I received an e-mail the other day stating:

“It seems to me that we need to stop this hatred toward Muslims, as it is doing exactly what the militant Muslims want.  Most are peace loving and good citizens.“

My reply was the following.

I agree, there are many Muslims who are peaceful citizens and wish to practice Islam along with being American.  We frequent a restaurant here that is owned and run by a Muslim family and every Thanksgiving they provide FREE meals to anyone.   They seem to have acclimated to the American way.   But.

There are the other type too, the radicals with many in powerful positions who do desire to spread Islam in militant fashion everywhere they go, pushing in their new homesteads their sharia law.  During the time of slavery in this country, many in powerful positions defended slavery, while the majority of Christians said nothing.  The “silent majority” in this country, by their silence, allowed racism to spread and accepted the socialist spread of monster government regulatory intrusion over the entire country.   And now, those who wish to preserve our Judeo-Christian heritage are considered discriminatory, non-inclusive radicals.  It appears that our leaders would accept a building permit for a Mosque, while rejecting a permit for a church.   Playing of church bells is banned but sounds of prayer time coming out of a Mosque is permitted.  Special prayer rooms for Muslims are being supplied in airports, but Christian chapels are being discarded.   Are the Hindus asking for the same privileges?   Our leaders are confused.  Their thinking is clouded by their pursuit of power.  

Why is it hate to ask of Muslims why they do not talk against their radical brothers?   Do they support them or not?   The silent Muslims are just as guilty as our grandparents generation were about the black discriminatory practices in this country.   Do all Muslims wish to wipe Israel off the face of the earth?  Do all Muslims think of America as the great satan?   What would those moderate Muslims do if they had to choose?   The silence we hear speaks loudly.

Changes from the bottom up, from the community level up to the national level works to the advantage of the most people, while changes instituted from Government down is always messy, usually favoring specific groups over others.  People resent it when demands are forced upon them by those in power, but will listen and join the ranks when the changes are coming from the smallest community denominator.

So, my point is that when the average Muslim push their leaders to condemn the radical element of Islam, and make it known loud and clear by their actions against their radicals, then they can all live in peace in their communities among the rest of the average people of different faiths, living side by side, respecting each other, and letting their lives testify to the authenticity of their faith.  That diversity has already been started at the local level.  When the leaders pursue the peaceful coexistence they see locally, then we’ll all be safer.

 

“I recently submitted a building permit application for a new house.

It was going to be 100 ft. tall and 400 ft. wide with 9 gun turrets at various heights and windows all over the place and a loud outside entertainment sound system. It would have had parking for 200 cars and I was going to paint it snot green with pink trim.

The City Council told me to forget about it.

So, I sent the application in again, but this time I called it a Mosque.

Work starts on Monday.”  Patriot Post.

Boy, this controversy about that NY Mosque is heating up to boiling point, as it should.  Published on the Wall Street on line journal, the wife of Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf spouts off with “It’s beyond Islamophobia. It’s hate of Muslims.”   She vowed that they would push ahead and build that Mosque in that location regardless of the opposition, saying “there was too much at stake.”

Yea, right lady.  You’re one of the lucky women in Islam, so have your say so as you can do things like that in America and not fear the authorities will come knocking on your door and drag you downtown to the lock-up until you can find a lawyer to bail you out. . . temporarily.   This country was built on that freedom to speak against the authorities, to criticize their moves, and we can even carry our pistols around to protect ourselves from criminals who don’t respect our rights to our property.  Yep, you are living the good life here in America.   What’s at stake here is your hidden agenda that you and your husband will not be honest about. 

Now that Iman Rauf is off on “mission to Qatar, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates. His previous trips under the government program were in 2007 to Bahrain, the UAE, Qatar and Morocco and earlier this year to Egypt.”   His message is on “what it’s like to be a practicing Muslim in the United States.”   Speaking to audiences in Muslim countries, paid for by our politically correct State Department (taxpayers). I just wonder how many of our reporters are on that trip with him reporting back to us the statements Rauf makes about what it’s really like living in the USA.  How many reporters are covering this?  Who?  Working for what media?  Does CNN have any female reporters along on his US jet?  

Since this is a trip paid for with TAX dollars, shouldn’t we have transcripts of his messages?  Where are those reports?     Politicians reporting on the progress;  Ha, we can’t trust them to give us much truth.  But the independent media, yea, we should be able to trust them to spit out the truth at least once in awhile, especially when a huge controversy such as this proposed Mosque being built on hallowed ground energizes the population as it has. 

For the average citizen none of this makes any sense.  Playing church bells meets all kinds of negatives, but Islamic call to prayer sounds are positive enhancements.

 

 

We the snoozing people over the years have been led to believe that progressives, also known as higher education academia, liberals, politicians called democrats (and many republicans too), and socialists were the experts continually providing us the people with all that expert advice on how we needed to live our lives.   They’ve said they had our best interests in mind.   Now we’ve learned that there really is a brotherhood of journolisters conspiring behind the scenes.   Independent news broadcasters?   Yeah sure, we bought that line.

You’ve seen the news broadcasts over the years telling us that the “experts” have discovered . . . . blah blah blah, and that . . . . blah blah blah was good for us.   It continues as daily soundbites.   Repeating something over and over will finally sink in and soon the “we the people” have become sheeple.  The progressive expert scientists have told us the world began with a big bang, but how can nothing make a bang?   From that we have had blah, blah, and more blah about how removing the Ten Commandments was about separating church and state and that it was really really good for us.  We were told that banning DDT would save the earth, but then millions died from malaria.  The progressive experts told us melting icebergs will flood our lands unless we abandon our vehicles and comfy lifestyles, but fill a glass with ice and water to the top and it don’t run over as the ice melts.  How many melted ice bergs will it take to raise 71% of the earth’s surface 2 feet?   Are the experts secretly building an ark somewhere?  Now, even a Christian denomination has accepted the . . . blah blah blah and are allowing gay priests to be sexually active. 

Experts?  Scientific studies?  How can a government funded scientific study be seriously taken as truthful?

So now the experts have a plan to provide health insurance for everyone, and it would save our health care system and . . . it will really be affordable for everyone, of course.  So say the experts.  It will revolutionize American health care.  No one will be without insurance.   You will no longer have to worry about a health emergency wiping out the bank account.   Children will be covered for all their growing up accidents, even gang members.  The ones with previously existing conditions will be covered removing the anxiety and decisions of paying the high cost of insurance or feeding the family.  Yes, it all sounds so morally right.  It all sounds so caring, so charitable, so timely.

Fast forward to 2042 and the headlines might read: American system of Health Care starts privatizing . 

The story will be similar to what is happening right now to the British system.

Practical details of the plan are still sketchy. But its aim is clear: to shift control of England’s $160 billion annual health budget from a centralized bureaucracy to doctors at the local level. Under the plan, $100 billion to $125 billion a year would be meted out to general practitioners, who would use the money to buy services from hospitals and other health care providers.

The plan would also shrink the bureaucratic apparatus, in keeping with the government’s goal to effect $30 billion in “efficiency savings” in the health budget by 2014 and to reduce administrative costs by 45 percent. Tens of thousands of jobs would be lost because layers of bureaucracy would be abolished.   Read it all. . .

How long will it take our leaders, our experts to learn from others?  How long will it take we the people to insist that politicians adhere to the constitution?

A couple of headlines I ran across spiked my interest and outrage.  The interest was focused on the agency that awards the kind of money for the research projects that were in the headlines.  So I spent an hour or so reading various sections of this federal agency NIH (the National Institute of Health), part of the Dept. of Health and Human Services.

 

We’ve got a direct advantage over the pre-internet time when the average American had a tough time reading about the various departments of the federal government.  Where did we go if we wanted to know about the spending habits of any agency?  That information was not available to us.  Now we the people can visit the agency on line and check what  it is they do, how they do what they do and where they spend that kind of money. 

 

The NIH has roots going as far back as 1798 when the only function was the relief of sick and disabled Seamen.  No doubt, you’ve probably heard the phrase that once a federal agency is created it never goes away, but only grows larger and larger.  Over time the agency has grown into a massive mass of people researching for cures to any kind of health problem that makes it’s presence known, or is suspected of being a potential health problem for someone, anyone. The National Cancer Institute was established in 1937, a worthy endeavor, and since then 26 other institutes and Offices have been established. NIH is now under the direction of the current Director, Francis S. Collins, a Theistic Evolutionist. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act named the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) is another office created inside NIH by with a budget of $500 million . . . to begin its expansion.  To make it sound less federalized, the PCORI was created as a non-profit corporation.  

 

Don’t you feel relieved?   Patient-Centered Outcomes Research.  I guess they’ll research how well we the people respond under the care of bureaucrats running the health care industry.

 

I don’t get the importance of the non-profit designation as every government agency is non-profit.  But that’s another book sized report.

 

The following headlines are what caught my eye today.  

 

U.S. Government Funded Study Establishing ‘Web-Based Sex Diaries’ for Gay Males As Young as 16   $250,000 sent out to University of Washington.

 

U.S. Spent $314,613 Studying Increase in Family Violence After NFL Upset Losses

 

U.S Government Spent $181,406 to Study How Cocaine Enhances Sex Drive of Japanese Quail

 

U.S. Spent $410,624 on Project to Teach Chinese Meditation to Cocaine Addicts

 

U.S. Has Paid $1.44 Million for Project That is Studying the ‘Social Milieu’ of Male Prostitutes in Ho Chi Minh City and Hanoi

 

Enough?  There’s many more.  The people at the NIH have too much time available sitting around big oak conference tables thinking of new ways to spend our tax money.  A letter is received from a college professor (scientist) with an idea to study the possible homosexual habits of butterflies, and the oak table conference votes and out goes our money.  They consider $400,000 as only a drop, so why not.  Next on the agenda?

 

Cutting the budget of the federal government is considered a difficult thing to do, but it’s infuriating to see our hard worked for tax monies spent so frivolously.   Studying male prostitutes in China?   Promoting condom use Among Intravenous Drug Users in Kazakhstan?   How do they promote that?  S400,000 to study Drinking and Sex Habits of Homosexuals in Argentina?   Give them the drinks first and then watch. The wrong team won the NFL, so study it.  Come on now bureaucrats, people of the NIH, think of we the people.  Oh, I forgot, they do think of us . . .  as the unwashed masses, the dummies, the infants who need to be told to come in out of the rain, to put that sun screen on, cover your head, watch your feet, wash your hands, tie your shoes, cover your mouth when sneezing, get your shots, wear warm clothing, wear cool clothing, drink lots of water, use baby wipes on door knobs, see your doctor, on and on. 

 

About time some of our leaders get the gonads to trim the heck out of these budgets to reduce the deficit and save the country. 

 

After November, in their spare time some NIH bureaucrat will think it a good idea to study the effects on the elite experiencing post-election stress syndrome. 

 

Obama has proved himself to be the golfingist president.  He has played more golf in his 18 month presidency than any other president played during their entire terms.  He plays even when the world thinks he ought to instead intend to business, leaving the tee times open for members.  He plays when Michelle is out with the kids, and plays when Michelle is home with the kids.  Yep, he’s an enthusiast of the game of golf.  Wouldn’t you like to know what those who have played a round with him would say about his golfing ability and strategy while navigating the obstacles?   What do the secret service agents think of his behavior and manners on the course?   They’ll never tell, as they are professionals doing the job of protecting our president, but it’d sure be interesting to hear them chat among themselves. 

 

Does he think of how the game of golf applies to the course of life?   Does he ever think of the rules and . . . golly ghee whiz. . . how sports are governed?   George Allen wrote a book titled “What Washington could learn from the World of Sports”, and I recommend it to Obama in particular and to all politicians and the bureaucrats running the country too, and our judges could learn a thing or two from the analogies.   Hey, it’s a good read for anyone.

 

Playing a round of golf is a game of navigation, a game of avoiding the hazards for the purpose of getting to the goal set before you in the least number of attempts.  The rules are clear.  They are the same for everyone.  The starting point is the same for everyone.  The goal is the same for everyone.   The obstacles affect everyone the same way.  No discriminating rules in golf, or any other sport for that matter.  No favors here or there. 

 

Put a diverse foresome together on the same tee and the rules apply evenly, the obstacles apply equally.  That’s fairness.  The maintenance crew is not out there moving ponds, trees, bunkers and the tall grasses so one player has it easier than the others attempts to avoid those obstacles.  The rules committee is not changing the rules during the round favoring one over another.  You’re on your own against the course and the best navigator wins.  You may think the other is there to intimidate and distract your “shots”, but there are those unspoken rules of governing that too.   Things like “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” keep the players acting in sportsmanlike conduct during the event, like remaining quiet and still while the other is playing his shot. 

 

Baseball has umpires.  Football has referees.  In tennis they are called referees too, and professional golf uses officials.   Unlike the other sports golfers are their own scorekeepers.   Golf officials are called upon by the golfers themselves to rule on a particular situation the player finds himself, not wanting to violate a rule and have to impose a penalty on himself.  Recreational golfers, like Obama and the rest of us at the local course must call penalties on ourselves according to the rules.  If one tries to circumvent a rule to save a stroke, like kicking a ball back in bounds, the others will eventually shun that rule breaker, never ever wanting to play with that person again, ever.  Nobody likes a cheat. 

 

Such should our law makers act.  So should the president of the US be thinking when any law is put forth on his desk considering that his job is to make sure all the rules (regulations) apply to all citizens, insuring that the new rules do not hinder the individuals navigation through life. 

 

 

The country does not need to create another federal agency when the federal debt is over the $13 trillion mark and climbing at the rate of over 3 million dollars a minute.  That’s $4.3 billion added per day.  Your share of the federal government debt is $42,800 and climbing by the minute.  Not a small sum in my neck of the woods.

Can it be paid off?   Ain’t no way.  Only once in our history has the US been debt free.   So what’s all the fuss about.  It’s natural for the federal government to operate in the hole.  Right?   We’ve all taken it for granted that it must assume debt because of the unexpected that will happen just around the corner.   Things like a war, or a hurricane wiping out a community, a tornado tearing up towns, or a flood like Katrina devastating millions.  Then the feds must act to alleviate the suffering of the people, which causes a drain on resources.   And we expect them to do their best protecting we the people.  

But this debt is not because of natural disasters, and just a small part of it is because of wars.   It’s the daily spending and expansionary programs that hurts.

We can and should hold the elected people accountable for this humongous debt.  But do we?   No, we just keep on putting them back into office election after election. 

 

So, we the people are responsible for this.  Huh?  You say.  Yes, we are.  We the people keep re-electing the ones who have added to this debt by piling on one pork barrel project after another, expanding the reach of federal power way beyond any common sense reading of the constitution.   What do we do?  We’ve applauded these people when they bring home the money for some “worthy” project in the home district.  The local news broadcast these projects as good news for the community, good for the local economy, long waiting for this and needed for that.  And then we the people send them back to Washington to get us more tax funded projects.  

Them days should be ending right now, this year, this November and then again two years from now, and repeated every two years from now on out.

How can the debt be kept from increasing?   Duh.  Stop spending more than taxes bring in.  Economics 101 calls it a balanced budget.

So, to get matters under control, a balanced budget amendment to the constitution would be a good place to start.

Second, stop creating new offices and new agencies.  Stop it immediately.  No new offices should be created under any other federal agency.  Put a freeze on new hires for new positions.   No new positions in any agency.  Just stop expanding the federal government.   Why should our federal government get away with creating a budget deficit so huge it’s unimaginable?   So huge, it is pushed off as impossible to do anything about.

We got to start somewhere.  Start with stopping the newest expansion.

“In June 2009, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) joined together to form the Partnership for Sustainable Communities, an unprecedented agreement to coordinate federal housing, transportation, and environmental investments; protect public health and the environment; promote equitable development; and help address the challenges of climate change.”   White House Blog.

A new bill ( S-1619 Livable Communities Act of 2009) was just passed out of committee that would create a New Office (the Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities (OSHC) under the current Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).   Introduced and sponsored by Chris Dodd (member of congress since 1974).

The purposes of this Act are–

(1) to facilitate and improve the coordination of housing, community

development, transportation, energy, and environmental policy in the

United States; 

(2) to coordinate Federal policies and investments to promote

sustainable development;

And 7 other purposes.  Read the PDF

This one must be stopped.  Read the bill and keep in mind that when any federal office or agency is created, it never goes away, it just keeps getting larger and larger with increased far reaching powers.   The Fedzilla gets bigger with more control.  It would be a good prognosis that 20 years from now this new office will have thousands of federal workers shuffling papers and telling local communities where and how to expand the city, even reaching out to the small 300 people bergs all across America.  The local mayor and council will have to get approval from the feds to zone land for building a new housing development.  Why, those homes must be energy efficient, they must be in a sustainable affordable planned community with bicycle trails, mass transit availability, schools within walking distance, shopping within a bike ride, parks for recreation meeting the goals of “healthy, safe, and walkable neighborhoods—rural, urban, or suburban”

 

They are the experts after all.  What do we know about building people friendly sustainable communities?  

 

We the people must put a stop to the spending habits of congress and the executive branch as well.  No new agencies.  Incumbents must be put on notice and sent back to civilian life ASAP.

 

ICE released the man on his own after being arrested twice for drunkeness.

The man suspected of drunken driving and killing a Catholic nun in Prince William County this weekend is an illegal immigrant who was awaiting deportation and who federal immigration authorities had released pending further proceedings, police said Monday.

The man, Carlos Montano, a county resident, had been arrested by police twice before on drunk-driving charges, and on at least one of those occasions county police reported him to federal authorities.

Read more. . . 

Hmm?  I was thinking that our federal government and the numerous agencies funded by our taxes are supposed to protect us average citizens.  When has all that changed?

There’s not a better program for young boys in this country than the BSA.   They teach kids the basics:

“On my honor, I will do my best
To do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law;
To help other people at all times;
To keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight.”

A scout is Trustworthy, Loyal, Helpful, Friendly, Courteous, Kind, Obedient, Cheerful, Thrifty, Brave, Clean and Reverent.

On this the anniversary of the scouting program, the president of the US as honorary chairman of the organization is expected to appear, give thanks for all the good work the scouts do, and encourage the kids to reach out and be the best, not only for themselves but for their neighbors.  But however, our current president will be seen on the “View” instead of honoring the scouting program and fulfilling his obligation.  Instead, Obama is sending a video.

Hmm?   The View?  What can these ladies do for him?   What can he do for the View?

My advice to the scouts would make the occasion a voluntary assembly, and spend the time sharpening their knives.  But they are better than that.

Over the years, we the people have been led to believe that progressives, also known as higher education academia, liberals, politicians called democrats (and many republicans too), and socialists/Marxists were the experts continually providing Americans with all that expert advice on how we needed to live our lives.   They’ve insisted they had our best interests in mind.   They’ve insisted they had the evidence.  Just as we’ve seen in the UNIPCC temperature data to manufacture the GW agenda, the evidence was tampered with.  Now we’ve learned that there really is a brotherhood of journolisters conspiring behind the scenes.   Independent news broadcasters?   Yeah sure, we bought that line.   You’ve seen the news broadcasts over the years telling us that the “experts” have discovered . . . . blah blah blah, and that . . . . blah blah blah was good for us.   It continues on for weeks as daily sound bites.   Repeating something over and over will finally sink in and soon the “we the people” will fall in line and behave as sheep.

The progressive expert scientists have told us the world began with a big bang, but how can nothing make a bang?   From that we have had blah, blah, and more blah about how removing the Ten Commandments from schools was about separating church and state and that it was really really good for us to be quiet as there are those who might get offended.  We were told that banning DDT would save the earth, but the fall out of not killing mosquitoes was killing millions of people. The progressive science experts told us melting icebergs will flood our lands unless we abandon our vehicles and comfy lifestyles, but suspend a glass with ice and water in a bathtub and it won’t flood over the tub.  How many melted ice bergs will it take to raise 71% of the earth’s surface to flood stage?  Blah blah blah.   Are those experts secretly building an ark somewhere?  Now, even a Christian denomination has accepted the . . . blah blah blah and are allowing celibate homosexual priests to be sexually active.   Huh?  Scientific studies said they have an abnormal gene and can’t help it?  Experts?  How can a government funded scientific study be seriously taken as seriously scientific?

So now the experts have a plan to provide health care and insurance for everyone, and it would dramatically improve our health care system, and . . . it will really be affordable for everyone, of course.  So say the experts.  It will revolutionize American health care.  No one will be without insurance.   You will no longer have to worry about a health emergency wiping out the bank account.  Children will be covered for all their growing up wheezes and accidents, and gang members can get treatments too.  The ones with previously existing conditions will be covered removing the anxiety and decisions of paying the high cost of insurance or feeding the family.  Yes, it all sounds so morally right.  It all sounds so caring, so charitable, so timely.  How could anyone stand against such a utopia?   No worries from here on out.  The experts will take care of Grandma too.  Trust them.  The congressional committee “studies” confirm the experts.  

The story will be similar to what is happening right now to the British system started in 1948.

Practical details of the plan are still sketchy. But its aim is clear: to shift control of England’s $160 billion annual health budget from a centralized bureaucracy to doctors at the local level. Under the plan, $100 billion to $125 billion a year would be meted out to general practitioners, who would use the money to buy services from hospitals and other health care providers.

The plan would also shrink the bureaucratic apparatus, in keeping with the government’s goal to effect $30 billion in “efficiency savings” in the health budget by 2014 and to reduce administrative costs by 45 percent. Tens of thousands of jobs would be lost because layers of bureaucracy would be abolished.   Read it all. . .

How long will it take our leaders, our experts to learn from historical accounts of what’s been tried before by previous “experts”?

Included in the economic stimulus bill of 2009 was this little gem: tracking your BMI, or to put it in more obtuse terms, your just plain obesity fat rating.

Last week, the effect of a little-noticed subsection of the 2009 Economic Stimulus Bill was revealed by Health and Human Services (HHS) secretary Kathleen Sebelius. Under section 3001 of the Stimulus Bill (on page 116 of 407), a new HHS Department was created called the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (HIT). The Stimulus Bill specifically gives the recently appointed head of this department, Dr. David Blumenthal, the objective of “utilization of an electronic health record for each person in the United States by 2014.”  Read on. . .

Seeing the opportunity to seize more power for her department, Secretary Sebelius, working with Dr. Blumenthal, released their “Standards and Certification final rule,” an expansive 228-page declaration of authority where, on page 61, they expound on their power to monitor every American’s body mass index, or BMI — a measure to estimate healthy body weight. 

Ah, so what?

I’m from the government and I’m here to help you maintain your ideal weight situation, so from now on we’ll be monitoring you, as the CDC experts have determined that your weight is just too much for your body frame, so we recommend you enroll in one of our sponsored weight reduction programs, free of course.  We’ll be in touch again next month to see how this is progressing.  Your doctor will process this information on your medical records also.  We are only here to help.  We do this to insure that all Americans are served fairly and equally without regard to race, sex, ethnic, religious, gender identification or legal status.   By the way, which group do you identify with?  Just for our records, of course, to insure there is no discrimination based on the previously mentioned groups, and to inform you that certain groups can get government assistance for fitness center memberships, and for adjustments to BMI index calculations based on race, gender, or sexual identification, because the experts have determined that certain racial groups have different ideal BMI’s.