the Obamacrats will eventually pay the price for this uncivil behavior of their leader, or the country will.  That is not a threat.  I have no influence or power over anybody.  It is a prediction.

A year from now ObamaCare will likely be exposed as a monumental disaster, so dysfunctional and damaging to the country's physical and financial health that even the Obamacrat controlled media will no longer be able to cover it up.  Obamacrats will pay for that at the polls, if we are still allowed to have elections by His Eminence in the White House.  Furthermore, if Americans continue to condone a party in power that refuses to negotiate with the other one that represents an almost equal amount of Americans, and whose only arguments about policy contain nothing but slanderous lies, hysterical demonization, outrageous accusations and irrational insinuations regarding their opponents, then this country is going down.

The only people in this country that can restore America's traditional principles of liberty, justice and limited government are the independents who reject both political parties and the segment at the core of the Republican Party that focuses on the important issues and could care less about the demands of the religious right.  I am not saying the religious right is wrong, but they need to understand there are much more important issues than gay rights and abortion.  They also need to understand that America was founded on separation of church and state, and that they cannot impose their beliefs on every American citizen.

The most recent Gallup poll of less than a month ago found that 30% of Americans identify themselves as Democrats, down just 2% from a year before.  20% identify themselves as Republicans (down 8%) while 47% (up 9%) are independents.  Independents reject the ideological rigidity of the extremists of both mainstream parties.  A party in the middle that rejects the big government domination and expansion of the Obamacrats and the unpopular social restraints of the Republican far right could coalesce to become the viable alternative to extreme leftists that now run the country.  They could bring rationality, responsibility, cooperation and civility to the American political environment.  It could bring an end to the unproductive and dangerous polarization of American society.

Finally, I will venture a forecast that to most folks will appear to be absurd folly.  I predict the biggest winner of the October 2013 budget war will eventually be Ted Cruz.  He fought the good fight against another entitlement because ObamaCare is wrong.  He did it because of principle and the knowledge that America will not survive with business as usual.  It was exactly what his constituents elected him to do.  Someday soon Americans will again realize that government leaders with intelligence, principles and integrity are what we must have to survive as a free, just, and prosperous nation.  Our elected representatives must represent us, not themselves.  If I am wrong, then it is time to start praying to the God of your choice, if you are still allowed to have one other than Barack Obama.

Suicide Is Not Painless

The Democrats have found a new candidate to lead their charge toward becoming relevant in the state of Texas.  Wendy Davis announced last Thursday as a candidate for Governor.  She jumped from obscurity onto the radar screen and became a national celebrity in June with an 11 hour filibuster against an abortion bill in the Texas legislature.  Democrats have trucked her all over the country ever since, raising funds nationally to promote a new female liberal to run in Texas.  Of course Texas is the Democrats ultimate prize.  They figure if they can win Texas the game would be all over for Republicans in the United States of America.  They might be right.

So far Ms. Davis has said mostly the right things.  She said she opposes raising sales or property taxes, although she didn't mention anything about income taxes.  She claims to have supported business interests in her tenure on the Fort Worth city council.  She has a very impressive resume, apparently a very competent attorney with a law degree from Harvard.  And of course the best thing she has going for her is she is a woman.  Davis is a very legitimate threat to the Republican old boy network in Texas, whether they want to believe it or not.

The one readily identifiable problem with Wendy Davis is that she is on the wrong side of the argument of by far the most important issue regarding the future of America.  She is a Democrat, and Democrats want to spend more money on everything (except our national security) whether it does any good or not.  A recent article in the Dallas Morning News reported that she said we need to spend more money on public education, highways and health care.  As most Democrats do, she calls it investing in the future.

Why can't Democrats ever acknowledge that government spends too much money.  They say Republicans don't want to spend money on education, health care and infrastructure.  That is just not true.  Republicans don't object to spending money, they object to wasting money.  Besides, Democrats don't spend money to invest in the future, they spend money we don't have to buy votes.

The real problem is that government is spending too much money on programs and public services that don't do anyone any good.  Kids aren't learning anything despite the fact America spends more money per student than any other country in the world.  A recent Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) study reported that we spend $15,171 per person in the educational system, or 7.3% of GDP, versus the average for all developed countries of $9,313 and 6.3%.  The primary problem is that the ranks and salaries of school administrators have skyrocketed and the incompetent teachers are rewarded the same as the competent ones. Unfortunately, powerful teachers unions control school boards that grant compensation packages the taxpayers cannot afford and institute politically correct curriculums that result in educational mediocrity.

America's health care system has been a disaster for a long time, and ObamaCare will make it even worse.  Why would anyone believe that a massive federal bureaucracy could generate better health care services at a better price when everything in history that has been run by such a beast has been a colossal failure.  Nothing generates the best results in any endeavor better than free market competition among providers of goods and services who must continually work to offer the best product at the best price.  ObamaCare goes in the opposite direction.  Besides leading to less favorable outcomes for patients, rules and regulations of ObamaCare are de-incentivizing medical professionals, leading to fewer practitioners down the road.  It also is discouraging business enterprises from hiring new employees and encouraging them to reduce the number of full time employees, re-classifying them as part time to reduce health care costs.  It is really nothing more than another irrational massive government entitlement program that America cannot afford.

Spending money on infrastructure is often a good idea, but not when it is for some Congressman's or special interest group's unnecessary boondoggle.  Furthermore, under the current system of awarding government contracts in most states, necessary infrastructure projects are too costly due to union influence and cronyism when awarding the contracts.  In many cases, allowing private enterprise to bid for these projects and manage them once completed produces considerably better results than does awarding contracts to a unionized bidder who happens to be some politicians brother-in-law or fraternity brother.

The people who are generating the income to pay for government's profligacy want their tax dollars to be spent wisely, not wasted.  If government is just going to waste the money, or even worse give it away to create more dependency on government (meaning confiscating more money from America's producers), then taxpayers would rather just keep more of what they earn.  Democrats, and some Republicans, are salesmen, not managers.  They promise everything since it isn't their money.  They are good at selling themselves to get elected but couldn't manage a port-o-potty.  They do not care about the concepts of efficiency, productivity, and cost versus benefit.  They just care about making the sale.  They presume they can raise taxes on the middle class and print money indefinitely.

Unfortunately, too many voters don't give a shit about anything mentioned in the last five paragraphs.  Blacks and Hispanics will vote for Wendy Davis because she is a Democrat.  Women will vote for Wendy Davis because she is a woman.  That is what voting has degenerated to in America.  Rational policies don't mean a damn thing.  Besides, Republicans are doing nothing in Texas to help themselves gain supporters.

Greg Abbott, the Texas Attorney General, is the front running Republican candidate who will most likely oppose Wendy Davis.  He has a very strong resume as well, but may suffer with his dependence on the shrinking traditional voting groups Republicans have relied on in Texas.  He has cultivated Christian evangelical support around his opposition to abortion and gay marriage.  Most liberal commentators declare that those are the issues of the tea party, although I seem to remember the original tea party focus was on limited government, not the religious right's agenda.  Whatever, opposing those issues is a losing strategy in today's America.  And what is the point of opposing them?  That war has been lost.

Republicans in Texas are going to lose if they keep catering to the far right religious wing-nuts.  These are the same folks who made Obama president because they didn't vote at all in the last election, apparently because they couldn't bring themselves to vote for a Mormon.  That is inexcusable.  Republicans need to appeal to the largest segment of voters in America today, the intelligent, rational and fiscally conservative independents who are not exactly thrilled with the choices either party produces.  Who can blame them?

Republicans need to become more centrist while defining the Democrats in Texas as the irresponsible spenders they would be, and nationally as the left wing extremists they are.  Republicans must focus on fiscal responsibility, social tolerance, limited government intrusion into our lives, maintaining viable safety nets for those truly in need, and rebuilding a strong national defense.  Making an issue of abortion and gay marriage will lead them into irrelevance.  Republicans had better wake up to the world we now live in or they will disappear.

Temper Tantrums

Barack Obama is throwing another temper tantrum today because Republicans are not kissing his ass as he blames them for shutting down the government.  Somebody needs to tell this guy to grow up, pull his head out of Saul Alinsky's dead butt, and get an education in how the real world works.  Oh, and maybe it is time for one of his fawning brownnosers to inform him not everyone in this country thinks he is God.  In fact, many folks think he is a Muslim, a follower of Muhammad.  Personally, I think he believes he is Muhammad.

Who are the obstructionists here?  The House of Representatives has produced four budgets over the last few days as the fiscal year deadline approached, each summarily rejected without consideration by Obama and Harry Reid.  The only issue in contention was that Republicans proposed to postpone the implementation of ObamaCare on private individuals for one year, not an outrageous request since Obama had already done that for employers.  Besides, ObamaCare is not ready to be implemented as it is becoming one giant clusterf**k.  Interestingly, one of the issues that really pissed off us ordinary citizens was Congress exempting themselves and their staffs from ObamaCare.  How many people know that the last of the four Republican budgets included language that would have repealed that exemption, making the privileged denizens of Capitol Hill subject to the rules of ObamaCare just like the rest of us?  Not happening.

Whatever happened to the principle of responsibility, the concept that the decision makers at the top are responsible for their actions?  The editors of America's tabloid publishing and broadcasting organizations, the New York Times, the Washington Post, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, etc., never hold Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid and the rest of the Democratic Party that has been in charge for the last seven years (lest we forget, they controlled the House and Senate the last two years of W's presidency) responsible for anything.  Somehow a first term Senator from Texas who hasn't even been in office for two years gets blamed for the last five years of government mismanagement.

Apparently the news organizations don't want to confuse the public with the facts.  Barack Obama has presided over the weakest economic recovery ever while at the same time turning us into a whiny wimpy weakling on the world stage.  Even though the Constitution requires the Senate to produce a budget every year, Harry Reid's Senate had not done so in four years until last Saturday on a party line vote, but only after throwing out the one passed by the House that the Democrats refused to even consider.  How does Hillary Clinton escape any responsibility for our plunge in global relevance during her reign as Secretary of State?  She spent most of her time in the Middle East, and look how that has turned out.  And those were her people who died in Benghazi, but she seemed to care less. Yet she is now the Democrat's leading candidate for 2014.

The United States is becoming a nation of zombies, brain dead but still breathing.  In the real world people get fired for not doing their jobs, or doing them badly.  In Washington, D.C., they get re-elected, re-appointed or move on to higher office.  It's insane.

The Eve of Destruction

Last Wednesday eleven of the biggest rebel groups in Syria joined together to form the Islamic Alliance, representing 75 percent of the insurgents in the various rebel factions fighting Bashar Assad's government.  This included several groups that defected from affiliation with the Free Syrian Army, the faction supported with many words but few deeds by the Obama administration.  The new group also announced they intend to impose Islamic Sharia Law in Syria once they get rid of Assad.  The alliance is led by Jabhat al-Nusra, an al-Qaeda affiliated group already designated a terrorist organization.  This means they have rejected any Western influence over whatever emerges once Assad is deposed, if he is.  Of course Assad is supported by Russia, Iran and the Hezbollah.  So whatever the outcome in Syria, it is a lose - lose situation for American interests.

The rebels stated that their reason for forming the alliance was disappointment with the Obama administration's failure to conduct airstrikes punishing Assad for the use of chemical weapons against rebel strongholds, and then Obama's surrender to meaningless negotiations with the Russians regarding the future disposition of Assad's weapons of mass destruction.  They were quoted as saying they had "lost all hope in the international community.  Bashar al-Assad is killing us, all the West is betraying us, and they want to negotiate with the regime over our blood."

Barack Obama and his administration are the ones to blame for this.  Of course it is doubtful the media will do so, but Obama's actions and inactions are clearly making the world a much more dangerous place.  Perhaps this development may seem like a minor event to those who blindly believe Obama's bullshit, but it is just the most recent of a series of disastrous events that are establishing a perilous trend.  From Tunisia to Yemen to Egypt to Libya to Syria the bad guys are undermining Western interests throughout the Middle East while the United States remains unengaged and loses any influence we once had in the region.

It is almost humorous but even more embarrassing to see how fast Iran has proposed nuclear arms control talks with the US after they saw how easily the Russians rolled over the Obama administration in Syria.  And it is not surprising to see Obama and Kerry crow about diplomatic "victories", aided and abetted by the major media co-conspirators, that do nothing but provide cover for the bad guys to continue their nuclear weapons programs under the radar screen.  Reagan said trust, but verify.  These guys say accommodate, smile for the cameras, then move on to bashing Republicans.  The fact is that Syria, Iran, Pakistan, North Korea, Russia, China and even the UK and France will all give up their WMD's when hell freezes over.  But by now all of our adversaries have realized they can get anything they want from Obama by letting him look presidential on television.

Of course the fire Obama has fueled in the Middle East by his inactions will not spread and consume the world until he is gone from office (assuming that he recognizes the two term limit and leaves), at the same time his national security policies will have left us defenseless.  The world he and the Democrats are creating for our children - domestic economic decline and inflammatory political polarization accompanied by unthinkable global violence and chaos - is something those who support him should think about long and hard.  They are accomplices to this state of affairs.

Modern Western Civilization began to emerge in the 14th century with the Italian Renaissance, followed later by the Reformation (15th), Age of Discovery (late 15th), the Enlightenment (17th), and the American and French revolutions (late 18th).  Future historians are likely to set the date of its demise in the middle of this century unless the people in the Western countries pull their heads out and do something about it.  At some point we are going to have to draw a line in the sand and mean it.  Due to Obama's economic, social and defense policies we are rapidly becoming too weak to do so.

Americans can only maintain our heritage of liberty, justice, and economic progress if the people throw out the current leaders - the ones promoting redistributive economic policies, politically correct social policies, multi-culturalism that discourages assimilation, unilateral disarmament, dependency on government, and capitulation to any country that does not buy Obama's threats.  That includes a lot of Republicans in Congress who apparently are just happy to be there and satisfied with the status quo.

Democrats must wake up and repudiate the anti-capitalist, anti-democracy elitists who have taken over their party and our country.  If they continue to offer up the Joe Biden's, Hillary Clinton's and Elizabeth Warren's then our country's course will not change, which means we're fucked.  It also wouldn't hurt for the Republican Party to purge itself of the rigidly religious authoritarian wing-nuts of the far right who let this all happen by not voting in the last election.  The United States and Western Civilization are going up in smoke as people focus on the trees of personal, self-centered social and religious issues while the whole forest is gradually being consumed in flames.  Those who are not concerned about the big picture, particularly younger folks, women and those with alternative life styles, may be surprised to find out the hard way that Sharia Law does not care about your happiness or personal feelings.

The Conversation

Both black and white commentators have been calling for a national conversation about racism in America.  Good idea.  I'll start it off -

My ancestors have been in America since 1620, and my pedigree has been traced in detail back to the early 1800's.  There is no record of anyone in my family ever owning a slave.  I would imagine the vast majority of white people in America, except possibly those with roots in the southeastern states, could trace their history back and find that no one in their family ever owned a slave, either.  On the other hand, blacks serving other blacks as indentured servants was common in Africa and continues to the current day.  Furthermore, in the early history of America free blacks were known to own black slaves.  Look it up.  The question is, why do black people today think white people owe them something?

There is no question that a small percentage of upper class whites have taken advantage of black people to make their personal fortunes.  They have taken advantage of the majority of white people, too.  White people were not all born to wealth and privilege.  My grandmother worked as a cleaning lady for mostly Jewish families well into her 70's until around 1970.  I have cousins who grew up in Iowa as dirt poor as anyone could be.  I grew up at the low end of the lower middle class in a family of five living in an 800 square foot house with two small bedrooms and one bathroom.  We never received any assistance in any form from the government.  That was not unusual in America in the 1950's and 1960's, and no one bitched about it.

The only thing we did have that many of the underclass today do not, particularly young black kids, is both a mother and a father living with us in the same household.  But it is not white people's fault that black men can't keep their dicks in their pants or accept parental responsibility, or that black women can't keep their legs closed.  The same goes for the growing ranks of irresponsible white and brown people who won't stop creating one parent families.  If they can't help themselves then maybe they should try some condoms.  Oh, I almost forgot.  There was one other thing we didn't have.  We didn't have the Jesse Jackson's, Al Sharpton's, nor liberal media types running around fomenting social conflict by screaming victimhood and demanding reparations, which really means retribution for whatever imagined white sins they can think up.

Perhaps everyone has a different definition of racism.  All I know is, I don't know anyone who dislikes black people or treats them any different than anyone else, which would be my definition of racism.  OK, there is one guy I know out of more than a hundred, but that's his problem, not mine.  On the other hand, most everybody I know intensely dislikes left wing socialists arrogantly telling us that Americans who have worked hard to earn a living and support their families owe a debt to those who aren't willing to do so.  They claim everyone is entitled to the same lifestyle.  That is bullshit, and it is not racist to say so.  The process of earning a decent living has nothing to do with the color of skin.  It has everything to do with attitude.

The only thing everyone in America is entitled to is individual liberty, equal justice according to the law, and security from foreign aggression - and each of those is being taken from all of us by the growth of big government and its intrusion into every aspect of our lives.  It is not the function of the federal government to provide an affluent lifestyle for everyone, because it can't.  Anyone who wants to improve their personal living standards needs to get off their butt, take advantage of the equal opportunities available to all Americans, and take responsibility for their own life.  No matter what color you are, get an education, get a job, earn your respect and stop listening to the phony, incendiary rants of the race-baiting agitators and stop supporting the dead end policies of the left wing political con artists.  Then maybe we could all get the country back on track and live happily ever after.