Maybe we can chalk it up to Marco Rubio's youth and inexperience. But he's being quite naive on the Immigration Reform thing. He strongly insists that the reform won't happen until the borders are secure.
All while Chuck Schumer slaps him on the back, saying "Sure, we'll secure the borders first, Marco!". At the same time he's winking at his leftist supporters in the wings and crossing his fingers behind his back.
Marco's about to learn the lesson every Republican from Gerry Ford to Reagan to Bush had to learn the hard way. Democrats love to make promises that help them get their way, then break the promises as soon as their bill's signed.
Remember when Schumer and his friends pulled the bait-and-switch on Reagan on the last massive Amnesty Program for Illegal Immigrants? They made the same deal and reneged on the border security part of the deal. Schumer's telling his buddies, "I can't believe they're going to let us do this to them again!".
Remember when they convinced George H. W. Bush to increase taxes in return for spending cuts? They immediately reneged on the spending cut promise, then taunted Bush as he lost re-election to Bill Clinton.
Marco, you're a great guy, but I've gotta tell you buddy - you're being set up!
Thursday, January 31, 2013
When Common Sense Isn't
As the debate on gun control rages on, the normal Leftist practice of choosing a small number of misleading by emotionally powerful phrases to sway public opinion is in full force.
There are two Democratic themes that have caught my attention.
"These are common sense measures that will save lives".
"Who could possibly need military-style weapons and hundred-round magazines?"
Common Sense? How do we measure common sense? The Left has always believed that the only thing the country needs to solve all problems is to put them in charge. So a crazy kid breaks out his mother's guns and goes on a rampage, taking out his dear mother first. Then the common sense Left says, "If only his mother didn't have the guns, none of that would have happened".
Let's compare their solutions to the Newtown disaster. Would the shooting have been avoided if the AR-15 rifle was banned? No. The shooter would have used the pistol or another "legal" rifle.
Would the shooting have been avoided if 100-round magazines were banned? No. The kid didn't even have one of those.
At the same time, all these "common sense" liberals completely ignore the factor all mass shootings have in common - mentally disturbed young men on psychotropic drugs.
Mr. President, if you call that common sense, I'm afraid to hear what you'd consider stupid or misguided. Oh wait - you think the idea of staffing armed security as a deterrent to these mass shooters is stupid and misguided.
So let me get this straight: A flipped-out young man steals some guns and goes to shoot as many people as he can in a school, movie theatre, or shopping mall. You think the common sense idea is to pass laws that make sure nobody in that public place is allowed to carry a weapon, so the number of people Mr. Crazy kills is limited only by the number of minutes it takes for the Police to arrive and subdue him. I think the better idea is that there's an armed security person, and/or some legally armed private citizens present in the venue. When Mr. Crazy arrives, the armed citizens are able to take him down as soon as he raises his illegally obtained firearm to shoot someone.
Which scenario sounds more like common sense? I suppose it depends on whether or not someone actually has enough common sense to recognize it.
I've come to understand that the Left's strategy all hangs on incrementalism. If you listen for only a few minutes to a Leftist gun control advocate, he'll tell you what he really wants - a complete and total ban on the ability of private citizens to own a firearm of any type. But the Left knows they can't impose that all at once, because people will rise up against them.
So just like Obamacare, they pass laws that just put us on the path to their eventual goal. Obamacare is merely a waystation on the way to complete government control and operation of everybody's healthcare. Selective banning of certain scary-looking rifles and high capacity ammunition magazines is likewise a waystation along the way to a total gun ban.
I think the legislation will fail. But only this time. Like Gay Marriage failed initially. But the Left never gives up on their priorities. We've got maybe 10 years, maybe less, before they succeed. Their success will be achieved by fooling enough of those people Rush Limbaugh calls "Low Information Voters", appealing to their emotions to sell their Big Brother message. "Don't worry, we'll protect you".
Sure, all the way to the Gulags.
There are two Democratic themes that have caught my attention.
"These are common sense measures that will save lives".
"Who could possibly need military-style weapons and hundred-round magazines?"
Common Sense? How do we measure common sense? The Left has always believed that the only thing the country needs to solve all problems is to put them in charge. So a crazy kid breaks out his mother's guns and goes on a rampage, taking out his dear mother first. Then the common sense Left says, "If only his mother didn't have the guns, none of that would have happened".
Let's compare their solutions to the Newtown disaster. Would the shooting have been avoided if the AR-15 rifle was banned? No. The shooter would have used the pistol or another "legal" rifle.
Would the shooting have been avoided if 100-round magazines were banned? No. The kid didn't even have one of those.
At the same time, all these "common sense" liberals completely ignore the factor all mass shootings have in common - mentally disturbed young men on psychotropic drugs.
Mr. President, if you call that common sense, I'm afraid to hear what you'd consider stupid or misguided. Oh wait - you think the idea of staffing armed security as a deterrent to these mass shooters is stupid and misguided.
So let me get this straight: A flipped-out young man steals some guns and goes to shoot as many people as he can in a school, movie theatre, or shopping mall. You think the common sense idea is to pass laws that make sure nobody in that public place is allowed to carry a weapon, so the number of people Mr. Crazy kills is limited only by the number of minutes it takes for the Police to arrive and subdue him. I think the better idea is that there's an armed security person, and/or some legally armed private citizens present in the venue. When Mr. Crazy arrives, the armed citizens are able to take him down as soon as he raises his illegally obtained firearm to shoot someone.
Which scenario sounds more like common sense? I suppose it depends on whether or not someone actually has enough common sense to recognize it.
I've come to understand that the Left's strategy all hangs on incrementalism. If you listen for only a few minutes to a Leftist gun control advocate, he'll tell you what he really wants - a complete and total ban on the ability of private citizens to own a firearm of any type. But the Left knows they can't impose that all at once, because people will rise up against them.
So just like Obamacare, they pass laws that just put us on the path to their eventual goal. Obamacare is merely a waystation on the way to complete government control and operation of everybody's healthcare. Selective banning of certain scary-looking rifles and high capacity ammunition magazines is likewise a waystation along the way to a total gun ban.
I think the legislation will fail. But only this time. Like Gay Marriage failed initially. But the Left never gives up on their priorities. We've got maybe 10 years, maybe less, before they succeed. Their success will be achieved by fooling enough of those people Rush Limbaugh calls "Low Information Voters", appealing to their emotions to sell their Big Brother message. "Don't worry, we'll protect you".
Sure, all the way to the Gulags.
Wednesday, January 30, 2013
Today's Dilemma
I can't seem to get this puzzle out of my mind today.
Our modern calendar was created by the Church, and I grew up understanding these dating terms:
B.C. = Before Christ
A.D. = Anno Domini
Why is our era named in the Latin for roughly 'Year of our Lord', when the era before Jesus arrived on earth uses the simple english phrase 'Before Christ'? Why isn't that a Latin designation like Ante Christum used? Maybe if it's Ante Domini it doesn't work because it gives us the same two letters.
B.C.E (Before the Common Era) and C.E. (Common Era) were made up by atheists in the universities who would prefer to deny that the Church had a hand in the modern calendar. They'd like everyone to forget all about good old BC and AD. Let's pretend those monks who created the calendar never existed (even though they miscalculated the year of Christ's birth by just a bit).
Still, the whole thing has been rolling around in my head all day. I'd like to know who first used the B.C. designation and why. Was it the same time they started with A.D.? What was B.C. before the English language defined it?
Maybe somebody will stumble across this and tell me the history in a comment.
Our modern calendar was created by the Church, and I grew up understanding these dating terms:
B.C. = Before Christ
A.D. = Anno Domini
Why is our era named in the Latin for roughly 'Year of our Lord', when the era before Jesus arrived on earth uses the simple english phrase 'Before Christ'? Why isn't that a Latin designation like Ante Christum used? Maybe if it's Ante Domini it doesn't work because it gives us the same two letters.
B.C.E (Before the Common Era) and C.E. (Common Era) were made up by atheists in the universities who would prefer to deny that the Church had a hand in the modern calendar. They'd like everyone to forget all about good old BC and AD. Let's pretend those monks who created the calendar never existed (even though they miscalculated the year of Christ's birth by just a bit).
Still, the whole thing has been rolling around in my head all day. I'd like to know who first used the B.C. designation and why. Was it the same time they started with A.D.? What was B.C. before the English language defined it?
Maybe somebody will stumble across this and tell me the history in a comment.
Water is Getting Hot
The old metaphor's getting tired, but here we are. Obama's the cook and the American people the frog. The water's very hot and some of us can see the bubbles. But we're stuck inside the frog alongside all the oblivious who think they're enjoying a nice spa pool.
Let's review Obama's checklist.
Take control of the Healthcare Industry - check.
Nationalize the Auto Industry - check (all but Ford).
Make oil too expensive - check
Shut Down the coal industry - check
Funnel billions to cronies creating "green" companies - check
Distract everyone from all this by focusing on gays, amnesty for illegal immigrants, a phony "War on Women", telling us that his opposition is driven solely by racism, blaming greedy rich people for everything - check
Destroying the First Amendment with new anti-Catholic birth control mandates - check
Next on the agenda:
Shut Down Talk Radio and Fox News
Effectively Repeal the 2nd Amendment
Complete the transition to 100 percent nationalized healthcare
Forced Unionization
Passing random laws at his whim by Executive Order, daring those who disagree to take him to court. Then ignoring any court decision that goes against him, continuing to enforce his new laws until he's out of office (will he ever be out of office?)
Farewell, frog friends.
Let's review Obama's checklist.
Take control of the Healthcare Industry - check.
Nationalize the Auto Industry - check (all but Ford).
Make oil too expensive - check
Shut Down the coal industry - check
Funnel billions to cronies creating "green" companies - check
Distract everyone from all this by focusing on gays, amnesty for illegal immigrants, a phony "War on Women", telling us that his opposition is driven solely by racism, blaming greedy rich people for everything - check
Destroying the First Amendment with new anti-Catholic birth control mandates - check
Next on the agenda:
Shut Down Talk Radio and Fox News
Effectively Repeal the 2nd Amendment
Complete the transition to 100 percent nationalized healthcare
Forced Unionization
Passing random laws at his whim by Executive Order, daring those who disagree to take him to court. Then ignoring any court decision that goes against him, continuing to enforce his new laws until he's out of office (will he ever be out of office?)
Farewell, frog friends.
Tuesday, January 29, 2013
Sports Break
Fair warning, you might find this shocking:
I don't care about the Super Bowl.
That's right, this guy that's a big sports fan has no particular interest in the outcome of this year's Super Bowl.
Jim Harbaugh played quarterback for two of my favorite teams, Chicago and Indianapolis. Although it's nice to see him succeed as a coach, that's not quite enough to make me a 49ers fan.
I know that Ravens fans hate the Colts. They think the Colts were stolen from them way back when they bugged out in the middle of the night to escape being stolen by the government in some twisted application of Eminent Domain. They continue to hold a grudge, and I understand it was a major source of celebration for many Ravens fans when they knocked the Colts out of the playoffs this year.
I would have loved to see Luck and the rookie Colts team knock off the Ravens, even though they likely would have been beaten soundly the next weekend by the Patriots. But I'm truly neither a fan nor an enemy of the Ravens. I'm Switzerland.
So the Ravens versus 49ers in the Super Bowl gets no reaction from me. I don't care who wins the game. To the extent I watch at all, it will just be to see if there are any particularly entertaining commercials this year. Forget the halftime show, which will not feature anything approaching musical excellence.
I'm more interested in what I think will be an excellent matchup between Indiana and Michigan this weekend. Besides, I'm probably going to be traveling during the Super Bowl anyway.
No Super Bowl predictions from me this year. Ho Hum.
I don't care about the Super Bowl.
That's right, this guy that's a big sports fan has no particular interest in the outcome of this year's Super Bowl.
Jim Harbaugh played quarterback for two of my favorite teams, Chicago and Indianapolis. Although it's nice to see him succeed as a coach, that's not quite enough to make me a 49ers fan.
I know that Ravens fans hate the Colts. They think the Colts were stolen from them way back when they bugged out in the middle of the night to escape being stolen by the government in some twisted application of Eminent Domain. They continue to hold a grudge, and I understand it was a major source of celebration for many Ravens fans when they knocked the Colts out of the playoffs this year.
I would have loved to see Luck and the rookie Colts team knock off the Ravens, even though they likely would have been beaten soundly the next weekend by the Patriots. But I'm truly neither a fan nor an enemy of the Ravens. I'm Switzerland.
So the Ravens versus 49ers in the Super Bowl gets no reaction from me. I don't care who wins the game. To the extent I watch at all, it will just be to see if there are any particularly entertaining commercials this year. Forget the halftime show, which will not feature anything approaching musical excellence.
I'm more interested in what I think will be an excellent matchup between Indiana and Michigan this weekend. Besides, I'm probably going to be traveling during the Super Bowl anyway.
No Super Bowl predictions from me this year. Ho Hum.
Monday, January 28, 2013
Its Never About Solving a Problem
Here we go again with a "Gang of 8" senators teaming up to create their "bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform".
It's a political joke on all of us, illegal immigrants included.
The real solution to the problem is ridiculously simple, but since it doesn't create a political advantage for any particular party or candidate, forget it.
I've posted it before, but suppose it doesn't hurt to do it again.
Secure the border immediately. It can be done - those who insist it can't are lying. All it takes is adequate resources. Electronic surveillance, strategically placed barriers, and adequate manpower could shut down the border crossings immediately.
Impose severe enough penalties on employers so they stop hiring illegals. Once again, politicians who claim it can't be done are lying. e-Verify is already out there and working fine. Just make it required. Tell companies, "if we catch illegal immigrants in your shop or on your farm, we're going to hammer you". First offense is a steep fine for each illegal found working in the company, maybe by third offense there might be jail time involved for company officers. Companies will get in line quickly.
As for the illegals themselves, announce a 6-month grace period. For 6 months, anybody in the US without a work visa or other form of official authorization to be here needs to either get their status resolved or go home. From home, they can go to a consulate where they can apply to return. The application must prove they meet basic requirements, such as English fluency, a job waiting for them, or enough personal wealth to insure they won't be a burden on taxpayers.
By the way, if they choose not to go home or get their paperwork in order during the 6 month grace period, they're in trouble. There will be no organized roundup, but whenever an illegal is encountered by police in the normal course of business, he, she, and their family will be unceremoniously deported. Give them, say, up to 48 hours to produce paperwork to prove they're in the country legally if they request the time. Then load up the bus, plane, or ship and send them to their country of origin. Simple and straightforward.
If there's such a thing as an illegal immigrant that was brought into the country as a child and is now finishing up high school or college (I'm not exactly convinced that's a common situation), then a process might be created to give them some consideration. But I'd still push for my "go home and apply to come back" approach for them as well.
I believe it's also too easy for educated foreign workers to enter the country. Engineers and programmers from India and the Far East get hiring preference from American companies who believe they're better workers than Americans, and in some cases maybe so. But I don't think we're importing foreign engineers by the boatload because they're better - more like because they'll happily work hard for less money than the Americans they replace.
OK, you don't have to tell me I'm a lonely voice in the wilderness on this topic. People who think they're compassionate think I'm being too hard on folks by making them go home and apply to come back. Then there are the corporate types who are loving their free pass to bring in foreign workers by the boatload that they can pay next-to-nothing.
But the stupid and corrupt gang of senators are intent on stuffing a stupid "reform" law down our throats that I guarantee will only make the problem worse.
If only there were a few more folks who actually paid attention. That gang of senators wouldn't even be in Washington to band together to make bad law.
It's a political joke on all of us, illegal immigrants included.
The real solution to the problem is ridiculously simple, but since it doesn't create a political advantage for any particular party or candidate, forget it.
I've posted it before, but suppose it doesn't hurt to do it again.
Secure the border immediately. It can be done - those who insist it can't are lying. All it takes is adequate resources. Electronic surveillance, strategically placed barriers, and adequate manpower could shut down the border crossings immediately.
Impose severe enough penalties on employers so they stop hiring illegals. Once again, politicians who claim it can't be done are lying. e-Verify is already out there and working fine. Just make it required. Tell companies, "if we catch illegal immigrants in your shop or on your farm, we're going to hammer you". First offense is a steep fine for each illegal found working in the company, maybe by third offense there might be jail time involved for company officers. Companies will get in line quickly.
As for the illegals themselves, announce a 6-month grace period. For 6 months, anybody in the US without a work visa or other form of official authorization to be here needs to either get their status resolved or go home. From home, they can go to a consulate where they can apply to return. The application must prove they meet basic requirements, such as English fluency, a job waiting for them, or enough personal wealth to insure they won't be a burden on taxpayers.
By the way, if they choose not to go home or get their paperwork in order during the 6 month grace period, they're in trouble. There will be no organized roundup, but whenever an illegal is encountered by police in the normal course of business, he, she, and their family will be unceremoniously deported. Give them, say, up to 48 hours to produce paperwork to prove they're in the country legally if they request the time. Then load up the bus, plane, or ship and send them to their country of origin. Simple and straightforward.
If there's such a thing as an illegal immigrant that was brought into the country as a child and is now finishing up high school or college (I'm not exactly convinced that's a common situation), then a process might be created to give them some consideration. But I'd still push for my "go home and apply to come back" approach for them as well.
I believe it's also too easy for educated foreign workers to enter the country. Engineers and programmers from India and the Far East get hiring preference from American companies who believe they're better workers than Americans, and in some cases maybe so. But I don't think we're importing foreign engineers by the boatload because they're better - more like because they'll happily work hard for less money than the Americans they replace.
OK, you don't have to tell me I'm a lonely voice in the wilderness on this topic. People who think they're compassionate think I'm being too hard on folks by making them go home and apply to come back. Then there are the corporate types who are loving their free pass to bring in foreign workers by the boatload that they can pay next-to-nothing.
But the stupid and corrupt gang of senators are intent on stuffing a stupid "reform" law down our throats that I guarantee will only make the problem worse.
If only there were a few more folks who actually paid attention. That gang of senators wouldn't even be in Washington to band together to make bad law.
What's Wrong is Easy to Find
Want to find out what's wrong with America? There's an easy way. Just turn on the TV.
Finding the appalling truth about the decline of America takes only about 30 minutes of channel surfing. Nearly every channel serves as evidence.
If you've got a scintilla of intelligence and are not completely ignorant, you'll be stunned at the ignorance, stupidity, and outright fraud. Just spend a few minutes to find out what's going on any evening at MSNBC, HBO, CNN, E!, MTV, or most of the rest of the alphabet soup of cable channels.
No, I don't include Fox News. They may have a conservative bent, but that doesn't mean they're responsible for the destruction of our culture. They're straight news programs are very much down the middle, which just seems right-wing to the average leftist viewer.
I watch sports, some movies, news, and only one or two television shows. I ignore Reality TV, don't know or care in the least about Honey Boo Boo or the Kardashians. I proudly admit I have no idea who "Snookie" is, and no thanks, I prefer to remain blissfully ignorant about that subject.
So last night I was channel surfing in the hotel and found myself shocked and appalled at what was happening with each click.
The experience served to confirm the hopelessness that hit me after the election. America is shallow, narcissistic, entitled, ignorant and gullible. I can't change that fact. Maybe my kids can have an influence someday in the future, but I'm afraid its already too late even for them. My generation were the enablers.
It's troubling and disappointing.
Finding the appalling truth about the decline of America takes only about 30 minutes of channel surfing. Nearly every channel serves as evidence.
If you've got a scintilla of intelligence and are not completely ignorant, you'll be stunned at the ignorance, stupidity, and outright fraud. Just spend a few minutes to find out what's going on any evening at MSNBC, HBO, CNN, E!, MTV, or most of the rest of the alphabet soup of cable channels.
No, I don't include Fox News. They may have a conservative bent, but that doesn't mean they're responsible for the destruction of our culture. They're straight news programs are very much down the middle, which just seems right-wing to the average leftist viewer.
I watch sports, some movies, news, and only one or two television shows. I ignore Reality TV, don't know or care in the least about Honey Boo Boo or the Kardashians. I proudly admit I have no idea who "Snookie" is, and no thanks, I prefer to remain blissfully ignorant about that subject.
So last night I was channel surfing in the hotel and found myself shocked and appalled at what was happening with each click.
The experience served to confirm the hopelessness that hit me after the election. America is shallow, narcissistic, entitled, ignorant and gullible. I can't change that fact. Maybe my kids can have an influence someday in the future, but I'm afraid its already too late even for them. My generation were the enablers.
It's troubling and disappointing.
Friday, January 25, 2013
Dear Progressive
The greeting in this letter started out, "Dear Liberal". But then I realized you prefer to be called "Progressive", because I suppose that's a term that makes you feel good about yourself. My purpose in writing to you today is to ask you a question.
Why do you hate me so?
You deride me for my Christian faith. You call me supersitious, weak-minded, intolerant, ignorant, hateful. All because I believe there is an all-powerful God who created us, who loves us, and who will welcome those of us who acknowledge him into eternity after our physical bodies die. He never told us to be intolerant, ignorant, or hateful. Rather, God's message to mankind (oops, humankind) is to love each other and be good to each other. Why does that make you angry?
You think I'm heartless for supporting a political perspective that believes that people should take responsibility for themselves and their families. Why do think that's heartless? Studies have proven what I never needed a study to prove; that people who get a good education, marry and stay with a spouse for life, then together raise children in a cohesive family unit are far happier and more successful in life than those who choose "alternative" lifestyles. I don't need to be a Christian to recognize how those basic truths make for a safe, peaceful and prosperous culture.
You get red in the face when we talk about unions. I don't have a problem with a group of people who work together at a company somewhere banding together for the purpose of negotiating better pay, benefits, and working conditions for themselves. I simply think its unAmerican to force people into a labor union they don't want to join, where a large portion of their wages is confiscated to be spent on lavish lifestyles for the unelected union bosses and to fund campaigns for politicians chosen by those same bosses. As a member of a labor union, you are not allowed to so much as ask to see the books of what you thought was your own organization?! I prefer to choose what organizations I want to join and what causes deserve my hard-earned money.
My pro-life orientation also makes you angry. Why would you hate me for expressing scientifically established fact, that human life begins at conception. Surely you're not arguing that you will fight to the end to preserve a "right" to reserve infanticide just in case you find somebody cute you want to take to bed without consequence? Why do you insist on making a straw man argument about abortion for rape and incest victims, when the number of such cases are so small as to be statistically insignificant? Or is this merely an extension of your hostility over my inconvenient truth that sexual behavior is only appropriate within the context of the nuclear family?
You think I love war. I can't figure out where you got that idea, because in reality I believe war should be the last resort and used for protecting ourselves against enemies determined to kill us. It is the government's foremost responsibility to raise a strong army to protect its citizens. You often state that no war is justified. The very idea that a foreign soldier or jihadist might one day walk into your home and kill you is nothing more than some right-wing fantasy, according to you. When you and your like-minded friends take over control of everything, I suppose all I have left is to pray for God's protection - because you and your "Progressive" friends will never protect me. Sadly, you won't protect yourselves either.
Which brings us to guns. You find them frightening and unnecessary. You go on and on telling me that nobody "needs" a gun. You are appalled that I might go out in the woods to shoot a poor little animal. You scoff at the very idea I might need to protect myself from a home invader one day, something that happens every day across the country. Pardon me for pointing out, you don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about when you stridently demand that the government ban "assault rifles".
There are so many other things we could discuss, but I will end with the economy, jobs, deficits, and debt. You don't care to so much as consider the fact that our mutual destruction is taking place right now by ruinous spending in Washington, DC. I wish you would at least consider the harm your god-like president is doing to both of us as he pays interest on the debt with printed money. Everything costs more, but you and I don't get higher salaries to offset those rising costs, so our standard of living continues to erode. We're trying to save for retirement, but our retirement funds are drying up in front of our eyes as the value of each dollar in our IRA and 401K shrinks faster than their investment earnings can replace it. Your god-like president is telling businesses what they may and may not do within their own operations, pushing their costs ever higher and forcing them to consider leaving for a friendlier country or closing the doors forever. You're just fine with all that, and hate me for suggesting I am not.
I don't hate you, and it hurts me that you hate me. I want to be your friend. My hope for you is that one day you will open your mind and let the light in just long enough to understand. Perhaps the first step on the journey to enlightenment is the end of hatred.
Whether it offends you or not, I will continue to pray for you.
Why do you hate me so?
You deride me for my Christian faith. You call me supersitious, weak-minded, intolerant, ignorant, hateful. All because I believe there is an all-powerful God who created us, who loves us, and who will welcome those of us who acknowledge him into eternity after our physical bodies die. He never told us to be intolerant, ignorant, or hateful. Rather, God's message to mankind (oops, humankind) is to love each other and be good to each other. Why does that make you angry?
You think I'm heartless for supporting a political perspective that believes that people should take responsibility for themselves and their families. Why do think that's heartless? Studies have proven what I never needed a study to prove; that people who get a good education, marry and stay with a spouse for life, then together raise children in a cohesive family unit are far happier and more successful in life than those who choose "alternative" lifestyles. I don't need to be a Christian to recognize how those basic truths make for a safe, peaceful and prosperous culture.
You get red in the face when we talk about unions. I don't have a problem with a group of people who work together at a company somewhere banding together for the purpose of negotiating better pay, benefits, and working conditions for themselves. I simply think its unAmerican to force people into a labor union they don't want to join, where a large portion of their wages is confiscated to be spent on lavish lifestyles for the unelected union bosses and to fund campaigns for politicians chosen by those same bosses. As a member of a labor union, you are not allowed to so much as ask to see the books of what you thought was your own organization?! I prefer to choose what organizations I want to join and what causes deserve my hard-earned money.
My pro-life orientation also makes you angry. Why would you hate me for expressing scientifically established fact, that human life begins at conception. Surely you're not arguing that you will fight to the end to preserve a "right" to reserve infanticide just in case you find somebody cute you want to take to bed without consequence? Why do you insist on making a straw man argument about abortion for rape and incest victims, when the number of such cases are so small as to be statistically insignificant? Or is this merely an extension of your hostility over my inconvenient truth that sexual behavior is only appropriate within the context of the nuclear family?
You think I love war. I can't figure out where you got that idea, because in reality I believe war should be the last resort and used for protecting ourselves against enemies determined to kill us. It is the government's foremost responsibility to raise a strong army to protect its citizens. You often state that no war is justified. The very idea that a foreign soldier or jihadist might one day walk into your home and kill you is nothing more than some right-wing fantasy, according to you. When you and your like-minded friends take over control of everything, I suppose all I have left is to pray for God's protection - because you and your "Progressive" friends will never protect me. Sadly, you won't protect yourselves either.
Which brings us to guns. You find them frightening and unnecessary. You go on and on telling me that nobody "needs" a gun. You are appalled that I might go out in the woods to shoot a poor little animal. You scoff at the very idea I might need to protect myself from a home invader one day, something that happens every day across the country. Pardon me for pointing out, you don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about when you stridently demand that the government ban "assault rifles".
There are so many other things we could discuss, but I will end with the economy, jobs, deficits, and debt. You don't care to so much as consider the fact that our mutual destruction is taking place right now by ruinous spending in Washington, DC. I wish you would at least consider the harm your god-like president is doing to both of us as he pays interest on the debt with printed money. Everything costs more, but you and I don't get higher salaries to offset those rising costs, so our standard of living continues to erode. We're trying to save for retirement, but our retirement funds are drying up in front of our eyes as the value of each dollar in our IRA and 401K shrinks faster than their investment earnings can replace it. Your god-like president is telling businesses what they may and may not do within their own operations, pushing their costs ever higher and forcing them to consider leaving for a friendlier country or closing the doors forever. You're just fine with all that, and hate me for suggesting I am not.
I don't hate you, and it hurts me that you hate me. I want to be your friend. My hope for you is that one day you will open your mind and let the light in just long enough to understand. Perhaps the first step on the journey to enlightenment is the end of hatred.
Whether it offends you or not, I will continue to pray for you.
Wednesday, January 23, 2013
Proven Right
I was right.
Hillary finally appeared to testify this morning. I couldn't watch, but caught some excerpts. I was absolutely correct in my post about her delayed testimony. I can add that she claimed ignorance and forgot everything she's ever known or done about Benghazi. She was also defiant, projecting the attitude,
You guys have no right to question me!
There was one small revelation, when she screamed at a congressman who had the gall to question her about the false narrative of the spontaneous protest, "What difference would it make!". The small revelation is in what she probably meant by that outburst:
What I think she meant was, so what if we got together and made up a cover story. That's routine in politics. We make up stories every day to avoid scrutiny, and this was no different.
My point is still operative. She will never tell the truth about Benghazi. And nobody will hold her responsible. We are very likely to find out I'm right when she's the Democrat nominee for President in 2016, and Benghazi won't ever be mentioned in the campaign.
Hillary finally appeared to testify this morning. I couldn't watch, but caught some excerpts. I was absolutely correct in my post about her delayed testimony. I can add that she claimed ignorance and forgot everything she's ever known or done about Benghazi. She was also defiant, projecting the attitude,
You guys have no right to question me!
There was one small revelation, when she screamed at a congressman who had the gall to question her about the false narrative of the spontaneous protest, "What difference would it make!". The small revelation is in what she probably meant by that outburst:
What I think she meant was, so what if we got together and made up a cover story. That's routine in politics. We make up stories every day to avoid scrutiny, and this was no different.
My point is still operative. She will never tell the truth about Benghazi. And nobody will hold her responsible. We are very likely to find out I'm right when she's the Democrat nominee for President in 2016, and Benghazi won't ever be mentioned in the campaign.
Tuesday, January 22, 2013
Inauguration of a Dictator
I didn't tune in to the inauguration. I had to work. Plus I need to keep my blood pressure down.
But I caught the aftermath. The re-elected leftist president left little doubt about his attitude and ambition for the next 4 years. His message boils down to this:
"I'm going all-in on my agenda. If you don't like it, shut up and get out of the way. I'm opening the borders. I'm shutting down coal-fired electricity generation plants. I'm going to make gasoline so expensive you won't be able to afford to keep your car. I'm going to appease our enemies and insult our friends around the world - if we're attacked, I will not respond. I'm going to continue to expand the welfare state. I'm going to continue raising taxes, but not to reduce the deficit or debt. I will continue heaping onerous and unnecessary regulations on business until they are forced to close or relocate out of the country. I will control your healthcare. I will make every one of you dependent on me for your livelihood. I will force you to embrace and pay taxes toward new benefits for gay people who marry."
All to the cheering and celebration of the left-leaning or ignorant crowd. And network "journalists".
A sad day for a once great republic.
But I caught the aftermath. The re-elected leftist president left little doubt about his attitude and ambition for the next 4 years. His message boils down to this:
"I'm going all-in on my agenda. If you don't like it, shut up and get out of the way. I'm opening the borders. I'm shutting down coal-fired electricity generation plants. I'm going to make gasoline so expensive you won't be able to afford to keep your car. I'm going to appease our enemies and insult our friends around the world - if we're attacked, I will not respond. I'm going to continue to expand the welfare state. I'm going to continue raising taxes, but not to reduce the deficit or debt. I will continue heaping onerous and unnecessary regulations on business until they are forced to close or relocate out of the country. I will control your healthcare. I will make every one of you dependent on me for your livelihood. I will force you to embrace and pay taxes toward new benefits for gay people who marry."
All to the cheering and celebration of the left-leaning or ignorant crowd. And network "journalists".
A sad day for a once great republic.
Sunday, January 20, 2013
Big Brother is Strangling Me
Mainly the slow torture from our Big Brother government comes from Obamacare. My health insurance premium is 50% higher this year, and it still has yet to pay a penny in benefits after about 6 years. I've already received the letter informing me that the insurance will be discontinued at the end of this year, to be replaced by Obamacare's "exchange" plan. Just great, how much higher will the premium be next year? Another 50% I'll bet. I can't afford the premium I've got now, so I think the fine will be cheaper.
Then there are prescription drugs. I first got my main brand-name prescription about a year before the Medicare prescription plan was passed by George W Bush and friends. That same pill costs me exactly double the price today versus the price back then. Half of that doubling happened the day after Medicare prescription drugs passed. The other half happened the day after Obamacare passed.
But that's only part of the story. I'm now forced by my insurance company (you know, the one that hasn't paid for any claim in 6 years) to follow their arbitrary rules. For example, I got stuck in St. Louis over the weekend a week ago this past Saturday. I only brought a week's supply, so I tried to get a temporary refill to get me through the second week. Guess what? The mail order pharmacy I'm forced to use exclusively said it's not time for a refill yet, therefore I am not permitted to add to my supply. So I tried a CVS pharmacy in St. Louis, but the pharmacist in a very nice way told me there was no system available get a temporary refill. The only possible way to do that was to get my own Doctor to call it in.
Well yeah, you know Doctors don't work weekends. So my only option was to go without for the weekend, then call the office Monday morning to get an emergency 1-month refill. You remember, the prescription that costs double what it did when I first started taking it.
Gee, I wonder what would have happened if I needed that pill to keep me alive? Try to get to an emergency room before I kicked the bucket, I suppose.
Big Brother is an idiot.
Then there are prescription drugs. I first got my main brand-name prescription about a year before the Medicare prescription plan was passed by George W Bush and friends. That same pill costs me exactly double the price today versus the price back then. Half of that doubling happened the day after Medicare prescription drugs passed. The other half happened the day after Obamacare passed.
But that's only part of the story. I'm now forced by my insurance company (you know, the one that hasn't paid for any claim in 6 years) to follow their arbitrary rules. For example, I got stuck in St. Louis over the weekend a week ago this past Saturday. I only brought a week's supply, so I tried to get a temporary refill to get me through the second week. Guess what? The mail order pharmacy I'm forced to use exclusively said it's not time for a refill yet, therefore I am not permitted to add to my supply. So I tried a CVS pharmacy in St. Louis, but the pharmacist in a very nice way told me there was no system available get a temporary refill. The only possible way to do that was to get my own Doctor to call it in.
Well yeah, you know Doctors don't work weekends. So my only option was to go without for the weekend, then call the office Monday morning to get an emergency 1-month refill. You remember, the prescription that costs double what it did when I first started taking it.
Gee, I wonder what would have happened if I needed that pill to keep me alive? Try to get to an emergency room before I kicked the bucket, I suppose.
Big Brother is an idiot.
Thursday, January 17, 2013
Shooting Down Our Heroes
There are three sports-related stories getting a lot of play this week, all three combining to destroy our admiration of sports heroes. The message we're getting loud and clear goes something like this:
Stop admiring sports people who achieve at an extremely high level. Because the person you admire most likely achieved so much because he or she cheated or was given an unfair advantage.
Lance Armstrong: I was disappointed at how it seemed that people destroyed his reputation and took away all his trophies and medals by accusing him of doping without proof. Now they tell us that the reason he never had a positive test was because he or someone close to him was paying off the corrupt officials that oversaw the testing procedures.
I'm cynical, and take with a grain of salt whether the payoff charges are true. But the larger message is that "everybody" in cycling was doping. All the Tour de France winners over the last several years seem to have been caught doping in what they say was a rampant practice, with doctors who were experts in avoiding positive tests helped the athletes. So now we don't know whether any TdF winners over the last decade or so were actually clean.
Look at olympic gold medalists who took banned performance enhancing drugs. Every silver medalist who knew he or she was absolutely clean is justified in being very angry to lose that gold to a cheater.
Rather than going on Oprah to confess, Lance should have held a Press Conference. He should have told the truth, whatever that is, then announced he was retiring to his private life and will no longer be a public figure. That's the right way to do it. I'm disappointed that he was willing to go the exploitation route to try to rehabilitate his image.
Chip Kelly went on an interview with the Philadelphia Eagles. He came back and told his college, Oregon, that he decided to stay. Perhaps too coincidentally, he got all the Oregon recruits signed for Oregon right before he announced, "I changed my mind, I'll be taking the Eagles' job".
Maybe the Eagles came back with an offer he couldn't refuse. Maybe after taking some time to think about it, he decided that job would be best for his career. I hope so. But that story smells.
Manti Te'o was part of a big story last Fall about his girlfriend dying of cancer. It brought him fantastic press and the sympathy and increased admiration for Notre Dame fans all over the country. Now we find out the girlfriend didn't die. She didn't even exist. Notre Dame says Manti was duped by some sort of internet prank.
Sorry, I don't buy it. If your girlfriend is somebody you've never met but spend lots of time flirting with over the internet, she doesn't qualify as a girlfriend. Whether or not you were duped by the fake cancer story is irrelevant. She wasn't your girlfriend, but some fantasy date you found on the world wide web. Manti should have stopped the story when it started by telling the press that the girlfriend who died of cancer was somebody he'd never actually met, but just communicated with online.
All these stories suggest we should never get caught up in a sports personality as someone to emulate or admire. Because in real life that personality may be a complete and total jerk or fraud. So where does that leave the kids?
Without heroes, how can young kids aspiring to be great at some endeavour, or even just a person of high integrity and character, find the role models they need to actually achieve their goals?
Stop admiring sports people who achieve at an extremely high level. Because the person you admire most likely achieved so much because he or she cheated or was given an unfair advantage.
Lance Armstrong: I was disappointed at how it seemed that people destroyed his reputation and took away all his trophies and medals by accusing him of doping without proof. Now they tell us that the reason he never had a positive test was because he or someone close to him was paying off the corrupt officials that oversaw the testing procedures.
I'm cynical, and take with a grain of salt whether the payoff charges are true. But the larger message is that "everybody" in cycling was doping. All the Tour de France winners over the last several years seem to have been caught doping in what they say was a rampant practice, with doctors who were experts in avoiding positive tests helped the athletes. So now we don't know whether any TdF winners over the last decade or so were actually clean.
Look at olympic gold medalists who took banned performance enhancing drugs. Every silver medalist who knew he or she was absolutely clean is justified in being very angry to lose that gold to a cheater.
Rather than going on Oprah to confess, Lance should have held a Press Conference. He should have told the truth, whatever that is, then announced he was retiring to his private life and will no longer be a public figure. That's the right way to do it. I'm disappointed that he was willing to go the exploitation route to try to rehabilitate his image.
Chip Kelly went on an interview with the Philadelphia Eagles. He came back and told his college, Oregon, that he decided to stay. Perhaps too coincidentally, he got all the Oregon recruits signed for Oregon right before he announced, "I changed my mind, I'll be taking the Eagles' job".
Maybe the Eagles came back with an offer he couldn't refuse. Maybe after taking some time to think about it, he decided that job would be best for his career. I hope so. But that story smells.
Manti Te'o was part of a big story last Fall about his girlfriend dying of cancer. It brought him fantastic press and the sympathy and increased admiration for Notre Dame fans all over the country. Now we find out the girlfriend didn't die. She didn't even exist. Notre Dame says Manti was duped by some sort of internet prank.
Sorry, I don't buy it. If your girlfriend is somebody you've never met but spend lots of time flirting with over the internet, she doesn't qualify as a girlfriend. Whether or not you were duped by the fake cancer story is irrelevant. She wasn't your girlfriend, but some fantasy date you found on the world wide web. Manti should have stopped the story when it started by telling the press that the girlfriend who died of cancer was somebody he'd never actually met, but just communicated with online.
All these stories suggest we should never get caught up in a sports personality as someone to emulate or admire. Because in real life that personality may be a complete and total jerk or fraud. So where does that leave the kids?
Without heroes, how can young kids aspiring to be great at some endeavour, or even just a person of high integrity and character, find the role models they need to actually achieve their goals?
Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Sports Update
The weekend NFL games had their usual unpredictability. Favorites lost as some always do. Denver gave the game away to the Baltimore Ravens despite plenty of opportunities to close out their victory. Atlanta very nearly did the same, but escaped with a (literally) final minute drive for the winning field goal to edge a scrappy Seahawk team.
San Fransisco won more easily than I expected against the Packers, who many were picking to make the Super Bowl. New England won about as easily as I expected against the Texans. Too bad Houston, you're pretty good but you're not at the level of the Patriots just yet - you just need better pass defense.
Based on the weekend games, it seems that New England is a lock for the Super Bowl on the AFC side, but the Ravens have been talking destiny. We'll see. It's hard to pick between Atlanta and San Fran, both were rather impressive. I'm staying on the fence for the NFC title, because once again I have no idea how that game will go.
In college basketball, I'm enjoying the Indiana teams this year. As I write, Notre Dame just got beaten by St. John's, but they've been pretty good so far.
Butler lost their point guard and top scorer, Rotnei Clarke, to a scary neck injury over the weekend. So Butler might easily lose one or both of the two games Clarke is reportedly going to miss. Particularly against Gonzaga. But you never know.
Indiana looked great in their first half against Minnesota, but the wheels came off in the second half. They managed to hang on for the victory, but need to play two halves like that first one last weekend if they hope to beat Wisconsin. That's still a fun team to watch play offense, while Butler's fun to watch because of their hustle and relentlessness on both offense and defense.
San Fransisco won more easily than I expected against the Packers, who many were picking to make the Super Bowl. New England won about as easily as I expected against the Texans. Too bad Houston, you're pretty good but you're not at the level of the Patriots just yet - you just need better pass defense.
Based on the weekend games, it seems that New England is a lock for the Super Bowl on the AFC side, but the Ravens have been talking destiny. We'll see. It's hard to pick between Atlanta and San Fran, both were rather impressive. I'm staying on the fence for the NFC title, because once again I have no idea how that game will go.
In college basketball, I'm enjoying the Indiana teams this year. As I write, Notre Dame just got beaten by St. John's, but they've been pretty good so far.
Butler lost their point guard and top scorer, Rotnei Clarke, to a scary neck injury over the weekend. So Butler might easily lose one or both of the two games Clarke is reportedly going to miss. Particularly against Gonzaga. But you never know.
Indiana looked great in their first half against Minnesota, but the wheels came off in the second half. They managed to hang on for the victory, but need to play two halves like that first one last weekend if they hope to beat Wisconsin. That's still a fun team to watch play offense, while Butler's fun to watch because of their hustle and relentlessness on both offense and defense.
A Couple of Things I Picked Up
Since work has me completely buried lately, I don't catch much of the news and commentary stuff I usually get. But I did catch part of Obama's press conference about the debt ceiling and gun control.
It strikes me how brazen he is on both subjects. Only he seems to be able to get away with outrageous and misleading rhetoric, but of course the press abandoned all pretense of fair reporting a long time ago.
Let's see if I can condense the basic message. Second Amendment activists are happy to see school children get killed by men with "Assault Rifles". They refuse to even discuss the "common sense" regulations that will save childrens' lives. Why, they just scare everybody by telling them Obama's going to take away their guns because it makes them a ton of money.
On the debt ceiling, it seems Obama had nothing to do with the spending levels bankrupting the nation. It was Congress and Bush, don't you know. So there's no need to negotiate raising the ceiling because Congress simply needs to pay the bills they've already piled up.
And by the way, he will not talk to Republicans about spending cuts that will starve seniors and children and deny healthcare to millions. There is no such thing as unnecessary spending. If only the rich were paying their fair share, we'd be OK (wait, didn't he just get a tax increase with no spending cuts through congress only a couple weeks ago?)
This stuff is so over-the-top in its blatant dishonesty. And the Republican leaders never even tried to hold a press conference to refute Emperor Obama's slanders. Business as usual I guess.
My feeling is that the Republicans in the House and Senate should reconfirm their principles, then stick by them regardless of how badly Obama and his lapdog press want to mischaracterize them. They will anyway, so why knuckle under to score points you'll never get from them?
Then I find this little tidbit about the FOIA request to see the illegal emails the former EPA chief, Lisa Jackson. The court ordered those emails be released to Chris Horner. Lisa was using "Richard Windsor" as her email alter ego. The EPA eventually gave Horner a CD with a bunch of emails. They chose to inundate him with a high volume of irrelevant emails, while still holding back the smoking guns that are almost certainly there.
It makes me wonder whether Lisa at the EPA is merely the tip of the iceberg of corrupt practices throughout the Obama span of control in government.
I'm sorry there is no evidence that anybody's going to succeed in toppling the totalitarians that have grasped control of Washington. Obama's our new King George, only he's doing a lot more harm than merely taxing our tea.
It strikes me how brazen he is on both subjects. Only he seems to be able to get away with outrageous and misleading rhetoric, but of course the press abandoned all pretense of fair reporting a long time ago.
Let's see if I can condense the basic message. Second Amendment activists are happy to see school children get killed by men with "Assault Rifles". They refuse to even discuss the "common sense" regulations that will save childrens' lives. Why, they just scare everybody by telling them Obama's going to take away their guns because it makes them a ton of money.
On the debt ceiling, it seems Obama had nothing to do with the spending levels bankrupting the nation. It was Congress and Bush, don't you know. So there's no need to negotiate raising the ceiling because Congress simply needs to pay the bills they've already piled up.
And by the way, he will not talk to Republicans about spending cuts that will starve seniors and children and deny healthcare to millions. There is no such thing as unnecessary spending. If only the rich were paying their fair share, we'd be OK (wait, didn't he just get a tax increase with no spending cuts through congress only a couple weeks ago?)
This stuff is so over-the-top in its blatant dishonesty. And the Republican leaders never even tried to hold a press conference to refute Emperor Obama's slanders. Business as usual I guess.
My feeling is that the Republicans in the House and Senate should reconfirm their principles, then stick by them regardless of how badly Obama and his lapdog press want to mischaracterize them. They will anyway, so why knuckle under to score points you'll never get from them?
Then I find this little tidbit about the FOIA request to see the illegal emails the former EPA chief, Lisa Jackson. The court ordered those emails be released to Chris Horner. Lisa was using "Richard Windsor" as her email alter ego. The EPA eventually gave Horner a CD with a bunch of emails. They chose to inundate him with a high volume of irrelevant emails, while still holding back the smoking guns that are almost certainly there.
It makes me wonder whether Lisa at the EPA is merely the tip of the iceberg of corrupt practices throughout the Obama span of control in government.
I'm sorry there is no evidence that anybody's going to succeed in toppling the totalitarians that have grasped control of Washington. Obama's our new King George, only he's doing a lot more harm than merely taxing our tea.
Saturday, January 12, 2013
Historical Perspective
The historical path that's led to America's fall helps put things in perspective. All that's been running through my head make the sad but obvious self-destructive path seem inevitable. My challenge is to try boiling it all down into a short blog post.
Mankind's earliest society was based on a tribalism. Tribes were extended families who lived together in their villages and worked together for mutual protection and made their living off the land, either by hunting and gathering or learning some basic agricultural and animal husbandry skills. The leader of each tribe was the father or grandfather of the family.
Tribes would raid each other to steal food or women, or take the land away from another tribe if they thought it was better than the land they already controlled. This grew into feudalism, where tribes began to coalesce into slightly larger regional kingdoms led by the strongest alpha male best able to keep enough people organized and controlled to protect their corner of the world from outside marauders.
But outside marauders were a fact of life, coming from other places in search of loot. Gradually there were newer things they came to steal, like tools and precious metals. So the petty Lords that were now calling themselves Kings got the idea of fending off the marauders by bribing them with those tools and gold and silver in return for leaving their little fiefdom in peace. The Lords came up with the idea of taxation and began taking a small percentage of each person's output each year to support the defense of the kingdom.
Some kings began to realize that they could become very rich and powerful by developing their tribes into accomplished warriors. The Persians conquered most of the known world, but the Greeks developed their own warrior class and the Persian Empire was supplanted by the Greek empire. The Greeks were so successful that they were able to explore cultural and scientific pursuits, once their society moved beyond the daily struggle to merely feed themselves and fend off invaders.
The Romans borrowed heavily from Greek cultural ideas and supplanted the Greeks as rulers of the known world. The Romans expanded on the Greek idea of democratic governance and formed a republic. Fighting to keep the republic alive, the Roman Senate executed the highly successful military leader Julius Caesar, the first Roman Emporer. But even that assassination turned out to be futile, as strongman warlords continued to rise and anoint themselves the imperial ruler of the Rome and thus the world.
Eventually the Romans became comfortable and decadent, just as the Greeks before them and perhaps the Persians before them. Their empire crumbled, and the western world reverted to feudalism.
Then Christianity took hold in the western world. Strong Lords were able to leverage a biblical idea based on King David, now called the Divine Right of Kings, to unite the fiefdoms under a single High King. The King found it easier to control larger and larger coalitians with a Bishop at his side, proclaiming him God's anointed ruler. Then the Europeans found America, the rich New World ripe for the picking. People flocked to the New World to escape tyrannical kings and seek their fortunes. Then English King George went too far, demanding ever-increasing taxes on the colonists. George needed the funds to support his ongoing war with France and restock his diminishing coffers as his own subjects productivity declined dramatically while the Americans were getting rich from the sweat of their brows. The onerous taxes George was imposing make him look like a piker when compared with modern tax rates.
America fought to be independent, and the fledgeling country decided to adopt a governing system modeled after the Greeks and Romans but leavened with Christian principles. There were plenty of struggles through the years with a terrible civil war fought over whether America was a confederation of independent states, or a unified country ruled from a powerful central government. The powerful central government won. But the country's success continued to build through the industrial age, then the Germans ignited two World Wars. After the devastation of the world wrought by the second War, a victorious America was left relatively unscathed and ascended to claim their perch as the most powerful and therefore wealthiest nation on earth.
The children of the war veterans who won this unprecedented power and prosperity for America rebelled against their parents, not as warriors but as philosophers of a sort. They rejected their parents' faith and values, despite enjoying the wealth and priviledge those values provided them. Now they're in charge of the American government. They weaken America's warriors because they've decided those warriors are bullies, not protectors and freedom fighters. They demand unprecedented taxation rates, demanding more than half of the output from the productive so they can give more to the unproductive (while lining their own pockets). In the meantime, marauders have begun their invasions. We are experiencing both economic and warrior marauders. Economic marauders sneak into the country to get in line for the post-war generation's generous wealth redistribution programs, while warrior marauders seek to destroy the country from within and out through terror, murder and destruction.
History shows that the marauders always win, eventually. The two factions vying for that role are Communists and Islamists, who for the moment are allies in the war against America. My guess is between the two, the Islamists will win because they're more committed to their cause and believe Allah is on their side. Communists are atheists, so they're not going to get revved up to win a victory for God. Their definition of victory looks more like a world where everybody's as poor and miserable as they are, they can kill all the babies they deem unworthy, and can grant homosexuals an extra share of the government dole with a false narrative about marriage rights.
America's already lost its perch atop the list of world economic powers. And enemy states no longer fear America's military, not because the military is no longer strong but because the Commander-in-Chief of that military is weak.
The only question remaining is how much longer does America have before it lands in history's dustbin alongside the Persians, Greeks, and Romans? 20, 50 years? Perhaps as few as 10 years, I think. Sorry about that, kids. It's all the fault of my generation. Your generation can save America if you so choose, but all indications are you're oblivious.
It all tempts me to join the Amish. Living on the farm with a lifestyle out of the 19th century, I can just grow crops and tend the livestock all day and remove myself from the cares and worrys of modern America. At least I won't have any time to worry about the marauders taking my farm away until they arrive. One day it will either be a communist government representative officially confiscating my farm on behalf of the People's Revolution, or a squad of Islamist warriors lining me up alongside my family in the barnyard and executing us for being unrepentant infidels.
Good luck, kids.
Mankind's earliest society was based on a tribalism. Tribes were extended families who lived together in their villages and worked together for mutual protection and made their living off the land, either by hunting and gathering or learning some basic agricultural and animal husbandry skills. The leader of each tribe was the father or grandfather of the family.
Tribes would raid each other to steal food or women, or take the land away from another tribe if they thought it was better than the land they already controlled. This grew into feudalism, where tribes began to coalesce into slightly larger regional kingdoms led by the strongest alpha male best able to keep enough people organized and controlled to protect their corner of the world from outside marauders.
But outside marauders were a fact of life, coming from other places in search of loot. Gradually there were newer things they came to steal, like tools and precious metals. So the petty Lords that were now calling themselves Kings got the idea of fending off the marauders by bribing them with those tools and gold and silver in return for leaving their little fiefdom in peace. The Lords came up with the idea of taxation and began taking a small percentage of each person's output each year to support the defense of the kingdom.
Some kings began to realize that they could become very rich and powerful by developing their tribes into accomplished warriors. The Persians conquered most of the known world, but the Greeks developed their own warrior class and the Persian Empire was supplanted by the Greek empire. The Greeks were so successful that they were able to explore cultural and scientific pursuits, once their society moved beyond the daily struggle to merely feed themselves and fend off invaders.
The Romans borrowed heavily from Greek cultural ideas and supplanted the Greeks as rulers of the known world. The Romans expanded on the Greek idea of democratic governance and formed a republic. Fighting to keep the republic alive, the Roman Senate executed the highly successful military leader Julius Caesar, the first Roman Emporer. But even that assassination turned out to be futile, as strongman warlords continued to rise and anoint themselves the imperial ruler of the Rome and thus the world.
Eventually the Romans became comfortable and decadent, just as the Greeks before them and perhaps the Persians before them. Their empire crumbled, and the western world reverted to feudalism.
Then Christianity took hold in the western world. Strong Lords were able to leverage a biblical idea based on King David, now called the Divine Right of Kings, to unite the fiefdoms under a single High King. The King found it easier to control larger and larger coalitians with a Bishop at his side, proclaiming him God's anointed ruler. Then the Europeans found America, the rich New World ripe for the picking. People flocked to the New World to escape tyrannical kings and seek their fortunes. Then English King George went too far, demanding ever-increasing taxes on the colonists. George needed the funds to support his ongoing war with France and restock his diminishing coffers as his own subjects productivity declined dramatically while the Americans were getting rich from the sweat of their brows. The onerous taxes George was imposing make him look like a piker when compared with modern tax rates.
America fought to be independent, and the fledgeling country decided to adopt a governing system modeled after the Greeks and Romans but leavened with Christian principles. There were plenty of struggles through the years with a terrible civil war fought over whether America was a confederation of independent states, or a unified country ruled from a powerful central government. The powerful central government won. But the country's success continued to build through the industrial age, then the Germans ignited two World Wars. After the devastation of the world wrought by the second War, a victorious America was left relatively unscathed and ascended to claim their perch as the most powerful and therefore wealthiest nation on earth.
The children of the war veterans who won this unprecedented power and prosperity for America rebelled against their parents, not as warriors but as philosophers of a sort. They rejected their parents' faith and values, despite enjoying the wealth and priviledge those values provided them. Now they're in charge of the American government. They weaken America's warriors because they've decided those warriors are bullies, not protectors and freedom fighters. They demand unprecedented taxation rates, demanding more than half of the output from the productive so they can give more to the unproductive (while lining their own pockets). In the meantime, marauders have begun their invasions. We are experiencing both economic and warrior marauders. Economic marauders sneak into the country to get in line for the post-war generation's generous wealth redistribution programs, while warrior marauders seek to destroy the country from within and out through terror, murder and destruction.
History shows that the marauders always win, eventually. The two factions vying for that role are Communists and Islamists, who for the moment are allies in the war against America. My guess is between the two, the Islamists will win because they're more committed to their cause and believe Allah is on their side. Communists are atheists, so they're not going to get revved up to win a victory for God. Their definition of victory looks more like a world where everybody's as poor and miserable as they are, they can kill all the babies they deem unworthy, and can grant homosexuals an extra share of the government dole with a false narrative about marriage rights.
America's already lost its perch atop the list of world economic powers. And enemy states no longer fear America's military, not because the military is no longer strong but because the Commander-in-Chief of that military is weak.
The only question remaining is how much longer does America have before it lands in history's dustbin alongside the Persians, Greeks, and Romans? 20, 50 years? Perhaps as few as 10 years, I think. Sorry about that, kids. It's all the fault of my generation. Your generation can save America if you so choose, but all indications are you're oblivious.
It all tempts me to join the Amish. Living on the farm with a lifestyle out of the 19th century, I can just grow crops and tend the livestock all day and remove myself from the cares and worrys of modern America. At least I won't have any time to worry about the marauders taking my farm away until they arrive. One day it will either be a communist government representative officially confiscating my farm on behalf of the People's Revolution, or a squad of Islamist warriors lining me up alongside my family in the barnyard and executing us for being unrepentant infidels.
Good luck, kids.
Friday, January 11, 2013
Tebow Victim of Informal Discrimination?
There are more than 70 quarterbacks in the NFL. There are maybe a half-dozen really good ones raking in huge salaries and many of them have their teams still alive in the NFL playoffs. The rest work hard as they dream of joining the elite group of quarterbacks like Manning and Brady.
But out of all those quarterbacks, there is one who is facing a likely expulsion from the league without being given an opportunity to prove himself. Tim Tebow took over the starting job in Denver a couple years ago. He was not a prolific passer, but Denver still made it into the playoffs. Tebow wasn't the only reason they achieved a playoff berth, as they had a good running game on offense and an above-average defense. But he was certainly a factor, because despite his unorthodox throwing style, he was a fierce competitor who found ways to win.
The Broncos jumped at the chance to sign Peyton Manning, so Tebow had to move on. The Jets decided to take him as a change-of-pace quarterback to run wildcat sets and perhaps other creative plays that were promised for the 2012 season. They ran a handful of wildcat plays with Tebow early in the season, then sat him on the bench. Oh, they had him block for the punter. When the Jets' starter, Sanchez, struggled badly for most of the season, the Jets stuck with him rather than try their backup. When the coaches finally gave up on a demoralized Sanchez at the end of the season, they bypassed Tebow for the third-string guy.
So Tebow's future is in doubt. He almost certainly won't be a Jet next season. News today is that even his hometown Jaguars aren't interested. Very possibly he'll simply be released, then no team will invite him to camp next summer, even for a tryout. Why has that happened?
Because he's a strong Christian who does not shy away from letting it be known. And many people hate him for it. How many unproven quarterbacks, especially former Heisman Trophy winners, are trashed daily on ESPN as incompetent and worthless? If he played in a half-dozen games this season for the Jets and stunk up the stadium, that would be one thing. But he hasn't even been on the field at quarterback. And there are plenty of quarterbacks who played horribly this season. So why the hyper-focus on Tebow?
I believe it stems from an anti-Christian bias. If Tebow is out of the league next season, it won't be due to any government sanction against Christian players or even a league policy that frowns on the famous Tebow prayer pose. It will be an insidious popular culture shunning of somebody who doesn't fit the modern template for expected behavior.
My wish is that he can get free of the Jets then be invited to an NFL camp this summer where he'll either earn a backup job or he won't. But whether he sticks on a roster will be based on how he performs in preseason, and not his faith.
But out of all those quarterbacks, there is one who is facing a likely expulsion from the league without being given an opportunity to prove himself. Tim Tebow took over the starting job in Denver a couple years ago. He was not a prolific passer, but Denver still made it into the playoffs. Tebow wasn't the only reason they achieved a playoff berth, as they had a good running game on offense and an above-average defense. But he was certainly a factor, because despite his unorthodox throwing style, he was a fierce competitor who found ways to win.
The Broncos jumped at the chance to sign Peyton Manning, so Tebow had to move on. The Jets decided to take him as a change-of-pace quarterback to run wildcat sets and perhaps other creative plays that were promised for the 2012 season. They ran a handful of wildcat plays with Tebow early in the season, then sat him on the bench. Oh, they had him block for the punter. When the Jets' starter, Sanchez, struggled badly for most of the season, the Jets stuck with him rather than try their backup. When the coaches finally gave up on a demoralized Sanchez at the end of the season, they bypassed Tebow for the third-string guy.
So Tebow's future is in doubt. He almost certainly won't be a Jet next season. News today is that even his hometown Jaguars aren't interested. Very possibly he'll simply be released, then no team will invite him to camp next summer, even for a tryout. Why has that happened?
Because he's a strong Christian who does not shy away from letting it be known. And many people hate him for it. How many unproven quarterbacks, especially former Heisman Trophy winners, are trashed daily on ESPN as incompetent and worthless? If he played in a half-dozen games this season for the Jets and stunk up the stadium, that would be one thing. But he hasn't even been on the field at quarterback. And there are plenty of quarterbacks who played horribly this season. So why the hyper-focus on Tebow?
I believe it stems from an anti-Christian bias. If Tebow is out of the league next season, it won't be due to any government sanction against Christian players or even a league policy that frowns on the famous Tebow prayer pose. It will be an insidious popular culture shunning of somebody who doesn't fit the modern template for expected behavior.
My wish is that he can get free of the Jets then be invited to an NFL camp this summer where he'll either earn a backup job or he won't. But whether he sticks on a roster will be based on how he performs in preseason, and not his faith.
Thursday, January 10, 2013
False Hope
Republicans still hold out hope that they will actually get the truth once Hillary Clinton finally shows up in Congress to testify. They are delusional if they think she'll actually tell them the who, what, when, where, and how
about the terrorist raid and subsequent murder of our Ambassador and other Americans in Benghazi.
They held out a similar hope of getting the information from David Petraeus. He declined to share any meaningful information, even though one would think he had nothing to lose by telling the truth. But then again, how can we know exactly what he had to lose if he had exposed the President and Secretary of State?
We've seen it before. When her husband was President and she did several horrible things from the White House, she got grilled about them. They hoped to get the truth back then about various things like the missing law firm billing records from Whitewater, the Travel Office scandal, the FBI Files scandal. She didn't tell them a thing. She said she didn't remember.
That's exactly what she will do this time. Question after question will be answered with "I don't know", "I don't recall", "I had no involvement in that", etc.
Come on guys. Do you really think Hillary will actually tell you the truth? She'll never tell you why she denied repeated requests from the Ambassador for more security. She'll never tell you why the Seal Team was told to stand down while the consulate was under attack. She'll never tell who in the White House created the cover story about a protest gone awry.
The simplest answer is always the best. Hillary knew and supported the denial of requests from the Ambassador to increase security. They were denied because she and Obama were trying to be sensitive to the desires of the fledgling Islamist government being formed in the vacuum after Qadafi was executed.
They told the Seals to stand down for much the same reason. They expected the new Libyan government to be outraged at American commandos landing in Benghazi and killing a bunch of Libyan terrorists - in fact, that government reportedly told them they would not permit any troops in their country, even for a limited rescue mission.
They made up the cover story for purely political reasons, with the aim to protect Obama's re-election campaign from bad press. My guess is the idea came from somebody in the campaign, probably Axelrod. I wouldn't call it a guess to say Obama endorsed the idea and ran with it - we have plenty of evidence of that. Turns out it worked like a charm, because the press had zero curiosity about the inside story of how or why the Ambassador was killed inside our own consulate. So as it turns out, they could have told the truth and the press would have covered for them anyway.
Hillary will not admit her role in the massacre, and won't even admit to knowing anything about it. So stop dreaming about a grand expose in the hearing room. It's not going to happen, and you'll never get the truth. At least until some white house staffer writes his memoirs 20 or 30 years from now and tells the actual story.
about the terrorist raid and subsequent murder of our Ambassador and other Americans in Benghazi.
They held out a similar hope of getting the information from David Petraeus. He declined to share any meaningful information, even though one would think he had nothing to lose by telling the truth. But then again, how can we know exactly what he had to lose if he had exposed the President and Secretary of State?
We've seen it before. When her husband was President and she did several horrible things from the White House, she got grilled about them. They hoped to get the truth back then about various things like the missing law firm billing records from Whitewater, the Travel Office scandal, the FBI Files scandal. She didn't tell them a thing. She said she didn't remember.
That's exactly what she will do this time. Question after question will be answered with "I don't know", "I don't recall", "I had no involvement in that", etc.
Come on guys. Do you really think Hillary will actually tell you the truth? She'll never tell you why she denied repeated requests from the Ambassador for more security. She'll never tell you why the Seal Team was told to stand down while the consulate was under attack. She'll never tell who in the White House created the cover story about a protest gone awry.
The simplest answer is always the best. Hillary knew and supported the denial of requests from the Ambassador to increase security. They were denied because she and Obama were trying to be sensitive to the desires of the fledgling Islamist government being formed in the vacuum after Qadafi was executed.
They told the Seals to stand down for much the same reason. They expected the new Libyan government to be outraged at American commandos landing in Benghazi and killing a bunch of Libyan terrorists - in fact, that government reportedly told them they would not permit any troops in their country, even for a limited rescue mission.
They made up the cover story for purely political reasons, with the aim to protect Obama's re-election campaign from bad press. My guess is the idea came from somebody in the campaign, probably Axelrod. I wouldn't call it a guess to say Obama endorsed the idea and ran with it - we have plenty of evidence of that. Turns out it worked like a charm, because the press had zero curiosity about the inside story of how or why the Ambassador was killed inside our own consulate. So as it turns out, they could have told the truth and the press would have covered for them anyway.
Hillary will not admit her role in the massacre, and won't even admit to knowing anything about it. So stop dreaming about a grand expose in the hearing room. It's not going to happen, and you'll never get the truth. At least until some white house staffer writes his memoirs 20 or 30 years from now and tells the actual story.
Wednesday, January 09, 2013
The Point I Have Been Trying to Make
If this blog has a theme, it was summarized very succinctly by Steve McCann in this very good article.
The essence of his article appears in the following statement:
"Those that self-identify as progressives, leftists, socialists or Marxists, have one overwhelming trait in common: they are narcissists who believe they are pre-ordained to rule the masses too ignorant to govern themselves."
Finally the reason for the existence of Digging Out Truth has been summarized in one brief statement.
The essence of his article appears in the following statement:
"Those that self-identify as progressives, leftists, socialists or Marxists, have one overwhelming trait in common: they are narcissists who believe they are pre-ordained to rule the masses too ignorant to govern themselves."
Finally the reason for the existence of Digging Out Truth has been summarized in one brief statement.
Tuesday, January 08, 2013
Faulty Wiring
There's a cognitive problem in America. Those on the Left seem to have a short-circuit in their brains, as they get crazier by the minute. The proof is in the latest news.
Krugman at the NY Times thinks we can solve the debt problem by minting a Trillion Dollar Coin.
Every high profile shooter over the past several years has been mentally disturbed and on psychotropic medication. Yet nobody on the Left seems to have any curiosity about whether American efforts to stop mass shootings might need to look into cause-and-effect of the mentally disturbed and the drugs they take. They just want to repeal the 2nd Amendment and confiscate firearms from all of us who aren't disturbed and aren't taking psychotropic drugs.
According to the usual Left-wing suspects in Congress, taxes still aren't high enough.
According to Leftwinger-in-Chief Obama, America does not have a spending problem. And don't try to tell him otherwise - he's tired of hearing it.
The new Secretary of State is 60's era anti-war hippie activist John Kerry.
The new Secretary of Defense is an anti-Semitic former Senator who doesn't think Iran's nuclear program presents a threat. Iran is proudly supporting his nomination.
A British visitor with a show on CNN is running a personal crusade to outlaw gun ownership in America. He nightly hammers a message that all gun owners and especially NRA members are evil, as if we're the ones that shot up the school in Newtown. Besides being a British idiot, American gun laws are none of his business.
New Jersey's governor, who pretends to be a Republican, is outraged by congressional republicans who hesitated at borrowing 60 billion dollars on New Jersey for disaster relief. So much for fiscal responsibility.
Illinois is giving drivers' licenses to illegal immigrants. Presumably they get a voter card with their license?
Democrats are joining with Planned Parenthood to celebrate a record number of abortions (333,964)performed last year. Plus a record amount of Federal funds funneled into the organization. If we want to stop children from being killed, shouldn't we start here? Why does PP get record tax dollars to kill so many children?
The implementation of Obamacare continues despite a huge and growing list of related taxes and regulations that are killing the American economy. All while the law is being used to stamp out Religious Liberty.
If I could go back to school, I think I would study Neurology. I want to find out why the brains of half of all Americans are short-circuited. We've lost our ability to think logically.
Krugman at the NY Times thinks we can solve the debt problem by minting a Trillion Dollar Coin.
Every high profile shooter over the past several years has been mentally disturbed and on psychotropic medication. Yet nobody on the Left seems to have any curiosity about whether American efforts to stop mass shootings might need to look into cause-and-effect of the mentally disturbed and the drugs they take. They just want to repeal the 2nd Amendment and confiscate firearms from all of us who aren't disturbed and aren't taking psychotropic drugs.
According to the usual Left-wing suspects in Congress, taxes still aren't high enough.
According to Leftwinger-in-Chief Obama, America does not have a spending problem. And don't try to tell him otherwise - he's tired of hearing it.
The new Secretary of State is 60's era anti-war hippie activist John Kerry.
The new Secretary of Defense is an anti-Semitic former Senator who doesn't think Iran's nuclear program presents a threat. Iran is proudly supporting his nomination.
A British visitor with a show on CNN is running a personal crusade to outlaw gun ownership in America. He nightly hammers a message that all gun owners and especially NRA members are evil, as if we're the ones that shot up the school in Newtown. Besides being a British idiot, American gun laws are none of his business.
New Jersey's governor, who pretends to be a Republican, is outraged by congressional republicans who hesitated at borrowing 60 billion dollars on New Jersey for disaster relief. So much for fiscal responsibility.
Illinois is giving drivers' licenses to illegal immigrants. Presumably they get a voter card with their license?
Democrats are joining with Planned Parenthood to celebrate a record number of abortions (333,964)performed last year. Plus a record amount of Federal funds funneled into the organization. If we want to stop children from being killed, shouldn't we start here? Why does PP get record tax dollars to kill so many children?
The implementation of Obamacare continues despite a huge and growing list of related taxes and regulations that are killing the American economy. All while the law is being used to stamp out Religious Liberty.
If I could go back to school, I think I would study Neurology. I want to find out why the brains of half of all Americans are short-circuited. We've lost our ability to think logically.
The Truth Sometimes Hurts
The truth must certainly be painful for the members of Notre Dame's football team this morning. Last night they found out that they were nowhere close to the best team in college football this year. The Irish defense could do nothing but watch as the faster, stronger, more athletic Alabama ran past them on their way to the end zone.
The offense did little better. The Irish running backs, accustomed to racking up 100-plus yards per game, kept searching in vain for a hole in the 'Bama defense. Everett Golson was under heavy pressure the entire game, yet managed to connect with Tyler Eifert and Tavaris Jackson a number of times for decent gains, but could not cross midfield in the first half.
The most memorable image in my mind from the game was a play in which Manti Te'o blitzed through the Alabama line with a clear shot at 'Bama running back Eddie Lacy. Te'o ended up on his back, grasping at air, wide-eyed and open-mouthed in stunned amazement as Lacy rumbled downfield for a big gain.
Alabama was bigger, stronger, faster, better coached, and showed superior skill over the stunned Irish. Were the Crimson Tide that much superior to the Irish, or did Brian Kelly fail to adequately prepare his team for this contest?
I think perhaps it's a little of both. It seemed that the Irish came into the game not realizing the talent level they were facing, and not really mentally prepared to play the game. The defense looked like they had forgotten how to tackle as the Alabama rushers ran over, around, and through them for easy touchdowns. The Irish defensive backs were completely confused, watching wide-open 'Bama receivers catch easy balls from AJ McCarron. The defensive front were stopped in their tracks on passing plays and easily moved aside on rushing plays by an unusually big, strong, and technically competent 'Bama offensive line.
The Irish should have been awakened to the fact that they're not as good as they thought. That they've got a long way to go to be able to match up with Alabama next year, should they make it to another national championship.
That truth must hurt for Notre Dame this morning. But the important thing is how they respond to that pain - they can shake it off and just be on their way, or internalize it as motivation to get a lot better next season. We shall see which approach they choose.
The offense did little better. The Irish running backs, accustomed to racking up 100-plus yards per game, kept searching in vain for a hole in the 'Bama defense. Everett Golson was under heavy pressure the entire game, yet managed to connect with Tyler Eifert and Tavaris Jackson a number of times for decent gains, but could not cross midfield in the first half.
The most memorable image in my mind from the game was a play in which Manti Te'o blitzed through the Alabama line with a clear shot at 'Bama running back Eddie Lacy. Te'o ended up on his back, grasping at air, wide-eyed and open-mouthed in stunned amazement as Lacy rumbled downfield for a big gain.
Alabama was bigger, stronger, faster, better coached, and showed superior skill over the stunned Irish. Were the Crimson Tide that much superior to the Irish, or did Brian Kelly fail to adequately prepare his team for this contest?
I think perhaps it's a little of both. It seemed that the Irish came into the game not realizing the talent level they were facing, and not really mentally prepared to play the game. The defense looked like they had forgotten how to tackle as the Alabama rushers ran over, around, and through them for easy touchdowns. The Irish defensive backs were completely confused, watching wide-open 'Bama receivers catch easy balls from AJ McCarron. The defensive front were stopped in their tracks on passing plays and easily moved aside on rushing plays by an unusually big, strong, and technically competent 'Bama offensive line.
The Irish should have been awakened to the fact that they're not as good as they thought. That they've got a long way to go to be able to match up with Alabama next year, should they make it to another national championship.
That truth must hurt for Notre Dame this morning. But the important thing is how they respond to that pain - they can shake it off and just be on their way, or internalize it as motivation to get a lot better next season. We shall see which approach they choose.
Monday, January 07, 2013
The QB from Columbus
There's an interesting article done in the Ft Wayne News-Sentinel about Gunner Kiel's Freshman year riding the bench as Notre Dame's fourth-string quarterback.
The article, along with a few others written about one of last year's top recruits, suggests he's the ultimate team guy. He's humble and happy to work his way up from the scout team. He is hoping to prove himself and earn playing time next year or be ready to step in if something happens to Golson. Other outside observers think he should bolt the Irish for a new college that will let him play immediately. That he's wasting his time in South Bend, because Everett Golson has the job.
The only thing the reporters don't know is what Brian Kelly is thinking. And I seriously doubt Kelly's going to share his plans with anybody, certainly not before the National Championship game tonight. I'd like to think he'll do the right thing with Kiel by not allowing him to waste away on the bench when he could be a star quarterback for some other team. If he doesn't advise his young 5-star quarterback to go play somewhere else, hopefully that means he's got plans to use him next year.
Might Gunner be behind center for Indiana or Tennessee or some other school next fall? If not, he should be appearing on the field for the Irish at least part of the time.
The article, along with a few others written about one of last year's top recruits, suggests he's the ultimate team guy. He's humble and happy to work his way up from the scout team. He is hoping to prove himself and earn playing time next year or be ready to step in if something happens to Golson. Other outside observers think he should bolt the Irish for a new college that will let him play immediately. That he's wasting his time in South Bend, because Everett Golson has the job.
The only thing the reporters don't know is what Brian Kelly is thinking. And I seriously doubt Kelly's going to share his plans with anybody, certainly not before the National Championship game tonight. I'd like to think he'll do the right thing with Kiel by not allowing him to waste away on the bench when he could be a star quarterback for some other team. If he doesn't advise his young 5-star quarterback to go play somewhere else, hopefully that means he's got plans to use him next year.
Might Gunner be behind center for Indiana or Tennessee or some other school next fall? If not, he should be appearing on the field for the Irish at least part of the time.
Sunday, January 06, 2013
Good Picks
My NFL picks were pretty good. 3 for 4, and I only missed on the Colts. But I had to pick my home team, even though I knew it was probably a bit of a long shot.
The next round is much more difficult to pick. Moreso the NFC side than AFC. I think Denver will defeat the Ravens without too much difficulty. Likewise I don't see how the Texans can steal one from the Patriots up in Foxboro, MA. So I'm pretty sure we'll get the media's favorite matchup, Manning vs Brady, for the right to play in the Super Bowl.
The NFC is nowhere near as easy to pick. I am leaning toward Green Bay stealing a win in San Fran, but am nowhere near confident in that pick. And right now I have no earthly idea how Seattle will do in Atlanta.
Although it's disappointing that the Colts blew it today, it was still an entertaining season. The patented Andrew Luck comeback story got derailed by a number of Colts mistakes. They were in the red zone when Anthony Costanzo got flagged for a false start, then Donnie Avery dropped a perfect pass that might have given them a first down, then Adam Vinatieri sliced off the field goal attempt.
Add in the Colts cornerbacks couldn't cover Anquan Bolden, and Luck threw a bad interception in the end zone in the Colts' next red zone opportunity. Any two of these key mistakes don't happen and just maybe the Colts go to Denver next week (and lose to their old QB). Oh Well.
These Colts might be able to move up to the next level if they can close a few holes. I think they need a tight end (in my opinion, Coby Fleener's a bust). They need another wide receiver to replace Avery. They need a cornerback and a quality outside linebacker to eventually take over for Freeney, who seems to have lost a step.
It would be nice if Bruce Arians decided to stay put instead of grabbing one of those head coaching jobs being dangled in front of him. My sense of the guy is that he'd rather be the Colts' Offensive Coordinator than take on the pressures of a head coaching job for another team in disarray.
Which teams will play in the Super Bowl this year? I don't know. If I were to pick the game I'd most like to see, I suppose it would be Green Bay and Denver. That at least seems plausible.
The next round is much more difficult to pick. Moreso the NFC side than AFC. I think Denver will defeat the Ravens without too much difficulty. Likewise I don't see how the Texans can steal one from the Patriots up in Foxboro, MA. So I'm pretty sure we'll get the media's favorite matchup, Manning vs Brady, for the right to play in the Super Bowl.
The NFC is nowhere near as easy to pick. I am leaning toward Green Bay stealing a win in San Fran, but am nowhere near confident in that pick. And right now I have no earthly idea how Seattle will do in Atlanta.
Although it's disappointing that the Colts blew it today, it was still an entertaining season. The patented Andrew Luck comeback story got derailed by a number of Colts mistakes. They were in the red zone when Anthony Costanzo got flagged for a false start, then Donnie Avery dropped a perfect pass that might have given them a first down, then Adam Vinatieri sliced off the field goal attempt.
Add in the Colts cornerbacks couldn't cover Anquan Bolden, and Luck threw a bad interception in the end zone in the Colts' next red zone opportunity. Any two of these key mistakes don't happen and just maybe the Colts go to Denver next week (and lose to their old QB). Oh Well.
These Colts might be able to move up to the next level if they can close a few holes. I think they need a tight end (in my opinion, Coby Fleener's a bust). They need another wide receiver to replace Avery. They need a cornerback and a quality outside linebacker to eventually take over for Freeney, who seems to have lost a step.
It would be nice if Bruce Arians decided to stay put instead of grabbing one of those head coaching jobs being dangled in front of him. My sense of the guy is that he'd rather be the Colts' Offensive Coordinator than take on the pressures of a head coaching job for another team in disarray.
Which teams will play in the Super Bowl this year? I don't know. If I were to pick the game I'd most like to see, I suppose it would be Green Bay and Denver. That at least seems plausible.
Finally They are Angry at the Messiah
Was just looking at some online commentary from the Left. Can you believe it, they actually didn't realize their taxes were going up this year!? The media and Democrats were silent while they allowed the temporary 2% reduction in employee Social Security contributions to expire.
I was in a Payroll Office Friday and overheard the payroll staff patiently explaining to a litany of employee callers that yes, the Social Security Tax rate went back up from 4.2 to 6.2 percent. Sorry about that, but the government tells us what to deduct and that's what we deduct.
Happy New Year! The low-information Obama voters finally got some information that made them realize he may not be a deity after all.
Let's hope the enlightenment continues.
I was in a Payroll Office Friday and overheard the payroll staff patiently explaining to a litany of employee callers that yes, the Social Security Tax rate went back up from 4.2 to 6.2 percent. Sorry about that, but the government tells us what to deduct and that's what we deduct.
Happy New Year! The low-information Obama voters finally got some information that made them realize he may not be a deity after all.
Let's hope the enlightenment continues.
Friday, January 04, 2013
Only in These Times
Can such a crazy irony take place. The opportunistic and hyper-hypocritical Al Gore wanted to sell off his failed cable network before tax rates went up. Glenn Beck expressed interest and was rebuffed before negotiations started, because Al didn't want to sell to any party holding such extreme and opposite points of view to the former VP.
Then he sells the network to Al-Jazeera. Which means the anti-American terrorism apologist media outlet from the middle east is better aligned with Al's philosophy than conservative American Beck.
Just in case anybody misses it, let's summarize:
Al Gore would rather sell his left-wing cable channel to jihadists than to a right-wing American radio talker. He has always supported increasing taxes on rich folks, but is scrambling to make his big bucks before the new higher tax rates go into effect. This is the same guy who pulls in big bucks from the very energy companies he says he wants to drive out of business. The same guy who lectures all of us about energy conservation but rides around the world in his own jet and owns homes that consume more energy than 10 average American homes.
And this guy was almost the President?!
Only in America, and only in 2013.
Then he sells the network to Al-Jazeera. Which means the anti-American terrorism apologist media outlet from the middle east is better aligned with Al's philosophy than conservative American Beck.
Just in case anybody misses it, let's summarize:
Al Gore would rather sell his left-wing cable channel to jihadists than to a right-wing American radio talker. He has always supported increasing taxes on rich folks, but is scrambling to make his big bucks before the new higher tax rates go into effect. This is the same guy who pulls in big bucks from the very energy companies he says he wants to drive out of business. The same guy who lectures all of us about energy conservation but rides around the world in his own jet and owns homes that consume more energy than 10 average American homes.
And this guy was almost the President?!
Only in America, and only in 2013.
Thursday, January 03, 2013
Wearing My Sportswriter Hat
Today I'll put the sportswriter hat on and share my thoughts on the NFL Wildcard Weekend. There are 4 games representing the first round of the NFL playoffs, and all 4 look like quality matchups. Picking the winners is difficult, but I'll take a stab.
Cincinnati @ Houston
Saturday afternoon's game is Cincinnati at Houston. Houston had control over the first seed in the playoffs until they stumbled in their last few games and fell all the way down to the third seed and lost the first round bye.
Cincinnati's been on a roll late in the season and earned their berth in the playoffs with quality wins against Pittsburgh and Baltimore.
Houston has the home field, but needs to rediscover their potent offense from early in the season. If Matt Schaub can find his rythm again and start hitting his talented receivers, and Arian Foster hits his stride and can gash the Bengals on the ground for over a hundred yards, the Texans will win. Otherwise the hot Bengals will steal the underdog victory.
As tempting as it is to predict a Bengals upset, I'm picking Houston. 28-24.
Minnesota @ Green Bay
Saturday night it's Minnesota at Green Bay. Minnesota beat Green Bay at home to edge out Chicago for the last NFC spot in the playoffs. There's no disputing the fact that Minnesota's success comes from a superhuman season by Adrian Peterson, without whom the team would have gone nowhere this season.
Green Bay has the home field, and should dispatch the Vikings on their famous "Frozen Tundra". With Christian Ponder nursing a sore elbow and the elements making a passing game difficult anyway, the Green Bay defense can focus on stopping Peterson. I'm picking the Pack. 35-10.
Indianapolis @ Baltimore
Sunday afternoon is the game I'm most interested to watch, the Colts at the Ravens. Nobody gives the Colts a chance, but then again, nobody's given them a chance all season. The team just keeps on winning anyway, most of the time with dramatic fourth quarter and overtime comebacks.
But the Ravens have their inspirational defensive captain, Ray Lewis, back to sweeten their home field advantage. By most objective measures, the Ravens should outclass the Colts in this game.
I can see a couple of scenarios playing out in this game. The undesirable outcome is that Luck throws a couple of early interceptions that the Ravens turn into touchdowns, putting the Colts into a hole. Then the defense lets Ray Rice run over them while Luck gets sacked a half-dozen times trying desperately to generate a comeback. That's a Ravens blowout.
The other outcome is Andrew Luck protects the football and the Colts stay close well into the fourth quarter. The victor makes a big play late in the game, whether a long pass or a breakaway run or a key interception. And that big play could be made by either team.
I've gotta support my team, despite the fairly long odds. Colts win a tight one late, 31-28.
Seattle @ Washington
This is a pretty good matchup. RGIII versus Russell Wilson, the other two fabulous freshman quarterbacks who with Luck have made the NFL more exciting this year. The Redskins have the home field, while the Seahawks have been hot late in the season.
This seems to be a game that could go either way, and might be the most difficult to pick. If the Seahawks can contain RGIII and get the discipline from their defensive ends to keep him corraled and deny him the outside run, they can win. I perceive Wilson is a better passer, so keeping Griffin away from the big running plays is the key to the game for Seatle.
I'm going to pick the Seahawks. 31-21.
Cincinnati @ Houston
Saturday afternoon's game is Cincinnati at Houston. Houston had control over the first seed in the playoffs until they stumbled in their last few games and fell all the way down to the third seed and lost the first round bye.
Cincinnati's been on a roll late in the season and earned their berth in the playoffs with quality wins against Pittsburgh and Baltimore.
Houston has the home field, but needs to rediscover their potent offense from early in the season. If Matt Schaub can find his rythm again and start hitting his talented receivers, and Arian Foster hits his stride and can gash the Bengals on the ground for over a hundred yards, the Texans will win. Otherwise the hot Bengals will steal the underdog victory.
As tempting as it is to predict a Bengals upset, I'm picking Houston. 28-24.
Minnesota @ Green Bay
Saturday night it's Minnesota at Green Bay. Minnesota beat Green Bay at home to edge out Chicago for the last NFC spot in the playoffs. There's no disputing the fact that Minnesota's success comes from a superhuman season by Adrian Peterson, without whom the team would have gone nowhere this season.
Green Bay has the home field, and should dispatch the Vikings on their famous "Frozen Tundra". With Christian Ponder nursing a sore elbow and the elements making a passing game difficult anyway, the Green Bay defense can focus on stopping Peterson. I'm picking the Pack. 35-10.
Indianapolis @ Baltimore
Sunday afternoon is the game I'm most interested to watch, the Colts at the Ravens. Nobody gives the Colts a chance, but then again, nobody's given them a chance all season. The team just keeps on winning anyway, most of the time with dramatic fourth quarter and overtime comebacks.
But the Ravens have their inspirational defensive captain, Ray Lewis, back to sweeten their home field advantage. By most objective measures, the Ravens should outclass the Colts in this game.
I can see a couple of scenarios playing out in this game. The undesirable outcome is that Luck throws a couple of early interceptions that the Ravens turn into touchdowns, putting the Colts into a hole. Then the defense lets Ray Rice run over them while Luck gets sacked a half-dozen times trying desperately to generate a comeback. That's a Ravens blowout.
The other outcome is Andrew Luck protects the football and the Colts stay close well into the fourth quarter. The victor makes a big play late in the game, whether a long pass or a breakaway run or a key interception. And that big play could be made by either team.
I've gotta support my team, despite the fairly long odds. Colts win a tight one late, 31-28.
Seattle @ Washington
This is a pretty good matchup. RGIII versus Russell Wilson, the other two fabulous freshman quarterbacks who with Luck have made the NFL more exciting this year. The Redskins have the home field, while the Seahawks have been hot late in the season.
This seems to be a game that could go either way, and might be the most difficult to pick. If the Seahawks can contain RGIII and get the discipline from their defensive ends to keep him corraled and deny him the outside run, they can win. I perceive Wilson is a better passer, so keeping Griffin away from the big running plays is the key to the game for Seatle.
I'm going to pick the Seahawks. 31-21.
Wednesday, January 02, 2013
Sigh
All the thinking person can do in response to the silly compromise from Congress today is shake the head and sigh.
It fixes nothing. It has zero impact on debt and deficit. It only gives Obama a victory, as he now can claim he's made things "fairer" by making rich people pay their "fair share".
But his next objective is to spend all of the extra tax revenue and then some. On boondoggles and giveaways to his cronies who are building his beloved trains and windmills.
The expected 600 billion dollars of added tax revenue won't materialize for obvious reasons. Those earning over 400 or 450 thousand will simply change their habits to get under the threshold. These rich folks aren't stupid, and they can easily manage their earned income down to the threshold and shift more heavily to other income sources. Or just work less.
The deal accomplishes nothing at all, and Obama certainly knows it. It's nothing more than a PR stunt. He created the crisis so he could claim victory today. It's all a charade.
And the most disappointing outcome is that most Americans fell for it.
It fixes nothing. It has zero impact on debt and deficit. It only gives Obama a victory, as he now can claim he's made things "fairer" by making rich people pay their "fair share".
But his next objective is to spend all of the extra tax revenue and then some. On boondoggles and giveaways to his cronies who are building his beloved trains and windmills.
The expected 600 billion dollars of added tax revenue won't materialize for obvious reasons. Those earning over 400 or 450 thousand will simply change their habits to get under the threshold. These rich folks aren't stupid, and they can easily manage their earned income down to the threshold and shift more heavily to other income sources. Or just work less.
The deal accomplishes nothing at all, and Obama certainly knows it. It's nothing more than a PR stunt. He created the crisis so he could claim victory today. It's all a charade.
And the most disappointing outcome is that most Americans fell for it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)