The Enemy Within is the Worst One

Commander in Chief Barrack Hussein Obama
Major Nidal Malik Hasan

I was discussing the Ft. Hood assault today with my father on the telephone. I said, "what am I missing? You've got a guy who is already been on the radar screen of authorities for some internet rants, he goes around Killeen, TX wearing 'traditional Arab garb' yet he was born and raised in the United States. And this guy is a Major in the U.S. armed forces??? How does this happen?"

Well, my father with his 79 years of wisdom and cut-to-the-chase Arkansan-cum-Texan uncomplicated way of seeing things says, "son, you only need to look through to the Commander in Chief."

I have been very private in certain thoughts I have had about Barrack Obama, because on the surface they may seem unfair or even snobbish. But Barrack Obama has never been "American enough" for me. It's not like this guy was raised in London or even Frankfurt because his father worked for Citicorp or IBM. There is little to no cultural overlap between the United States and Kenya. Furthermore, between Indonesia and Hawaii, it doesn't appear that Obama ever lived in the mainland United States until he graduated from high school. I am sorry, but I want someone who played on the high school football team somewhere like in Kansas, who said the Pledge of Allegiance, and decorated his bike on the fourth of July to be President. Maybe he was in Cub Scouts, went duck hunting with Grandpa, and wore a Larry Czonka Miami Dolphins jersey. His mom would have been a den mother or class mom, not a sixties radical. Does this make me horrible?

When things don't appear right on the surface, they rarely are underneath too, and bad things are prone to happen. It just doesn't pass the "dumb test" for Major Hasan to be in the military. And look what we got yesterday. Likewise it just doesn't pass the dumb test for Barrack Obama to be President of the United States. I think we are in for it. God help us all.

English Spoken Here

My son is taking Drivers Education at the local high school. As such, he was told to go to the Department of Motor Vehicles and get a NJ Driver’s Handbook. My wife took him to two locations, and the only manuals available were in Spanish. At one location, after waiting in line for some time, he was told that he would have to download the manual off the internet.

I have one thought on this: Welcome to America, now SPEAK ENGLISH!

Congratulating Versus Condemning Goldman Sachs

I made the mistake of flipping to CNN just before bedtime last night, to hear the lunacy of Ohio congresswoman Marcy Kaptur rant about Wall St. pay, her ignorance enraging me. Not a good feeling just before bedtime! It seems that Goldman Sachs bashing is back on the front burner. Why should Goldman not pay its employees well for a banner year? I just don’t get it. What should they do with all the money they made? They have already paid back the government the money they really didn’t want in the first place, plus an incredible return. And of the $20 odd billion in bonuses, at least $6 billion will go to the government in the form of income tax. Shareholders are in good shape, and employees shouldn’t be robbed to enhance their returns.

What many people don’t realize is that many recipients of TARP funds did not want or even need the capital. Way back before Bear Stearns went under, when the Wall St. firms were being encouraged to borrow from the FED, firms like JP Morgan used the FED window as a sign of leadership. Otherwise, firms that really needed the funds wouldn’t take them because they were concerned it would be a sign of weakness, so the government encouraged EVERYONE to engage in these borrowings. Woe be it for the firms that took TARP funds and borrowed from the Fed, whether they have paid the money back yet or not, the government has conspired with the media to vilify these firms and change the rules on them. Regulating maximum compensation??? You have got to be kidding. Just how un-American is that!

I hear over and over again that “taxpayers money” is being used to pay outrageous bonuses with respect to Goldman Sachs. This is wrong, wrong, wrong on so many levels. First think about what is ”taxpayer money” anyway. Where did those tax dollars come from in the first place? I would imagine that the average Goldman Sachs employee has paid more federal income tax in the last 2 years than the average American will pay in a lifetime. It is the wealthy that are paying the taxes in the first place. In 2006, the bottom half of earners only paid less than 3% of total taxes! The top 5% of earners pay a STAGGERING 60% of all taxes! So even if you so wrongly accept the argument that taxpayers money pay bonuses, well, the people that are getting the bonuses are the ones who paid the taxes anyway. Maybe they are just getting their own money back! In Goldman’s case, the most important issue is that Goldman Sachs is immensely profitable, and all TARP funds have already been repaid. It is that simple. There IS NO ARGUMENT for bashing Goldman’s compensation policy. And it is a DISGRACE for elected officials and members of the media to use their pulpits to suggest otherwise.

Firms like JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs are winners. Their employees should be rewarded as such! Congratulations, Goldman!

Jimmy Carter Calling us Racists

Recently, Jimmy Carter, perhaps in an effort to length his post-presidential 15-minutes, has suggested that to criticize Obama is to be a racist. “I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man…”

So what does this mean, that Obama should get a free pass BECAUSE of his race? I have seen some intensely demonstrated animosity toward George Bush just blocks from my office in New York City on many occasions. No one ever accused these people of being racist, or anti-straight, or “anti-male” or whatever one might attribute to George Bush’s inherent being. This activism was policy oriented – these people were anti-war, or pro gay marriage… fair enough, I guess. But when conservatives become activists, they are dubbed “religious fanatics,” “right wing extremists,” and of course, now, “racists.”

Carter stated that, “There is an inherent feeling among many in this country that an African-American should not be president.” What a ridiculous leap! Maybe he should consider that there is an inherent feeling among many in this country that a president should uphold the constitution, keep our nation strong with a strong military, stop wasteful spending, stop big government, allow capitalism to flourish, be proud of America, be proud of our history. As a president Obama is almost the complete embodiment of everything I am against, both domestically and regarding foreign policy. He is arguably a socialist, certainly a pacifist, an apologist, pessimist, and he vilifies success. Oh….. he’s black? Even if I were Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan that would be the LAST thing on my mind.

Obama's "Ghetto Speech" to our Children

When I first learned that Obama would be addressing our schools I was concerned he might try to use the opportunity to feed his liberal rubbish to my kids. I felt a sense of relief when I heard that would not really be the case. Interestingly enough, neither of my kids were shown the speech yesterday anyway (and I have kids in elementary, middle school, and high school). However, I read the text of the speech and was honestly flabbergasted by the negativity it contained, and a perspective revealed by Obama that America’s youth is some impoverished at-risk mass of depressed and misunderstood children teetering on the brink of dropping out. Mind you, this speech was for viewing by kindergartners as well! I have a daughter who just started first grade, and trust me when I say that she has no concept that a child can “drop out” of school.

Here are some of the depressing remarks with which our president defiled our nation’s youth:

“making sure you stay on track”
“turning around schools that aren’t working”
“unless you show up to those schools”
“you can’t just drop out of school and just drop in to a good job”
“if you quit on school – you are just quitting on yourself”
“I know you have a lot of challenges in your lives right now… that can make it hard to focus on schoolwork… my father left when I was two years old”
“I did some things I am not proud of and got in more trouble than I should have”
“I got a lot of second chances”
“maybe you don’t have adults in your life who give you the support you need”
“maybe you live in a neighborhood where you don’t feel safe”
“that’s no excuse for neglecting your homework or having a bad attitude,”
“that’s no excuse for talking back to your teacher, or cutting class, or dropping out of school”
“that’s no excuse for not trying”
“even when bouncing from foster home to foster home”
“keep young people out of gangs”
“your goal can be something as simple as doing all your homework”
“success through rapping or basketball”
“you can’t let failures define you”
“if you get a bad grade, that doesn’t mean you are stupid”
“even when you’re struggling…discouraged”
“and you feel like other people have given up on you”
“working hard to fix up your classroom and get you the books… you need”

Just WHO did Obama think he was talking to??? He provided a few anecdotal stories of struggle of three children: Jazmin, Andoni, and Shantell. What about Michael, Lisa, and David? This school speech is just another incident that portrays the narrow agenda of Obama at the expense of everyone else. There is a broad spectrum of experience in America that Obama either fails to recognize or chooses to ignore. Is he trying to depress our kids?

Where were comments about how the strength and future of our nation depend upon on youth? Where was the pride shown – perhaps that American children are some of the most talented and educated children in the world? Where was the “keep up the good work?” Why not “work even harder than you already are to even become greater than we expect?” Instead we got “don’t drop out” and “don’t quit on yourself” and a few patronizing attempts at optimism along the lines of “maybe you’ll be even good enough to write a book” one day.

What I thought would be perhaps the most “non-story” story of Obama’s administration so far has turned into one of the most troubling for me. Obama is either narrower in policy agenda than I had thought or perhaps more sinister in achieving what so many are afraid of – dumbing down our nation to allow for a more controlling government. You know, don’t worry, big Nanny government is here for you. Oh you poor depressed lamb, have a Wellbutrin on Uncle Sam!

Obama - Awakening a Sleeping Giant

Sir Francis Bacon, the great English philosopher, scientist, lawyer, and statesmen once said “if a man will begin with certainties, he shall end in doubts.” This may ring true for the Obama Administration and many of Obama’s staunchest supporters, as Obama’s presidency has quickly hit turbulent waters after having cruised easily through the election with well-trimmed sails and a nicely set rudder.

On the other side of the political spectrum, people have accused Obama of enormous hubris and sarcastically referenced his status as a messiah of sorts: The One. After all, Obama had a plan to “remake America” and “spread the wealth around” – much to the disdain of the many Joe the Plumbers across the nation, yet to the delight of the academic elite parading within Obama’s circles. What with Democratic control in the House and the Senate – and not just Democrats, but very liberal Democrats in the best political position – this administration would prove to be a sure thing, with a certain outcome. Right?

Historically, Democrats have cornered the market on grass-roots activism to support their principal causes and have garnered attention for their most fringe ones as well, and their activism is something that Democratic political leaders could always rely upon. (Working in Manhattan I have on many occasions throughout the years had to step through throngs of people hailing for Bush’s arrest and for stopping the war in Iraq, and of PETA activists informing me that meat is murder.) For the most part, save for the occasional anti-abortion protests, conservatives are not activists. At least until now.

Earlier this year, in the wake of frustration with bailout funds, stimulus plans, and talk of tax increases on “wealthy” Americans, we saw numerous tax protests across the country. While tax protests are normally reserved for Libertarians, we witnessed many mainstream conservatives participate in these “tea parties,” each an obvious tip-of-the-hat to the Boston Tea Party, a precursor to “the shot heard ‘round the world.” The rage now is for conservatives to confront legislators at town hall meetings to protest Obamacare, rejecting any form of socialized medicine, capturing news headlines across the country. Recently a thirty-five year old stay-at-home mom, Katy Abram, confronted Senator Arlen Specter, challenging him in a voice quivering with her nervousness to tell her what he was going to do to restore America to an America consistent with the vision of its founding fathers. Mrs. Abrams claimed no involvement in politics, but warned Specter that he had “awakened a sleeping giant!” There must be millions more like her, rising up (or on the verge of) in protest, who like America the way it is… or perhaps was.

Politicians are ill-prepared for conservative activism; after all, it is so new. They have tried denial, claiming it is “fake” activism, organized by lobbyists – i.e. “Astroturf,” according to Nancy Pelosi, as opposed to truly grass-roots. They have lashed out at these town hall protestors, referring to them as “un-American,” “brown shirts,” “nazi-like” in their tactics. But however one chooses to view these tactics, they are tried and true, and straight from the playbooks liberals have used for decades. This is a medicine, formerly their own, and I wonder how it tastes to them now.

Conservatives appear to be enjoying their new voice. But by nature, with their general disdain for government, conservatives are less vocal, and we all know that the squeaky wheel gets the oil. Well, conservatives are squeaking like never before. I believe that most conservatives generally want to just go about their business, left alone, and want little from their government. Likewise, they want the government to stay out of their lives so they can enjoy the freedom and opportunity afforded by our country. They believe that America is special, and it should stay that way – that it should reject transnational overtures by groups such as the United Nations, who might suggest that the United States should do things “like everybody else.”

Perhaps conservatives have been pushed too far, to the detriment of those doing the pushing. There is an economic theory about taxation – the Laffer Curve – which suggests that there is a tax rate that when exceeded actually lowers tax revenue, perhaps as incentives to earn marginal income get taxed away, or increasing tax rates cause marginal income to more likely be deferred or sheltered. Maybe there is a similar curve, more social in orientation, whereby the conservatives’ tolerance to liberal ideology is surpassed, such that the liberal cause is diminished as a whole - conservatives having been pushed to the limit such that they not only reject but push back as well. I believe we may very well be at that point now.

Taking the healthcare issue, for instance, I have always accepted the status quo, and recognized healthcare insurance as an important part of my well being. Until recently, when I purchased my own health plan directly, I had always received and paid for health insurance through my employer. When confronted with taking my own position on Obamacare, which contemplates mandating employers either provide healthcare insurance or face penalties, I began to question why employers provide healthcare insurance in the first place –something I had never even thought about or questioned before.

Imagine the first company that provided access to health insurance as a benefit for its employees. What a novelty that must have been! And now, presumably decades later, what once was a novelty is now being codified into law? I would wager that more households have electricity, cable TV, and cell phones than an individual with a job. Why isn’t healthcare offered through these providers instead of employers? Where did this link between medical care and employment that we take for granted - as sure as gravity - come from? So now I am to the point of questioning the regulation of any employer benefit, and we have Obamacare to thank for that.

I tell you this to highlight the fact that new conservatives are born everyday – people that don’t even realize they are conservative because they’ve never had to think much about the issues. Sure, most people have taken a position on abortion, but that is no longer the conservative/liberal, Republican/Democrat litmus test.

Most of us accept that the feel-good ideology of the Democrat’s liberal base has always conflicted with the realistic pragmatism of conservative Republicans, but the centrists ultimately seemed to rule the day. This phenomenon allowed most people to find a way to live in comfort with political discourse, even to largely ignore it if they chose, and they were never too fearful of either the extreme right or their extreme left getting their way. But there is a new sheriff in town, from the left, unlike any we have ever seen, and his posse is like-minded. Talk of tax increases, fear of healthcare reform as a stepping stone to a single-payer system, gun control, legislating pay in the private sector, activist Supreme Court justices, big deficits, bigger role of government – some heavy stuff. Conservatives can no longer leave “their side” of the political discourse to Rush and the Fox network, not taking their part in it because they are too busy working, and well, taxes aren’t that bad. The Obama Administration has taken these issues to their doorsteps and knocked loudly. The sleeping giant is rubbing his eyes, waking up, and about to start stomping – who knew? - putting some doubt in the “certainty” of Obama.

Obama - It's All America's Fault

Obama recently added dates for his "American Apology Tour" and completed another visit to Mexico. It seems that, in Obama's opinion, America's freedom is to blame for Mexico's drug wars. He said that the U.S. owns the responsibility of stopping American guns from getting in the hands of Mexican mobsters. He lamented the fact that the recent ruling by our Supreme Court regarding the second amendment would make it harder to reinstate the Clinton-era Assault Weapons ban. Obama had already apologetically noted that he had no authority to overturn the Supreme Court's ruling. Duh! To even utter such a thought is disturbing to say the least. But in light of all of this, Obama has ordered more checkpoints to stop the flow of guns heading South.

NOW WAIT A MINUTE! If the U.S. is responsible for preventing the flow of guns to the South, shouldn't Mexico be held responible for another flow... a Northward flow? Yes, the flow of illegal aliens from Mexico to the United States? It seems Obama is more concerned about guns LEAVING our country than illegal aliens ENTERING our country. Perhaps the $1.4 billion we have earmarked to give to Mexico to help them stop their drug wars could be used instead to beef up border patrol to stop illegal immigration!

I will do a little rudimentary math. Suppose that $1.4 billion were invested to earn as little as 6%. That would mean the $1.4 billion could endow $84 million a year of expenditures. Now the US-Mexico border is about 2,000 miles. That means you could have patrols every 2 miles of the border and have $84,000 per year to pay each agents salary. That could provide a great wage in South Texas! And this new force would be IN ADDITION to what is already in place.

My point ultimately is that here is just another example of where Obama just gets it all wrong. He is out apologizing for our freedom, while failing to address the real problems of the American people. He is our president, NOT Mexico's.

Demand representation! Stop the insanity!

Free Speech Not So Free Under Obama

Please allow me to start with a little something found in our constitution; in fact, its first amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

A lot of people are up in arms about Obama's so-called "healthcare reform," and rightfully so. Many are very concerned about the government getting increasingly involved in something as private, and as near and dear to us, as our healthcare - whether that is how we get it or how we pay for it. As such, many Americans have called and written their representatives and confronted them at town hall meetings across the country - thus they "petition the government for a redress of grievances" about this matter, a matter of no small significance both fiscally and idealogically. What a country! Right?

It appears that the Obama administration is uncomfortable with Americans exercising this freedom. (God forbid anyone suggest that Obama keeps the change!) The White House blog now offers a special email address (flash@whitehouse.gov) encouraging citizens to alert the administration to anyone providing "fishy" information about healthcare overhaul. The idea of a partisan-controlled government collecting information from certain citizens about certain other dissenting citizens and potentially investigating their exercise of free speech makes me downright nauseous. And so much for Obama being a great uniter! Maybe Obama is trying to identify the socialists versus the non-socialists in America.

Congressman Brian Bair, seemingly offended by Americans exercising free speech at his town hall meetings, has referred to these dissenters as being like Nazis and "brown shirts." You see, this is another example of how liberals in our government want to demonize Americans who support independence and freedom. They view these people as a threat to change, and the change they seek is an America to become a socialist nation, a withered has-been like so many countries in Europe. Now I have already outed Janet Napolitano in an earlier writing how Homeland Security has tried to demonize right-wing Americans as potential "extremist terrorists." And this administration has also demonized Wall St. and painted anyone pursuing material success in America as greedy. But who's really intimidating here? Hecklers protesting at a town hall meeting or a government gathering information on its citizens?

Please help fight the insanity! Don't fight change, fight this change. Don't let our government turn our nation into a bankrupt, socialist disaster!

Obama Administration - "Tax as you Go, Say it isn't So"

We have heard over and over about tax increases and surcharges for the "wealthiest Americans" to pay for our rampant government spending and for Obamacare. The term "wealthiest Americans" is ill-defined, at best, and has been tagged for those with incomes of anywhere from $250,000 to $500,000 per year. But for middle-class Americans, Obama had pledged that "you will not see any of your taxes increase one single dime"... at least until now! The deficit is soaring, and after throwning in Obamacare, our modern messiah and his disciples have realized they don't have enough wealthy Americans to tax. So now there is talk of tax increases for the middle class too. Why am I not surprised?

This is a "play it by ear" administration that throws money at problems with little thought: for instance $1 billion for cash for clunkers didn't seem to last a week, and now maybe another $2 billion is up for grabs. For Obamacare the stakes are a little higher: a trillion a year for it, maybe two. In Obama's field of dreams, "build it and they'll be taxed" is the mantra of the day, and this will eventually doom his administration, our economy, or both.

Just say NO. Call and write your representatives. Let them know you have had enough!

Taking hard-earned income from one person and giving it to others, you know, "spreading it around." This is all just very un-American to me.

Need, Greed, and Compassion

The following is attributed to columnist Joseph Sobran. While I normally reserve this blog for my own thoughts, this was too poignant to not share.

"Today, wanting someone else's money is called 'need.' Wanting to keep your own money is called 'greed.' 'Compassion' is the sentiment of the politicians who arrange the transfer."

Obama - Foot in Mouth Disease

It seems that Obama's latest trend is to insult some of our nation's most respected professionals - those in law enforcement and doctors - on his quest to create the "Great Divide" in America.

Admittedly not knowing all of the facts, Obama claimed that the Cambridge police officers acted "stupidly" in their arrest of Professor Gates. In other words, Obama was willing to throw the law enforcement profession under the bus to take a "black activist" position. I would expect this from Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton. In fact I would even be concerned as to their health if they didn't come out of the woodwork on this one. But this was from the President of the United States of America - the great "uniter." My foot!

This is exactly the kind of "judgement" people have concerns about with the appointment of Judge Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. Frankly, activism has its place, after all this is a free country. But our leaders are supposed to serve us all!

In the same day, trying to charm his socialized healthcare plan down America's throat, Obama accused doctors of performing unnecessary procedures on children to make a buck. I guess we know what kind of doctor Obama would have been, had he chosen medical school instead of law school.

The end result is that Obama's running off at the mouth is dividing our country. His remarks pit minorities against police and support class warfare in pitting patients against doctors. And recall that he has already villanized bankers and investment banks.

Is it not enough that Obama destroys our economy, but that he will destroy our social system as well?

Tribute to John and Joel Rechlitz

America needs more heroes like brothers John and Joel Rechlitz of Milwaukee, WI who rescued a mother and her two children from a burning SUV turned on its side. The harrowing scene was captured on video and can be watched all over the internet. As I watched the video I felt my eyes tear up a little as I thought about the situation - the desperation of it - and I daydreamed about my own children, my own wife, my own SUV turned over on its side out in New Jersey, burning, while I sat here at my desk in New York City. Would there be another man, another husband, another father, to risk it all to save my family?

According to dictionary.com, the relevant definitions of a hero are:

1. a man of distinguished courage or ability, admired for his brave deeds and noble qualities, or

2. a person who, in the opinion of others, has heroic qualities or has performed a heroic act and is regarded as a model or ideal.

I think these definitions clearly describe the Rechlitz brothers. As a man, I can't help but imagine what I would have done in the same situation. Would I have had the courage, the mettle, to save that last child? They say that in situations like this, one can never know what he is capable of - or for that matter incapable of - until the situation presents itself. I would only hope that I would be such a man, like the Rechlitz men, capable of such heroism.

There is an intangible side to stories like this, something beyond the boundaries of the flames and smoke of that street yesterday, and beyond the finite group of people who witnessed the event. A story like this highlights the simple goodness that is inherent in us, if one allows it to show. It forces you to look inward and examine yourself, and it reminds you how precious your own family is to you. I like to think that there is a camaraderie among men, a secret pact, to look after each other. For the mother and her two children, the Rechlitz men saved their lives - that is the tangible effect of the event. What they did for the husband and father is something different - they "had his back" - something men generally understand, and this is the essence of what I mean when I refer to a "camaraderie of men."

I think we can all thank John and Joel Rechlitz for serving as such fine examples of what it means to be a hero - brave, selfless, capable, and good. If we lived like there was a hero in each of us, think of what we could be capable of, and what America could become.

Say a prayer for DJ, the rescued little boy, and pray that he has a speedy recovery.

Harvard Professor Playing the Race Card

A prominent university professor has Al Sharpton on the way! When Henry Louis Gates, Jr. returned from a trip a neighbor who did not recognize him thought he was breaking into the home. Apparently the door was jammed and required a heavy shoulder. Like a good neighbor, Lucia Whalen called the police to report her suspicions.

When police arrived they found Gates in his home and asked him for ID. They explained that they were responding to a report of possible break-in. Gates reportedly refused to come outside or initially provide ID, and said "Why, because I am a black man in America?" After eventually clearing up the issue upon confirmation of ID, the police were leaving; but that wasn't enough for Gates, who came outside to further berate the officers with his ranting and raving until he was finally arrested.

Allen Counter, a fellow professor stated, "We do not believe that this arrest would have happened if professor Gates was white."

To this I whole-heartedly agree. If Gates had been white, he would have shown his ID from the beginning, explaining that it was all a big mistake, that his door had been stuck. He would have thanked officers for their response and noted that it was good that neighbors stepped up to look out for one another. He would have laughed it off.

This reminds me of some Eddie Murphy material from years ago about Murphy being warned by friends about travelling to Texas - that they were racist down there! He relays his growing paranoia with the comedic story of a white airport attendent offering to take his bag and Murphy screams "what's the matter, can't a black man own a briefcase in Texas!"

Back in Cambridge, MA you just had police doing their jobs. This wasn't an episode of "driving while black" like you hear of in profiling cases. These policemen were responding to an actual call and did what they had to do to clear the matter up.

I think a certain professor has a really large chip on his shoulder. Maybe he thought about that down at the jail.

Obama - The Date-Rape of the Economy

Barrack Obama has gone on the offensive in trying to ram his health care system overhaul through the collective throat of the American public. According to a Washington Post - ABC News poll, less than 50% of Americans approve of the plan, and 44% disctinctly disapprove. Many of us, including many who serve in government, have resisted Obama's attempt to charm us into submission, resisting his advances and "all-hands" approach. But he is determined to have his way with us, at all costs, and he is getting angry. "We will reform health care," he emphatically states, and "It will happen this year." Like many men, when I was raised I was taught that "no" means "no" - so why can't Obama just back-off and behave like a gentleman?

If he would put his hands back in his own pockets instead of ours, he might take some time to take a longer and harder look at our healthcare system. I understand that roughly 12% of Americans do not have health insurance. Well, that means 88% do... not too shabby in my opinion. And those that don't have insurance still can get medical care. Many people are simply averse to purchasing insurance of any sort, and fail to purchase automobile insurace or other forms of hazard insurance. Just like there is a natural rate of unemployment, I believe there is likewise a natural rate for the uninsured.

I hear the word "reform" so often in this debate. I am not quite sure what that word means - after all, perhaps the finest medical care in the world is offered right here in the good old US of A. I think most people think that medical insurance is just too expensive, because the underlying costs of medical care are skyrocketing. Perhaps "reform" really should mean trying to lower the underlying costs of health care and consequently, health care insurance.

One of the largest expenses for any physician is his own medical malpractice insurance coverage. For many types of physicians, such as OB/GYN's, a quick Google search can tell anyone that this coverage can run as high as $200,000-$250,000 per year. (Obama could even do this late at night when he is seeking a cigarette.) This equates to roughly $1,000 per work day! With an office visit of $100 a pop, that could mean a physician's first 10 patients a day only cover this one cost - of many - that physicians must endure to be in business.

Medical malpractice insurance is so high because malpractice awards are so high. Individuals who have been hurt by a negligent physician often are awarded million upon millions of dollars - far exceeding what they might ever earn in their lifetimes. So perhaps the first place to start in lowering the cost of medical care is with tort reform. There is no price one can put on the heads of my loved ones, so why even bother? God forbid I lose someone I love, but should I get $50 million for it?

I don't claim to have all of the anwers, but I know that a rushed, thrown-together massive government healthcare overhaul that runs roughshod over our economy and picks the pockets of a small slice of America's citizens, when we are screaming "no!" is no better than date-rape. Obama needs to be a gentleman and be patient. If he is patient he may get his way, and it may feel much much better.

Dr. Manning's Warning: "White Folk Not Gonna Take it No More!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hFiab7fjak

I invite you to watch this outrageous Youtube video from Dr. James Manning, the chief pastor at a church in Harlem. I first heard about him sometime during the presidential campaign last year, in a YouTube rant blasting Obama. Well it would appear he is fed up, and warns that God-fearing and God-loving working Americans have about had enough - that "white folk not gonna take it no more!"

I do not agree with everything he says, but his message is so compelling, especially coming from an African-American. Sometimes one must exaggerate a point to make that point understood, and this he does well. I will let the video speak for itself, so please watch and enjoy.

Obamacare and Insanity - Cancer to Small Business

Let me begin today's post by challenging the seemingly inexorable norm that bonds health care to employers. Of all goods and services, health care and accompanying medical insurance are very important to the well-being of an individual or family. After all, we desire medical care for ourselves and dependents, and we also wish to contain its cost. For similar reasons we insure our homes from fire and insure our automobiles to protect us from the financial impact of accidents - all to contain cost. And just as we wish to keep our bodies working and need access to preventative health care, we also need to fix our cars and houses, and often purchase automobile warranties and even warranties for our home and important appliances.

I have to assume that at some point in history, medical insurance was first offered by an employer to its employees - as a benefit to make working there attractive. Imagine what a novelty this was at the time! This practice soon caught on as the demand for labor competed for its supply. And nowadays, this benefit from an employer has come to be viewed as an obligation from them, and is about to be codified into law as an obligation during one of the worst recessions in history.

So ask yourself, why should your employer provide you access to medical insurance and coverage? Don't get me wrong, this is a good thing if your employer offers this, but why should they be required to do so by law? And if so, why should they pay for any of it? Should your employer provide you an extended warranty on your car? Should property and casualty insurance be arranged through and paid for by your employer? That sounds ridiculous, of course. But I have to imagine that if employers started offering it as a benefit, one day this novel benefit would become law. From another perspective, why isn't medical coverage offered through your cable TV provider? After all, probably more people actually have cable TV in this country than actually have jobs. Your utility provider? Churches? My point is that what seems so customary is actually also quite arbitrary.

One part of the current proposal calls for business with payrolls in excess of $250,000 either provide coverage or pay employees 8% of their wages. Now that is a hefty tax! And this comes at a time when federal minimum wages are up 40% in just two years! How would a small business handle that? If they are on the margins they will likely resort to a policy of avoidance - either laying off employees to get just underneath the threshold, using temp workers instead, or even more complicated things like splitting their business into smaller segments - for instance, a small grocery store splits into a "produce business" and a "dry goods business," assigning $249,000 worth of employees to one and $249,000 to the other. People WILL get creative.

There is also to be tax surcharges on top-line income of Americans to pay for the "government-funded" option. Many small business owners aren't incorporated, so their business' financial operations just pass-through to their personal tax returns. Thus the tax surcharge will be essentially applied to their revenue, not their income, after which business expense deductions would have been applied.

At best, the United States is acting like a sub-prime borrower. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the Obama administration's proposed budget will mean our federal debt will rise from 41% to 82% of GDP by 2019! THAT IS INSANE! Who will ever repay this debt? How much can the "wealthy" afford? This year alone, theTax Policy Center estimates that an astounding 47% of tax-filing households will have NO federal tax liability. The continued shifting of the tax burden to a certain segment of society destroys the very incentives of these citizens who actually create the jobs America so desperately needs, or who purchase goods and services from others who create the jobs we need.

STOP THE INSANITY!

Louisiana Governor Jindal Gets it Right!

The Governor of Louisiana, Bobby Jindal, used the power of veto on Friday to quash a piece of assinine gun legislation typical of what we often see put forth by "well meaning" legislative feel-gooders. As is typical, legislative proposals of this type really have no basis of need, and appear to be arbitrary affronts to law-abiding gun owners.

This bill called for the prohibition of carrying a firearm within 1,000 feet of a parade or demonstration. There were a few exemptions, but not exempted were those with lawful concealed-carry permits (the bill's sponsor refused the addition of this exemption), and penalties for a violation were severe - felonies to be exact.

There was a shooting this year at Mardi Gras and the perpetrators were arrested straightaway. Luckily no one was killed. I wonder, if this law were in place at the time, would this crime not have been committed by this criminal? Do you think Lee Harvey Oswald would NOT have killed our president if there had been a law such as this in place in Dallas? I bet we agree on the answer.

The flipside to laws like this are they trip up law-abiding gun owners. Instead of preventing crime, they create criminal acts for the otherwise unthreatening, law-abiding citizen. Perhaps a minor traffic stop occurs several blocks away, and the occupant reveals he is carrying, as many concealed-carry permitholders do as a courtsey to police officers. Unaware of his crime, this citizen would wind up in jail. It is for this reason that Jindal used common sense in exercising his veto power - citing the bill posed an unacceptable risk to lawful gun owners.

Like most gun control efforts, this one lacked common sense. Anti-gun proposals are almost always either about just feeling good or part of a true agenda to disarm the American public, and rarely is there any emperical basis to them. It is refreshing to know that there are still some politicians who "get it right" and respect our constitution.

I expect to see Piyush "Bobby" Jindal at some point on the national political stage, and this will be welcomed by many.

Holy Wars - At Home and Abroad

Over the weekend I received one of those emails... you know, the ones that tell the story of an honorable yet humble teacher, veteran, radio or tv personality who "tells it like it is" about what is ailing America. This one had a high school principal from Kingston, TN addressing the crowd at a high school football game about how he can no longer say a prayer before games, yet schools may dispense condoms and teach abortion as birth control among other things. I always enjoy these emails, which are normally only fictional portrayals or anecdotes at best. However, they serve an important role in that they highlight the crying out of a significant portion of American society, a humble class of folk which is often silenced by the mainstream media. These people aren't the loudest bunch, and they aren't always visible either, so these emails seem to give them a much needed voice.

As I usually do, I do a quick Snopes.com search of the content of these emails to confirm my suspicions, that they are indeed fictional works. It is typically with mild disappointment, yet coming as no surprise, that this in indeed the case. Today I was delighted that Snopes revealed that this was in fact a true story, and I hoped that the stadium was crowded when this school principal highlighted the hypocracy of our politically correct society.

On the other side of the globe in Iraq, at a time when US troops have been pulling out, there has been a rash of church bombings - seven in just three days. It's as if the insurgents are quickly trying to get our attention, saying, "hey, we aren't done yet - let's play this out!"

We used to hear more talk of "holy wars;" in fact, many believe they have been prophesized. There is a holy war going on right here at home just as there is abroad. But this war is more subtle, and bombs used are movies like "Religulous" or court decisions born of overinterpretation of First Amendment rights. But whether or not we pull out of the Middle East, or our courts try to silence Tennessee high school principals, I firmly believe "this ain't over yet."

Minimum Wage Increase - There isn't a WORSE Time

I was reminded by today's news that on July 24th the federal minimum wage will be raised to $7.25 per hour. This is happening at a time when unemployment continues to go up, banks and Wall Street firms have tanked, and everyone from major corporates to small businesses are struggling. These step-ups were mandated, if I recall, two years ago when things were only starting to look so grim.

Just two years ago the minimum wage level was $5.15 per hour. This new level represents a staggering 40% increase across two of the worst years in decades. It frankly constitutes a tax, at a time when corporate earnings have plummeted. But this tax is optional, in that employers who cannot absorb this "tax" can instead choose to lay off even more workers or cut their hours - just what America needs.

I am no fan of anyone but the market mandating what workers get paid, whether on the high-end or the low-end. However, I have accepted that these laws are well-entrenched in our economy. But congress should enact emergency legislation to postpone this increase indefinitely.

This will especially hurt retailers, who have already been hammered hard and are expecting poor back-to-school sales to begin with. Unfortunately this increase won't ultimately help the economic class of people it is designed to benefit, and it is salt on the gaping wounds of employers. But what what do you expect, from a government running wild.

The Beheading of Liberty

Last month, an 8 foot replica of the Statue of Liberty that stood outside a coffee shop in Brooklyn disappeared. I had thought this was an ironic metaphor to the disappearance of real liberty we see day in and day out, as we drift away from our constitutional mooring. A video has now surfaced which shows the beheading of said statue, islamic extremist style, with flashes of "Death to America" on the screen. You can watch the video here:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/07092009/news/regionalnews/brooklyn/liberty_beheaded_in_video_178348.htm

The video just seems too deadpan and creepy to be a hoax. It almost comes across as some kind of warning. This video serves as a stark reminder that there are real enemies of America, just as the metaphor I cited above highlights that there are real enemies within, enemies of freedom.

At a time when North Korea has threatened us, and is test-firing missiles, Obama is putting sheets, pillows and a comfortor on a bed to lay down in with Russia, who objects to our missile defense initiatives. Obama's Homeland Secretary doesn't used the word "terrorist" anymore, rejecting what she refers to as the "politics of fear." I think that Obama believes that by just being a nice guy and making everyone feel good, the world's evil will be no threat.

Surprisingly, and inconsistent with his other dealings, Obama has chosen to beef up our presence in Afghanistan. That is his "token" conflict, I believe because he secretly wants to get bin Laden, so that he can wear a badge of toughness on his lapel. But back on the homefront he continues to increase the role of federal government in our lives, and further a culture of dependency.

There is no stronger America than one with a strong military, and there is no stronger America than one with a truly free people. Weakened individual rights will serve as an accomplice to a weakened military in beheading liberty. Perhaps the enemy within is the one we should fear more.

Taxed to Death

Certain Senate Democrats have been holed up this week brainstorming on ways to tax Americans to pay for the proposed government-provided healthcare program. They seem to like this “tax surcharge” on higher income earners the best, but have also considered taxes on employer provided healthcare (meaning employers subsidize healthcare insurance for people that DON’T work for them) and even taxes on “sugary” drinks!

Many have referred to the Obama administration as a “Tax and Spend” government. I think the order is wrong - really I see it as more of a “Spend and Tax” administration. That is – spend, spend, spend, and then figure out how we are going to pay for it. Well, we all know who is going to pay for it – those who are already taxed to death. The administration just cannot decide which of these folks' pockets it is going to pick.

Here are some staggering statistics, based upon the 2006 tax year. The bottom half – yes half - of earners in this country only paid 2.99% of the taxes. The bottom 75% of earners footed only a paltry 13.73% of total taxes. During the AIG bonus debacle, I always got a kick out of the protestors claiming “that’s my money – those are my tax dollars.” Well, not really… most of them don’t really pay taxes; little if any. The top 1% of earners pay a staggering 40% of all taxes, and the top 5% pay a whopping 60% of all taxes! So whose money is it really anyway?

Could you imagine dining at a restaurant serving 100 customers, eating the same pasta, the same salad, and drinking the same ice tea, and when the bill comes 5 individuals over at a small table in the corner had to pay 60% of EVERYONE'S bill? Then, to a round of cheers, the restaurant decides that going forward everyone should have appetizers, dessert, and wine too?

It is time to cut spending in our government and for this administration to quit acting like a college student with his first credit card. Unless we want this recession to worsen, or for recovery to be prolonged a decade or more, it is time for the nonsense to stop.

King on the King of Pop

FINALLY! I had been waiting for someone to say something - anything - at least a feeble hand to be raised amidst the colossal worship of Michael Jackson followed by, "wait a minute... isn't this the guy accused of pedophilia, who paid hush money to his victims?" Obama didn't raise his hand when asked. Colin Powell didn't either.

Well, Peter King, a US congressman from New York did more than raise his hand. He published a video on YouTube, calling Jackson a pervert, lowlife, and pedophile. He asked why the media wasn't talking about real heroes - soldiers, firemen, policemen. This finally got the media talking, and there was a panel on CNN to discuss the video. They talked about Michael Jackson's accomplishments, what he did for African Americans - yet each admitted they would not allow their own children to be with Jackson. They clearly were willing to separate the art from the man, something I am having some difficulty doing.

King, knowingly or not, is really addressing something bigger than the here-and-now of the Michael Jackson story. He is really addressing something fundamentally wrong with American culture - how we have lost sight of goodness, honor, integrity - now only a mirage in the media. Instead we celebrate excess, infidelity, and hold no one to any moral standards. In fact to try to do so, as King has done, is to draw attack. Already there is a website soliciting donations to build a campaign war chest for whoever may run against King in whatever election in the future.

The media has put together what they think we want - America's own "Lady Di" funeral. What America really needs is a kick in its moral ass. Peter King has his boots on and is ready to deliver.

McNair Update - Vilification of the Weapon

The focus of this story has now shifted to the gun used to facilitate this tragedy, not what led up to it. Various headlines relate to when the gun was purchased, and by whom. Do you think that if the weapon used had been a kitchen knife, there would be a headline such as "Knife Purchased on the Home Shopping Network - Part of Cutlery Set"?

Guns are inanimate objects. Guns don't get involved in love triangles or fly into jeaolous rages. Really, they just kind of sit there until picked up and used by humans, for good or for bad. The type of gun used and when and where it was purchased is largely irrelevant to this story, certainly not befitting the headlines.

Steve McNair did not deserve the death penalty. But our Second Amendment freedom doesn't either. It is time for this story to subside, so that the families can mourn and have their privacy.

Blaming our "Gun Culture" - McNair

Well it didn't take long for something to set me off this morning. As I was waiting for my train this morning I noticed a guy nearby reading the New York Daily News, and the following headline took up nearly a third of the page: "Famous face just another victim of our gun culture." The story was about the apparent murder-suicide of Steve McNair, the famous former NFL quarterback who was believed to be killed by his 20 year-old girlfriend in her condo, before she took her own life.

I have to take a moment to examine what our gun culture had to do with this tragedy. Hmmm... one Mississippi, two Mississippi... Done. NOTHING! If McNair had been at home asleep in bed with his wife, and wasn't having an extramarital affair this likely would have never happened. And had there been no gun available, a kitchen knife or some poison would have been suitable for this diabolic task.

If I were the journalist at the Daily News, my headline might have reflected that our culture of celebrity was to blame. Yes, a culture that suggests that you can have it all - that enough is never enough. That if you are a celebrity, the public will turn a blind's eye to your transgressions and cheer you on in any direction your moral compass points, even if it is always pointing in the same direction as one's "johnson." The hero worship of celebrities fosters young girls throwing themselves at actors, rock stars, and sports figures, and was the backdrop for parents, who allowed their young boys to sleep in the same bed as a highly-suspected pedophile. Perhaps if the media gave celebrities the same lashing that they give Republicans who transgress, celebrity worship would subside. Maybe as a culture, we would then hold people accountable for their actions and behavior.

I obviously don't know Steve McNair, or his family situation; but this is not a tragedy of the gun, but a family tragedy, one of infidelity that led to the impasse of conflicted romantic intentions among three people. It is a shame and even pathetic, while not surprising of course, that the Daily News would use this tragedy to further its gun control agenda.

Independence Day

Today is Independence Day! Really I feel like I celebrated it yesterday, Friday, as I was off work and my family and I journied to Philadelphia for cheesesteaks, strolled through New Hope on the way back, and attended a neighborhood party in the evening, followed by our town's fireworks display.

Sometimes I wonder what we are celebrating anymore on this holiday: what America was? is? or is going to be? July 4th probably means different things to different people. I took a ribbing from a neighbor when he noticed I had brought Mexican beer to a July 4th party, as he unloaded his Miller product into a large cooler. I informed him that to the best of my knowledge, Miller was owned by South Africans so he wasn't any better. Perhaps his beer choice was more suited for celebrating what America was and my beer choice reflected its future - an America with a confused immigration policy, or lack thereof... mostly from South of the border.

Today the National Park Service re-opened the crown at the Statue of Liberty and some military veterans who are non-citizens will be sworn in as citizens there. Serving in our military isn't a bad way to earn citizenship! At least they probably need to learn English to serve. Anyway, I wonder how much room we have left for more "huddled masses" of immigrants when we are moving to a tax policy that makes them more of a burden as our government taxes away the opportunity they came here for.

Also in the news today we learn that Sarah Palin is resigning as Governor of Alaska. I like what she represented - a fresh, young, attractive face to conservative America. Unfortunately she was a real threat to the liberal agenda, so the media destroyed her. They prefer the face of conservative America to be grumpy old white guys - much easier targets to ridicule or demonize - just watch any TV show or commercial. I hope Palin takes to the airwaves and continues to fight the good fight - I think big things are in store for her, but likely more on the fringes of politics, where it might be a little safer.

Last night I laid on a blanket in a bank parking lot to view the fireworks, my little daughter snuggled up next to me, drowsy as it was well past her bedtime. The fireworks were astonishing, well beyond what one would expect from such a rinky-dink town in the NJ suburbs. Maybe people would feel patriotic for a day or two, as the media might allow, before putting America back on Michael Jackson to numb our minds. After all, they give us the anesthesia we need so the surgery of removing our liberties by Dr. O and his team feels less painful.

Happy Fourth!

Janet Napolitano - Politically Cunning Linguist

Something hit me on the train to the city this morning. It involves two pieces of news during the last quarter that I thought about together for the first time this morning. As part of the Obama administration's American apology tour, while in Germany our Homeland Security Secretary, Janet Napolitano, avoided referring to terrorists or acts of terror. Instead she referred absurdly to "man-caused disasters." When questioned about this, she said they were trying to avoid the "politics of fear."

A few weeks later the Department of Homeland Security released its report warning law enforcement on the home-front of American "right-wing extremists," radicals, and domestic terrorists. The report further insulted our military by suggesting returning veterans were ripe for recruitment into these terrorist groups.

Taken together, these two events suggest the "politics of fear" is best used at home. That we should fear conservative Americans, people who believe in and protect the constitution, those who exercise their rights under the second amendment - that we should fear our military patriots as well. Forgive me, but I would feel 100% safer at an NRA convention in a state that allows concealed carry than I did in Manhattan on 9/11, when I watched those buildings come down.

So why this "bilingual" attitude about terrorism? Well, the Obama administration supports the utopian one-world concept and is an enabler of the power-grab sought by the UN. These transnationalists believe we should harmonize our rights with what everybody else is doing. They need to set the cultural stage - our collective mood - and soften our views about nations that do not support freedom and commit acts of terror, while hardening our views about America's rich culture of freedom. Then our rights and liberties can be much more easily eroded - watered-down to the point we don't even recognize them anymore.

Well, I am somewhat of a cunning linguist myself, so I will refer to this administration as an "election-caused disaster!"

"Obama is My Homeboy" - What??

Today I was dining for lunch out on the patio at Naples near Grand Central Station. I was talking to my colleagues and enjoying a chicken sausage pizza when I noticed an individual walk by wearing a t-shirt with "Obama is My Homeboy" across the front. The guy appeared to be a bike messenger - sans bike - but he was grooving along listening to his ipod. I wondered why this guy thinks Obama is his "homeboy." It made me think about what qualities I want in my own "homeboys" and likewise what qualities I want in my president. Not surprisingly, these requirements are starkly different.

For me, a homeboy should know some good jokes to tell while drinking beer at a barbecue. If he's a hockey buddy he talks a little trash on the ice and contributes good BS for locker room banter. He may be someone I'd enjoy hitting the woods with, shotgun in tow, dog on point 40 yards ahead. My accountant should decidedly not be a homeboy. He should be unemotional and have attention to detail to the point of annoyance. Likewise, I'd just as soon not have my cardiologist (who I am sure I will need in the next 4 years) be a homeboy either... especially should I need bypass surgery. I certainly don't want or need my president to be my homeboy.

Maybe the bike messenger feels he has something in common with Obama. Perhaps he too was a community organizer - after all, maybe he passed out fliers promoting an outdoor concert over in Brooklyn, or he volunteered one Saturday at a "green" rally.

I will tell you what I want from my president. I don't think it is too much to ask. I want my president to be a lover of freedom, of free markets; a man of faith who is humbled by something much bigger and grander than himself. He should be tough, yet diplomatic. He shouldn't be an apologist for America or our way of life. He should protect the constitution, in its purest and simplest form, and recognize the limits it imposes on government.

People refer to Obama as the hippest president EVER! The elite think he is urbane and fashionable. Our youth - well OMG he is so kewl LOL! I don't care about any of that to be honest. I don't need him to be cool (or "kewl" for that matter), I don't need him to be my skin color either. If he sneaks a Marlboro on the lawn of the White House after midnight, that is no concern of mine.

Anyway, while I am not sure someone like me is even allowed to have homeboys, I still wouldn't want one in the Oval Office!

Enabling Bullies and Outlawing Aggression

There are so many implications in this story that there are a number of titles I could have chosen. Another could have been "Zero Tolerance vs. Common Sense." The scene is outside a middle school in New Jersey, where a bully meets one of his regular quarry, trying to hit him with a lacrosse stick. The victim, who has been studying karate and has finally had enough, puts the bully in a head-lock to restrain him until the tussle is broken up. So what did the school do? Suspend them both. Yes, both. The message is, if you are engaged in fighting for any reason, you are to be punished.

Why is engaging in self defense something to be punished for? Why is it that the good guy goes down too, becoming the bad guy? (Notice how George Bush became the bad guy in Iraq, not Sadaam Hussein.) Oh why oh why can't the world be made of cotton candy and no one ever needs to fight? Well, too much cotton candy causes tooth decay. And there are always the likes of North Korea's KIM Jong-II out there who can't keep to himself on the playground.

Young American boys used to live out their warrior fantasies on the schoolyards and sports fields across the country. A found stick became a Colt .45 and "bang bang" was the shot heard 'round the world! Holding a stick and saying "bang" at a public school today will earn a child a few day's off from school. So where do our boys learn to become young capable men... men who may one day have to be strong and fight for what they believe in or engage in self defense?

The answer is certainly not in the public school systems in the United States. The schools these days punish any form of aggression. This fits in nicely with the notion that all violence is bad, even in self defense. One need only look at some of the gun control advocates' wishes and look inside some of the UN policy endeavors to see that this view is held by many.

So let's replace all of our M-16s with candy canes and share them with the world! Well, one day that may be all we know how to do.