Energy is the key. Would there be as big of a "Sub Prime" crisis if families weren't paying over $3.00 for a gallon of gas, and having their heating cost go up? (On an aside, if people wouldn't keep their house so warm in the winter that they can run around in shorts and bare feet their heating costs wouldn't be so stinking high either.) One of the reasons they had to increase minimum wage was because of the increase in gas costs and heating bills. See my earlier post on how that has caused the rest of us to take pay cuts. Every summer we have to go on peak alerts during the hottest part of the day because of the energy draw on our overworked coal powered electric plants.
If some Republicans would grow themselves a pair and stand up to the stinking environmental extremists we could have cheap fuel and electricity. Everybody else is drilling for oil in the Gulf of Mexico and then selling it to us, but we can't drill there. (Think about it, no tankers to spill just pipelines to the main land). We can't drill in Alaska because of the environment, which is a bunch of BS. Lets put up some nuclear power plants to produce some electricity. They are clean, and they produce cheap energy. Not to mention the people that would be employed by these new employment opportunities. We don't need to abuse the environment but we can definitely use it to help us out. If there is cheap gas then food costs will not go, (hello transportation costs, planting, harvesting, biofuel BS not needed). STAND UP AND EDUCATE THE PEOPLE! Time to go or I'll lose my temper.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
George Orwell, profit?
I admit I have never read 1984; I started it but only got about 15 pages in and put it down never to pick it up again. I do know the general principal and I have to admit that I am becoming more and more nervous of big brother here in America.
For instance, did you know that when he was president, Bill Clinton signed a treaty called "the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child", and now we are simply waiting for Congress to ratify this treaty? Once a treaty is ratified by Congress it becomes the supreme law of the land? Look it up in Article VI Section 2, "all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution of laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding." This was upheld by the US Supreme Court in Missouri v. Holland.
So you are probably thinking what the big deal is, after all shouldn't children have rights? Yes, children should have SOME rights, and from what I understand some of this treaty is good, BUT under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, children will have the "right" to disregard Parental Authority.
Article 13 "freedom of expression"
Section 1 declares a child's right to "seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of the child's choice." So if little Timmy wants to watch hard core porn on the internet, you as his parent must let him. If he wants to read Mein Kampf I can't stop him. I guess I can't even stop little Tina from posting that hate speech on her myspace blog, or keep her from posting those nude photos she took of herself.
Article 14 "freedom of thought, conscience and religion"
If Timmy and Tina don't want to go confirmation, or even church, they don't have to. In fact if they want to get involved in the occult I am suppose to all them to. I guess I may get to step in if they start sacrificing animals since it would infringe on the animals right to life, but I'm not certain on that. This is something that is already closer to reality than you may realize. About 15 years ago in Washington state, under a similar law, a 13 year old boy complained to his school social worker about having to go to church on Sunday morning and night, and Wednesday night. The court removed custody of the boy from his parents until they agreed to only take him to church once a week.
Article 15 "freedom of association"
Parents could be stopped from prohibiting their child to associate with people they deem inappropriate. Timmy wants to join the Klan? Who am I to tell him he can't, after all he does look good in white. Tina wants to meet the nice boy she met online who is actually a 40 year old pedophile? Well, I guess she will make a better choice next time.
Article 16 "right to privacy"
First off I don't even have this right under the US Constitution. I have protection from illegal search and seizure, but I don't have a right to privacy. Yes the law has been interpreted to say that I do, but I don't. Maybe this is better off anyway. Do I really want to know that Tina had three abortions her senior year in school? Who am I to tell Timmy that he can't hang Hustler centerfolds up in his room, besides the drugs he is selling out his bedroom window to his friends has scared off that annoying neighbor who used to live next door.
Article 19 "oversight"
Mandates the creation of an intensive bureaucracy, (that’s good we can never have enough bureaucracy) for the "identification, reporting, referral, investigation, treatment, and follow-up" of parents that violate their child’s rights, or treat their kids with negligence.
Article 7 "registration"
All children must be registered at birth. Excuse me; may I get the mark on my left hand instead of my forehead?
Articles 3, 19, and 37 "spare the rod or go to jail"
All ratifying countries must protect children from "degrading punishment" (I guess Mr. Johnson my old government teacher won't get to finish his hand written copy of the dictionary), and "physical violence". "Honest officer, I was just patting his butt for a job well done."
Article 29 "indoctrination"
Public and private schools will be forced to adopt "federally prescribed curriculum content" intended to make our children responsible citizens by having "the spirit of understanding, peace, toleration, equity of sexes, and friendship [for] all peoples, ethnic, national and religious groups of indigenous origin." In other words they must be taught the principles of the treaty. Doesn't this come in direct opposition with Article 14's freedom of thought? That's right it is just my influence that I need to limit on my child, the government can tell them anything they want. If my religion encourages corporal punishment when necessary, don't Articles 3, 19, and 37 contradict the above phrase?
Boy I can't wait for this treaty to be ratified so my kids can become spoiled little brats! Yet another reason we should cut off US funding for the UN. Wait; there wouldn't be a UN if there wasn't money from the US. I guess that makes it a win win. More money for us to spend on national defense, or (wait till you get a hold of this idea) give back to people who pay taxes, and the UN going away. If only we would have had the sense to stay out of the UN like we did the League of Nations.
A lot of the information in this post comes from http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000000/00000021.asp .
I tried not to plagerise to much, but I am sure I did more than I thought.
For instance, did you know that when he was president, Bill Clinton signed a treaty called "the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child", and now we are simply waiting for Congress to ratify this treaty? Once a treaty is ratified by Congress it becomes the supreme law of the land? Look it up in Article VI Section 2, "all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution of laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding." This was upheld by the US Supreme Court in Missouri v. Holland.
So you are probably thinking what the big deal is, after all shouldn't children have rights? Yes, children should have SOME rights, and from what I understand some of this treaty is good, BUT under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, children will have the "right" to disregard Parental Authority.
Article 13 "freedom of expression"
Section 1 declares a child's right to "seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of the child's choice." So if little Timmy wants to watch hard core porn on the internet, you as his parent must let him. If he wants to read Mein Kampf I can't stop him. I guess I can't even stop little Tina from posting that hate speech on her myspace blog, or keep her from posting those nude photos she took of herself.
Article 14 "freedom of thought, conscience and religion"
If Timmy and Tina don't want to go confirmation, or even church, they don't have to. In fact if they want to get involved in the occult I am suppose to all them to. I guess I may get to step in if they start sacrificing animals since it would infringe on the animals right to life, but I'm not certain on that. This is something that is already closer to reality than you may realize. About 15 years ago in Washington state, under a similar law, a 13 year old boy complained to his school social worker about having to go to church on Sunday morning and night, and Wednesday night. The court removed custody of the boy from his parents until they agreed to only take him to church once a week.
Article 15 "freedom of association"
Parents could be stopped from prohibiting their child to associate with people they deem inappropriate. Timmy wants to join the Klan? Who am I to tell him he can't, after all he does look good in white. Tina wants to meet the nice boy she met online who is actually a 40 year old pedophile? Well, I guess she will make a better choice next time.
Article 16 "right to privacy"
First off I don't even have this right under the US Constitution. I have protection from illegal search and seizure, but I don't have a right to privacy. Yes the law has been interpreted to say that I do, but I don't. Maybe this is better off anyway. Do I really want to know that Tina had three abortions her senior year in school? Who am I to tell Timmy that he can't hang Hustler centerfolds up in his room, besides the drugs he is selling out his bedroom window to his friends has scared off that annoying neighbor who used to live next door.
Article 19 "oversight"
Mandates the creation of an intensive bureaucracy, (that’s good we can never have enough bureaucracy) for the "identification, reporting, referral, investigation, treatment, and follow-up" of parents that violate their child’s rights, or treat their kids with negligence.
Article 7 "registration"
All children must be registered at birth. Excuse me; may I get the mark on my left hand instead of my forehead?
Articles 3, 19, and 37 "spare the rod or go to jail"
All ratifying countries must protect children from "degrading punishment" (I guess Mr. Johnson my old government teacher won't get to finish his hand written copy of the dictionary), and "physical violence". "Honest officer, I was just patting his butt for a job well done."
Article 29 "indoctrination"
Public and private schools will be forced to adopt "federally prescribed curriculum content" intended to make our children responsible citizens by having "the spirit of understanding, peace, toleration, equity of sexes, and friendship [for] all peoples, ethnic, national and religious groups of indigenous origin." In other words they must be taught the principles of the treaty. Doesn't this come in direct opposition with Article 14's freedom of thought? That's right it is just my influence that I need to limit on my child, the government can tell them anything they want. If my religion encourages corporal punishment when necessary, don't Articles 3, 19, and 37 contradict the above phrase?
Boy I can't wait for this treaty to be ratified so my kids can become spoiled little brats! Yet another reason we should cut off US funding for the UN. Wait; there wouldn't be a UN if there wasn't money from the US. I guess that makes it a win win. More money for us to spend on national defense, or (wait till you get a hold of this idea) give back to people who pay taxes, and the UN going away. If only we would have had the sense to stay out of the UN like we did the League of Nations.
A lot of the information in this post comes from http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000000/00000021.asp .
I tried not to plagerise to much, but I am sure I did more than I thought.
Monday, February 18, 2008
Global Poverty Act
Oh I love it when liberals are liberal. Now if only the press would cover these obvious steps toward socialism. As many of you don't know, Democrate front runner Barack Obama sponsors Senate Bill 2433 that is called "The Global Poverty Act". This sounds nice until you look a little deeper into what it does. This legislation commits us to spend 0.7% of our GNP (the total dollar value of all final goods and services produced for consumption in society during a particular time period)! That means that last year we would have had to hand out $90.79 BILLION in foreign aid. Only 49 countries in the world have a GNP that is higher than the amount we will be giving away in aid (http://www.studentsoftheworld.info/infopays/rank/PNB2.html). Other estimates are that we will increase spending on foreign aid by a total of $845 Billion over the next 13 years.
On top of that S.2433 forces the Presidtent "to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by 1/2 the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 a day." The "Millennium Development Goals" are the goals then UN General Assembly set forth in Resolution 55/2 (2000). Beside stamping out poverty that declaration commits nations to banning small and light weapons (2nd Amendment anyone?), and signing the Kyoto Protocol (global warming farce), and says that the UN is "the indispensable common house of the entire human family"(I think I'm going to throw up). The only way to raise the money needed for the increase in foreign aid is through tax increases. If Jeffrey Sachs (runs the U.N. Millennium Project), has his way it will be through a GLOBAL tax on carbon-emitting fossil fuels. I'm pretty sure that would infring on US Constitution to have the U.N. levy taxes on us. But what do I know! I hear this bill is being pushed through comittee so Obama can say he has accomplished something.
On top of that S.2433 forces the Presidtent "to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by 1/2 the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 a day." The "Millennium Development Goals" are the goals then UN General Assembly set forth in Resolution 55/2 (2000). Beside stamping out poverty that declaration commits nations to banning small and light weapons (2nd Amendment anyone?), and signing the Kyoto Protocol (global warming farce), and says that the UN is "the indispensable common house of the entire human family"(I think I'm going to throw up). The only way to raise the money needed for the increase in foreign aid is through tax increases. If Jeffrey Sachs (runs the U.N. Millennium Project), has his way it will be through a GLOBAL tax on carbon-emitting fossil fuels. I'm pretty sure that would infring on US Constitution to have the U.N. levy taxes on us. But what do I know! I hear this bill is being pushed through comittee so Obama can say he has accomplished something.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
One possible take on the election
McCain is what, 72 right? So depending on who is VP is maybe I could vote for him. The President is under a lot of stress and as a 70+ year old man, he may not remain healthy. Not that I am wishing anything bad happen to him, but if there is a good conservative VP that can run the country if necessary, that along with his hopeful appiontment of conservative judges, may be enough to swing me. After all there are no good choices and a third party canidate only seems to hurt Republicans. Unless we could be so fortunate to get Obama to run third party (I am convinced the Clintons will get the nomination through super delegates), and maybe Thompson or Mitt could run on another ticket. That would be interesting! I have better chance of winning the lottery (which means I'd have to find the winning ticket on the floor somewhere) than this occuring, but I have to have Hope, right Mr. Obama?
Friday, February 8, 2008
What America needs
Well it is now official. My horse is out of the race leaving me with the difficult decision of choosing the lesser of two evils. I remember very vividly the day when Senator McCain formed his band of 14 and screwed up the filibuster restructure called the nuclear option. His wonderful fianance reform that brought the money into politics, and his attempt to destroy my national identity through amnisty. After all if you have no boarder how can you be a nation, and therefore how can you have a national identity.
This leaves me with a heavy heart and some questions about what America needs. To identify them we must first identify the challenge currently facing the United States.
Islamic radicals.
Believe it or not we are winning this battle for now. The problem we face is how do you defeat someone who is readily willing to die for their cause? The only way I know is to kill them. But we are a nation that does not want, nor should we want, to simply go around killing people we are suspcious of. This leaves us with the choice of either waiting for an attack and then responding to it, or taking the fight to the friends of our enemies. This is the choice we have made and I think it was a wise one. If nothing else the terror attacks have not occured on our soil to our civilians, but rather have occured to our soldiers who at least are trained and somewhat protected.
Immigration.
Seriously, I am tired of being told that illegal immigrants do the jobs that American's won't do. Make those people on welfare get off their butts and do them. If the jobs suck, all the better. As my Uncle used to say, "If summer jobs didn't suck, you wouldn't go back to school, would you." If their jobs suck it will motivate them to get an education, or some training, or whatever they need to do to improve their life. When I visited China several years ago I was amazed to see people with brooms out sweeping off highways. I asked what was up and was told that under communism everyone needs to have a job to get the money they get. Welfare practically is communism so we may as well get some work out of the people. I am not against immigration! I am against illegal immigration just like I am against everything else that is illegal. My great grandparents immigrated to this wonderful country, and made a life for themselves. They did it legally and they tried their best to adopt our language, culture, and laws. I do not see illegals doing that. I have known severl and they are very hard workers, however most of them have no wish to stay in our country, just to get money and send it back to their families. That is fine but did you know that the number 2 income generator in Mexico is money sent back to families from the US? It topped the money brought in from the vacations industry and is second only to money from oil export. That is money that is leaving our economy, not to mention the cost we have to educate their children and take care of their medical needs.
I keep hearing that we can't get all the millions of illegals out of the US. Bull! There is nothing that Americans can't do if we set our minds to it and work at it over time. We send people out of our atmosphere into an environment that is the most hostle known, and bring them back. If we can overcome all of those obsticles there is no reason why we can't put our minds to it and work at it, and get all the illegals out of here. Let them apply for reentry, but don't just forgive them and welcome them into the family. If I stole something I would get punished. They are breadking the LAW!! They must be punished!
Healthcare
It costs a lot. There is no doubt about it. As far as I am concerned the only people who deserve to get government healthcare are veterns. They served our country and they deserve some help. Do you want to know why healthcare costs so much? First we want the best and brightest to come into the field. They tend to go where the money is. Second, tort lawyers sueing the crap out of people for honest mistakes. They are humans and they will make a mistake from time to time. Third, the government makes it so stinking expensive for drug companies to get drugs developed, tested, and approved that the cost of drugs skyrockets to try to make up the difference. Plus for every new drug that hits the market there are multiple drugs that don't pan out and have to be scrapped.
If you want affordable insurance, turn it over to the open market. Get rid of huge company insurance programs that are all inclusive. Give the money that the company spends on that to the workers, and let them shop for the insurance that they want. If they want a $2,000 deductable, let them get it. If there is no history of mental disease in their family, don't force them to get coverage for it. Once people shop for their own insurance everyone will benefit as companies lower their costs to attract buisness.
Big Government.
Government did not make our country great. Individuals did. If the government would get out of our way we would continue to advance and be the superpower that we are. Despite the government telling us what we can and can't do we have still managed to become the greatest nation in the history of the world. Instead of the government getting out of my way they continue to get in my way. I have friends who own rental properties, that have people in them who refuse to pay their rent, and they can't evict them because it is winter. So instead of supporting his wife and two kids he is now forced to support them and the dead beats who are living in his rentals because the government says he has to let them stay there.
The Church.
A lot of the social concerns that the government has been taking care of lately are things that the church was in charge of before. The church has dropped the ball on this and just have not been doing a good job at all. If they are to demonstrate the love of Christ then they need to get off their butts and do it. Gathering once a week in a church means nothing. Go out there and show people that you love them by helping them. Don't just give them a fish but teach them how to fish so they can help themselves, get back on their own feet, and then help others.
I'll step off my incoherient soapbox now.
This leaves me with a heavy heart and some questions about what America needs. To identify them we must first identify the challenge currently facing the United States.
Islamic radicals.
Believe it or not we are winning this battle for now. The problem we face is how do you defeat someone who is readily willing to die for their cause? The only way I know is to kill them. But we are a nation that does not want, nor should we want, to simply go around killing people we are suspcious of. This leaves us with the choice of either waiting for an attack and then responding to it, or taking the fight to the friends of our enemies. This is the choice we have made and I think it was a wise one. If nothing else the terror attacks have not occured on our soil to our civilians, but rather have occured to our soldiers who at least are trained and somewhat protected.
Immigration.
Seriously, I am tired of being told that illegal immigrants do the jobs that American's won't do. Make those people on welfare get off their butts and do them. If the jobs suck, all the better. As my Uncle used to say, "If summer jobs didn't suck, you wouldn't go back to school, would you." If their jobs suck it will motivate them to get an education, or some training, or whatever they need to do to improve their life. When I visited China several years ago I was amazed to see people with brooms out sweeping off highways. I asked what was up and was told that under communism everyone needs to have a job to get the money they get. Welfare practically is communism so we may as well get some work out of the people. I am not against immigration! I am against illegal immigration just like I am against everything else that is illegal. My great grandparents immigrated to this wonderful country, and made a life for themselves. They did it legally and they tried their best to adopt our language, culture, and laws. I do not see illegals doing that. I have known severl and they are very hard workers, however most of them have no wish to stay in our country, just to get money and send it back to their families. That is fine but did you know that the number 2 income generator in Mexico is money sent back to families from the US? It topped the money brought in from the vacations industry and is second only to money from oil export. That is money that is leaving our economy, not to mention the cost we have to educate their children and take care of their medical needs.
I keep hearing that we can't get all the millions of illegals out of the US. Bull! There is nothing that Americans can't do if we set our minds to it and work at it over time. We send people out of our atmosphere into an environment that is the most hostle known, and bring them back. If we can overcome all of those obsticles there is no reason why we can't put our minds to it and work at it, and get all the illegals out of here. Let them apply for reentry, but don't just forgive them and welcome them into the family. If I stole something I would get punished. They are breadking the LAW!! They must be punished!
Healthcare
It costs a lot. There is no doubt about it. As far as I am concerned the only people who deserve to get government healthcare are veterns. They served our country and they deserve some help. Do you want to know why healthcare costs so much? First we want the best and brightest to come into the field. They tend to go where the money is. Second, tort lawyers sueing the crap out of people for honest mistakes. They are humans and they will make a mistake from time to time. Third, the government makes it so stinking expensive for drug companies to get drugs developed, tested, and approved that the cost of drugs skyrockets to try to make up the difference. Plus for every new drug that hits the market there are multiple drugs that don't pan out and have to be scrapped.
If you want affordable insurance, turn it over to the open market. Get rid of huge company insurance programs that are all inclusive. Give the money that the company spends on that to the workers, and let them shop for the insurance that they want. If they want a $2,000 deductable, let them get it. If there is no history of mental disease in their family, don't force them to get coverage for it. Once people shop for their own insurance everyone will benefit as companies lower their costs to attract buisness.
Big Government.
Government did not make our country great. Individuals did. If the government would get out of our way we would continue to advance and be the superpower that we are. Despite the government telling us what we can and can't do we have still managed to become the greatest nation in the history of the world. Instead of the government getting out of my way they continue to get in my way. I have friends who own rental properties, that have people in them who refuse to pay their rent, and they can't evict them because it is winter. So instead of supporting his wife and two kids he is now forced to support them and the dead beats who are living in his rentals because the government says he has to let them stay there.
The Church.
A lot of the social concerns that the government has been taking care of lately are things that the church was in charge of before. The church has dropped the ball on this and just have not been doing a good job at all. If they are to demonstrate the love of Christ then they need to get off their butts and do it. Gathering once a week in a church means nothing. Go out there and show people that you love them by helping them. Don't just give them a fish but teach them how to fish so they can help themselves, get back on their own feet, and then help others.
I'll step off my incoherient soapbox now.
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
And I don't even smoke!
What the heck! Here I am watching TV last night (not something I do often) trying to catch some of the returns from Super Tuesday, when the top story comes across that Iowa is one step closer to passing a state wide smoking ban. Seriously I thought the anchors were going to get up and do a happy dance right there at the "news" desk. Most of you are thinking, "great I hate having someone light up near me when I am outside."
As I mentioned I don't smoke, okay the occasional cigar does cross my lips, but doesn't anyone else see this proposed ban as an infringment on my rights? Yes it is smoking now, but smokers through their taxes on cigarettes do fund a lot of programs, but what is next? In New York it was trans fats. So how long before I get taxed extra for being overweight, or forced to loose weight or not be covered by the new socialized medicine that seems to be inevitible.
I have nothing against individual restruants, or bars, banning smoking. I don't even mind banning smoking in public buildings or stadiums. But forcing everyone to ban smoking is wrong. If the smoking market is where one bar or restraunt wants to target their buisness, let them! I don't have to go in there if I don't want to. I realize that this is kind of covered in the legislation since they want to ban smoking everywhere but casinos. Instead I think that lawmakers are more concerned with the profits that will be lost if they ban smoking in casinos.
As I mentioned I don't smoke, okay the occasional cigar does cross my lips, but doesn't anyone else see this proposed ban as an infringment on my rights? Yes it is smoking now, but smokers through their taxes on cigarettes do fund a lot of programs, but what is next? In New York it was trans fats. So how long before I get taxed extra for being overweight, or forced to loose weight or not be covered by the new socialized medicine that seems to be inevitible.
I have nothing against individual restruants, or bars, banning smoking. I don't even mind banning smoking in public buildings or stadiums. But forcing everyone to ban smoking is wrong. If the smoking market is where one bar or restraunt wants to target their buisness, let them! I don't have to go in there if I don't want to. I realize that this is kind of covered in the legislation since they want to ban smoking everywhere but casinos. Instead I think that lawmakers are more concerned with the profits that will be lost if they ban smoking in casinos.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
