Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Ron Paul, Texas congressman and physician, put up a video providing some insight and perspective as a physician. Take a few minutes to watch it because he makes some very relevant points.
Many of you may have heard about the fly over New York City of Air Force One and a couple of F-16s for a photo op. It apparently scared the you know what out of some people causing them to evacuate buildings in a post 9/11 New York City. Check out the below link to a CBS affiliate story.
It indicates that the police, secret service, FBI, and mayor's office (though not the mayor himself) knew of the flight and were threatened with federal sanctions if word of the fly over got out.
Why would the federal government threaten sanctions on a state over word about a flight? Is that even constitutional? Are you ok with this kind of a threat? Are you ok with the impromptu and unknown "fire drill" so to speak? Are you ok with the resulting fear it caused people in New York?
Do you find it interesting that the government is allowing a message of fear to be spread twice in the same week over two different issues? Ok that's a bit far fetched but mass fear leads to chaos which leads to martial law. "The exercise of government and control by military authorities over the civilian population of a designated territory."
"Martial law on the national level may be declared by Congress or the president. Under Article I, Section 8, Clause 15, of the Constitution, Congress has the power "[t]o provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress insurrections and repel Invasions." Article II, Section 2, Clause 1, of the Constitution declares that "[t]he President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States." Neither constitutional provision includes a direct reference to martial law. However, the Supreme Court has interpreted both to allow the declaration of martial law by the president or Congress. On the state level, a governor may declare martial law within her or his own state. The power to do so usually is granted in the state constitution." (Click for source)
I'm not generally a conspiracy theorist, however I do believe that 99% of politicians thrive on power. And I believe the longer they are in power the more power they will seek and the more ways they will explore to achieve that power. Something to think of when you're voting to re-elect your representatives or not.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
The reason I'm reprinting this article is because from my perspective you can't place expectations on the car companies to succeed with the billions of dollars we are giving them, without giving them the freedom to restructure the way they do business. Being forced to deal with the union is what's hurting them and the employees that are getting let go. So here goes, I hope you like it...
So before I get to what I feel are the obvious similarities between Pimps and Labor Unions, I have a very important question that I know many of you have discussed or thought about and one time or another. How is it that Pimps talk themselves into a job in the first place? Do they go up to prostitutes on the street and say “I got a proposition for you. You go find work and give me 70% of your money, and I’ll beat the crap out of you when I feel like it.” Is that how the negotiation works? Because let me tell you, agents only get 10% if I’m correct, and they actually find you work. If I were that prostitute I’d slap that pimp upside the head and tell him “hell no. Why would I give you 70%, 50%, or even 10% when I can keep 100%?” That seems like the obvious response from all prostitutes to wanna-be pimps. But somehow, there’s still a profession of pimps out there. Makes no sense to me.
Now that we’ve established that Pimps will take your money and beat you senseless, let’s look at just exactly what labor unions do for people. So they tell you they that they will negotiate your salary and benefits on your behalf. But this is obviously not a free service. Rather than charging you a one-time finders fee, they charge you in the form of union dues. And this comes directly out of your pay check either every time you get paid or once a month. And correct me if I’m wrong, in most union run companies, you don’t get the opportunity to opt out of the union to handle your own negotiations. You’re either in or you’re unemployed. Correct?
Next comes the negotiations, so after they’ve been taking everyone’s money for so long they have to make it look like they are doing more than just collecting dues every month. They need to justify their existence. So they rile up the payers of the dues and convince them that they need more of this, that, or the other and if they don’t get it, it’s worth striking over. So the union leaders go to management and make generally unreasonable demands and insist on their way or the highway. This is all in spite of the fact that management is telling them they just can’t afford all of that. But the union leaders refuse to budge because they want to look like heroes in an effort to justify their existence. So they force a strike and all the dues paying workers are forced to walk the picket line, which means they are no longer earning a paycheck. Well most of these people can’t afford to go without a paycheck, but nonetheless, this is expected so strike they must.
What happens if you try to cross the picket line? Haven’t you all seen Hoffa? And isn’t that when they were actually doing the workers some good? They beat them senseless. But since they probably have media outlets and the cops on the payroll, it’s not a big story. The only story is that they are on strike and management is being unreasonable and the union won’t budge because it is only “fair.” I tell you this, is it fair for them to take your money and then force you to not take a paycheck for a while? Is it fair for them to bitch-slap you if you disagree with them?
So then they go back to the negotiating table after a few days, weeks, or months and concede some of their demands but miraculously strike a deal with management and they are heroes, who by the way weren’t technically on strike since they were working for the strikers. So their incomes didn’t take a hit. Had you not paid them one bit of dues and not gone without a check while on strike, you’d probably be better off financially than you are with their “help.”So let’s sum up the comparison between the two:
-Take money from the hard working Prostitutes
-Force Prostitutes to do as they say
-Beat them if they try to run away
-Provide nothing of value for Prostitutes
-Take money from the workers actually doing the work for the company
-Force union workers to follow union rules
-Beat workers who dare cross the picket line
-Provide nothing of value for workers
I think I’ve made my point.
Monday, April 20, 2009
JANEANE GAROFALO: "Thank you. You know, there's nothing more interesting than seeing a bunch of racists become confused and angry at a speech they're not quite certain what he's saying. It sounds right and then it doesn't make sense. Which, let's be very honest about what this is about. It's not about bashing Democrats, it's not about taxes, they have no idea what the Boston tea party was about, they don't know their history at all. This is about hating a black man in the White House. This is racism straight up. That is nothing but a bunch of teabagging rednecks. And there is no way around that. And you know, you can tell these type of right wingers anything and they'll believe it, except the truth. You tell them the truth and they become -- it's like showing Frankenstein's monster fire. They become confused, and angry and highly volatile...."
I for one would like to know what her version of what the Boston Tea Party was about. But I find it interesting how she couldn't even address that and went straight to name calling and making up a ridiculous preposterous point that everyone there was ignorant, hateful, and mindless. They couldn't possibly be furious about the taxation without representation that has been going on in Washington prior to this administration as well as during this administration, on both sides of the aisle. If we don't agree with them and we assemble we are misinformed, hateful, morons. Never mind that beauty that we live in a country where we have a right to free speech even if we don't always agree with each other. Wait I suppose my disagreeing now is disrespecting their right to free speech huh???
GAROFALO: "I don't think you do, for most of them. This is a -- it's almost pathological or elevated to a philosophy or lifestyle. And again, this is about racism. It could be any issue, any port in the storm. These guys hate that a black guy is in the White House. But they immigrant bash, they pretend taxes and tea bags, and like I said, most of them probably couldn't tell you thing one about taxation without representation, the Boston tea party, the British imperialism, whatever the history lesson has to be. But these people, all white for the most part, unless there's some people with Stockholm syndrome there."
So now if you showed up and you were anything but white you suffer from Stockholm Syndrome. Which means you feel sympathy and empathy and an emotional attachment for your captors. Look up Stockholm syndrome if you're not familiar with it. But she's saying you're too stupid to have a mind of your own. I'm just a dog and I love everyone so I'm not an expert on racism, but is her comment racist? Is anyone offended yet? Well I'd like to emphasize that it is a beautiful thing to live in a country where we have the right to free speech. We don't want to loose this liberty so I will defend her right to say whatever she wants and I will defend your right to rebut with anything you want to.
GAROFALO: "Here's what the right-wing has in, there's no shortage of the natural resources of ignorance, apathy, hate, fear. As long as those things are in the collective conscious and unconscious, the Republicans will have some votes. Fox News will have some viewers. But what else have they got? If they didn't do that, who is going to watch -- you know what I mean? They have tackled that elusive clam -- you know, the clam, the 18 to 35 clam -- klan. Klan. With a k demo. But, you know, who else is Fox talking to? I mean, what is it urban older white guys? And the girlfriend, and, you know, the women who suffer from Stockholm syndrome gain. There's a lot of Stockholm syndrome, is what I'm saying ultimately. What else do you want to know?"
More with the Stockholm Syndrome and now it's women. Where is the feminist outrage??? Wait feminism is about how evil men are and the women that love them, depend on them, care for them, etc. are weak and mindless. So that explains why feminist groups aren't outraged. And women that don't identify with feminists are too busy having lives to care that Janeane Garofalo reverts to Stockholm syndrome to insult them and every other group that doesn't fit into the "white male" category. Come on...New material...
This isn't about hating Obama. This dates back to the original bill that was passed before the election that both of my senators voted for (my representative voted against it in the House) when me and my fellow Americans called and wrote their representatives and senators begging them NOT to bail out the banks. But they passed it anyways with the patronizing excuse that they had to do what was good for America. One of my senators was the face for Republicans that were going to vote for it. The only part Obama had to do with it was his vote for it. Bush is the one that was pushing it and our congressmen passed it. This is about a collective government spiting in the face of Americans and saying we don't care what you think, we are going to do what we want in the name of power. And now the government is in the banking business with your tax dollars and mine. And they will never get out of that business.
With all due respect Ms. Garofolo and Mr. Olberman, I'll keep my Stockholm syndrome and you can keep your wretchedly unhappy lives.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
The only thing I don't like about it so far, is that it doesn't address the spending problem. But we the people have to take care of that by getting involved and voting out the good ol' boys and getting fresh blood in there. If they won't impose term limits on themselves, we'll do it for them!!! Let your congressmen know that you intend to impose a term limit on them.
Sunday, April 12, 2009
So every holiday around my neighborhood you can walk through or drive through the various streets and see all kinds of decorations out in the yard. Easter is no exception. The one that floored me was the year I saw Valentines decorations out at one or two houses. Not everyone decorates their yard, but a few handfuls do including some of our neighbors surrounding us. Yesterday in really hit me that no one has decorated for Easter. Usually a few people have some kind of blow up monstrous easter bunny out in their yard with who knows what else.
You may be thinking what I was thinking at first, they just didn't put out their decorations from last year. Maybe they got lazy. My father was quick to point out that most of these people don't store their decorations, they have garage sales all spring and summer to get rid of all their crap so they can buy new crap for the next holiday. You might be able to conclude from that statement that our household doesn't waste money to put crap outside in the yard for every holiday. But those that do are more than welcome to. I just hope they aren't going into debt for it or already drowning in debt.
That may not seem like much, and to be honest Texas is one of the better places to be during this economic slowdown. But there are random foreclosures around here and there are people getting layed off. But Dell is always laying people off so you know you will get it if you don't leave first. There are jobs to be had here and it's not nearly the painful blow that some states are experiencing. Nonetheless, you do see people pinching their pennies and restraining their spending. Which most probably should have been doing all along.
So how do you see the economy affecting your neighborhood, office, or city? Do you think tax policies increasing taxes on income or goods and services that you consume will help your personal economic situation? Will that help you and your neighbors pay their mortgage, pay off their credit cards, or perhaps buy their next meal? Will it help employers add a job that perhaps you or your neighbor would love to have? Remember tax day isn't about refunds, it's about all the hard earned money that the government takes from hard working people to spend as they see fit. I'm not saying all functions of the government are bad. But how much is too much? What percentage did you end up paying? Are you ok with it? Are you ok with your employer's taxes going up? What if that means he has to let one person go as a result? Are you ok if that person is you?
There are alternatives to current tax policy, but that includes taking power away from the government and putting it back in the hands of the people. How do you feel about that? Would you just prefer the government take care of all your wants and the loss of your power and money? or would you prefer they not have as much power and you have more money?
Of course I support the Fair Tax at this point. But their are other solutions out there that I would be ok with. You can't just whine and complain about tax policy. You have to have a plan you can support. Then you have to nag your representatives and let them know what you support and what you want them to support. Let them know current policies are unacceptable to you and commit to voting them out of office if they support them.
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Anyways I'd really like to call your attention to check box after the label at the top. "Pet Election Campaign" It doesn't say a designation of a particular candidate but I'll go ahead and say feel free to write in my name should you feel compelled to mark that box and make a donation to my campaign.
Hope you enjoy