Bumps Stump

Right and Wrong and Clarity

2011-10-16T17:01:00.000-07:00

I'm damn tired of American politicians. All of 'em. They've painted themselves as dishonest self absorbed mental midgets. We'd be better off with Disney characters running the country. The Obama Administration has become the overwhelming straw that broke our wobbly nation's back. Their abysmal record of seriously stupid decisions have disgusted our main stream voters. Reasonable "liberal" and "conservative" voters are dynamite mad. Revolution is in the air - and no wonder. If the radical liberal Democrats can not be turned out of office soon and replaced with honest politician - ALL is lost. That's right, ALL.

Why is it so damned difficult for the extreme left and extreme right to agree that some things are better suited to federal administration and some are better handled by states, counties or municipalities. That is what our Founders had in mind - and they were right. Of course the devil is in the details. The lines between issues are whisper thin and that is why the Founders gave us exacting descriptions of which kind of governance should apply to which kind of issue. They also gave us a system of jurisprudence to interpret the application of laws and controls; (1) The Constitution, (2) The Declaration of Independence, (3) The Bill of Rights, and so forth.

But . . . . Lawyers, Judges, and politicians have mangled and spun statutes to the point that "black is white" and "up is down". Sorry people, but you are the cause of our decline. Politicians, especially, at every level, have aided the process of our nation's decay. If not for you the radical extremes could not get away with it. They've robbed the magnificence of America and we've got to get it back.

Greatly reduce our world wide military presence.
We do not need any military people in unfriendly nations.
We must eliminate our military presence where ever it is not wanted.
When we are invited to do so we need to support our allies.

Convert our military establishment to a truly "DEFENSIVE MILITARY".
"Defense Department" is an oxymoron.

Social Security is broken.
Fix it.

Design federal limits to punitive legal damages of every kind.
Our legal system has been broken by ridiculous judgement awards.
Insuring private property from natural disasters at 100% recovery is stupid.
Get a federal handle on the "out of control" medical industry.

The entire industry is overcharging it's customers.
Provide some level of medical care insurance for every citizen.
Americans can't afford 100% lifetime medical insurance unless the industry is fixed.
As it stands right now there is no reasonable way to pay for it.
Protect and control our national borders.
By not protecting and controlling we jeopardise damage the lives of all Americans.
Develop a reasonable path for illegal residents to become citizens.
There is no reason not to insist that all permanent residents become citizens.
All laws must be enforced or officially erased/stricken from the law books.
Bring back a "braceros" type temporary work plan (or 120 day visas) for illegal
residents with the proviso that only two of these visas will be available per year.
Provide a similar "visa" program for illegal residents that do not wish to be citizens.
Permanently deport all other illegal residents to the country of their birth.
Establish and control legal limits on immigrant PROFILES.

All federal politicians (elected or appointed) must retire at 70 years of age or before.

All federal politicians must give up their current federal medical insurance and social
security programs, to be replaced by the same systems that apply to all
American citizens.

to be continued

Overwhelmingly Stupid

2011-10-08T09:47:00.000-07:00

@ Some idiot Baptist Pastor has decided that Mormonism is a cult rather than a religion. This arrogant dude presumes Christianity is the only religion acceptable in America. No wonder atheists find it so easy to convince people that NO GOD is better than ANY GOD as taught by religion.

@ Rick Perry is a good ol' boy from Texas who is apparently a reasonably good executive leader around home. Unfortunately he does not fit the national or the international stage. He might be a better President than Mr. Obama but that's not good enough. Mr. Perry's campaign is dead in the water.

@ The TEA Party is universally scorned by the liberal elite even though they know that the TEA Party represents the majority of Americans. The far-left crowd still insists that it knows what is best for America. How they keep a straight face is amazing, but they do. Of course the Federal Government has a clear role to play. It is described very well in our founding documents - which also establishes firm limits to it's power.

@ There is no statement in the entire history of far-left liberal American politics that defines the corruption of the Federal Government legislative process better than the words of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. "WE HAVE TO PASS THE OBAMACARE BILL IMMEDIATELY SO THAT WE CAN READ IT LATER". That's not a perfect quote but it's close.

@ I believe it was during the administration of President Nixon that America went off the gold standard. Perhaps it is coincidental that around the same time the powers of lobbyists grew rapidly, the government discovered that the Social Security plan was underfunded but did nothing about it, a person as thoroughly corrupt as Spiro Agnew managed to get elected as America's Vice President, and the nation reached the apogee of it's political maturation. From that time forward America was declining in stature.

MORE Power To The President.?

2011-10-01T13:09:00.000-07:00

We have people in our government offices who are either stupid, incompetent or both. A few of the good guys, like you and I, have been disgusted by the questionable methods and activities we see in the news. Something has gone wrong with the evolution of our our three branches of government. Years ago the Constitution, Declaration of Independence, and other founding documents established a balanced system. What happened? Where did it go? We now have people in government who want to destroy that Constitution, other guide posts, and negate all American progress over the previous 200+ years. We let them do it!

These people are not traditional liberal politicians. They are extreme, dangerous, and many are anti-traditional American values. We refer to them as far, far left radical liberals. A few have passed even further to the failed socialist philosophy.
A partial list of examples: Barrack Obama / William Ayers / Barbara Boxer / Rahm Emanuel / Barney Frank / Tim Geithner / Van Jones / Janet Napolitano / Nancy Pelosi / Harry Reid / Charles Schumer / Maxine Waters /

These mis-guided officials want to rebuild our government to imitate (THE FAILED) European model of a quasi -socialist state. Just look at them. The idea makes no sense whatever. The LIBERAL FAR LEFT is terribly wrong headed. The notion that bigger and bigger government should control more and more aspects of American life is contrary to our proud American tradition. This week our President, the Commander in Chief, specifically ordered the assassination of an American citizen:

who was not charged with a crime, and
who was not given due process in our courts.

I can't remember any instance of a former President authorizing the murder of an American citizen. At the same time I do believe the guy deserved to die. He had a long record of anti-American activities and was closely associated with the al-Qaeda terrorist network. He was a terrorist of significant rank and a danger to all non-Muslims. But should the President have the exclusive power to condemn an American citizen to death? Near the end of WWII President Truman authorized the use of the Atom Bomb on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Hundreds of thousands of non-combatants were exterminated. It has been estimated that the atomic bombs saved over a million allied soldiers. And we won the war.

Someone later suggested the notion of state dominoes. If a nation in a region went Communistic, the others in the region would follow. Communism attempted to spread to Korea. The nation was divided with the Communists controlling the North and America the South. It was a cold, muddy, and deadly war that had no winner. It just stopped with an armistice at the 39th Parallel.
It was during the period between WWII and the end of the Korean conflict that the "Cold War" began and with it the armaments race between the USSR and America. Thousands of nuclear weapons were produced and stockpiled by each side. The theory was that both nations would destroy each other if a war was to start. President Eisenhower, at the end of his term, warned America of the increasing danger of a "the military - industrial complex" that had become a dangerous element in our government. Civilian industries had hired thousands of representatives to LOBBY government personnel by influencing where government contracts were placed. Their power to control government purchases grew by significant, sometimes dangerous, proportions.

Work in process. More to come

TEA Party Racist Non-sense

2011-09-26T10:11:00.000-07:00

The far left is getting desperate. People like Morgan Freeman are now claiming the TEA PARTY is racist. He is a very accomplished screen actor and well known left wing Democrat. I can understand that he would not support many of the TEA PARTY positions - but there is absolutely no reason to call the TEA PARTY racist. I expect this kind of stupidity from Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and Louis Farrakhan, but not from Mr. Freeman.

The TEA PARTY. These people are more or less from America's grass roots. They are common and uncommon voters who are fed up to their eyeballs with the lack of representation in our Federal and State Governments. The republic given to us by the Founders is (obviously) in great trouble. The very Constitution responsible for over 200 years of growth, prosperity and the exceptional nature of America has been attacked without mercy or understanding by selfish elected and appointed fools. Sadly, this is not a partisan complaint. Republicans are just as responsible as are the Democrats.

The TEA Party is by definition the conservative right of the Republican party. It is a citizen initiated effort to stop the trend toward socialism, and to restore the principle of progress dependent upon individual initiative. The TEA Party believes in the ongoing influence of our Constitution, Laws, and Free Market economics.

Racism has almost become a dead issue in America. Certainly there are still a few individuals and a few small groups who maintain racist ideas. Thankfully however, they have all but disappeared. By far most Americans have become less interested in a person's race and infinitely more interested in a person's character. This fact is true of all America's political parties (including the Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, and TEA PARTY)

Morgan Freeman has sided with the irrational left of Hollywood's Barbra Streisand, Lou Grant, Jane Fonda, George Clooney and so forth. It's too bad. I thought he was smart enough to see through these people.

End.

Islam/Christianity/Obama

2011-09-22T14:07:00.000-07:00

RELIGION

Non-Muslims are understandably concerned. Today is the anniversary of the 9/11 attack and the memory hurts. It's the day a group of Muslim fanatics drove airplanes into American buildings full of innocent people. The event unfolded on television sets around the world. Television cameras also pictured Muslims in far off cities celebrating the horrific tragedy. Who would do such a thing? What kind of person would celebrate such an evil act of war?

The same warped Muslims that burn our flag in the name of Muhammad.
The same anti-American fanatics that murder by blowing themselves up.
The same idiots that explode bombs in public places amid non-Muslims.

Okay. Enough already.

Islam has always had a bloody history but before sentencing all of Islam we have to recognize that Christians do too. Christians however, believe they left that part of their history behind way back in the middle ages. Unfortunately, they did not. Christ lived with the people of his day and taught that peaceful living should be everyones ambition. Despite his teaching Christianity evolved over many centuries and there were times when Christians did terrible things to other people. Do we need to be reminded that there were religious wars, persecutions, terror campaigns and worse - were done, all in the name of Christianity.

Christians today are asked to blame a few Muslim religious fanatics for 9/11 and not their entire religion. We are constantly told that Islam is a religion of peace. We are told that we understand that there are good and bad Muslims just as there are good and bad Christians. There is a grain of truth in that, but it is wrong. Both Christians and Muslims have elements described by their Holy Books that are not acceptable in the modern world. Christians choose to overlook their evil past. Unfortunately, many fundamentalist Muslims do not. A very large number believe the Koran, their Holy Book, is the infallible truth and may never be changed. They believe it is the actual word of God as given to the prophet Muhammad. They are wrong.

It is this point of controversy that divides the two major religions.

OBAMA

I've reviewed some of my earlier blogs about Mr. Obama and I'm not impressed by them. Several of my good friends think his Administration is better than any known alternative. I disagree but seem to be unable to clearly state why. I think the Obama Administration is one of the worst in American history. It's troubling to see how many disagree. I just don't understand how anyone can overlook the Obama Administration's actions:

to destroy America's exceptualism,
to take away so many of our historic freedoms, and
to speed the ultimate bankruptcy of our nation.

These may or may not have been caused by the Obama Administration, but they ALL have been made worse. There is simply no argument that Americans could have and should have been better served.

Webbs and Vondraks

2011-08-15T09:35:00.000-07:00

Ed . . . . Perhaps you would like to add these to your scrapbook?

1937

Dixon Sr.& Jr.

Need help to identify kids

Dixon Jr.

Mark Turner - Another Look

2010-12-26T09:18:00.000-08:00

MARK TURNER. I'm an interested ex-corporate exec., now retired, and have little to contribute to this. Perhaps you can help? At first I thought Mark's story was so complicated it couldn't be true. I discovered later that Mark's business may indeed have generated as much money as he said it did. His story is long and complicated, but regardless of his guilt or innocence, there is definitely something wrong with the legal process he encountered. Maggie Thornton says his business dealings were honest. I'm not thoroughly convinced, but she may be right. There is no question that he was improperly sentenced in one court, and deserves an appeal process in another.

I have received several comments from a blogger named "Anonymous". He (or she) has chosen to remain unknown but clearly has an inside track to information about Mark's problems. I have removed my original speculations from this blog and regret there were so many errors. Sorry folks, my fault entirely.

1.   When I first learned about Mark Turner I was told that he sold as many as 4,000 cars per year. Divided by 12 months that equals roughly 335 cars per month. Anonymous says that it never happened and that the quantity of cars sold was much less.

2.   Mark was accused by the D.A. of money laundering. There seems to have been no evidence to support this charge.

3.   Mark's civil lawyer (Jim Chase) was illegally threatened by the D.A. not to testify in Mark's behalf. He thereafter would NOT testify.

4.   The civil lawyer Jim Chase later decided to testify at Mark's criminal trial, but Mark's criminal lawyer (Beroset) did not call him to testify.

5.   Mark and Pete Moore had a verbal agreement whereby Pete would purchase 1/2 of Mark's Internet business. Pete has not honored this agreement.

6.   David Turner (Mark's brother) is heavily involved in Mark's problems.
           a. He tried to empty Mark Turner's bank account and failed.
          b.  He was involved in a suit against Hartford Insurance and the
               suit was dropped in a criminal trial by Judge Michael Jones -
           c. who also dropped David Turner's charge that Mark Turner
                removed his name from the original business checking
               account to take sole control of the company.
            d. David Turner was not the owner of Mark Turner's companies.
                Mark Turner was.

7.   David Turner did tell his son in law Anthony Ramsey to give him the days deposit of nearly $40,000 which he then deposited into his (David Turner's) wholesale account. This money belonged to Pete Moore and Mark Turner.

8.   David Turner did write Anthony Ramsey a check for $5,000 and gave him a car for helping him (steal) Mark and Pete's $40,000.

9.   Curiously, Anthony Ramsey continued to work for Pete Moore?

10. Pete Moore and his Attorney Mike Guttmann did testify (I need to clarify civil or criminal trial.)

11. Mike Guttmann testified that he personally handed Mark Turner's check for $205,000 to Pete Moore.

12. Mark Turner sued Pete Moore civilly for $36,000,000. Pete's insurance company lawyers came after Mark Turner so they would not have to pay.

13. One of those (civil case) lawyers (perhaps Kevin Hausfeld) went to the Escambia Sheriffs Office and was given (by Sgt. Busby) all state evidence for a SLAPP case against Mark. This lawyer knew there was a legal case which included this lawyer's client Pete Moore. This act was in violation of the "chain of evidence custody".

14. Per "Anonymous: It is our belief that Mark's CRIMINAL ATTORNEYS were in cahoots with the D.A. and Pete Moore. Mark's attorney had Pete as a previous client! He should have excused himself from representing Mark and never should have taken Mark's money because it was a conflict of interest"!

Bump

http://www.markturnerandfriends.com/main.aspx?page=peopleinvolved.htm

An Answer For Angelo

2010-11-03T10:15:00.000-07:00

Hi Ang . . .

Got your e-mail re: A "Message for the Tea Party Activists" and thought I might try to answer some of the comments from my perspective. First of all, I see the TEA Party people as patriotic Americans concerned about the recent liberal trend in the national political arena. I do not believe the TEA Party people are stupid. They are a loose confederation of generally conservative and libertarian types that think we would be better off if American politicians honored the brilliance of the founding documents that have served us so well. Not perfectly perhaps, but almost.

(1) Bush/Cheney disaster. I would add Rumsfeld and agree that the troika got many (most?) decisions wrong. I don't know any Conservative that approved the 2nd Bush term. It was a disaster.

(2) Supreme Court /Al Gore Won. This could have gone either way but with hindsight I suspect Gore was robbed. At the same time I have no doubt whatever that electing that arrogant dingbat would have resulted in a bigger mess than Bush Jr. created.

(3) Sorry, but I simply do not believe any part of this. Our so called "Energy Policy" presumably including our oil interests, had nothing to do with Bush's decision to start a pre-emptive war.

(4) No covert CIA operative was "outed". The person referred to was one step above a clerical nobody and married to an anti-American moron.

(5) The Patriot Act called for suspension of several laws. The reason given was that the government would be better able to protect Americans from terrorism. I don't believe it was ever proven effective - or ineffective. It did reduce several of our freedoms, and it is unlikely to be cancelled now that it is in place. Not good.

(6) America did not illegally invade an Iraq. Iraq openly threatened one of our staunchest allies (Israel) and proclaimed their intention to destabilize the entire region. Bush Jr. had a choice and he made it. Most conservatives I know do not believe that Don Rumsfeld's "war-on-the-cheap" was fought correctly. Our strength (air power) was idle while foot soldiers died. War is war. If we have to fight, we have to win.

(7) Every conservative I know objected strongly when Bush Jr. ran up the deficit.

(8) What 10 billion disappeared? You must mean the money that was lost during the distribution of humanitarian aid. Poor management, graft and outright theft accounted for nearly all of the missing money - and it was the U.N. agencies that were responsible.

(9) Torture is part of war. If the information obtained from one enemy can save 100 of our soldiers, it's worth it. To pussyfoot around legitimate information gathering from the enemy is nonsense.

(10) Bush Jr. never outsourced 6 million jobs. It didn't happen because of him or his administration. If it happened at all it was caused by the reality of free trade between nations.

(11) See Patriot Act (Number 5 above).

(12) Our failure to catch Bin Laden. This has to be the most embarrassing failure of all. The man is elusive but certainly we should have located and eliminated him by now. All conservatives would agree.

(13) See (Number 7) above.

(14) Walter Reed conditions. Every single conservative (and liberal) got mad. The deplorable conditions were/are a national disgrace.

(15) Failure at New Orleans. The most significant Katrina failures were at the local level. No relief agency coped well, and no local government entity did either. Complicating matters, relief from the Federal government was slow and ineffective. It was a bad show by everyone in charge.

(16) Trillions for the filthy rich. This is a tough one. It is the filthy rich that gamble big time investing in businesses that employ people. If we didn't have a graduated tax schedule, your contention might have more weight. Say, for example, that every worker was taxed 20% of his or her earnings. That means that the very few filthy rich people would actually pay less taxes and the huge number of blue collar workers would pay more. Despite their number the working people would not pay enough to cover the nation's bills. In order to do so the working stiff would have to pay at least 40% to 50% in taxes in order that the nation's government could function. There would be a lot of very unhappy working folks, and a comparative few filthy rich people complaining. And if a filthy rich person pays 0% to 50% in taxes - that person will still be filthy rich and the blue collar working people will be worse off rather than better off.

(17) Eight worst years of job creation. Agreed. The last Bush Jr. term + the first Obama term will be the 8 worst years of job creation and the 8 worst years of job losses that America has experienced in decades.

(18) 200,000 U.S. citizens lost their lives because of no health insurance. Frankly I think your figure of 200,000 is mis-leading. If it was true the logical inverse statement would be that about 99.94% of U.S. clitizens had health insurance - and that is just not accurate.

(19) The Bush Administration caused U.S. Citizens to lose 12 trillion dollars in investments, retirement, and home values. Where do these moronic and bogus ideas come from? Certainly the American and other world economies declined during the Bush and Obama Administrations. Financial markets in countries around the globe have seen drastic reductions in values and are said to be (hopefully) working their way out of a general recession. The Bush Jr. Administration had very, very little to do with it. Bush Jr., in his second term, tried a relatively small stimulus package that apparently had no real impact one way or another. Obama, after he took office, threw all caution to the wind and literally threw money at the recession. So far, and it is still a bit early to judge, it appears to have had almost no impact at all.

(20) Blame the black man. So all of America's problems are to be blamed on the black man who is our President. This is the worst lie of them all. American's elected Obama. They preferred him and wanted him. He promised youth and change and new ways to address our problems. He was open and clear about his intentions during his campaign. There is a lot of complaining now, but it comes from two major sources: 1. The opposition that voted against him and does not support his agenda, and 2. The few of the majority that did vote for him and did support his agenda until they finally realized that his agenda is to destroy American values, traditions, Constitutional laws and so forth. They woke up at last. If Mr. Obama was purple, white or green he would still get the same criticism.

Ang . . . We see the same things but through different prisms - but I have no wish to start a major conflict here. I look at this as a friendly difference of opinion and I welcome your thoughts. If nothing else they spur me to re-think my own.

Dixon

Mark Turner Notes

2010-11-01T14:25:00.000-07:00

I started writing about Mark Turner a few weeks ago. I attempted to sort out Mark's complicated problems but had incomplete information. I have since erased my attempt.

Mark's past used car business needs to be examined by a court appointed accountant. The Trial Judge and Prosecutor did not have the background to make a decision in Mark's case. They accused hims of money laundering and, he was found guilty, and they wrongly sentenced him and denied him an appeal.

Florida has it's own laws and rules, but regardless, Mark's case was not handled correctly. He should be granted a re-trial.

Three things stand out:

1. Mark Turner has been wrongly sentenced

to 3 terms of 12.5 years each in prison.

2. He (Mark) brought a $36,000,000 civil lawsuit

against Pete Moore in 2002 and it is still pending.

3. Pete Moore is a very slippery fellow.

Santa Ana Kiwanis 90 yrs. Strong

2010-10-31T16:14:00.000-07:00

The Kiwanis Club of Santa Ana has an outstanding monthly bulletin. It's full of news, projects, planning, and sometimes even a column by Amazing Clint. Because it is such a good communicator I want to use it to start a converstation about membership. Churches, Service Clubs and other Non-profit charitible organizations have experienced membership problems recently. Their influence has gradually eroded and for some the result is not good. The reasons why this is happening are not crystal clear but there is one characteristic that appears common to the problem:

A DECLINE IN RELEVANCE.

Such organizations usually have dwindling but committed core of ageing members. As they get older they find it increasingly difficult to participate and contribute, and realize that their organization is not attracting new and younger members, and at some point they find themselves with a serious membership problem.

IT'S AN OLD PROBLEM

I read somewhere that when Plato founded his academy (about 387 BC) it encouraged in the broadest possible way the intellectual pursuit of politics, philosophy, religion and science. When Plato died his student Aristotle continued as head of the Academy and continued it's work. Ultimately the collected works Plato and his successors formed the basis of modern philosophical thought. You probably wonder why I've included this little paragraph.

Plato's work developed encouraged a close relationship between Religion and the Sciences. It gained strength during the dark ages and reached a high point during the middle ages. Interestingly, though distinctly separate, church and state worked together. The dominant Catholic church was very powerful. Any head of state that dared disobey papal directives risked excommunication, seizure of properties, confiscation of wealth or worse. He (or she) also faced the attack of enemies fired with the "love of God" and the promise of wealth and power once the "enemy of the church" had been crushed.

Something is familiar there isn't it?

At some time point prior to the dark ages, science had been introduced through religion. The main alchemist's objective was the changing of base metals into gold. The objective of Religion at that time became the improvement of man. The church with it's monasteries and other institutions provided the centers of learning and research. A very few individuals were supported by the royal courts of the time, who in turn were generally under the close influence of the church.

Time passed and three things happened that changed the balance between Church and State. They were:

The Reformation (1517)
The French Revolution (1789-99)
The Industrial Revolution (1750-1850)

**************************
I've not finished this and yes there is a point. I'm just having trouble getting to it. 11-01-10

How Fast Is Fast

2010-10-22T09:14:00.000-07:00

Acceleration Explained

This was sent to me as an email, not sure on the total truth to it all, but interesting any way. Even if you're not a motor head, this is impressive.

* One Top Fuel dragster outfitted with a 500 cubic-inch replica Dodge (actually Keith Black, etc) Hemi engine makes more horsepower (8,000 HP) than the first 4 rows at NASCAR's Daytona 500.

* Under full throttle, a dragster engine will consume 11.2 gallons of nitro methane per second; a fully loaded Boeing 747 consumes jet fuel at the same rate but with 25% less energy being produced.

* A stock Dodge Hemi V8 engine cannot produce enough power to merely drive the dragster's supercharger.

* With 3000 CFM of air being rammed in by the supercharger on overdrive, the fuel mixture is compressed into a near-solid form before ignition. Cylinders run on the verge of hydraulic lockup at full throttle.

* At the stoichio metric 1.7:1 air/fuel mixture for nitro methane the flame front temperature measures 7050 degrees F.

* Nitro methane burns yellow. The spectacular white flame seen above the stacks at night is raw burning hydrogen, dissociated from atmospheric water vapor by the searing exhaust gases.

* Dual magnetos supply 44 amps to each spark plug. Which is typically the output of an electric arc welder in each cylinder.

* Spark plug electrodes are totally consumed during a pass. After 1/2 way thru the run, the engine is 'dieseling' from compression and the glow of the exhaust valves at 1400 degrees F. The engine can only be shut down by cutting the fuel flow.

* If spark momentarily fails early in the run, unburned nitro builds up in the affected cylinders and then explodes with enough sufficient force to blow the cylinder heads off the block in pieces or split the block in half!

* Dragsters reach over 300 MPH +... before you have completed reading this sentence.

* In order to exceed 300 MPH in 4.5 seconds, a dragster must accelerate an average of over 4 G's. In order to reach 200 MPH well before reaching half-track, at launch the acceleration approaches 8 G's.

* Top Fuel engines turn approximately 540 revolutions from light to light!

* Including the burnout, the engine must only survive 900 revolutions under load.

* The redline is actually quite high at 9500 RPM.

* THE BOTTOM LINE: Assuming all the equipment is paid for, the pit crew is working for free, & NOTHING BLOWS UP, each run will cost an estimated $1,000 per second.

0 to 100 MPH in .8 seconds (the first 60 feet of t he run)

0 to 200 MPH in 2.2 seconds (the first 350 feet of the run)

6 g-forces at the starting line (nothing accelerates faster on land)

6 negative g-forces upon deployment of twin 'chutes at 300 MPH

*********

An NHRA Top Fuel Dragster accelerates quicker than any other land vehicle on earth . . quicker than a jet fighter plane . . . quicker than the space shuttle....or snapping your fingers!!

The current Top Fuel dragster elapsed time record is 4.420 seconds for the quarter-mile (2004, Doug Kalitta). The top speed record is 337.58 MPH as measured over the last 66' of the run (2005, Tony Schumacher).

Let's now put this all into perspective:

Imagine this...........You are driving a new $140,000 Lingenfelter twin-turbo powered Corvette Z-06. Over a mile up the road, a Top Fuel dragster is staged & ready to 'launch' down a quarter-mile strip as you pass. You have the advantage of a flying start. You run the 'Vette hard, on up through the gears and blast across the starting line & pass the dragster at an honest 200 MPH.... The 'tree' goes green for both of you at that exact moment.

The dragster departs & starts after you. You keep your foot buried hard to the floor, and suddenly you hear an incredibly brutally screaming whine that sears and pummels your eardrums & within a mere 3 seconds the dragster effortlessly catches & passes you. He beats you to the finish line, a quarter-mile away from where you just passed him. Think about it - from a standing start, the dragster had spotted you 200 MPH.....and it not only caught, but nearly blasted you off the planet when he passed you within a mere 1320 foot long race !!!!

That, my friends.....is acceleration.

Bump

Post Office Example

2010-10-17T09:58:00.000-07:00

THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE SCAM

Most Conservatives and Libertarians point at the U.S. Post Office as an example of big-government's inability to run a business. Are they right? Yeah, they're right but in this case they are more than right. The U.S. Post Office has become one of the Federal Government's largest and most damaging scams. It's a racket like no other.

The Post Office employs 712,000 people - and the total average annual compensation is now $83,000 each. Does that surprise anyone?

How about this one: The Post Office is expected to lose over $238,000,000,000 during the next decade. It's a regular "black hole" to drop YOUR money in.

They (the Government Accountability Office) estimates that the Post Office will lose $550,000,000,000 between 2010 and 2030.

Did any of you know that the American Postal Workers Union had to postpone their annual election of officers this month . . . because so many of the ballots were lost in the mail?

With such a huge mis-managed drag on our economy, why do we persist year after year in not fixing it? Obviously, a major reform is needed. If not a complete government management overhaul, perhaps the Postal Service should be "privatized"?

My bet is that we will let the government continue to lose billions and billions of dollars every year for the foreseeable future. That is if the TEA Party folks don't get recognition in the GOP. That, I think, is our only hope.

Bump

Remembering Too Many Good Men

2010-10-16T16:42:00.000-07:00

A TRIBUTE TO THE MEN WHO

FLEW P-51 MUSTANGS IN WORLD WAR II

When I was a kid World War II began. My pals and I played war games with a battered old officer's hat and sticks for rifles. There was no television or other instant communications with the war. Information was filtered and then passed to us by radio and the newspapers. We tracked the war with Edward R. Murrow, Ernie Pyle, Bill Mauldin, Life Magazine, and the Movietone News. You know, the film strip that showed just after the serial and before the movie. Then one of the gang was given a silver First Lieutenant's bar and we thereafter always had a Colonel and a 1st Looie.

A couple of years in, probably 1940 or 41, most of the guys graduated to Red Ryder's Daisy BB guns. We set up targets. We drew pictures of the nation's enemies and then we shot'em to pieces. The air war particularly excited all of us. The heroic planes and pilots were idolized. In school, most of the guys spent the day looking out the window for an airplane passing by. We just knew that if we were first to spot an enemy plane we could be a hero too.

The war was not a "police action" and our fighting men were not "political advisers". Everyone around us was involved. There were Liberty Bonds, Victory Gardens, and USO dances down near the train station. Parents saved grease from the kitchen and turned it in to the local butcher shop. Gasoline was rationed with little A - B - C stickers glued to the windshield. Soldiers were looked up to. If there had been a "high five" in those days, everyone in uniform would have received dozens every day.

It was surely a different world then - and it will never come again.

This video presentation is riveting to anyone remotely interested in the people and machines that fought World War II. It helps a person understand a flier's love and respect for his aircraft. I recommend this one highly. Bump

http://www.asb.tv/videos/view.php?v=1bf99434&br=500

Senior Citizen's Song

2010-10-11T09:49:00.000-07:00

This video had me laughing so much I fell off the chair. I just had to give it home, so here 'tis on my blog:

Bump

My Friend Ben Stein

2010-10-05T16:23:00.000-07:00

The following was written by Ben Stein and recited by him on CBS Sunday Morning Commentary. What a wonderful attitude. What a great outlook. This is wisdom from the top of the mountain and deserves a blog on it's own.

Ben's confession:

I am a Jew, and every single one of my ancestors was Jewish. And it does not bother me even a little bit when people call those beautiful lit up, bejeweled trees, Christmas trees... I don't feel threatened.. I don't feel discriminated against.. That's what they are, Christmas trees.

It doesn't bother me a bit when people say, 'Merry Christmas' to me. I don't think they are slighting me or getting ready to put me in a ghetto. In fact, I kind of like it. It shows that we are all brothers and sisters celebrating this happy time of year. It doesn't bother me at all that there is a manger scene on display at a key intersection near my beach house in Malibu .. If people want a creche, it's just as fine with me as is the Menorah a few hundred yards away.

I don't like getting pushed around for being a Jew, and I don't think Christians like getting pushed around for being Christians. I think people who believe in God are sick and tired of getting pushed around, period. I have no idea where the concept came from, that America is an explicitly atheist country. I can't find it in the Constitution and I don't like it being shoved down my throat.

Or maybe I can put it another way: where did the idea come from that we should worship celebrities and we aren't allowed to worship God as we understand Him? I guess that's a sign that I'm getting old, too. But there are a lot of us who are wondering where these celebrities came from and where the America we knew went to.

In light of the many jokes we send to one another for a laugh, this is a little different: This is not intended to be a joke; it's not funny, it's intended to get you thinking.

In light of recent events... terrorists attack, school shootings, etc.. I think it started when Madeleine Murray O'Hare (she was murdered, her body found a few years ago) complained she didn't want prayer in our schools, and we said OK. Then someone said you better not read the Bible in school. The Bible says thou shalt not kill; thou shalt not steal, and love your neighbor as yourself. And we said OK.

Then Dr. Benjamin Spock said we shouldn't spank our children when they misbehave, because their little personalities would be warped and we might damage their self-esteem (Dr. Spock's son committed suicide). We said an expert should know what he's talking about.. And we said okay.

Now we're asking ourselves why our children have no conscience, why they don't know right from wrong, and why it doesn't bother them to kill strangers, their classmates, and themselves.

Probably, if we think about it long and hard enough, we can figure it out. I think it has a great deal to do with 'WE REAP WHAT WE SOW.'

Funny how simple it is for people to trash God and then wonder why the world's going to hell. Funny how we believe what the newspapers say, but question what the Bible says. Funny how you can send 'jokes' through e-mail and they spread like wildfire, but when you start sending messages regarding the Lord, people think twice about sharing. Funny how lewd, crude, vulgar and obscene articles pass freely through cyberspace, but public discussion of God is suppressed in the school and workplace.

Are you laughing yet?

Bump

More Than A Little Sad

2010-10-03T11:30:00.000-07:00

When a person slows down enough to look around everything he sees are the negative TV news of the depressing headlines of the morning newspaper. A drink of coffee might help absorb the latest disasters, murders, bloody accidents, and earthquakes, but probably not. It's simply not a cheerful picture. Our world is going to hell faster and faster.

Somebody, I think the Heritage Foundation, estimated that only about 2% of the world's Muslims were dangerous fanatics. That sounded pretty good until I realized the 2% of 1.6 billion is 32,000,000. Now that is a hell of a lot of people that want the rest of us infidels in pine boxes six feet under. Are you smiling yet?

We presently have ourselves tied in a knot over the middle east. Two things drew us in to this mess; oil and Israel. President Bush was advised that Iraq was a danger to both. It wasn't. His intelligence was dead wrong and it led to his wrong decision to start the so-called liberating war with Iraq. After mobilizing and getting the war underway, President Bush, for some unknown reason, forgot the principles and people that got him elected. Bush began spending like a drunken Democrat and his term in office became a political and economic disaster.

"Bash Bush First" became the rule of the day, and Bush made it easy. He did a few of good things while in office, but not nearly enough to offset the criticism. Now Bush, Jr. is off on his ranch in Texas and President Obama is now in charge.

Good Lord! He is ten times worse than Bush, Jr.! ! !

We elected, for the first time ever, an ego driven, socialist inspired revolutionary who is determined to destroy America. Our political situation at home and abroad could hardly be worse, but Mr. Obama is trying. We got in this mess because Americans have changed and no longer follow the principles laid down by the Founding Fathers. We no longer hear much about honesty, integrity, and "do onto others as you would have done onto you". Those concepts are considered obsolete by the Obama administration.

And nobody reads Horatio Alger any more. The idea of individual initiative, hard work, and raising a person by his own boot-straps, is laughed at. Typically, it has been replaced with; "how much can I cheat on my income tax, how can I squeeze more welfare out of the government, what exaggeration can I put on my resume that can't be proved wrong, what's the best way to cheat my neighbor and not get caught, and what ever happens to me is not my fault so who do I sue for damages?" Think I'm wrong? Read the newspapers.

A very unstable Islamic ruled Iran may soon be able to manufacture atomic bombs. An even more unstable Islamic Pakistan already is able to make atomic bombs, and so can the world's most desperate nation, North Korea. No wonder the rest of the world is nervous.

Christian churches in America are shutting down, and Islamic Mosques are being built in their place. Most of these new Mosques are financed by Saudi Arabia's Radical Wahhabist Muslims - who are determined to subjugate Americans or die trying. Are you still comfortable?

Enough already.

Bump

Women Convert to Islam. Why?

2010-09-28T10:04:00.000-07:00

It amazes me that ANY American women convert to Islam, but they do. In most cases the attraction is either unexplainable or irrational in view of the subjugation and loss of gender equality and societal freedom they knowingly accept. The following three links offer most of their reasons.

1.      http://www.islamfortoday.com/evans01.htm

2.      http://www.sultan.org/articles/convert.html

3.      http://wasalaam.wordpress.com/2007/07/16/why-do-women-convert-to-islam/

These converts KNOW that their peaceful new religion does this to women:

UNBELIEVABLE

Bump

America's Math and Science Future

2010-09-25T15:46:00.000-07:00

Most American colleges and universities teach politically liberal philosophies. When we wonder where Mr. Obama and his supporters learned their far left political ideas, we have only to look as far the schools they came from.

A student's education forms the foundation of his knowledge. It should be no surprise that left liberal biased teachers will produce left liberal students.

The teaching of MATHEMATICS and THE SCIENCES are usually free of political and philosophical biases. Interestingly, the modern world has come to value these subjects as major enablers of progress. Sadly, compared to other nations teaching MATH and the SCIENCES, America is not providing students with a competitive education. This is a definite problem and we don't seem to be addressing it.

HERE'S LOOKING AT YOU KID

Among all nations our High School Graduates rank 14th in MATHEMATICS.

They rank 15th in the SCIENCES.

Among to other nations the starting wage of our primary school teachers ranks 5th.

And spending on EDUCATION as a percent of GDP, America ranks 37th.

These statistics indicate that our educational system is not as good as it could be. If it is not improved, America will continue to fall further behind.

There are other statistics that indicate most American HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATES are not prepared to do college or university work. Many colleges and universities have to offer remedial (high school) classes for the student's freshman year. This does not speak well of our INTERMEDIATE and HIGH SCHOOLS, which is where our higher education problems begin.

It is a particularly significant handicap for those students who wish to further their education in MATHEMATICS and/or the SCIENTIFIC STUDIES.

Bump

U.S. Taxpayers Build Mosques. Why?

2010-09-05T11:15:00.000-07:00

Everyday I am more amazed at our government. Somebody up there on the pedestal actually voted to take my taxes and give the money to Muslims who want to build or restore Mosques. Unbelievable, but apparently true.

1. In 2003 our JUSTICE DEPARTMENT declared that the U.S. Constitution's "Establishment Clause" did not prevent federal funds from going to preserve religious structures - IF THEY HAD CULTURAL IMPORTANCE. They never did figure out just who should decide what religious structure is or isn't culturally important. I wonder if anyone in the Justice Department is awake?

2. There are currently over 20 projects being at least partially funded by U.S. FEDERAL FUNDS to construct, renovate, or rehabilitate Mosques around the world. Who is authorizing this?

3. When was the U.S. Ambassadors Fund For Cultural Preservation established? By whom?

4. The U.S. Ambassadors Fund For Cultural Preservation (A.F.C.P) is currently funding or planning to fund "heritage preservation" projects in the developing world" - which is a phrase that hides the financing of Mosques and Mosque related projects. This is not how I want MY taxes spent. How about you.

5. Hillary Clinton apparently thinks this is a good way for America to exercise what she calls "soft power". No, she isn't kidding.

6. The United States Agency for International Development (U.S.A.I.D.) has spent MILLIONS reconstructing and financing several Mosques in Egypt and Cyprus. Did you vote for that? I didn't.

7. Why is the U.S. taxpayer funding Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf's trip to the middle east? Exactly who in our government stupidly approved this?

Does ANYBODY in our government realize that WE ARE AT WAR with radical Muslims and several of these radical groups (like the Muslim Brotherhood) are the slickest and most dangerous con-men that America has ever been at war with. Is anyone investigating the Muslims who are receiving this money?

Apparently not.

Bump

The RNC Has No Leader or Platform

2010-09-02T09:54:00.000-07:00

HERE WE GO AGAIN !

Bloggers pump out daily drivel and most goes where it is needed . . . the great eraser dust in the sky. But is there a grain of truth hidden in the mountain of verbiage? Maybe. But it's well hidden and one must suffer through the liberal hog-wash to find it.

America needs honesty and integrity. Where in the hell did they go? Everybody proudly cheats on their taxes. What else do they cheat on? The government is run by people that were once committed to serve others. That was when they turned two years old. After that it became a game of who has the most toys. Greed came in and ruined the soup.

Now we have a government that we all deserve. They spend whatever and pay for it by printing money. Inflation will save us they say. Take another drink and spend some more. It cost us nothing. The bill will be sent to our future generations. We pay nothing. It's the ol' free lunch syndrome. We get the free lunch. Future generations get the bill. Now what could be more wonderful than that?

Two political parties fight tooth and nail with the single minded purpose of keeping their jobs. Citizens can go hang as long as they get theirs. The Democrats have been invaded by the freebie weasels. Socialism does not work and they know it. It's just a scheme to level humanity. The idea that everyone should be six feet tall and have brain power equal to all their neighbors is positively stupid. That's why Democrats chase that idea in every direction. The mistakenly figure that creating sameness, eliminating competition and paying everybody the same wage no matter what their worth . . . . will result in a world without greed. These brilliant liberal-socialist really believe that destroying history that contradicts their stupidity is going to result in a better world.

Well, Democrats, you are nutso. Common sense over-rules your plan to do nothing and get paid the big buck to do it. Sorry pal, the free lunch idea is dead and it's time you returned to American values and traditions. It's time you realized that individuals can be motivated by something other than welfare and free lunches.

Then we come to the Republicans. What a sorry bunch of spineless losers. These people take first prize in the dumbo contest. The RNC is a toothless disaster in need of a root canal. Michael the boss is 90% clueless. Time to go Mike. Sarah Palin might be rightfully be appointed to some office or another some day, has developed a recent history that suggests she will not be elected President or Vice President . . ever. Despite her outstanding record, sharp as a tack mind, strong conservative leanings, and willingness to speak the simple truth to the unwashed crowds, Sarah would be a terrific cheerleader-money raiser and head of the RNC.

Sarah Palin and her panel of common sense could and would develop a strong Republican platform that conservative and moderate Republicans could sell to the voters. The platform would launch the careers of several attractive candidates for office. There are, believe it or not, many very bright and articulate moderate conservatives in the Republican party who are champing at the bit to rectify the Obama Administration catastrophe and erase the long term death spiral course they have tried to set. The plain fact is that the common sense, tradition oriented, free market promoters are not getting their points across. There is no apparent unity among them. Conservative leaning moderate Republicans must get up front and lead. If they don't, America is headed down that old slippery slope to oblivion.

Our nation is founded upon the freedom documents given to us to guide our society. Republican must restore them to their pedestals and return the government to their principles. To do so they will have to win elections. To win elections Republicans must develop and agree on a strong minded platform of intentions.

Let's get it done, people.

Bump

How Can Any Of Us Be So Stupid

2010-08-31T10:23:00.000-07:00

The political debate is becoming ridiculous. The venom that flows makes an unintelligible impact. Yet we, the unwashed and supposedly stupid citizens, are expected to make sense of the political debate. It's almost impossible. Our political system attracts a fairly wide spectrum of talent yet a large segment of Congress were lawyers at one time. So right off the mark we can extrapolate that most members of Congress have received at least part of their education from a college or university and that many have gone on to become a lawyer. Think about that for a moment. The apprentice political people we have elected to govern are most often the upper crust or elite of our society.

Why then do so many become corrupt and greedy once in office?

These people started out pretty good. They really did know right from wrong and so forth, but then something happened. They found that to channel their efforts in the direction they wished to go, they must bargain and compromise. These two elements are the name of the game. They rule politics anywhere and everywhere. So let's take another look at our lawyer dominated Congress, our lawyer dominated President's office and cabinet, and our lawyers on the Supreme Court.

These three branches of our American government were established with complimentary and relatively equal power. Each branch was to watch over the other two and in that way reduce the opportunity for mischief. Does it work? Has it worked? The answer dodges the question. The answer is that our entire government is operated by people who have never run a small business, produced a product, or competed in a market. These (probably) elite young people with (probably) wealthy parents who were able to send them college or an university . . . . . where they were taught by liberal educators who usually had no work experience outside of academia. It is no surprise therefore, that the young adults graduating and entering American politics tend to have a liberal (big government) bias. It's built into the system.

Most of the politicians (and their appointed or hired help) work their way up the ladder in the normal way . . . at first. They serve, advise and otherwise help their boss. They learn the ways and means of getting things accomplished, and they learn the importance of compromise and trading votes.

At this point the advocates for selfish interests show up. These people, the LOBBYISTS, are paid specifically to influence the government in a way that benefits their employer. Lobbying is not a new idea. It more or less began in America when the nation was founded, and over the years since, lobbyist's have paid hundreds of millions of dollars (from their bosses) to government representatives and employees in an effort to benefit their interests. They have supplied beautiful women, expensive gifts, and often obscured the source of their largess. It is their job to influence our government, and since World War II it has become accepted that Democrats and Republicans are now (almost equally) dependent on campaign contributions and perks they get from lobbyists.

The huge (but unknown) amount of money used by lobbyists to influence our government creates a tremendous opportunity for corruption. It is a powerful part of our government, and so pervasive that our three basic branches are actually four branches:

1. Executive
2. Legislative
3. Judicial
4. Lobbyist-Money-Gifts-Donations-Influence

The American political process has strayed from the system established by our founders. For reasons unforeseen by them, the training ground, apprenticeship and ultimnate ambition for American politicians has changed from:

1. One that interprets the founding documents as restrictions on government size and power, values the individual freedom of citizens, and encourages the least amount of government interference with individual initiative.

2. One that believes in changing the interpretation of our founding documents to allow increasing government size and power to increase dependency of indiviuals and cause the consequent reduction of individual freedoms resulting in a more controlled society.

Those very few words offer a fairly good abreviated description of the REPULICAN and the DEMOCRAT party.

We, the citizens of America, have lost confidence in our own nation. Starting with partisan politics, we no longer trust either major political party. Neither is representative of the majority of voters, and each has splintered into several sub-parties. The most important of these are the CONSERVATIVE and the LIBERAL wings, and each of these is further divided by the LIBERTARIAN and the SOCIALIST sub-wings. Neither major political party can mount a platform that pleases everyone in their party. It's become impossible.

The Republican Party has a Conservative and Libertarian wing.

The Democrat Party has a Liberal and Socialist wing.

There is little overlap between them, and at the present time neither cooperates with the other. The antimosity between them has poisoned the process of governing. The Bloggers that can not separate the vindictive "let's blame the other guy" rhetoric from what is actually happening have little to add to the debate. Back now to my original question: How can any of us be so stupid?

Bump

Are All Muslims Our Enemy?

2010-08-26T11:48:00.000-07:00

My infinite wisdom has let me down again.

After 9/11 and reading about the reactions around the world, I concluded that America was soon to be tested. Terrorism had definitely arrived on our virgin shores - and would not be going away until we learned how to deal with it. All Americans were confused. We quickly learned that the terrorists that carried out the attack were neither stupid nor cowards. We didn't understand them at all. In our experience, educated, capable people just didn't drive airliners into buildings. But it was done.

What would motivate an individual to do such a horrendous act? Instantly, from our long exposure to the on-going terror faced by Israel, we knew the answer would be tied to the PEACEFUL RELIGION OF ISLAM. It was clearly in our best interest to study this, the second largest religion in the world. We obviously would have to know our new enemy better than we did before 9/11.

These Youtube videos provide a pretty good summary of Islam and it's danger to western and advanced societies. Unfortunately I've not been able to assure myself that all of the facts presented are accurate, yet I am reasonably sure they are. So please open the following links and let me know if you agree:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ib9rofXQl6w&feature=player_embedded

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-871902797772997781&q#

The Holy Book of Islam is the Quran. Mulims can not pick and choose the verses they like, and ignore those verses they do not like. All Muslims, moderate, radical, fundamentalist, fanatical or whatever . . . are supposed to obey the entire Quran.

Doesn't this fact indicate that ALL MUSLIMS are the enemy of non-believers (infidels) wherever they are? This is a definitive question that I've asked two of my Muslim friends and neither has a ready answer . . . . ? Why not.

Because the Quran does instruct ALL MUSLIMS that they are allowed to, and should, lie about anything if it will advance the expansion of Islam. Doesn't this apply to any question asked of a MUSLIM? Apparently it does.

ALL MUSLIMS ARE OUR ENEMY - OR IF NOT, WHY?

Bump

My Liberal Friend Rain - Again

2010-08-25T15:05:00.000-07:00

Hi Rain . . . Just read your blog "Answering some questions with my opinions" and found it as thought provoking your thoughts usually are. We agree on who carried out the 9/11 attack. We agree that we have a pretty good reason to go after the "terrorist group within Islam", and we agree that President Bush made several elementary mistakes in his decision to make war on blustering Iraq. We agree that Iraq did not attack America and if it had any part in the 9/11 disaster, it was certainly (and well known at the time) a very, very small part. They may (or may not) have had one or more of the terrorist plotters as a guest for a temporary and insignificant short time living on Iraqi soil. That was Iraq's one and only connection to 9/11, and to this day we are not certain about it.

Hindsight proves that President Bush never should have attacked a nation (Iraq) that had not attacked us. The notion of beginning a preemptive war is non-sense . . . but if we are going to start one it should be against a REAL ENEMY. Iraq was not.

My memory is slipping but I honestly don't remember anyone saying that we wanted to go to war in Iraq TO PROTECT Muslims. I do remember hearing that we were "going to war to protect Israel and to stabilize the middle east". I also remember reading in several places that the war in Iraq was really about oil and protecting Americas supply.

Shortly AFTER our preemptive strike President Bush said (in so many words) that this war was an opportunity to depose a brutal dictator and rebuild the country and it's government in a democratic style that allowed citizens a voice. This statement was pure P.T.Barnum.

You are absolutely right when you question America's military presence in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan or Yemen. You MIGHT be very wrong when you claim that Muslims (Radical, Moderate, or just Stupid) do not want to take over the United States and install SHARIA LAW. That is EXACTLY what the Desert Arab Radical Islamists have been SCREAMING at America for decades. That is EXACTLY what all Muslims are directed to do by the Qu'ran . . . and I didn't get this from anybody named Breitbart. It is common knowledge available from almost any reliable source.

Reading Lolita in Tehran was a terrific and very instructive book.

Of course ALL Muslims do not want to live under Sharia Law . . . but do they have a voice?

I am firmly behind religious tolerance . . . but I do draw lines. Jim Jones was not a religious leader and he caused many people to die. Rev. Jesse Jackson and Rev. Al Sharpton are rather pathetic charlatans, and despite his awful rhetoric, Rev. Louis Farakhan is the religious leader of the Black Islamic Church In America. I don't think he does his flock much good, but I have not read or heard that he (or his church) advocates the overthrow of our government or murdering people that won't join up. So it's at least possible that he (and his church) are legit. I think common sense can usually figure out what is or is not a real religion.

BUT THE ISSUE IS NOT ABOUT RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE.

THE ISSUE IS WHETHER WE SHOULD SUBMIT TO AN ENEMY WHO HAPPENS TO BE HIDDEN IN THE FOLDS OF ISLAM AND CLAIMS TO BE JUSTIFIED BY THE QU'RAN.

I doubt that I even mentioned Mr. Obama.

Regarding your questions about the early versus the later passages in the Qu'ran. The first part of the Qu'ran pre-dates the latter part, and is referred to as generally moderate, peace loving, and beautiful. The second and last part of the Qu'ran does indeed rule over the first. In other words, a passage in the second part can and does change, modify, reverse or erase the passage in the first part. The last time the subject is addressed in the Qu'ran is the correct passage.

Even more interesting, ALL Muslims are required to follow the Qu'ran exactly. They are not permitted to interpret - nor are they permitted to disregard - the passages they don't agree with.

Somewhere in your blog you infer "that I don't want to answer your questions about Islam". I'm pretty sure you have me mixed up with someone else. I study more and more about Islam every day . . . and I'm usually not hesitant to answer questions.

Back to FREEDOM OF RELIGION. I guess we disagree on what this statement means. The old saw "my freedom extends only as far as your nose" comes to mind. I do not believe in UNLIMITED freedom of any kind - including unlimited freedom of religion.

And lastly, I am not "turning" on all Muslims living in America. Their failure to purge these radical terrorists or otherwise disassociate themselves from them is a clear indication that they have "turned" on us.

Whew!

Bump

The Ongoing Debate With Rain

2010-08-20T10:25:00.000-07:00

Hi Rain . . .

When a person has descended from Irish and Highlander stock you can expect an argumentative result. From the get-go I've enjoyed your bright and sometimes stubborn prose. It's obvious that you are smarter than I am (durn it) - and also write better. My only weapon is common sense and a pretty good idea of what is right and what is wrong.

Fly In Ointment Commander

Not long ago you replied to one of my regular epistles about the religion of Islam. I know I tend to speak with a forked tongue sometimes, but I usually keep my written stuff close to what I really believe. There is, however, a leprechaun living in my keyboard that now and then pushes the envelope. When my text is displayed on the screen I don't always realize that I've gone over the top. You know, a bit too far.

I rely on you and other bloggers to pull me back from the abyss. Your recent reply was precisely that, an attempt to get me to back off and smell the roses. It worked. The subject that caused your objection was, I think, my bald statement that "ALL MUSLIMS ARE OUR ENEMY". You are right and I should tone this statement down. The word ALL has to be erased. Consider it done. My reasoning was not faulty but my emphasis was. There is no question in my mind that radical, fundamentalist Muslims have declared WAR upon Americans. This enemy is small in numbers, but nevertheless they are an able, vicious and dangerous enemy. They can not be ignored.

Your recent reply centered on Ground Zero and my attitude toward religious power. In answer to your specific questions:

1. You say that I said Christianity was incapable of being involved in an aggressively political movement. I did not (ever) say that.

2. You say that religion in ultimate power is a problem. I agree.

3. You ask does that mean the religion of Islam should be banned here? I suggest America should take a very close look at this question. Islam is an ideology more than a religion, and it is joined at the hip with the Islamic political movement and Sharia. It is perhaps more of a political-legal ideology than it is a religion at all. This ideology specifically seeks to overthrow and control our government and replace our laws with Sharia. If some other other movement or religious sect were to advocate the violent overthrow of our government we would consider them to be hostile and jail or deport them. I am no longer sure that is an over reaction.

4. You say that most Americans fear that Islam is a serious threat and may be able to take over America. I think that is accurate. To not think so is dangerous to our country.

5. You say it is one thing to build a memorial to a catastrophic event and another to turn it into a holy shrine. I agree.

5. Your analogy of comparing highway deaths to the number of people killed (murdered) at the Twin Towers is not a particularly convincing one. The 3,000 deaths on 9/11 are more related to the World War II attack at Pearl Harbor. It seems to me that just because more people are killed auto accidents each month than are killed in Iraq, doesn't make the War in Iraq more or less important. And a fisherman that goes down when his boat fails off the Oregon coast is just as important as a person killed in the 9/11 tragedy. If the fisherman believed in religion, there is nor reason he people should not erect a Holy Shrine reflecting his faith. But after an attack like 9/11 where thousands of people were killed and they belonged to no specific religion, they should not be given a Holy Shrine but rather a non-sectarian, non-religious, non-partisan shrine where the victims family and friends might gather and mourn in their own private way, and our nation's can recognize the event forever.

6. You say that our tradition of freedom should be extended to an Islamic sponsored commemorative Islamic Center near ground zero. I, as you would expect, disagree. I look at Islam as an enemy and any new Islamic Center or Mosque as an abomination and insult to America. Notice that my statement encompasses ALL Islamic building anywhere in America. These people are a direct and active threat to our government and way of life. They have declared war upon us. Their Islamic Centers are planned and financed by the hostile centers of Islamic expansion. They want Americans to submit to Islam or die, and they still expect us to allow more centers of evil to be built all across America. Until the religion of Islam no longer threatens people, no longer has the public purpose of destroying America, and until Muslims accept the domination of their host country's laws over Sharia . . . Americans should treat Islam as an enemy and give them nothing.

Bump

New Immigrant Propulsion System Seen At The Border

2010-08-17T10:32:00.000-07:00

This one struck my funny bone about a year ago. Another copy arrived this morning and struck it again. Apparently Democrats have no interest in preserving our country for future generations. They look at illegal immigrants as future Democrats. Are they nuts? The overwhelming numbers of immigrants passing over our southern borders has visibly started to degrade America and it's prosperity. Of course, welfare for some is badly needed and a blessing, but for a larger number recipients it is a heavy iron collar around their necks. When we provide welfare for this latter group, it is counter productive at best. It teaches dependence, stifles ambition and results in perpetual poverty.

The majority of poor and uneducated Hispanic people crossing our southern borders are sapping the strength and well being of American citizens. Across the nation there is apparently no resistance to legal immigrants that follow American rules and laws. It is widely believed that the laws on our books provide a system of regulating the influx of immigrants as well as filtering their quality by requiring certain conditions if they plan to stay.

It is very possible that our system needs an overhaul and updating, but for partisan political reasons our Federal Government has, until recently, REFUSED TO APPLY ANY OF THOSE LAWS AND CONDITIONS. Like the man says:

Stupid is as Stupid does.

Nostalgia 1950-60 Best Yet

2010-08-06T11:43:00.000-07:00

I just received an e-mail from a friend, an 86 year old Sons of Norway member. He's been selling tickets for a Kiwanis program I'm in charge of and the last sentence of his note tickled my funny bone:

"I think I've sold the last ticket possible
- because everyone else I know is
deceased."

If you are in the older than sand category, I think you will like what you find on the following link. Give it a try.

It's a good one.

http://oldfortyfives.com/TakeMeBackToTheFifties.htm

end

Weapons For Everybody - Yes or No

2010-08-03T15:49:00.000-07:00

I was originally from Minnesota where I lived up north for a time. In hunting country. I found out at an early age that I didn't enjoy hunting at all. I learned that I actually HATE the idea of killing little or big critters. It's just so damn unfair.

Our ancestors may have had to hunt for food. That doesn't trouble me. Not much anyway. I must admit that it would be difficult for me to work as a butcher taking animals apart. I've had to gut and skin a few small animals. Not my favorite thing to do. When I was about 14 years old I said; "never again".

I was 16 when I drove with a couple of friends to the Kratka Ridge Skiing Area up Angeles Crest Highway. The car was a brand spanking new Volvo P2. Small as a VW Bug but with an engine twice the size. At the end of the day on the hill we were exhausted. Shadows on the moguls made skiing difficult if not dangerous. We packed up and started back down the highway. By the time we were about half way home it had become dark and a thick fog slowed us to about 30 miles an hour. As we twisted and turned down the road there was an instant movement and a WHOMP.

We had unavoidably hit a small deer, or rather it had hit us. The poor animal was laying on top of the snow plowed berm next to the road. It was awake, hurt, bleeding from the nose and mouth, and terribly frightened. One of our guys tried to approach it. It screamed and scrambled to stand on three legs. One hung limp and was obviously broken and dragging. The deer managed to limp about 6 feet toward toward some bushes. Then it fell and died. All of us damn near cried.

We turned back to the car parked at the side of the road about 20 feet away. The left front fender and the hood were badly dented. The right side of the windshield was dented outward where my head hit it, and the glass shattered. (Pre-seat belt days.) It was the top of my head that hit the windshield and one of my friends looked at me and told me I was bleeding from what looked like a dozen small cuts. Other than that, and my bruised and hurting head, no one else was hurt. Except the deer of course.

The memory of the accident is clear in my mind some 60 years later. The event was the exact date that I determined never to hurt living animals, ever. My promise to myself was more than simply intending to not hunt anymore. It was a positive instant that became a soft spot in my heart for animals, big and small.

So, in the 5 years between 1947 and 1952 I swore off hunting. I had learned how to handle a rifle 22 gauge, a handgun (32 caliber) and a small shotgun (410). Since that time I've never pointed a gun at a living animal. When I was in the USAF I learned to shoot an officers 45 automatic pistol and a M-1 Carbine. I was a good shot. My experience with guns is not impressive, but if I had to use one I could. Linda and I have never felt the need to have a gun in the house for protection. We figured that with our little kids running around, a gun posed more of a danger than any kind of intruder. In today's world I am re-thinking on that - and the kids are gone now.

Should every adult American have the right to purchase and keep a gun? I reallly don't think so. Yet, it is one of our freedoms and should not be trifled with. I think that common sense rules must qualify a person to purchase and own guns. There are too many troubled adults in our society for us to sell guns like a loaf of bread. Guns can be dangerous in the wrong hands.

I think I will ponder that for a while before answering.

And Our Kool Aid Leadership Fails

2010-08-03T10:30:00.000-07:00

WHILE WE GO DOWN IN FLAMES HE PLAYS GOLF

SMILE BEFORE IT GETS WORSE

Like most of you I am up to my eyeballs in nasty political rhetoric. The extremes of partisan politics are tearing us apart - and doing great harm to America in the process. Most of the vehement anger is between:

    [ULTRA LEFT LIBERAL DEMOCRATS]
                         and
[FAR RIGHT CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICANS]

The extremes of neither party offer a workable system of government.

LIBERAL-SOCIALISTS vs CONSERVATIVE-LIBERTARIANS

The differences between these two groups have divided our government into hostile partisan camps at a time that our WORLD is rapidly becoming more dangerous. America should be presenting a strong and UNITED front. Not everyone in other countries realizes that most Americans gravitate toward the middle in respect to their politics. Most Americans follow neither extreme. They are proud that they can have civil discussions and debates about their political opinions.

The people of other countries, blinded by the spectacular rhetoric of the extremes in American politics, do not envision America as a nation with common principles. They do not realize that most Americans are not as politically disunited as it would seem.

PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATIONS LEAVE UNFINISHED WORK

When a President leaves office and a new President steps in, the transition has always been peaceful despite the carry over of unfinished legislation and unwanted decisions. Once the new administration is settled in, it is normal that the voters rarely hear anything good about the previous administration. The new guys endeavor to blame the old ones for every problem. Sometimes, perish the thought, they even embellish the failures of the previous administration. The current Obama people, for example, have carried this ["BLAME THE PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION"] excuse to a new low.

Mr. Obama told voters "It's a choice between the policies that led us into this mess and the policies that are leading us out of this mess." Okay. What exactly were the policies that created this mess? He complained that most of the mess resulted from tax cuts. When he took office he had the power to cancel them, but he didn't. Why?

Mr. Obama told the voters "The tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 CAUSED the housing crash in 2007 and 2008." Okay. There is no evidence that this is true. None. The statement was just another attempt to blame the previous administration for the collapse.

THE OBAMOBILE 2010

Mr. Obama told the voters "The Bush tax cuts fueled the out of control deficit?" Okay. Mr. Obama did not explain that while it is true that in 2007 the deficit was about $165 Billion Dollars when Mr. Bush took office and over ONE TRILLION dollars when he left office, it is a fact that the Obama administration immediately INCREASED the deficit to over $13 TRILLION dollars by massive spending on entitlement programs. The Obama administration told Americans that: "Deficits were better than surpluses in a down economy." America is now on the edge of bankruptcy and Mr. Bush had little or nothing to do with it. Mr. Obama and his administration did.

As for the housing bust, in 1999 and important bi-partisan financial deregulation was signed into law by President Clinton. It was the result of the rising housing bubble and bust. Mr. Obama has attempted, over and over again, to blame this legislation on Mr. Bush. He continues to do so despite knowing that Mr. Bush was not even in office at the time.

Interestingly, Mr. Obama knows that the real reason for the housing bust was that

"Federal Reserve Board Chairman, Ben Bernanke, FAILED to increase interest rates fast enough." Why then did Mr. Obama retain and promote Ben Bernanke to be the Federal Reserve Board Chairman?" Curious, isn't it.

Another curiosity. The housing bust was followed by the banking industry bust, and it was NOT anticipated by Mr. Timothy Geithner, who was then the head of the New York Federal Bank (which oversees the Wall Street Stock Market). Mr. Geithner had failed to foresee, stabilize, protect and prevent bank failures and a stock market collapse. That was his job. Knowing this, why did Mr. Obama retain and promote Tim Geithner to be the National Treasury Secretary?"

Rhetorical: Doesn't this sound like the inmates are running the asylum?

End

Things That Go Bump & Other Irritations

2010-08-02T13:52:00.000-07:00

Minor Irritations . . .and More

When you answer the phone you say hello

and the caller asks "who am I talking to please?'

Defining what is, is.

Mail addressed to you and asking you to

fill in your name and address and return.

JOE BIDEN'S CAR

Republicans who don't follow and defend the Constitution,

Bill of Rights, and Declaration of Independence.

The Republicans that will most likely vote to seat

Elena Kagan on the Supreme Court.

Politicians that ignore the disqualification facts

uncovered by Jeff Sessions about Elena Kagan.

Partisan politics preached from church pulpits.

Corrupt politicians.

Entitlements without merit

Racial preferences anywhere at any time

The lack of Post Office standard sizes and

weights of advertising mail.

Telephone sales people that call during dinner time.

No punishment for proven sex abusers in the Catholic Church

Liberals who want to spend my money on their "Free Lunch"

College Graduates that can't write a coherent sentence

Political Ballots written in multiple languages

Any religion that claims it is the ONLY right one

Aggressively hostile and negative political advertising

More irritations coming soon

Meanwhile

Peter Arnett Visits The Geezers

2010-07-23T09:42:00.000-07:00

PETER ARNETT 7-22-2010

Yesterday our guest at the Geezer's Book Club meeting was the intrepid journalist, Peter Arnett. Ray Herndon, one of our regular members, has known Peter Arnett for over 40 years. They were friendly competitive reporters during the war in Viet Nam, and the friendship has survived several wars since. Peter began speaking with an overview of his time in Viet Nam, and then briefly related a few highlights of the first 1st and 2nd war in Iraq. After taking a deep breath, Peter focused on the intended subject of the day, China and the Chinese people.

CHINA

Peter is now teaching journalism at a college about 400 miles north of Hong Kong, near the Chinese coast. Peter is 76 years old, in good health, full of energy and enjoys his job as an educator. In that capacity he is able to travel unhindered (not everyone can) throughout China. He has personally observed the daily trials, troubles and opportunities that abound in this huge and complicated country.

Peter described a rapidly modernizing China. He presented information that gave each of us an improved perspective. Peter's knowledge, his scholarship and observations, were absolutely fascinating. Granted, we had a bit of a head start. At his suggestion, and prior to the meeting, we all read "OUT OF MAO'S SHADOW" by Phillip P. Pan. The author and Peter have similar observations. It's a terrific book, and helped to lay the foundation for Peter's comments. He used several excerpts from the book in his presentation. China's population is so mind-blowing-huge it is very difficult to visualize. Every problem in China is multiplied by the numbers. China is racing forward as it's government attempts to improve their entire society, their industrial ability, and their political administration. Fortunately, while pulling themselves up by the boot straps, the government discovered the very real benefits of capitalism and foreign trade. They have used this discovery (?) in recent times to boost the surge of their economy. Growing access to TV and other worldwide communications challenged their government and encouraged it o hurry. They are doing so - and in the process they've made a few mistakes. Like Tianamin Square.

Regardless, in most respects the China of today is nothing like China just 10 years ago. The pace of change is staggering. The present day Chinese circumstances are vaguely comparable to the [rural-to-city-to-industy] growth of America about 70 years ago. Americans think of that time as their [industrial revolution]. Well, right now is the time of China's.

THE CHINESE COMMUNIST PARTY

Today the Chinese Communist Party does not actually practice Communism as we have come to know it in Russia. Chinese Communism has always been different. Under Mao Tse Tung it was routinely changed to fit what he saw as [the needs of China], but it never was successful. It failed despite the changes. After Mao died the succeeding government was free to discard Communism altogether. In the world today, Chinese Communism would be better understood if it was known as :

THE CHINESE AUTHORITARIAN POLITICAL SYSTEM.

Before listening to Peter I was not aware that communism had been so thoroughly erased, nor that authoritarianism had so completely taken it's place. The original version of communism has been soundly rejected. After Mao died, the government, almost immediately, dismantled the failed communes and collective farms. They introduced a rapidly evolving Authoritarian Controlled Capitalism, and citizens are again allowed to own land and encouraged to develop businesses. Students are now being sent abroad to learn and bring back knowledge to China. As you read this, China continues it's fast pace forward and, as expected, Chinese problems are of monumental size. The people of China are probably served better by their present form of government than they could be by any other. The Chinese have very unique problems. For example:

1.    1/3 of the population is relatively advanced and rich.
2.    another 1/3 generally considered the middle class,
3.    and about 1/3 are living in absolutely awful poverty.

These figures seem not so unusual . . . until you realize that:

THERE ARE 500,000,000 CHINESE LIVING IN POVERTY.

It is the overwhelming numbers that make China unique. Any Chinese government must walk a narrow tightrope. Because of the shear number of discontented Chinese people living in a condition of terrible poverty - the government is in constant fear of the revolt of it's own population. It fears revolt as much as any external threat. For these reasons, among others, the government firmly believes it must be stern and authoritarian to maintain control. Yet, despite the problems, the government is metering more and more freedoms (and privileges) to Chinese citizens. This is happening at a time when China is racing toward modernization.

It should be said that the Chinese government is aware that it is sometimes over-controlling, brutal, and unfair. They are convinced that it can not be otherwise. They want to quiet criticism (with censorship) while sternly controlling the elements of change. They want to improve Chinese lives as fast as they possibly can, and they are forced to proceed rapidly - with caution.

Peter Arnett discussed the [THREE T's] in China today. The government doesn't tolerate negative comments on these delicate subjects:

1.    Taiwan. The island of Formosa/Taiwan
      is considered part of China and it always
      will be a part of China. End of discussion.

2.    Tibet. The country was once part of China
       and never was not. It is a critical element
       of China's protection. It is now, and always
       has been, a buffer between India and China.

3.   Tianamen Square. It is history best forgotten
      and not to be discussed or commented upon.
      Period.

END

Islam Is Coming Fast

2010-07-13T09:52:00.000-07:00

Every generation faces new and different problems. You and I will be in the ground when this one finally arrives - yet it is up to us to figure out now how best to deal with it. Islam is referred to as a religion but it is much more than that. It is an entire way of life based on civilization as it was hundreds of years ago. Since it is so intertwined with laws, rules, ethics, morals and psychology - I prefer to think of it as a POLITICAL SYSTEM rather than a RELIGION.

Islam, as a political system, is a ruthless, bloody, medieval way of life - and not acceptable. Regardless, we must find some way to deal with it's increasing numbers. Muslims will soon dominate our modern and sophisticated societies whether we like it or not. That means it's crucial and urgent that we devise NOW a plan to accommodate the transition.

1. Can it be done?

2. If so, how?

CAUTION: I have not verified that all of the information

in this video is accurate. I think it is, but

it needs to be checked out. Bump

From my pedestrian point of view I think we must first FACE THE INEVITABLE FACT that Muslims will outnumber non-Muslims in Europe very soon, and in North and South America a few years later. If it is not acceptable to modern societies in it's present form, Islam will have to change to be accepted. Since it is a huge religious/political/social and legal system, perhaps it is more practical to encourage the change in just one element at a time.

Let's look at it from America's point of view. Since Americans accept virtually ALL religions (except those advocating intrusion their neighbors), perhaps a peaceful dialog with leaders of Islam could initiate changes to make it acceptable to infidels? For example:

1. If Americans could convince Islam to drop

their advocacy of MILITANT domination of

all non-Muslims, they might convince all

infidels that the religion of Islam has merit

making it certainly more acceptable.

2. Americans have their own peculiar republican

democracy and they will vigorously defend it.

3. Muslims that choose to live and work in America:

a. must agree to live under American

laws and not Sharia Laws,

b. agree to become citizens with loyalty

to America only,

c. and agree to learn English, the common

language of America.

Despite all of the recent terrorism, I can't believe that Muslims or Non-Muslims want another shooting war.

North and South Americans and Europeans must learn how to get along with peaceful religious Muslims. Perhaps they, the NON-RADICAL intellectuals and theocratic leaders of Islam, could be convinced that it is in Islam's interest to modernize (change) and join the other peaceful religions of the world. It doesn't sound impossible, does it?

It stands to reason that convincing the RADICAL FUNDAMENTALIST MUSLIM element of Islam will be considerably more difficult. I would suggest that it would be substantially easier if the NON-RADICAL MUSLIMS were to be on our side in this.

At least, in America, I believe our peaceful Muslim friends and neighbors do not condone or approve of the radical terrorists in their midst - but it is very difficult for them to safely condemn the terrorists. They have no forum or organization, yet they have embraced civilization and put the bloody past of Islam back in the history books. I submit that if these fine Muslim neighbors had a suitable and protective forum to help America, they would.

The Pope Goes Backwards . . . Again ?

2010-07-11T10:27:00.000-07:00

Most of my friends know I am a rather skeptical Christian with many unresolved questions. Regardless, a few years ago I became a fan of Pope John Paul and I've read many of his books. No, I didn't always agree, but I did respect his thoughts regarding the Catholic Church's position on most issues. I believe Pope John Paul was a terrific person, an outstanding intellectual, and a powerful advocate of Catholic religious thought.

Pope Benedict followed, and has a completely different personality. They say he is a bright light in Catholicism, but frankly, I think he pales in comparison with Pope John Paul. The new Pope shoots himself in the foot periodicaly, and I do not think it benefits the troubled Catholic Church.

Here is a typical example. In 2001 and 2005 the Church issued watered down policy statements attempting to put a bandaid on the sexual abuse problem. Now, years later, Pope Benedict is again in the process of defining penalties for PRIESTS who sexually abuse children. This time he has defined "children" and included mentally disabled adults. He has also extended the statute of limitations from 10 years after a victim turns 18 years old . . .to 20 years after. His new policies are not complete nor are they of any help to the seriously challenged Church.

POPE BENEDICT HAS MANAGED TO OUTRAGE CATHOLICS WORLDWIDE BY PURPOSELY NOT INCLUDING BISHOPS, CARDINALS AND OTHER EXECUTIVES OF THE CHURCH IN HIS SEX ABUSE POLICY - AND - BY EQUATING SEXUAL ABUSE WITH THE ORDINATION OF WOMEN.

This has caused a turmoil in the church like none before.

Pope Benedict must be terribly out of touch with his flock.

He's shot himself in the foot again . . . while the church suffers.

END

Racist. Not me my friend, not ever.

2010-07-04T17:01:00.000-07:00

I write a lot of critical comments about many things and many people. It is presumed that my readers might be of any color, creed, religion, or other distinctive description. Since most of the writing concerns historical, sociological, religious or political aspects of what ever the subject happens to be, it's no surprise that there are people that disagree with me.

A few days ago one of my favorite bloggers, Kay, told me that my writing suggests that I am a racist. At first I was outraged and offended, but when I cooled down I realized that reaction would get me no place. Instead I should find out exactly what Kay found offensive. I reviewed my blog going back over a year, found absolutely no clue, and I am now more puzzled than ever. So what in the world has Kay found?

There are a few public people that I believe are now (or were once) racist. Henry Ford was a well known anti-Semite. George Wallace was anti-Black. Reverends Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and Jeremia Wright are each anti-White. Whoa! This too was getting me nowhere. Well, maybe not as it led me to understand that there is a very fine line between DISCRIMINATION and RACISM. One is good and one is bad.

I have many definite opinions and prefer some things over others. Doesn't everybody? I prefer blonds over brunettes, my meat cooked well done rather than rare, my President to lead with due respect to the nation's Constitution rather than none, and I prefer powerful cars over underpowered cars. These are preferences that discriminate.

That said, I do not think the preservation of our American lifestyle is advanced by following the far left liberal path. My blogs make this abundantly clear.

I do not think financial stimulus packages are allowed by our Constitution and other founding documents.

I do not think the President should have the power to commit America to a premptive act of war. That power properly belongs to the Congress.

I think growing the government larger and larger by giving it increased powers that are not specified in the Constitution and other founding documents, is in fact ANTI-AMERICAN.

Notice if you will, that there is absolutely nothing RACIAL in these opinions. The choices I have made indicate that I definitely prefer, or discriminate, in these matters.

One area might be considered "tricky". I have come to the conclusion that ISLAM should be more properly considered a political system with it's own laws than a religion. This isn't the more accepted popular view. My negative comments on ISLAM and it's followers may indeed be hyper critical of the radical desert Arab Muslims. I do not really think of them as a race of people - but I admit this may not be entirely correct. My negative comments might be considered RACIST when in fact they are anything but that.

At the end of my investigation of Racism in my blogs . . . I find NOTHING at all. I really think my friend Kay has confused my blogs with someone else's.

Bump

Sleeping, C-PAP and Pills BLOG 2

2010-07-04T03:01:00.000-07:00

Some time has passed since I wrote of experiences with my C-PAP machine. I have finally figured out how to make the most of it, and I am able to reliably use it 6 to 8 hours per night. Not in one stretch however. I still wake at least once during the night and have to readjust the face mask. My success is due to 3 things:

1. Perserverance

2. Remzzz gaskets

3. Turning the moisture knob on maximum.

Okay, now it's time to address the other problem:

A HAPPY RETIREMENT

I was an active 70 when I sold my business. My plan, as I've described elsewhere, was to finally purchase a small motorcycle, move to a more rural location, where it is less expensive to live, purchase a smaller (1400 t0 1800 sq. ft,) one story home, and join a local fraternal or service club. Notice that there is one big, major assumption not mentioned. I don't know why (?) but all of these objectives were for ME. Apparently I just automatically figured that my wife Linda would happily follow along. THIS WAS A BIG TIME MISTAKE.

Understand if you will, that Linda and I have been happily married for almost 50 years. There has never been any inclination to stray. We've had children (now adults) together and we remain very proud of them. Linda and I met our difficult times together - and we enjoyed many good times too. In the last analysis, Linda is the most important person in my life and always will be. To maintain that healthy relationship I have gone out of my way to never seriously cross her. I try not to do ANYTHING that she might object to.

I know it sounds like I'm some kind of Milquetoast, but I am not. Instead, I am a difficult person to live with and very much aware that Linda has made similar efforts to accomodate my many problems. It's a fair trade, and it works for us.

Now, with all of that background information, perhaps you will understand where I'm coming from. MY PLANS FOR RETIREMENT HAVE BEEN THROWN INTO THE GARBAGE, and I am in the process of planning for OUR retirement once again. Notice that this time I will plan for BOTH OF US.

This time there will be:

1. No motorcycle.

2. No location change for at least 5 more years.

3. No downsized our home anytime soon.

4. No voyages / travelling / sports / airplane rides / trains / and no farm areas.

5. No horses / ocean swimming / guns / heights / and no small boats.

This time I will concede that Linda:

1. Wants to stay in our home

2. Wants to stay in our town

3. Wants to stay with her job

4. Will NOT plan for retirement

5. Has no particular change in mind.

This, then, is where I have to start.

Let me think on it for a while.

And there will be much more to come. . . .

Sleeping, C-PAP Machines, and Pills

2010-07-04T03:00:00.000-07:00

C-PAP or PILLS

This blog is normally filled with political nonsense. . . but today I want to discuss something else that bothers me. For over 30 years I've been a restless sleeper. I twist and turn and snore most of the night, but despite the acrobatics I manage to get some rest.

When I retired a couple of years ago my sleeping problem got worse. The restlessness and snoring increased, and sleep apnea began. For the last few years I've been treated by several physicians, each of whom tried a number of treatments and medications to fix my problem. Nothing seemed to work and the process was frustrating.

Since I was a small kid I have been restless, agitated, and worried most of the time, but only after I retired did I also become depressed. Our family doctor prescribed a few of the popular serotonin adjusters (Efexor, Wellbutrin), and a morphine related pill (Xanax) to help me get to sleep. None of these was of any measurable help and I was eventually referred to a "sleep doctor" who specializes in my kind of problem.

This doctor subjected me to a monitored sleep study (electrical signals from various parts of the brain were recorded during a sleep session), and it was found that during sleep I wake up some 80 times each hour. It was easily determined that I have a condition known as sleep apnea. It can be a rather serious problem as it may lead to other problems, a few of which can end in death.

The sleep doctor prescribed the use of a C-PAP machine during normal sleep periods. It involves a forced flow of moisturized air through a person's nose during sleep. My C-PAP is set to produce a fairly high air pressure (14) because of the severity of my problem. Air from the machine is sent by a flexible plastic tubing to a full face mask sealed around the nose and mouth by a mask that directs it into my nose.

The face mask seal required fine tuning to get it just right. There can be no leakage between the soft and flexible silicone rubber gasket and a person's face. In my case, because of the relatively high air pressure this was not easy to accomplish. Finally I purchased a product called Remzzz (a soft, cotton, fine weave, thin fabric) to be placed between the silicone rubber seal and a person's face. Remzzz solved the leakage problem.

Unfortunately, using the C-PAP machine does not lessen my tendency to twist, turn and change position during the night and when I move around the seal on the mask is broken and a stream of air leaks out. The air leak is loud and wakes me. To reseal the mask to the face a person needs to turn off the airflow, sit up on the edge of the bed, locate the Remzzz gasket, re-center it on the silicone rubber seal, and then re-attach the mask. By the time all of this is accomplished the C-PAP user is thoroughly awake. If this happens several times each night, as it does in my case, the person doesn't get a good sleep time period.

Essentially that is where I am now. C-PAP works for me, but only for short periods of about, 2 to 3 hours at a time. I am awakened several times each night and this is not how C-PAP is supposed to work. I conclude that something else is involved and causing my sleep apnea and consequent lack of sleep.

POSSIBLE AGGRAVATIONS

My sense of depression does not seem to respond to either the Efexor or Wellbutrin. I know that any change might be very subtle. For me, the relatively mild depression I feel is an emotional down or sadness that inhibits pleasure, happiness and perhaps sleep. I'm pretty sure that the serotonin adjusters do not address the problem.

Understand, if you will, that I have always been a nervous, short tempered, and can't-sit-still person. I've had the restless legs syndrome since as far back as I can remember. The Xanax seemed to help calm my legs for a while, but eventually the pills became ineffectual. Today, my legs twitch as much as they ever did.

So the pills don't help, the C-PAP probably would - if I could sleep without flipping around.

RETIREMENT

I retired a few years ago and the sleep apnea arrived about the same time. I suspect now that they are related. I think the problem is more mental than physical and that it started just after I retired. If so, I believe I know the cause of the problem. Like Sherlock Holmes, one can deduce quite a lot when you put the facts together.

Let's briefly review my retirement plans. My financial goal was to have enough for Linda and I to live from the age of 70 to 90 with no particular change in our lifestyle. When we finally had a substantial equity in our home and condo, and several good mutual funds, plus a reasonable level of 401(k) investments, I elected to retire. MY PLAN was to sell our home in Tustin, sort out our belongings and family treasures, downsize to a home or condo of 1500 sq. ft. or so, and move to a less expensive area. I figured that Linda would work 2 to 3 days a week for about 5 more years in the Dentist office, and assumed that she might have to commute if we moved out of the Tustin area. In my mind I pictured Linda enjoying a smaller home with easier maintenance, and working with our daughter Trisha on the challenge of redecorating it. Another part of my plan was to continue our $1,000 per month support of Susie, Ashley and Shane . . . until the condo became an empty nest.

I saw myself in a new home and fresh new environment. I would join a local Masonic Lodge or service club to make new friends in the new community. I would FINALLY purchase a motorcycle for recreation and a hobby, and to ride it as long as I felt able. Note: One major consideration was that if I had a motorcycle hobby it would not interfere with any of Linda's fears and phobias. All in all, I thought my plan was sound and within our ability - provided (as always) that our health remained fairly good. I was amazed when she refused to accept any change or risk.

Well, I blew it big time. I vastly underestimated my ability to get Linda to agree to the plan. I absolutely should have hashed these things out with her BEFORE setting it in stone. This was a HUGE MISTAKE.

I think it is the cause of my depression and my sleeping problems.

Linda has always been timid and afraid of situations she is uncomfortable in - or can not control. This severely limits her pleasure in many, many activities. I'll mention a few to illustrate; Linda is subject to acrophobia (fear of heights) and suffers from vertigo in many situations. For example, she is not happy on a boat (it tips), in an airplane (she has no control), on a long car trip (no bathrooms), in RV's or trailers (carrying dirty dishes from one run down park to another). She does not enjoy traveling, or sightseeing, and has no interest in most tourist destinations. Considering that she turns down all of these potential activities, what is there left for us to do and enjoy as a couple?

Linda's is reluctant to do most of the usual things that retired people enjoy. When planning our retirement I was very careful to work around her inhibitions so as not to upset her. I WAS WRONG. She did NOT want to sell our house or to MOVE anywhere. She does NOT want to visit anywhere special, or at least anyplace where she had not been before. She has NO INTEREST in commuting from a less expensive area to her job, NO INTENTION to quit, and does NOT especially want to make new friends.

Linda REALLY doesn't want me to have a motorcycle. I purchased a small one thinking it couldn't possibly interfere with her problems. WRONG AGAIN. It made her so unhappy and uptight that I sold it within a few months. Her attitude rocked me to the core. It shouldn't have, but I thought it was selfish and inconsiderate.

I still do. . . . and THAT is where my depression and sleep problems come from.

For the very first time I am worried about our 50 years of marriage. We've managed to stay together and enjoy almost every minute with no regrets. Only recently, with my sleep apnea and restlessness, has Linda's various timidness been a significant bother and only recently did I decide that I would not do things that would upset her.

But I can not turn off my mind or my sleep problem.

OKAY MR. & MRS. AMERICA, THIS BLOG IS TOO LONG BUT I'D LIKE TO ADD SOME THOUGHTS. IF I HAVEN'T BORED YOU TO SLEEP YET, PLEASE CLOSE THIS BLOG AND LOOK FOR : "Sleeping, C-PAP Machines, and Pills - BLOG 2"

Oil, Disaster, Blame and Obama Politics

2010-07-02T10:45:00.000-07:00

I've been watching the unbelievable spout of oil issuing from the British Petroleum deep water wellhead, and I've listened to our unbelievably incompetent government officials as they attempt to deal with it. Their handling of Katrina was bad enough, but this is disgraceful to say the least.

British Petroleum. Their executives agree they area responsible for a major part of the disaster and agreed to put a cork in it and then pay for the damage. Meanwhile, they have undertaken the tremendous effort necessary to address the disaster. BP has, at least so far, acted in good faith. Yet all efforts to stop the gusher have failed.

Clearly, no one at British Petroleum (or any other major oil company) knows how to shut down the well and recover the bulk of the oil discharge already polluting the ocean.

This deep water spill is, apparently, a new experience and BP was not prepared for it. The 5,200 foot depth of sea bed is extraordinary. No oil company that has operated at this depth has ever had this kind of a blow-out disaster.

SINCE THE WELL HEAD CUT OFF SAFETY EQUIPMENT HAD NOT BEEN TESTED AT THIS DEPTH . . . WHY WAS BP ALLOWED TO DRILL WITHOUT A PROVEN BACKUP SYSTEM?

Since BP was authorized by our FEDERAL GOVERNMENT REGULATORY AGENCY it follows that our government also deserves a major share of the blame.

INCOMPETENCE (?) AT THE TOP

Yesterday our President and advisers soundly and thoroughly criticized British Petroleum executives and forced them to set aside $20,000,000,000 to be used to settle potential claims. NO PRESIDENT HAS EVER HAD THIS POWER. The Obama Administration INVENTED IT?

Today, our Congressional Oversight Committee "put their foot on the BP throat" in a obvious political move to determine THE BLAME. WHO CARES?

The broken well is still gushing. Our GOVERNMENT is using the tragedy to posture as a competent manager of the disaster. Our seriously demented President still sees the tragedy as an opportunity to advance his radical far left agenda. We must insist that these people get their act together.

The FIRST priority is to stop the gusher.

The SECOND priority os to care for all of the affected people in the region, help them protect their homes, jobs, factories and lifestyles.

The THIRD priority is to clean up and repair the damage.

The priority for determining the BLAME is down the list somewhere.

Any comments?

Al Gore. Not Guilty. Damn!

2010-06-29T09:48:00.000-07:00

With apologies to my Democrat friends, Al Gore is just not one of my favorite people. The Clinton-Gore ticket was the first time Sleezy Al caught my eye. The pair won the election and went on to administer a fairly good political term. Clinton, to this day, is a brilliant, charismatic scoundrel, but Al Gore has not aged as well. When in office, Al was a reliable supporter for the President. Granted, he didn't initiate much, but he wasn't supposed to. He simply did his job as the second banana. The glory years finally ended and Big Al ran for President on the Democratic ticket against the Republican, George W. Bush. We began to see a very different Al Gore.

The campaign was nasty (as most Presidential bids are), particularly at the end. The vote tabulation was not handled right and the outcome could have gone either way, depending on the election officials. They and the courts administered the voting rules, and determined which ballots counted and which did not. After bitter debate, George Bush was declared the winner because most of the state delegates voted for him. Al Gore lost even though he won the most actual balloted votes.

Big Al did not take the loss well. He behaved like a spoiled child and his stature as a viable politician was reduced to dust. He dropped out of sight for a while, then rose like the phoenix on the back of a distorted scientific theory. Global Warming had arrived. Big Al has written books about it, lectured and promoted disaster misinformation, and made himself very rich. The guy is no dummy. Al is now a champion of the ecology movement, he's won the Nobel Prize, and he founded (and now owns) the "Current" TV channel.

In his personal life the former Vice President has put on about 200 extra pounds and travelled the world. At home, Al and his wife purchased (and own) 14 multi-million dollar estate homes . . . while they live in only one? That's interesting isn't it. And even more important, they have "grown apart" and after several decades of marriage they have decided to separate.

NOW, IN 2010, A GREEDY FEMALE HAS ACCUSED

AL GORE OF SEXUAL MISCONDUCT. . . . . . FOUR YEARS AGO!

It never happened. Her "story' is that he requested a massage while staying in a hotel, and she went to his room, gave him the massage, and he attacked her. There is no proof and no reason to believe her. She, the accuser, wants a few of Big Al's millions and that is that. Al Gore may be a total jerk, a disgraced politician and a snake oil salesman, but he is certainly NOT GUILTY as charged.

Damn It.

Dominating An Inhuman Enemy

2010-06-12T10:06:00.000-07:00

The Commander Idiot

Torture will not leave my mind. Perhaps it is because I've been reading so much about Viet Nam recently. It's caused me to think about the relationship between torture and airpower. Yes, the two are related.

Since World War II we have dominated the air with our unbelievably sophisticated and powerful weapons. It was during the Korean War, however, that we learned airpower alone is much less successful when dealing with a mountainous terrain, and an agrarian society.

When we eased into Viet Nam by way of advisors that multiplied into a major military force, we frustrated Americans began to increase the application of air power. At first it was to support our ground troops and we used propeller driven planes to strafe, bomb, and locate the enemy. The power of that initial effort graduated to F-86 and F-100 fighters, coupled with hundreds, if not thousands of helicopters, particularly Huey Helicopters, flown as gun ships and for airborne search and rescue missions. We were still losing the war. This did not satisfy several civilian political whiz-kids like Robert MacNamarra. He and a few others led the President to authorize the use of B-52 bombers.

Until they arrived it was theoretically believable that our air power was shooting at enemy troops, equipment, and installations. When the B-52's were introduced this fiction could no longer be supported. America had crossed the line by purposely targeting innocent civilians; men, women and children. Our war policy became one of gross destruction at any cost. We began a program of indiscriminate carpet bombing. It was a scorched earth policy, and it failed utterly. We used bomb strings, defoliants, and napalm to clear great swaths of the landscape . . . and any living things that happened to be there at the time, was ethically and morally the wrong thing to do.

Around the world the reaction was one of horror and disgust. It was political suicide for Lyndon Johnson's administration as support for the war went away. The politics of the war soured and our government and military forces pulled out of Viet Nam. In a way similar to the Korean War . . we did not win in Viet Nam.

Now, years later, Americans no longer approve of carpet bombing innocents. We still have plenty of napalm available, but it may never be used again. Every effort is now made to guide our airborne weapons surgically to precise military targets. And TORTURE has been eliminated as a means of gathering military information about the enemy. It seems as if we are restricting our defensive and offensive abilities in order to wage a clean and bloodless conflict, an impossible dream. History has proven that it can't be done.

So where is the middle ground?

How do we dictate more humane way of war. . . to a enemy that could care less?

Think Tanks / Politicians / Preachers / Educators / Philosophers . . . or ?

To be continued . . .

Terror, Torture and Control

2010-06-09T10:39:00.000-07:00

There are a number of things I just don't understand. One of them is why so many of the anti-war crowd go thumbs down on torture. Our Radical Islamic enemy doesn't hesitate. In fact they often omit torture entirely, and simply lop off the heads of our soldiers.

War is a dirty, ugly, and deadly business to be sure, but if one person is known to have information that would lead to the certain murder of two or more innocent persons, it makes perfect sense to use every tool available to retrieve that information. Remember, the end of torture is not automatically death.

Interogation torture must end before death occurs.

But this opinion is not widely shared. The anti-war crowd sees torture as medieval and inhuman. They forbid torture under any circumstances and at any time, war or no war. Their position is blurred by the many opinions as to what constitutes torture. The precise definition is not uniform.

When the hypothetical question is: "Should one terrorist member of the group that plans to fly airplanes into the twin towers be captured . . .and he is strongly suspected of knowing the details of the prospective attack which, if carried out, will kill and maim thousands of innocent, non-combatant, American citizens . . . .should all means available (some degree of torture) be used to innterogate this terrorist in an effort to save them?"

To me, the answer is a crystal clear YES.

Should Nations Control Immigration

2010-06-02T10:07:00.000-07:00

Let's assume that nations surrounded by secure boundaries remain the most logical divisions of both geography and people, and those thus surrounded are correct to insist their government defend everything within the borders including them.

To prevent the government from being overwhelmed by the excessive demands of immigrants, a nation must, as a fundamental protection, insist on a gate-keeping control. All immigrants that desire to permanently change their residence and nationality should be required to accept and meet certain clearly described requirements:

To be accepted as applicants for citizenship according to the date they apply.
Pledge their to alligiance to America only.
Understand that there can be no duel citizenship.
Understand that English is the one official language.
All documents, contracts, and government correspondence will be in English only.
Agree to observe and conform to all American State and Federal laws.

Tom McClintock has it just right. Please watch:

http://www.breitbart.tv/outrage-california-congressman-blasts-calderons-lecture-to-lawmakers/

Immigrants that desire only a temporary visit to America should be granted a term limited visa for 90 days only with the ability to extend another 90 days only.

They must agree to observe and conform to all American State and Federal laws while visiting.
They must agree to leave when their visa time ends.
An unrestricted number of temporary visas should be available to holiday visitors, Farm workers, and virtually any other visitors.

There should be no other restrictions on immigrants regarding for example their intelligence, schooling, or wealth.

Immigrants whose primary residence is now in America, but are here illegally and are officially undocumented, after applying for a special temporary visa, be granted one year to become an American citizen or agree to leave at the end of the visa term.

The children born of undocumented immigrants or immigrants here with temporary documentation, shall NOT automatically be American citizens.

Only the children of American citizens will be automatically American citizens. The childrenborn in America of applicants for citizenship shall be American citizens at the time both parents become citizens. Until that time the children will be granted a special temporary visa.

Bump

P.S. The establishment of gate control of immigrant numbers should be enacted by the Congress following each Presidential election.

Off-Shore Oil Rigs

2010-06-01T11:13:00.000-07:00

The oil spill in the gulf is a disaster. So far there has been no authoritative forecast about containment. Isn't that a bit odd? Oh well.

I assume the people that design and operate off-shore oil platforms have to follow strict safety regulations - yet I've no idea where such controls from. The industry? I doubt it. Since so much of America's industrial activity is regulated and controled by our Federal Government, I think it is a safe bet that's where the safety regulations come from - and If so,I would think it is the government's responsibility to enforce them. But first, who is the responsible party? British Petroleum leased the platform from Deepwater Horizon, who seem to have hired another company by the name of Transocean to operate the rig. They each seem to have some degree of responsibility.

The floating, drilling platform rig was located 42 miles off shore. There are many oil fields closer to shore and not as deep (5,000 ft+), but drilling is prohibited by the Federal Government. Slant drilling from our dry coastal land tapping known oil sources close in-shore, and fixed platform, off-shore drilling rigs have been protested by environmental action groups for many years. After the Exxon Valdez incident in Alaska, these environmental groups have put ever-increasing pressure on our Federal Government to prohibit this kind of drilling. The (perhaps unintended) consequence is that drilling off-shore has been forced far away from the coastlines, as much as 42 miles for example. So, the leaking rig wouldn't exist at all if not for the environmental groups well intended pressure to not drill near American shores. In this case the unintended consequence turned out to be an environmentalist's worst nightmare, an environmental catastrophe more devastating than any before in history.

Back to the leaking oil. According to the media, the standard B.O.P. (blow out preventor) is a guillotine like device that is supposed to slice into and block the drill pipe when actuated. It failed. BP (British Petroleum), together with the U.S. Coast Guard, attempted to use a remotely controlled submersible device to find out why the BOP didn't engage, and fix it. The attempt failed.

Geology isn't my strong suit (and nothing is). So in my ignorance I picture a crude oil mass distributed in some sort of shale or other physical matter that may or may not be under pressure. If a drill bores through layers of matter to an oil pool that is under pressure . . . a gusher results as the pressure is released. Makes sense I guess, and if so, a pool not under pressure . . would yeild no gusher - and the oil would have to be pumped (sucked) out. Since this accidental (?) oil spill is pouring like a geyser out of the ground and into the Gulf of Mexico, it must be under tremendous pressure. There is apparently a pipe between the bottom of the sea bed 5,000+ feet below - and the oil pool below that.

It sounds like there is a pipe (or hose) between the 5,000+ feet deep sea bed and the rig. and that pipe or hose was severed just before or during the collapse of the drilling rig. Oil is now gushing out of the fracture at an rate that has overwhelmed normal safety systems.

"Are other off-shore drilling rigs operating with questionable blow out controls?"
Why don't the engineering requirements include a back up system of closure?
"Are off-shore drilling rigs safer than transporting oil in huge ships?

Why is our government making it so difficult to get answers to these questions?

Looking Down The Road

2010-05-25T17:15:00.000-07:00

Getting old has advantages, not many of course, but a few. We all know that perspective changes with age, and old guys see through a different lens. Today, North Korea announced they are going to war with South Korea. Big deal - but there were no behind-the-hand snickers. Dear Leader has run a vicious government in North Korea for many years and his track record is ;ousy. Dear Leader makes Idi Amin look like a choir-boy.

The citizens of North Korea are enslaved by their circumstances. They are controlled by a Communist regime that has failed to benefit anyone except North Korean eliltes and corrupt officials. Everyone else suffers.

The country has not yet begun to industrialize. They have been held down by their government for decades. North Korea remains an impoverished rural society with few natural resources. Their abusive government rules by fear and force.

Several years ago they purchased atomic technology from India/Pakistan, and used it to manufacture at least one atomic bomb. (Perhaps many.) Dear Leader, also purchased a few bomb delivery vehicles. With this technology on tap, Dear Leader apparently feels invincible. His raving, omnipotenet rhetoric tends to be dismissed because it is so unrealistic, and rather stupid. Yet he threatens his neighbors with nuclear annihilation constantly. Dear Leader is a dangerous and demented crack-pot.

In contrast, South Korea has blossomed since the Korean war back in the 1950's. They have begun their industrialization and their government has obviously provided a more logical path to the their future. America has maintained a 30,000 man military force there to prevent North Korea from stepping over the 38th Parallel and into South Korea. It is but a token force, but perhaps a very important token force. Should North Korea attack South Korea they must also attack both military presence. This would be no small move. They would also have to attack the multitude of American investments in South Korea. In other words, it would be hard for America NOT to help defend South Korea.

For over 50 years the tension between North and South has been a game of "chicken". So far it has been Dear Leader that has backed down. But who knows, he many not back down this time.

The living conditions, unhappiness and desperation of the North Korean people may threaten Dear Leader's Communist regime - if he doesn't do SOMETHING to improve their lives. He may see WAR as his only way to survive.

China can't be to happy to see Dear Leader flexing his atomic muscles. THAT is perhaps our salvation because China has the ability to smother Dear Leader without a trace. China knows that should North Korea start a nuclear war, America might decide that Japan should finally re-arm itself. China would absolutely not appreciate two atomic bombs in their neighborhood.

More as it develops.

TEA Parties - Good, Bad or Ugly

2010-04-30T09:50:00.000-07:00

Over the past few months I've been watching the TEA PARTY MOVEMENT. They support conservative positions but do they go too far? I view political rallies, marches, and picketing with a jaudiced eye. There have been too many of these groups taken over by the lunatic fringe. (The John Birch Society comes to mine). You know, the boneheads that go radical.

But so far I have been impressed with the peaceful character of the TEA PARTIES. They appear not to be radicals at all, and very much in favor of our traditional values, our American heritage, and perhaps most important, they advocate common sense.

Sarah Palin is the best known member and it's easy for me to rally around her. She has a genuine talent and a solid conservative history. Despite the awful liberal attacks on her personal life, she stands firm with her beliefs. I like that a lot.

I am, however, very disappointed that the Republicans are not supporting a conservative political agenda. They obviously don't listen to the voters any more than the Democrats do. The Republicans are not fielding strong and capable candidates for national office. I think Michael Steele is responsible and must take the blame and move on. Sarah Palin should take over for him. She would at least listen carefully and promote good people and a reasonable conservative leanins Republican agenda.

If something like this doesn't happen soon, Americans will continue to look at the confused Republicans - and laugh.

As of today, the Republican party can't even mount an effective agenda to counter the most Radical, Revolutionary, Socialistic, Big Government Spenbders that have EVER inhabited Washington. If this isn't fixed quickly - the Obama Administration's disaster will get even worse.

END

Oil Mess Off Shore

2010-04-29T09:52:00.000-07:00

Does the media pay attention? There is a catastrophe happening right now in the Gulf. An accident caused a off-shore drilling platform to be destroyed leaving an unplugged hole in the ground more than 5,000 feet below sea level. A HUGE amount of oil (no one knows how much) is pouring out of the hole and into the sea. Within a month or so it may be the largest oil leak accident in history.

AND NO ONE KNOWS HOW TO STOP IT.

This boggles my mind. There are hundreds if not thousands of off-shore drilling rigs and apparently very few, perhaps none, have been designed to have a disaster contingency plan. When I heard that I went through the roof. I am not familiar with the oil industry. I have been familiar with being responsible for a small manufacturing concern that was subject to endless laws about protection and safety. They were enforced.

Last month a couple dozen men expired in a coal mine that had been cited with numerous violations of safety laws over several years. Many violations were outstanding at the time of the accident. They had not been enforced. Why not?

This month it looks like we are about to witness the terrible consequences of more safety measures on drilling rigs that are not enforced. The gulf coast oil spill will soon cover an area the size of Rhode Island - and there is NO KNOWN WAY TO PREVENT IT FROM BECOMING THE SIZE OF TEXAS.

Isn't this worth the attention of our government and our main stream media?

Liberal Snoots

2010-04-24T16:36:00.000-07:00

PROLOGUE

Nothin fancy about me. Farm kid. Not rich but always fed. College grad. Sergeant in Air Force. Traveled in Europe and North Africa. Electrical Engineer. Alergic to drafting tables. Settled on salesman career. Became C.E.O. small L.A. corp. Retired. Bought engraving business. Retired again. Healthy. Very worried about my families future.

Liberal intelectuals look down their collective snouts at us heathen conservatives. I had a double dose yesterday at my friendly book club. There are only 10 of us, and 8 are firmly liberal Democrats. We get along just fine. Very good friends and all that. We respect and listen to each other. Simple as that.

There have been a few times when my ears turned red. One of thoses times was yesterday. Certain public people that twist my socks. People like Jane Fonda, Noam Chomsky, George Soros, and Norman Mailer for example. These and a few others are blithering idiots who spit on America (and Americans) at every opportunity. Is it a coincidence that each one is an ultra liberal Democrat? I think not.

These people push for big government, more regulation, more control of production, of consumption, and so on . . . In doing so they are repeating failed political methodologies . . . . yet when America goes over the cliff, these same people will wonder why? Amazing isn't it.

OUR GOVERNMENT MIXES A BIT OF SOCIALISM WITH FREEDOM

Our government, now a republic, is headed toward socialism. Why? Because Ultra liberal Democrats have convinced the less liberal Democrats to follow them down the socialist road. They have tipped the balance between socialism and freedom. With President Obama in charge, the race to socialism is moving ever more rapidly. It is a race to failure.

Sad to say, this administration has found some support from RINO (Republican In Name Only) legislators. Yeah, there are a few. The key word with them is "CORRUPTION". Not just routine thievery, but corruption of ideals, values, precidents, ethics, and morals. Most State Governments and the entire Federal Government is populated with unscrupulous and selfish people who think only of re-election and stealing rather than the good of the nation.

INFLUENCE.

There will always be outside influences to assist our legislators and other leaders in making decisions. In recent years 90% of this kind of influence has been supplied by a cadre of special interest lobbiests. They overwhelm the system money, promises, vacations, air travel, call girls, diamonds . . . what ever it takes to BRIBE. Anything at all, legal or otherwise.

Lobbiests have become the leaders of corruption in American government. Their influence reaches the inner circle of our political leadership. It threatens our entire way of life. And we do nothing?

The situation is now very quickly getting worse. The Obama Administration is imposing ultra-liberal, big government solutions to every facet of our nation. They are taking our liberties and gaining control over every aspect of our lives. The are telling us a terrible . . . LIE.

More later . .

Recent History And How We Became Entitled

2010-04-19T08:51:00.000-07:00

Every generation picks up a characteristic identifier.

In the 1940's the brave patriotism of Americas G.I. like Willie and Joe formed such an image. It was also the time of Rosie the Riveter, the jitterbug, and the New Deal.

The 1950's are identified the Cold War, cars with huge fins and lots of chrome, and the almost but not quite war in Korea. It was the time of Elvis Presley, the Sputnik and our race to catch up.

The 1960's were dominated by The Beatles. Nothing and nobody else comes anywhere close. Oh yeah. How about the acid tie dye cool aide drop outs, flower children, and the beginning of resistance to the growing war in Viet Nam.

The 1970's carried over the drop outs, university picketing, rush to Canada to avoid the draft, racial violence in Los Angeles, and more fancy drugs everywhere. Viet Nam became a horrible disaster for everyone concerned typlified by the massacre of My Lai and the general descent into the South East Asian Heart of Darkness.

By the 1980's our high school kids no longer could spell cat, make change in the supermarket, or meet college admission requirements. The answer was, of course, lower the standards. By the end of the decade our college students could spell cat and carry a protest sign properly. They could no longer legibly sign their own name.

In retrospect, the 1990's may have been close to the time of our high mark (zenith, apogee, pinacle . . . . whatever). The family farm was almost gone, the big money boys had learned how to scam the system, the wall in East Berlin came down, and the Soviet Union was going down the tubes fast.

Finally we have reached the decade of the 2000's. The computers didn't crash. The world didn't end. Mexica was taken over by drug cartels, and every country that had one nuke wanted more, every country that didn't have a nuke wanted at least one. The domino theory was long gone and so was the containment theory. Now the world kept peace by the threat of atomic annilation. Harley Davidson made a comeback and the big money boys were selling something called "Junk Bonds" . . . . Remember P.T. Barnum saying: "THERE IS A SUCKER BORN EVERY MINUTE."

And that phrase fits today even better than yesterday . . . .

More later

I AM THE CHIEF OF THE WORLD
AND DON'T YOU FORGET IT

YOU LESSER PEOPLE CAN STAND AS WE MEET
AND WATCH MY EGO WHILE I REST MY FEET

THIS DESK I ASSURE YOU IS A NATIONAL TREASURE

MADE EXPRESSLY FOR MY TIRED FEET AND PLEASURE

At some point during the last 40 or 50 years Americans became soft. Pride was lost. Individual initiative, hard work, integrity, and personal independence, were all replaced by the welfare state. Our citizens became "ENTITLED" to government programs that have all but replaced the original moral values of Christianity and our Nation. It has been a slow process, but America has definitely been moving toward SOCIALISM. In a true socialist state the government produces nothing but provides and regulates everything. Where ever this system has been in place . . . it has failed.

In America our politicians are racing toward socialism.

The question is "WHY?"

Toyota Problems vs American Unions

2010-04-14T18:12:00.000-07:00

Am I the only one other than TOYOTA to notice the over-zealous complaints recently? It looks to me like Toyota did (or does) have a few problems. In the media it is sometimes an unproven reference to a sticky accelerator pedal. At other times it's a weird claim that if one of their vehicles is purposely driven TOO FAST and TURNED TOO QUICKLY it might go out of control - if it is driven by a driver who is really trying to turn it over.

How quickly the very few claims have morphed into thousands? The media have gone into a feeding frenzy. Why this special attention? I DOUBT THAT ANY CAR MAKER HAS SAFER CARS THAN TOYOTA. So who would benefit from damaging Toyota's reputation? THE AMERICAN AUTOWORKERS UNIONS that's who.

These unions have long been frustrated with their inability to organize the foreign auto companies that build cars in America. It is these same unions that are responsible for putting our car manufacturers at a financial disadvantage in the market. Now they are building Toyota's relatively minor problems way out of proportion.

Does TOYOTA really deserve it?

What do you think?.

Congress Sets Their Pay & Benefits

2010-03-25T17:00:00.000-07:00

May I quote the Twenty-Seventh Amendment
to the Constitution:

"No law, varying the compensation for the services
of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect,
until an election of Reprentatives shall have intervened."

Further notes: Congress submitted the text of the
Twenty Seventh Amendment to the States as part of
the proposed Bill of Rights on September 25, 1789.

The Amendment was not ratified together with the
first ten Amendments, which became effective on
December 15, 1791. The Twenty-Seventh Amendment

was ratified on May 7, 1992 by the vote of Michigan.

WE WERE DOOMED IN 1992 WHEN WE GAVE CONGRESS
THE ABILITY TO PAY THEMSELVES.

Fixing Medical Care

2010-03-18T13:57:00.000-07:00

The American system of providing health care has come off the track. What should be done to fix it? A related questiion: Should an American taxpayer be required to pay for someone elses medical care?

Liberals: Yes.
Conservatives: No.

Before anything can be done a resolution of this difference must take place.

Senario 1. A fellow has been an alcholic, smoker, and diabetic for 20 years. He has knowingly not practiced a healthy lifestyle. Now he has heart disease and needs a $40,000 heart operation or he will die within a week. He has no assets, relatives, or borrowing power.

Mr. Liberal: Why should American taxpayers pay the bill?
Mr. Conservative: Are you sure you want him to die?

Scenario 2. Our government has promised Medicare and Medicaid to eligible citizens regardless of their assets. The same level of insurance may be purchased by rich people. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid were not viable when they were passed into law. None of the three can meet it's promises.

Mr. Liberal: Should government programs be paid for,
and if so, by who?
Mr. Conservative:Why legislate more promises before
funding the original three?

Scenario 3. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are government insurance plans. Most Americans also have private insurance available to them. Private insurance programs deny insurance to a few citizens that have pre-existing conditions. Our liberal government wants to REPLACE private insurance with GOVERNMENT insurance FOR ALL.

FACT A. American health care is quite good and available

to all but a small percentage of American citizens.

FACT B. The cost of private insurance could be lowered

by government improving the environment for
competition.

FACT C. A government insurance option would be an

                  equally humane way to provide insurance to the
                  relatively few people that can not qualify for
                  private insurance,

Mr. Liberal: Do you object to this limited gov't. insurance
program, and if so, why?
Mr. Conservative: Same question.

END

Gallery of Corrupt Politicians

2010-03-08T08:53:00.000-08:00

American politics has seen scoundrels over the years and each new crop is the worst ever. Okay. Chances are it's not the worst but it's surely bad. Many were elected and some, as expected, were not. The Obama Administration has appointed many ULTRA-LIBERAL DEMOCRATS without the oversight of Congress. All of the appointments are not dishonest, disloyal or anti-American, but most are. He has appointed VERY RADICAL people that definitely do not deserve to be in our government.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krybvOx-8Dk&feature=digest

Several of these recent appointments have exhibited questionable patriotism, ultra radical opinions, or have a proven history of actual corruption. They should all be dismissed. The lists that follow include many such people. There are way too many incompetant or corrupt people in government jobs. Perhaps the worst, in no particular order, are:

ELECTED
Frank, , Barney D-MA
Dodd, Christopher D-CT
Ensign, John D-NV
Holder, Eric Atty. Gen.
Jackson, Jr., Jesse D-IL
Obama, Barack Pres.
Pelosi, Nancy D-CA

If any or all were to resign tomorrow . . . America would benefit.

APPOINTED
Geitner, Tim - Treasury Serc.
Sonal Shaw - Involved in Pakistani massacre of 2000 Indian Christians.
Harold Kohl - Promotes Sharia Law to have precedence over U.S. Laws. Favors flexible interpretation of the Constitution.
Dalia Mogahed - Apologist for radical Islamists and Muslim Brotherhood. Praises Sharia Law as superior to U.S.Law.
Jeremia Wright - Rabidly anti-American. Racist. Hate mongering. Bigoted advisor.
Dr. John Holdren - Certified wacko. Says oceans to rise 13 t0 30 ft. Says thermonuclear war will occur very soon. Has history of chicken little catastophe promotions.
Kevin Jennings - A gay and lesbian rights promoter. Advises all schools to teach explicit homosexuality. Appointed Asst. Deputy Secretary of the U. S. Dept. of Education.

These lists might be a good start !

Greybeard And The Geezer's

2010-03-03T10:04:00.000-08:00

This morning I woke up pushing these computer keys. Must be a habit at best and an obsession at worst. It occurs to me that my blog friend Greybeard might find this interesting.

I belong to the Orange County Geezers Book Club. There is just ten of us and the variety of opinions makes it great fun. We gather once a month to 1. each bring and eat a Subway sandwich, 2. discuss the book of the month, and 3. choose the book for the next month. For the last year or so our emphasis has been on non-fiction, history, and politics.

There is no chairman.

Larry hosts at his house and provides lemonade. He retired as the C.E.O. of a large chain of hospitals. Liberal.
Dr. Ken is usually 10 minutes late. He retired as the General Manager of two large Kaiser Hospitals. Liberal.
Dr. Ed is a retired scientist who specialized in electornics design at a major military weapoons manufacturer. Liberal.
Skip retired as a Colonel in the Air Force and became the program manager of space telemetry at Cal Tech. Conservative.
Dixon was C.E.O. of a electronic/electrical materials distribution company, then an manufacturer's representative of a medical instrument company, and finally the Owner-Manager of a small engraving shop. Conservative.
Dr. Mike is a recently retired M.D. Liberal.
Angelo is a retired college Professor of advanced physics. Ultra-liberal.
Ray is a retired war time journalist, during the Viet Nam war was the head of station for the Associated Press in Saigon, and then the United Press in South East Asia, and a freelance writer for several newspapers and magazines. Liberal.
George served the United States government as a presidential advisor and speech writer during WW II, the Cold War, and Korean conflict. He left government service to become the President of the American Red Cross. He is now retired Liberal.
Ron is the owner of a large and elegant waterfront restraurant in Newport Beach. Liberal.

Drum roll please. This is the the roster. Greybeard, you would fit right in - and make a great addition to the conservative side of our monthly debate. Skip and I could obviously use some help. Unfortunately, there won't be an opening until one of the old geezers dies. I checked. None of them are planning to anytime soon. Sorry . . .

Can We Hire Geo. W. Bush

2010-03-02T14:55:00.000-08:00

George W. Bush had a tough time in office. He started well and ended badly - and will may be known in history as a less than outstanding President. There are a number of BUSH-BASHERS, including almost everyone in Mr. Obama's administration. They are far left liberals who blame George W. Bush for all of Mr. Obama's mistakes, and who will not give George credit for the many things he and his administration did right. Just for fun let's reverse the criticism:

1. If George couldn't get thru a press conference
without a teleprompter.
Would you laugh and said he was inept?

2. If George had appointed people who did not pay
their income tax.
Would you welcome these deadbeats in government?

3. If George had spent over $200,000.00 to take Laura
to a play.
Would you happily pay the bill?

4. If George was so dumb he became an Air Force Officer
and learned to fly a modern jet fighter aircraft.
Do you think Obama could do that?

5. If George had stated there were 57 states in
the United States.
Would you have said he is clueless?

6. If George had reduced your GM retirement plan by 90%.
Would you be happy about it?

7. If George had given unions a majority holding of the G.M.
Would you welcome the first step of ownership by the government?

8. If George had used 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant
a tree on EARTH day.
Would you think he was a hypocrite?

9. If George had doubled the national debt that took
    two centuries to accumulate.
    Would you say he was out of his mind?

10. If George flew to Denmark for a 5 min. speech
      about himself.
      Would you say that he might have an ego problem?

11. If George created jobs for 32 Czars who report
directly to him and bypass the Senate and the House.
Would you have approved?

Enough already.

Mr. Obama has done all of the above in one year
and still you think he's brilliant, charismatic and impressive.
Sure he is.

For me, I'll gladly take George W. Bush. . . .

Here comes a problem . . . Dementia

2010-03-01T14:28:00.000-08:00

About a year ago I began to experience short term memory loss. Being over 70 I thought it was more or less normal. Then it got worse. My cardiologist suggested that I not be too concerned, it's just part of aging. Months passed and it became more of a problem. My family doctor determined that it could be the first sign of alzheimers or something else, but to find out for certain I would have a CT Scan. The resulting xrays of my brain indicated no sign of alzheimers but clear pictures of "early on-set dementia".

There is a technical difference between alzheimers and dementia. I don't know what it is, but I am experiencing a continuing loss of memory. It's getting worse. Short term stuff; say earlier today and back for a few months. That time is almost lost. My memory seems to fade in and out. A small reminder may bring back an entire selection of memories. It's strange the way it happens. When I wake in the morning I have to think hard about what day of the week it is. I just don't know.

My long suffering wife tells me to do something. I say I will. Within a half hour to an hour I have forgotten all about it. So far I haven't been lost or confused about where I am or where I am going, but I am beginning to have a few seconds of doubt once in a while. I've not yet not lost my name identification ability except for people introduced to me recently. If I say I will do something, or promise to do something, it MUST be written on notes, and the notes put where I will see them often. At our house the notes we stick them to the microwave door at eyeball height. It usually works.

The ever present concerns are:

                (1) How fast is the deterioration.
                (2) How bad can it get.
                (3) Can I do anything to stall the process of loss.

More later . . .
It's later . . .

MY MAJOR WORRY. I have several very good doctors, yet I keep trying to figure out symptoms. My main complaint is the increasingly rapid memory loss. I pretty much know where this dementia is going, and I have a persistant vision of eventually being a living vegetable. This is not a nice vision to carry around.

All of the people I know (and have known), eventually do get old. Sometimes gracefully and sometimes not. A very high percentage of people over 80 do have some level of dementia or alzheimers disease. Why? Could it be our foods, toxic chemicals, lack of exersize, or something else? I have a theory based on my personal experience. There is a good chance that is is completely worthless. On the other hand there is a tiny chance that it isn't.

SLEEP APNEA. I've had this condition for at least 30 years. When I nap or sleep I snore unevenly and sometimes wake with an abrupt start. I often wake with an gasp or choking sensation. These are two significant symptoms of sleep apnea. Recent sleep testing in a medical environment shows that I STOP BREATHING FOR AN INSTANT 27 TIMES AN HOUR during the night. I rarely dream, or if I do I have no knowledge of it. When I sleep I usually make restless movements all night. I turn over, sleep on one side and then on the other, stay on my back for a while, move my feet, curl up then straighten, and so forth. Everytime I involuntarily gag while snoring, it triggers a reflex due to the deprevation of oxygen.

The theory is: that when a person stops breathing, even if only for a moment, the BRAIN is temporarily deprived of the oxygen it must have to sustain it's life.

Without a steady supply of oxygen the brain can not function and will and will slowly begin to die. Is it possible that the cumlative effect of sleep apnea over many years may contribute to the slow detirioration of brain cells?

Short term memory loss is the often the first indication of a problem. If not corrected by drugs, or by the use of a [positive air pressure] C-Pap machine, or by itself, the memory loss will gradually get worse.

More later . . .
Later

READING BOOKS. I have acquired a few thousand books. For years I tended to read at least one book every week. Since I retired (2 years ago) I've been reading at least two books a week. I've asked myself why I read more now. Surprisingly, I think that I am reading more because I remember less. I know, at first this doesn't make sense, but think about it. Short term memory loss does not impair cognitive ability. When reading I understand what I read perfectly, but when I put the book down it isn't long before I have forgotten what I previously read.

A person tends to develop a discriminating idea of which books might be of interest, and it might change over time. My interests used to be; books about the sea, adventure novels, spy stories, and books about war. There has been a gradual change. I now find myself reading; history, historical novels, non-fiction, and books about politics. The change is easily seen as I check the book spines on my book shelves. My wife claims there will be no room for the furniture if I don't stop collecting books. She does have a point, and about once a year I donate boxes of books to the Salvation Army. Despite the boxes going out the door - more books seem to be coming in. One day I asked myself why?

As my short term memory slowly closes down, I need to read the morning newspaper or turn the TV on to the morning news to find out what day it is. When I go to the book store I tend to look at books in my favorite categories. About five years ago I found myself buying books I had read before. It started to be a real problem. Today, when I see an interesting new book - I write down the title and search my book shelves for a duplicate before buying. It's a pain but it works. I've not bought a duplicate since last November. Now I can tell my wife that is why my collection has a purpose.

P.S. When I read books with a complex subject matter, I tend to forget elements from the first part of the book by the time I get to the end. To give myself reminders of what came before, I have started high-lighting key sentences or paragraphs as I go along. It helps.

More later . . .
Later

DRIVING A CAR. My Dad gave up driving when he was 85, and lived until he was 92. When he was about 80 he was barely proficient. He was then quite deaf in his right ear and partially deaf in his left. My parents drove everywhere together. My mother directed where he should point the car by making a hand signal. We were concerned that his doctor didn't tell him he should no longer drive. The family hinted that he should stop, but never insisted.

In their 80's my parents lived in a small and friendly trailer park only a few blocks from stores. Their circle of activities had grown smaller over the years, and they seldom drove further than 8 to 10 miles from their home. Dad kept saying that he was always very careful - and my mother said he drove just fine. He drove about 5 years longer than he should have.

Regarding myself, I am very much aware of my short term memory loss . . . and my mild hearing loss as well. So far I have not experienced any problem driving. None at all. At the same time I am concerned about what the future will bring. I've read articles and books on the subject and found that while my early on-set dementia is noticeable, it may or may not get worse. If it does get worse it may be very slowly. Apparently it is quite possible that I may not have to give up driving for several more years. I've also found that like most older drivers my eyesight and hearing should cause me to slow down and concentrate. Otherwise, driving is much like riding a bicycle. My memory loss will have to get much worse before I have to give it up. And I WILL give it up when it's time to do so.

More later . . .

S.S-Medicare-Medicaid / Bankrupt

2010-02-25T14:18:00.000-08:00

The majority of Americans are disappointed in our government.

We have AT LEAST three major entitlement programs that are not sustainable. Our elected officials know it . . . . but do nothing to prevent the eventual collapse of each one. This caliber of legislative stewardship is unforgiveable. The steady increasing cost of non-funded entitlements is a disaster for the American economy. The results are NOW apparent for all to see. Are you sure you want to re-elect these incompetant legislators? They not only refuse to make fiscal responsibility a prime priority, but they continue to add millions and billions to the borrowed debt we already owe.

LET'S INSIST THAT THE EXISTING PROGRAMS BE FIXED

BEFORE WE ADD MORE

Religion / Taxes / Politics

2010-02-24T17:01:00.000-08:00

When our government was designed the founders took special care to protect the freedom of religion by explicitly recommending a separation of church and state. Over the years it has been misinterpreted as forbidding the churches intrusion in governmental affairs. More recently a careful examination of the early references to the separation of church and state have yielded a very different interpretation.

The founders original intent was to prevent the state from intrusion in governmental affairs. The exact opposite of the previous conclusion. If the more recent interpretation is correct, it follows that the federal, state and local governments are required to not interfere in the affairs of any church.

Okay, what constitutes a church? How is it recognized? Who determines that a group is a church or simply a group? These questions may illustrate be the first conflicts between church and state. Right off we must recognise that churches are people, not buildings. To be a church they must have at least three people (a president, treasurer, and secretary) in order to be considered a corporation under the law. Once this is established two things happen: 1. A church is given (by the federal, state, and local government) tax free status as a non-profit organization. 2. The government will authorise a recognized church to purchase and hold property without paying any federal, state, or local property tax.

My point is that it is the government that recognises what group is or is not a church, and it is the government that determines that a church is a non-taxable non-profit organization that can purchase and hold property without paying any property tax. So government does indeed have a small role to play in the recognition and tax free status of churches. All of these inter-relations were thought of and written down by our founding fathers. They successfully defend all American churches from any [further] government influence.

This is a necessarily long way to reach our current American dilemna. The politically correct crowd merrily goes around defacing or prohibiting any kind of religious symbol from any government property. They claim this is illegal according to the separation of church and state concept of our government. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Nowhere in America's founding documents is any intended or unintended statement to that effect. There is no legal reason that the Ten Commandments can not be illustrated in a court room, nor is there a legal reason that any other recognized religion can not display one of their symbols. We need to use common sense to determine yes or no. Certainly, equal time, equal space, equal whatever, must prevail. So is the concept that if one is banned, they are all banned.

I am confident that the above statements are basically true. Certainly our founders did not want the government influencing or interfering in churches. Certainly, by granting tax free status to recognized churches the government favored the establishment of churches. My question gets down to the heart of the matter.

Should churches promote political positions?

I'm not talking about partisan politics here, but about issues that do not involve the morals, ethics, and values as taught by the church. Any church. This is a confusing issue for me and I would appreciate receiving your comments on it. Before you comment would you do me the favor of reviewing the website listed below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VUo8OuFaiI&feature=player_embedded

Thanks.