Friday, February 12, 2010
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Progressive Education
My carpool buddy mentioned something to me at the beginning of this week that just made my skin crawl. She was at a meeting of the textbook committee for our local schools. The committee is made up of 15 people. Of the 15, 7 of them wanted to eliminate any books in the curriculum that mentioned the Founding Fathers, the Constitution, the Fourth of July, Christmas and any other religious holiday. What a travesty! She said she thought of me at the meeting because somebody behind her said something to the effect of "Freakin Progressives."
In the coming months as I read more history and do more research, I believe that I will focus a lot more on the progressives and the agenda they have secretly been pushing for over the last 100 years. It seems to be the direction my blog is starting to head. Of course I will share why their agenda is so damaging and try to enlighten as many people as possible as to how we can work towards keeping strong conservative independant values and freedom at the forefront.
It has been plain from the outset of my research on Progressivism, which started with my school paper previously posted, that Progressives do not like the Constitution. They think the Founding Fathers got it wrong. The issue progressives have with the Constitution is that it limits the powers of the federal government. That was one of the biggest reasons the founders included not only a separation of powers but eventually the 10th ammendment as well. The Founding Fathers spent a LOT of time reviewing the governments of the past. They looked for what worked and what didn't. Their conclusion? No previous system of government had worked. That is why our Constitution and other founding documents are so unique. They are originals.
Our nation's founders were well read and educated. They understood that if you do not learn and understand history you are doomed to repeat it. The history of our nation's founding is something that progressives have been trying to obscure for a long time. It started with changes to the education systems as far back as 1880. The university system in our country does not cover much curriculum on our nations founding and civics. The Intercollegiate Studies Institute released its fourth annual national Civic Literacy Report entitled "The Shaping of the American Mind: The Diverging Influences of the College Degree & Civic Learning on American Beliefs." One of the scary things mentioned is that 60% of respondents could not identify on a multiple choice test several bits of basic knowledge that are REQUIRED knowledge for passing the citizenship test.
All of this fits in with the progressive model. If people don't know their history and the miracle that the founding of our nation was, then the progressives that push for more and more government can tweak that history to whatever they want it to be. Progressives have obviously on a Universtiy level been distorting our nations history and eventually working to not teaching it at all. This of course has trickled down over the years to our K-12 system. I remember as a kid learning about George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, The Declaration of Independance, The Constitution, and the great sacrifices our forefathers made to establish a truly free society. That's what our history classes pretty much were. These days its hard to find a school that teaches actual American History, not the slanted progressive view of it, and apparently based upon the efforts of some in my community, to have a school teach it at all.
Remember to keep yourself informed, and don't be afraid to speak out.
In the coming months as I read more history and do more research, I believe that I will focus a lot more on the progressives and the agenda they have secretly been pushing for over the last 100 years. It seems to be the direction my blog is starting to head. Of course I will share why their agenda is so damaging and try to enlighten as many people as possible as to how we can work towards keeping strong conservative independant values and freedom at the forefront.
It has been plain from the outset of my research on Progressivism, which started with my school paper previously posted, that Progressives do not like the Constitution. They think the Founding Fathers got it wrong. The issue progressives have with the Constitution is that it limits the powers of the federal government. That was one of the biggest reasons the founders included not only a separation of powers but eventually the 10th ammendment as well. The Founding Fathers spent a LOT of time reviewing the governments of the past. They looked for what worked and what didn't. Their conclusion? No previous system of government had worked. That is why our Constitution and other founding documents are so unique. They are originals.
Our nation's founders were well read and educated. They understood that if you do not learn and understand history you are doomed to repeat it. The history of our nation's founding is something that progressives have been trying to obscure for a long time. It started with changes to the education systems as far back as 1880. The university system in our country does not cover much curriculum on our nations founding and civics. The Intercollegiate Studies Institute released its fourth annual national Civic Literacy Report entitled "The Shaping of the American Mind: The Diverging Influences of the College Degree & Civic Learning on American Beliefs." One of the scary things mentioned is that 60% of respondents could not identify on a multiple choice test several bits of basic knowledge that are REQUIRED knowledge for passing the citizenship test.
All of this fits in with the progressive model. If people don't know their history and the miracle that the founding of our nation was, then the progressives that push for more and more government can tweak that history to whatever they want it to be. Progressives have obviously on a Universtiy level been distorting our nations history and eventually working to not teaching it at all. This of course has trickled down over the years to our K-12 system. I remember as a kid learning about George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, The Declaration of Independance, The Constitution, and the great sacrifices our forefathers made to establish a truly free society. That's what our history classes pretty much were. These days its hard to find a school that teaches actual American History, not the slanted progressive view of it, and apparently based upon the efforts of some in my community, to have a school teach it at all.
Remember to keep yourself informed, and don't be afraid to speak out.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Energy Independance
It was interesting to hear somebody who has no plan to use great sources of clean energy, like nuclear, tout it in a speech which essentially was a bold faced lie. Yep, that is what you are getting out of the President and his progressive friends in Washington. More on that in a minute.
One of the biggest ongoing issues that creeps up now and then is energy independance. It seems the only time we pay attention to it is when oil prices go up. Then they have hearings on capitol hill, they grill the oil companies, and put on a big dog and pony show. To what end? All so they can look like they are doing something and keep the status quo. As soon as the energy prices naturally start to fall a bit, the public stops the complaining and moves on because they no longer see it as an issue.
The thing with energy is that it has to be addressed. Real solutions have to be implemented by people with the cajones to do it right. That is your standard issue with politicians, they don't want to stand up for anything unless it gets them immediate election returns.
So, how do we go about creating energy independence? Why do we need to do it?
How about we start with the why's first. We import a vast amount of our energy supplies. At least in the forms of oil and natural gas. This obviously adds to the cost of the end product. If we developed it ourselves it would be cheaper. Just a simple rule of economics. Many of the countries we get our oil from don't like us very much. Even if they feign affection. This presents national security implications. Besides, wouldn't it be better to keep all that cash in our own country? Our energy demands as a nation will continue to go up. That is just a natural consequence of an expanding people and a growing nation.
How do we create energy independence? It really is a two pronged approach. All you hear about in the media and the noisemakers is green energy. While I agree that we need to be responsible in our energy development and that fossil fuels won't last forever, I don't buy into the "climate change" hysteria. We have talked about it here before. All the brouhaha continues to be further and further discredited. That being said, we need to fast track and develop the natural resources we have right now and continue to explore and discover more. This will allow us an energy source that is homegrown while we work to develop economically viable energy alternatives. You cannot just cut off one and use government funds and mandates to develop the other. For a good example, look at Spain. For every green job their government funded, the economy lost 2.2 other jobs. That comes out to a net loss of 1.2 jobs.
There are several energy sources we can tap. We have great reserves of oil and natural gas in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge. Don't be fooled by all the pictures of polar bears and elk prancing across grasslands. ANWR is like the deserts of Nevada with no plants or animals, just a bunch of ice and snow. It might make the snow fairies mad, but we need to develop it. Governor Palin showed a great use of tapping the resources in Alaska responsibly through the private sector. Not only have they expanded exploration and production for both oil and natural gas, they are in the midst of building a natural gas pipeline to bring all that energy to the rest of us. The environmentalists can complain all they want about pipeline projects decimating the ecology along their paths, but the facts show that life expanded along the current Alaska Oil Pipeline after it was built.
There are responsible ways to drill offshore. We are the best at environmentally safe ways of exploiting our natural resources. We need to free up the offshore areas so we can drill. If the state of California would learn from Alaska and allow more development off the coast, they would have a lot more money coming in instead of getting ready to file bankruptcy in April. You are not talking about rigs right on the beachline a mile off shore. You are talking about platforms several miles offshore. Hardly an eyesore. Plus, we are more responsible than any other country in the world when it comes to energy development. It would be safer for the trees and animals here than exploiting those resources in some third world country with no controls.
There are also great shale reserves in the mountain west. The technology has improved by leaps and bounds and continues to do so allowing us to extract this oil. It is reported that these shale reserves hold more oil than the fields in the middle east. They have also found vast reserves of oil in the upper midwest.
The great thing about tapping all of these sources is that it creates JOBS. It creates long term jobs for people in all sorts of fields. It also decreases the economic cost of energy. Of course, along with the increase in domestic production we also need to increase our refinery capacity so we can eliminate the costly bottle neck between the fields and the consumer.
As I mentioned, we all know that fossil fuels won't last forever. They may last us a couple hundred years or whatever, but we need to have a plan. One of the great sources of renewable and clean energy is nuclear. By ramping up our nuclear production it would once again create jobs, lower the cost of energy, and we would have a continuous supply. There was a great post about nuclear energy and the President's SOTU remarks posted today. It pretty much sums up that little topic mentioned at the beginning of this post. There was also this week some good discussion on Yucca Mountain.
While we wait for the cost of solar power to come down and finding the illusive spot on the earth where it is sunny 24/7 365, we need to use the resources we have been blessed with. They will tell you that it doesn't matter because those sources of energy won't be able to hit the market for like 10 years. That is one of the problems. Somebody needs to step up and say lets get going so we aren't having this same conversation 10 years from now. Also, the reason it takes so long is that the government creates too much red tape and beuacracy to get through, besides all the litigation from the environmentalists to do it. That is why it takes 10 years. For the companies that are just sitting on their leases. Tell them to start producing or you will revoke their lease and sell it to the highest bidder. They did that in Alaska and it worked wonders.
Car companies are working on viable alternatives to gasoline for vehicles. Some of the most promising work has been done with fuel cells. It would be a clean source of fuel. The biggest hurdle to overcome once they design a good cost efficient model, is the need for new types of stations to refuel your vehicle at.
Overall, the energy issue is something that can easily be solved by the free market. Companies are not going to push out a vehicle or product the people are going to hate. They will develop energy resources closer to their biggest consumers if given the opportunity. Other countries such as China seem to recognize this which is why their energy development is going full bore. They are even working with companies to drill oil in the Gulf of Mexico, our backyard.
Remember to keep yourself informed, and don't be afraid to speak out.
One of the biggest ongoing issues that creeps up now and then is energy independance. It seems the only time we pay attention to it is when oil prices go up. Then they have hearings on capitol hill, they grill the oil companies, and put on a big dog and pony show. To what end? All so they can look like they are doing something and keep the status quo. As soon as the energy prices naturally start to fall a bit, the public stops the complaining and moves on because they no longer see it as an issue.
The thing with energy is that it has to be addressed. Real solutions have to be implemented by people with the cajones to do it right. That is your standard issue with politicians, they don't want to stand up for anything unless it gets them immediate election returns.
So, how do we go about creating energy independence? Why do we need to do it?
How about we start with the why's first. We import a vast amount of our energy supplies. At least in the forms of oil and natural gas. This obviously adds to the cost of the end product. If we developed it ourselves it would be cheaper. Just a simple rule of economics. Many of the countries we get our oil from don't like us very much. Even if they feign affection. This presents national security implications. Besides, wouldn't it be better to keep all that cash in our own country? Our energy demands as a nation will continue to go up. That is just a natural consequence of an expanding people and a growing nation.
How do we create energy independence? It really is a two pronged approach. All you hear about in the media and the noisemakers is green energy. While I agree that we need to be responsible in our energy development and that fossil fuels won't last forever, I don't buy into the "climate change" hysteria. We have talked about it here before. All the brouhaha continues to be further and further discredited. That being said, we need to fast track and develop the natural resources we have right now and continue to explore and discover more. This will allow us an energy source that is homegrown while we work to develop economically viable energy alternatives. You cannot just cut off one and use government funds and mandates to develop the other. For a good example, look at Spain. For every green job their government funded, the economy lost 2.2 other jobs. That comes out to a net loss of 1.2 jobs.
There are several energy sources we can tap. We have great reserves of oil and natural gas in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge. Don't be fooled by all the pictures of polar bears and elk prancing across grasslands. ANWR is like the deserts of Nevada with no plants or animals, just a bunch of ice and snow. It might make the snow fairies mad, but we need to develop it. Governor Palin showed a great use of tapping the resources in Alaska responsibly through the private sector. Not only have they expanded exploration and production for both oil and natural gas, they are in the midst of building a natural gas pipeline to bring all that energy to the rest of us. The environmentalists can complain all they want about pipeline projects decimating the ecology along their paths, but the facts show that life expanded along the current Alaska Oil Pipeline after it was built.
There are responsible ways to drill offshore. We are the best at environmentally safe ways of exploiting our natural resources. We need to free up the offshore areas so we can drill. If the state of California would learn from Alaska and allow more development off the coast, they would have a lot more money coming in instead of getting ready to file bankruptcy in April. You are not talking about rigs right on the beachline a mile off shore. You are talking about platforms several miles offshore. Hardly an eyesore. Plus, we are more responsible than any other country in the world when it comes to energy development. It would be safer for the trees and animals here than exploiting those resources in some third world country with no controls.
There are also great shale reserves in the mountain west. The technology has improved by leaps and bounds and continues to do so allowing us to extract this oil. It is reported that these shale reserves hold more oil than the fields in the middle east. They have also found vast reserves of oil in the upper midwest.
The great thing about tapping all of these sources is that it creates JOBS. It creates long term jobs for people in all sorts of fields. It also decreases the economic cost of energy. Of course, along with the increase in domestic production we also need to increase our refinery capacity so we can eliminate the costly bottle neck between the fields and the consumer.
As I mentioned, we all know that fossil fuels won't last forever. They may last us a couple hundred years or whatever, but we need to have a plan. One of the great sources of renewable and clean energy is nuclear. By ramping up our nuclear production it would once again create jobs, lower the cost of energy, and we would have a continuous supply. There was a great post about nuclear energy and the President's SOTU remarks posted today. It pretty much sums up that little topic mentioned at the beginning of this post. There was also this week some good discussion on Yucca Mountain.
While we wait for the cost of solar power to come down and finding the illusive spot on the earth where it is sunny 24/7 365, we need to use the resources we have been blessed with. They will tell you that it doesn't matter because those sources of energy won't be able to hit the market for like 10 years. That is one of the problems. Somebody needs to step up and say lets get going so we aren't having this same conversation 10 years from now. Also, the reason it takes so long is that the government creates too much red tape and beuacracy to get through, besides all the litigation from the environmentalists to do it. That is why it takes 10 years. For the companies that are just sitting on their leases. Tell them to start producing or you will revoke their lease and sell it to the highest bidder. They did that in Alaska and it worked wonders.
Car companies are working on viable alternatives to gasoline for vehicles. Some of the most promising work has been done with fuel cells. It would be a clean source of fuel. The biggest hurdle to overcome once they design a good cost efficient model, is the need for new types of stations to refuel your vehicle at.
Overall, the energy issue is something that can easily be solved by the free market. Companies are not going to push out a vehicle or product the people are going to hate. They will develop energy resources closer to their biggest consumers if given the opportunity. Other countries such as China seem to recognize this which is why their energy development is going full bore. They are even working with companies to drill oil in the Gulf of Mexico, our backyard.
Remember to keep yourself informed, and don't be afraid to speak out.
Friday, January 29, 2010
A Letter to President Obama
Somebody sent me this transcript from Rush today. I know, some of my progressive friends out there really don't like him, but I think it is a very good letter that causes everyone to think.
Enjoy!
RUSH: I penned a message to Obama that I would like to deliver now. Because Mr. Obama, I think it's time we had a heart-to-heart talk. Let me be the father that you never had or never really knew, because I think you need some guidance. It's time to man up. It's time to grow up. That speech last night was an embarrassment. You couldn't focus, you lashed out in all directions, you refused to accept responsibility for your own actions, and you were angry.
And he was, folks! He was mad. Being president is a big job. It's a big responsibility. You wanted the position, Barack. You campaigned for it. You told the public to trust you with it, and they elected you -- and you're now president of the greatest country mankind has ever known, and yet you act like this was all coming to you, like you deserve it, that you're better than the people you are supposed to serve and that you have no tolerance for debate or dissent. That's not the way it works as president, Barack. We have a Constitution, we have checks and balances, we have separation of powers, we have states -- and most of all, we have the people. You don't get to impose your programs and policies on the nation and the people without our consent.
This is a representative republic, not a banana republic, and let me remind you: Karl Marx and Saul Alinsky are not our Founding Fathers. This is a nation built on individuality, built on liberty, free markets, and faith. Yet you, Barack, demand fidelity to a different belief system: A system that crushes individual initiative and free will. The president does not berate Supreme Court justices who are guests of the Congress and who have no ability to respond to your attacks. You've made such a mess of things, Barack, and it's time to stop deluding yourself. It's time to stop blaming others. You are delusional. You are delirious. It's time for you to assume the responsibilities of a president rather than pretending to be one.
You've driven the nation's debt over the edge. It is your responsibility to fix it now. Otherwise, our young people will have no future. You were wrong to grant terrorists constitutional rights. Even the libs in New York don't want the trial there now! You, Mr. President, are endangering the security of this nation. Now fix it! Reverse course, and send the terrorists -- all of them -- back to Guantanamo Bay, where they belong. You are wrong to nationalize one industry after another from automobiles to banks. You are destroying competition and jobs. You need to stop what you were doing before millions of more families go broke from your misguided policies. It's not too late to stop this. I know you're not going to stop it because last night you said you don't quit, and I know what you mean.
You're gonna keep plugging for the same agenda, which is going to destroy this country even more -- which makes me think, Barack, that's your objective. You know, Barack, unlike most presidents you're dealing with a Congress that has super majorities in both houses, fellow Democrats. It amazes me that with all the talk about your ability to persuade and communicate, that you can't even hold your own party members together anymore. Is that Bush's fault, too? Is it is fault of the banks and the insurance companies and the lobbyists that you can't keep your own Democrat Party unified -- or is it a problem with your leadership, Barack, or lack of leadership? It's the latter, Mr. President. I'll tell you, you are not a leader. You are an agitator and an organizer, and a process guy, but you are not a leader. It is you who are doing something wrong.
The people in Virginia don't like it. The people in New Jersey don't like it. The people in Massachusetts don't like it. The people in Massachusetts and all over the country have the ability to inform themselves outside of your sycophant press corps, and they are doing so. Members of your own governing majority don't like what you are doing. I mean, this calls for some self-reflection and some circumspection. Has it occurred to you, Mr. President, even once that you're not as cool as you think you are? Has it occurred to you that you are screwing up? And if it has, are you happy about that? Has it occurred to you that you have a great deal to learn and that you need to take your own measure, or are you Mr. Perfect? Are you God-sent?
Are you The One that you've been waiting for? See, I have a little concern there may be a psychological issue at play here. I don't say this to demean you, Barack. I say it because I'm concerned. I mean, Tom Daschle was always "concerned" and I like the word. I'm concerned. You seem to have a whole lot of enemies, at least in your own mind. A partial list would include Fox News, insurance companies, banks, oil companies, the "special interests," the Supreme Court, Republicans, talk show hosts, executives, anyone or any business that earns over $250,000 a year, mortgage companies, credit card companies -- and the list goes on and on and on. You have the longest enemies list of anybody I've ever known.
These people are not your enemies, though, Barack. They are Americans. They are part of this country. They are part of what makes the nation work. You are not. You have nothing to do, and have had nothing to do, with this nation's greatness. You can't lay claim to greatness on any scale, not even rhetorical. But you have no direct relationship to the greatness of this country. You are damaging the possibility of further greatness. Nevertheless, like a bully, you continue to threaten all of these people. The Supreme Court, Big Oil, Big Pharmaceutical, Big Retail, talk show hosts, Fox News, the list goes on. You threaten anybody who does not agree with you. You try to intimidate them. You smear them. Your sycophantic media goes right along and carries your water. But this is not what presidents do.
You're supposed to lead not by threatening people but by encouraging them, by embracing them, by thanking them, by inspiring them. Most of all you don't seem to appreciate the magnificence of this nation! I know you don't. The way you've been educated about this country it's painfully obvious. You think this country is guilty, period. Guilty and unjust. You seem to think this country needs to be torn down so you can rebuild it. But you were elected to be president, not some kind of dictator. You must operate within the confines of the Constitution. You are not bigger than the law, and you are not bigger than the people. You were elected to serve the people, not dictate to them. Anyway, I'm sure this little lecture will not do you much good, particularly given the spectacle of your speech last night. You really are full of yourself. But I truly hope that this little talk does do you some good down the way, because something is going to have to change in you or we are doomed for at least the next three years.
Remember to keep yourself informed, and don't be afraid to speak out.
Enjoy!
RUSH: I penned a message to Obama that I would like to deliver now. Because Mr. Obama, I think it's time we had a heart-to-heart talk. Let me be the father that you never had or never really knew, because I think you need some guidance. It's time to man up. It's time to grow up. That speech last night was an embarrassment. You couldn't focus, you lashed out in all directions, you refused to accept responsibility for your own actions, and you were angry.
And he was, folks! He was mad. Being president is a big job. It's a big responsibility. You wanted the position, Barack. You campaigned for it. You told the public to trust you with it, and they elected you -- and you're now president of the greatest country mankind has ever known, and yet you act like this was all coming to you, like you deserve it, that you're better than the people you are supposed to serve and that you have no tolerance for debate or dissent. That's not the way it works as president, Barack. We have a Constitution, we have checks and balances, we have separation of powers, we have states -- and most of all, we have the people. You don't get to impose your programs and policies on the nation and the people without our consent.
This is a representative republic, not a banana republic, and let me remind you: Karl Marx and Saul Alinsky are not our Founding Fathers. This is a nation built on individuality, built on liberty, free markets, and faith. Yet you, Barack, demand fidelity to a different belief system: A system that crushes individual initiative and free will. The president does not berate Supreme Court justices who are guests of the Congress and who have no ability to respond to your attacks. You've made such a mess of things, Barack, and it's time to stop deluding yourself. It's time to stop blaming others. You are delusional. You are delirious. It's time for you to assume the responsibilities of a president rather than pretending to be one.
You've driven the nation's debt over the edge. It is your responsibility to fix it now. Otherwise, our young people will have no future. You were wrong to grant terrorists constitutional rights. Even the libs in New York don't want the trial there now! You, Mr. President, are endangering the security of this nation. Now fix it! Reverse course, and send the terrorists -- all of them -- back to Guantanamo Bay, where they belong. You are wrong to nationalize one industry after another from automobiles to banks. You are destroying competition and jobs. You need to stop what you were doing before millions of more families go broke from your misguided policies. It's not too late to stop this. I know you're not going to stop it because last night you said you don't quit, and I know what you mean.
You're gonna keep plugging for the same agenda, which is going to destroy this country even more -- which makes me think, Barack, that's your objective. You know, Barack, unlike most presidents you're dealing with a Congress that has super majorities in both houses, fellow Democrats. It amazes me that with all the talk about your ability to persuade and communicate, that you can't even hold your own party members together anymore. Is that Bush's fault, too? Is it is fault of the banks and the insurance companies and the lobbyists that you can't keep your own Democrat Party unified -- or is it a problem with your leadership, Barack, or lack of leadership? It's the latter, Mr. President. I'll tell you, you are not a leader. You are an agitator and an organizer, and a process guy, but you are not a leader. It is you who are doing something wrong.
The people in Virginia don't like it. The people in New Jersey don't like it. The people in Massachusetts don't like it. The people in Massachusetts and all over the country have the ability to inform themselves outside of your sycophant press corps, and they are doing so. Members of your own governing majority don't like what you are doing. I mean, this calls for some self-reflection and some circumspection. Has it occurred to you, Mr. President, even once that you're not as cool as you think you are? Has it occurred to you that you are screwing up? And if it has, are you happy about that? Has it occurred to you that you have a great deal to learn and that you need to take your own measure, or are you Mr. Perfect? Are you God-sent?
Are you The One that you've been waiting for? See, I have a little concern there may be a psychological issue at play here. I don't say this to demean you, Barack. I say it because I'm concerned. I mean, Tom Daschle was always "concerned" and I like the word. I'm concerned. You seem to have a whole lot of enemies, at least in your own mind. A partial list would include Fox News, insurance companies, banks, oil companies, the "special interests," the Supreme Court, Republicans, talk show hosts, executives, anyone or any business that earns over $250,000 a year, mortgage companies, credit card companies -- and the list goes on and on and on. You have the longest enemies list of anybody I've ever known.
These people are not your enemies, though, Barack. They are Americans. They are part of this country. They are part of what makes the nation work. You are not. You have nothing to do, and have had nothing to do, with this nation's greatness. You can't lay claim to greatness on any scale, not even rhetorical. But you have no direct relationship to the greatness of this country. You are damaging the possibility of further greatness. Nevertheless, like a bully, you continue to threaten all of these people. The Supreme Court, Big Oil, Big Pharmaceutical, Big Retail, talk show hosts, Fox News, the list goes on. You threaten anybody who does not agree with you. You try to intimidate them. You smear them. Your sycophantic media goes right along and carries your water. But this is not what presidents do.
You're supposed to lead not by threatening people but by encouraging them, by embracing them, by thanking them, by inspiring them. Most of all you don't seem to appreciate the magnificence of this nation! I know you don't. The way you've been educated about this country it's painfully obvious. You think this country is guilty, period. Guilty and unjust. You seem to think this country needs to be torn down so you can rebuild it. But you were elected to be president, not some kind of dictator. You must operate within the confines of the Constitution. You are not bigger than the law, and you are not bigger than the people. You were elected to serve the people, not dictate to them. Anyway, I'm sure this little lecture will not do you much good, particularly given the spectacle of your speech last night. You really are full of yourself. But I truly hope that this little talk does do you some good down the way, because something is going to have to change in you or we are doomed for at least the next three years.
Remember to keep yourself informed, and don't be afraid to speak out.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Brain Crash and Reboot
So yesterday my brain totally crashed and had to reboot, interesting experience. That and the need for a bit more research will delay the Energy Independance post I know you were all eagerly awaiting. :-) So, let's talk about the longest speech in Presidential History. Well, at least the current President's history.
Although I did not watch it personally, I always read it after the fact. I get more about what was really said without all the personality that was thrown in. Besides, if I had to watch Nancy Pelosi wet herself again with excitement from being in Obama's presence I think I would have puked.
Just a couple of side points. He referred to himself more than 100 times. He also blamed Bush at least 8 times.
The big thing the President did was attempt to look like he was exercising some fiscal restraint. I give him a miserable fail on that. He did say the words "spending freeze." However, that freeze won't go into effect until next budget year and he already more than doubled spending last year. He can just double down on the spending and then freeze it. Here is the big thing though. The freeze only covers around 17% of the budget. It doesn't cover a lot of the things that totally go through the roof every year such as entitlement programs. If you look at the total deficit, it saves less than a %. I believe it is 0.58%.
The President still wants to push forward with his disastrous attempts at health care and cap n trade. These are going to cost the tax payer untold billions and result in millions of more jobs lost. He talks a big talk about we have to concentrate on the economy and jobs but everything he is doing signals that he is anti-business and pro-government which are the biggest job killers. Government isn't the solution to our problems, IT IS the problem.
He spoke of taxing the "evil" banks that received TARP funds so the people can be repaid. Ummm, news flash. The banks have paid back what they borrowed, with interest. However, GM and Fannie n Freddie that have sucked untold billions from us and have not paid anything back get a free ride? It is just more of the same progressive class warfare rhetoric. Mr. President, I guess you haven't been paying attention to the recent elections. People aren't falling for that crap. They are waking up.
One other thing to mention. The President directly attacked the Supreme Court last night on a national stage with them sitting two rows back. He disagrees with the court's decision to uphold the 1st ammendment and freedom of speech last week. He may not have said lets abolish the Supreme Court, but his direct attach on them is still a flagrant violation of the Separation of Powers in the Constitution. Although I did see a comment where a person stated Obama uses the Constitution as his toilet paper. Interesting perspective. Justice Alito was right to mouth the words not true.
I was curious to see what direction he would take after the elections in Massachussettes last week. I figured he would either go a bit more center like Clinton or he would dig in his heels and hit the gas pedal. Well, it appears that the President is a true progressive revolutionary. He is digging in and slamming down on the gas pedal. Remember for the progressives, its not revolution, its evolution. Amazing what the removal of one letter can do. Of course, I guess I should have seen it after the Diane Sawyer interview. He said he would rather be a really good one term President than a mediocre two term president.
For a longer list of discussions, see the responses from members of the Heritage Foundation.
Next week will bring my discussion of Energy Independence and after that I am debating a formal direction for the blog. I'm still looking for feedback from my few readers out there in cyberspace. Until then, remember to keep yourself informed and don't be afraid to speak out.
Although I did not watch it personally, I always read it after the fact. I get more about what was really said without all the personality that was thrown in. Besides, if I had to watch Nancy Pelosi wet herself again with excitement from being in Obama's presence I think I would have puked.
Just a couple of side points. He referred to himself more than 100 times. He also blamed Bush at least 8 times.
The big thing the President did was attempt to look like he was exercising some fiscal restraint. I give him a miserable fail on that. He did say the words "spending freeze." However, that freeze won't go into effect until next budget year and he already more than doubled spending last year. He can just double down on the spending and then freeze it. Here is the big thing though. The freeze only covers around 17% of the budget. It doesn't cover a lot of the things that totally go through the roof every year such as entitlement programs. If you look at the total deficit, it saves less than a %. I believe it is 0.58%.
The President still wants to push forward with his disastrous attempts at health care and cap n trade. These are going to cost the tax payer untold billions and result in millions of more jobs lost. He talks a big talk about we have to concentrate on the economy and jobs but everything he is doing signals that he is anti-business and pro-government which are the biggest job killers. Government isn't the solution to our problems, IT IS the problem.
He spoke of taxing the "evil" banks that received TARP funds so the people can be repaid. Ummm, news flash. The banks have paid back what they borrowed, with interest. However, GM and Fannie n Freddie that have sucked untold billions from us and have not paid anything back get a free ride? It is just more of the same progressive class warfare rhetoric. Mr. President, I guess you haven't been paying attention to the recent elections. People aren't falling for that crap. They are waking up.
One other thing to mention. The President directly attacked the Supreme Court last night on a national stage with them sitting two rows back. He disagrees with the court's decision to uphold the 1st ammendment and freedom of speech last week. He may not have said lets abolish the Supreme Court, but his direct attach on them is still a flagrant violation of the Separation of Powers in the Constitution. Although I did see a comment where a person stated Obama uses the Constitution as his toilet paper. Interesting perspective. Justice Alito was right to mouth the words not true.
I was curious to see what direction he would take after the elections in Massachussettes last week. I figured he would either go a bit more center like Clinton or he would dig in his heels and hit the gas pedal. Well, it appears that the President is a true progressive revolutionary. He is digging in and slamming down on the gas pedal. Remember for the progressives, its not revolution, its evolution. Amazing what the removal of one letter can do. Of course, I guess I should have seen it after the Diane Sawyer interview. He said he would rather be a really good one term President than a mediocre two term president.
For a longer list of discussions, see the responses from members of the Heritage Foundation.
Next week will bring my discussion of Energy Independence and after that I am debating a formal direction for the blog. I'm still looking for feedback from my few readers out there in cyberspace. Until then, remember to keep yourself informed and don't be afraid to speak out.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Global Smarming
There is a phrase in dancing circles, particularly the swing dancing circles I have thoroughly enjoyed in the past, called "collecting the no's". It basically goes like this. A guy continually asks different girls to dance, being turned down in turn by each one. He keeps working his way around the room "collecting the no's." This is how I see the reaction of the "global warming" screamers and environmentalists in general. Every time one of their reasons, arguments, justifications that supposedly goes to point out "global warming" or "climate change" as they are now referring to it is confronted with facts that disproves their theory, they try to jump to something else with equal result. They just keep jumping from theory to theory that continually gets disproved by the scientific facts, just like the guy collecting the no's.
There have been a chorus of things that have been piling up against the alarmists recently. A lot of this has been coming on fast and as expected, ignored by the main stream media. The biggest one of course is "climategate." Tons and tons of emails leaked that the scientists were manipulating data, refusing to share the data, and pressuring peer review journals to not publish any research that could disprove their theories and models. I am currently taking a science class in school. A couple of the first things I learned that I felt are quite applicable. One, the debate in science is never over. Two, the law of falsifiability. It basically states that a theory has no chance of being true unless it is possible to disprove it. You also have to allow others that chance. It seems the things the "climategate" emails reveal is that the scientists weren't staying true to scientifice principles.
The most recent bubble the alarmists had pierced was this one. The UN IPCC and others had been stating that the glaciers in the Himalayas were receding at an astonishing rate. If we didn't do anything to address "man made global warming" the glaciers would all melt in 30 years. Last week the scientist who published the report admitted to not having any data that shows that. He said he just guessed at it because it sounded good. None of the data he did use had been peer reviewed and checked by the scientific community. Of course, now the alarmists at the UN have egg on their face. They are being called out on it. They knew the data was wrong on it but kept it hidden away. Why would they do that? Because they are bent on international economic control.
Here's the crux about all this "climate change" stuff. A UN official even inadvertantly admitted it. "Climate Change" legislation and measures are not about the environment. They are about economic redistribution on a global scale. By stating that industrialized nations have pillaged and damaged the earth, they can be guilted into taxing their own productivity and redistributing those funds to less industrialized nations. That is what the big meeting in Copen hoggen was about.
You have to ask yourself, why do these environmental alarmists practice their craft with almost religious zeal? Why do they keep "collecting the no's?" It really dawned on me today. It is part of a bigger battle they are waging. The redistribution of wealth is where it really started to click with me. They are progressives on a world wide scale attempting to exercise their control over everyone. These people hate capitalism and freedom. The freedom of people allows to much to be in control of the individual. "Climate Change" legislation would cripple the economy. It has done it to the countries that have implemented some of these schemes and changes being proposed. Just take a look at Spain and Germany. At least the Chinese are right about one thing. They aren't going to be stupid enough to cripple their economy with ridiculous rules that have shown that they can't even hit their "goals" of reducing Co2 emissions.
In the end, the alarmists will keep "collecting the no's". As the audience of people that believes them continues to dwindle downward, they will keep screaming from the mountain tops. Hopefully everyone will be paying enough attention to make sure they don't push their draconian changes through some back door alternative.
Remember to keep yourself informed, and don't be afraid to speak out.
There have been a chorus of things that have been piling up against the alarmists recently. A lot of this has been coming on fast and as expected, ignored by the main stream media. The biggest one of course is "climategate." Tons and tons of emails leaked that the scientists were manipulating data, refusing to share the data, and pressuring peer review journals to not publish any research that could disprove their theories and models. I am currently taking a science class in school. A couple of the first things I learned that I felt are quite applicable. One, the debate in science is never over. Two, the law of falsifiability. It basically states that a theory has no chance of being true unless it is possible to disprove it. You also have to allow others that chance. It seems the things the "climategate" emails reveal is that the scientists weren't staying true to scientifice principles.
The most recent bubble the alarmists had pierced was this one. The UN IPCC and others had been stating that the glaciers in the Himalayas were receding at an astonishing rate. If we didn't do anything to address "man made global warming" the glaciers would all melt in 30 years. Last week the scientist who published the report admitted to not having any data that shows that. He said he just guessed at it because it sounded good. None of the data he did use had been peer reviewed and checked by the scientific community. Of course, now the alarmists at the UN have egg on their face. They are being called out on it. They knew the data was wrong on it but kept it hidden away. Why would they do that? Because they are bent on international economic control.
Here's the crux about all this "climate change" stuff. A UN official even inadvertantly admitted it. "Climate Change" legislation and measures are not about the environment. They are about economic redistribution on a global scale. By stating that industrialized nations have pillaged and damaged the earth, they can be guilted into taxing their own productivity and redistributing those funds to less industrialized nations. That is what the big meeting in Copen hoggen was about.
You have to ask yourself, why do these environmental alarmists practice their craft with almost religious zeal? Why do they keep "collecting the no's?" It really dawned on me today. It is part of a bigger battle they are waging. The redistribution of wealth is where it really started to click with me. They are progressives on a world wide scale attempting to exercise their control over everyone. These people hate capitalism and freedom. The freedom of people allows to much to be in control of the individual. "Climate Change" legislation would cripple the economy. It has done it to the countries that have implemented some of these schemes and changes being proposed. Just take a look at Spain and Germany. At least the Chinese are right about one thing. They aren't going to be stupid enough to cripple their economy with ridiculous rules that have shown that they can't even hit their "goals" of reducing Co2 emissions.
In the end, the alarmists will keep "collecting the no's". As the audience of people that believes them continues to dwindle downward, they will keep screaming from the mountain tops. Hopefully everyone will be paying enough attention to make sure they don't push their draconian changes through some back door alternative.
Remember to keep yourself informed, and don't be afraid to speak out.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Revolving Subjects
I have written a lot about various things the last several weeks. There has been of course some extensive stuff on Progressivism, which can go much deeper and get much more coverage as well, a little bit about various events that have been happening and their impact on our lives, and a little bit about some of my pet subjects, one of those being "climate change."
I would like to get some feedback from the few of you in cyberspace that read my blog. What kind of issues do you think are important to address? What are some things we need to be aware of to protect our future, the future of our children, and our nation?
I think for the next couple weeks I will write on "climate change" and energy independence. I believe at some level the two topics intertwine a little bit.
I have posted via Twitter and Facebook some articles on "climate change", in particular some information regarding the "climategate" scandal. There was a great three part series written on it. You can find them here, here, and here.
Energy independence is something that stretches into several different areas of concern. It not only has the obvious economic and environmental concerns, but national security concerns as well. In today's post i'll give a brief overview and in subsequent posts address each one individually. National Review did post a great article today concerning the national security implications of energy independence.
The most basic thing that people scream about is the cost of energy. Oil prices are high so gasoline and heating prices go up. There aren't enough resources for electricity production so the cost of electricity goes up. Those of us that live in desert areas know how that power bill just sky rockets in the summer months. People always spout off about the evil oil companies and their monopolistic hold on energy. When you look at the actual profit these companies make by percentages, they make far less profit then your local McDonald's. Its a simple function of math and economics that produces the high dollar amount listed as profit. They move a lot of product at a cost relatively higher than a Big Mac.
People in some circles complain about how dirty oil and coal are. They complain about how dirty fossil fuels are in general. Do you think you could keep the environmental impact down with production here where there are some protection laws and the companies work to do it in a clean manner, or in some third world country who could care less about how much waste or damage they cause pulling the resources? Keeping energy development here would better protect the environment.
I'll just touch briefly on the common sense national security argument. Do you think it would be harder for our potential enemies to get funds for their campaign if we weren't giving money to countries who don't necessarily like us?
There are several things that we can do to improve our energy independence that would create benefits in all three of these areas. First, economically we strengthen ourselves by creating new jobs to get the resources we have been blessed with. The money stays in our own country, and because we are producing it, the end cost for the consumer is less. Second, environmentally we safely take the resources ourselves which we can do better than anybody else while at the same time researching and investing in alternative energy resources. You can have a balance. You just can't wreck the entire economy by cutting off your current supply of energy. Even my three year old could explain that to you. I think the national security argument above can stand on its own today.
I believe we should go after the resources we have; oil, natural gas, coal, etc. Force the companies with leases to start pulling the resources, and open up more land and locations to do so. We need to build Nuclear Power Plants. It's the perfect and abundant energy source to take care of our electrical needs. France gets about 80% of their power from nuclear sources. They also lead the world in reprocessing and recycling the spent nuclear material. I think I am going to write my science paper for school on this very subject.
We can be an energy independent nation with some effort and a little bit of common sense.
Remember to keep yourself informed, and don't be afraid to speak out!
I would like to get some feedback from the few of you in cyberspace that read my blog. What kind of issues do you think are important to address? What are some things we need to be aware of to protect our future, the future of our children, and our nation?
I think for the next couple weeks I will write on "climate change" and energy independence. I believe at some level the two topics intertwine a little bit.
I have posted via Twitter and Facebook some articles on "climate change", in particular some information regarding the "climategate" scandal. There was a great three part series written on it. You can find them here, here, and here.
Energy independence is something that stretches into several different areas of concern. It not only has the obvious economic and environmental concerns, but national security concerns as well. In today's post i'll give a brief overview and in subsequent posts address each one individually. National Review did post a great article today concerning the national security implications of energy independence.
The most basic thing that people scream about is the cost of energy. Oil prices are high so gasoline and heating prices go up. There aren't enough resources for electricity production so the cost of electricity goes up. Those of us that live in desert areas know how that power bill just sky rockets in the summer months. People always spout off about the evil oil companies and their monopolistic hold on energy. When you look at the actual profit these companies make by percentages, they make far less profit then your local McDonald's. Its a simple function of math and economics that produces the high dollar amount listed as profit. They move a lot of product at a cost relatively higher than a Big Mac.
People in some circles complain about how dirty oil and coal are. They complain about how dirty fossil fuels are in general. Do you think you could keep the environmental impact down with production here where there are some protection laws and the companies work to do it in a clean manner, or in some third world country who could care less about how much waste or damage they cause pulling the resources? Keeping energy development here would better protect the environment.
I'll just touch briefly on the common sense national security argument. Do you think it would be harder for our potential enemies to get funds for their campaign if we weren't giving money to countries who don't necessarily like us?
There are several things that we can do to improve our energy independence that would create benefits in all three of these areas. First, economically we strengthen ourselves by creating new jobs to get the resources we have been blessed with. The money stays in our own country, and because we are producing it, the end cost for the consumer is less. Second, environmentally we safely take the resources ourselves which we can do better than anybody else while at the same time researching and investing in alternative energy resources. You can have a balance. You just can't wreck the entire economy by cutting off your current supply of energy. Even my three year old could explain that to you. I think the national security argument above can stand on its own today.
I believe we should go after the resources we have; oil, natural gas, coal, etc. Force the companies with leases to start pulling the resources, and open up more land and locations to do so. We need to build Nuclear Power Plants. It's the perfect and abundant energy source to take care of our electrical needs. France gets about 80% of their power from nuclear sources. They also lead the world in reprocessing and recycling the spent nuclear material. I think I am going to write my science paper for school on this very subject.
We can be an energy independent nation with some effort and a little bit of common sense.
Remember to keep yourself informed, and don't be afraid to speak out!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
