Monday, December 21, 2009

American Democracy: Is the End in Sight?

I recently had one of my readers e-mail me to request I write an article on how our elected officials in Congress can pass legislation that approximately 2/3 of the population is not in favor of, or believes we need right now. This is not easy to answer when for 200 years we have had a democracy, “of the people, by the people, and for the people”. Obviously, this was the intent of our founding fathers, but it no longer appears to be the practice of our legislators. Our population has become more diverse with many special interest groups and the federal government has taken upon itself to cater to the demands of these groups, invade every aspect of our lives, and than decide the winners and losers.

Now that the “progressive” wing of the Democratic Party has dominant control of Congress, and we just elected a President who is a believer in big government and the re-distribution of wealth, we have a situation where these progressive politicians think they know what’s best for you. Maybe it’s because they believe that we are not an informed public or don’t have the time or interest to become more informed. This has always been the credo of the elite liberal establishment.

The fact that this healthcare package, which affects 1/6 of the economy, is being rushed through Congress to meet some artificial deadline created by Obama because he says we need it now, is a vivid illustration that he knows what’s best for you and your opinion is not important. Also, the method by which this legislation is being debated (or not debated) is what one would expect from a corrupt regime:

The pretense of a debate
Partisan rules and involvement only
Bribery for votes via favors and pressure
Legislation written behind closed doors by a selected few
Media pressured to ignore the process

Does this sound like the United States of America or more like Red China, the old USSR, or maybe the new Venezuela?

I hope this answers my reader’s question. If we still are the democracy we once were, the only way to reverse this is in the ballot box. We will see in the 2010 and 2012 elections whether we are informed or care enough. Since Obama’s election victory came, in large part, from precincts populated by the less educated and those who pay no taxes, the current result is obvious.

An apathetic or impotent public leads to tyrannical government, it happened in Rome, Germany, China, Africa, and many countries in the Mid-East. It is almost unbelievable that it can happen in the United States, the most informed and wealthiest populace in the world. But just remember the words of Ronald Reagan, “Our freedom is only one generation away from extinction”. The next few years will tell us if this is so.




    Tuesday, December 8, 2009

    Harry Reid: Majority Nitwit

    Who is this fellow Harry Reid and how did he get to be the Senate Democratic Majority Leader? I realize that Nevada has not exactly been a reservoir of great statesmen, but it is a beautiful State with great vistas and I love Las Vegas, spent a fun night in Ely once, and enjoyed a scenic drive to Carson City as well. I guess Mr. Reid had established a record with important people in his party to earn this position, since he was the Minority Leader prior to the last election when the Democrats took control of the Senate.

    He looks like a shy but likeable gent until he stands before a camera and opens his mouth. He has a hesitant and insecure way of expressing himself, sort of like Speaker Pelosi, and most of the stuff that comes out is stupid and dumb. That’s why I was wondering how he got to this position. If anyone knows, please let me know. I always say to my friends that, “ I love when he and Speaker Pelosi get in front of the television cameras, because that’s the best thing for the Republican Party!”Let them talk, please.

    In keeping with his reputation, Harry Reid made a ridiculous, callus, and desperate statement yesterday which illustrates that he really has trouble in pulling enough Democratic votes together for this misguided healthcare legislation we now have before the Senate. Reid equated the current Republican opposition to the bill as the same as the opposition to slavery and the civil rights legislation of the 60’s, when opposing legislators said we need to “slow-down” and discuss this drastic legislation further. You may recall that there was a filibuster of the 60’s Civil Rights Bill, however, Mr. Reid neglected to tell you that 80% of the senators participating in that filibuster were Democrats. I also seem to recall that the Emancipation Proclamation abolishing slavery was made during a Republican administration. Nevertheless, the analogy of civil rights legislation and this healthcare bill is obviously ridiculous, out of context, and as I said, stupid!

    Legislation that will impact one-sixth of this giant economy and result in hundreds of government regulations and mandates that affect every part of the lives of all our people, should not have a timetable for passage. This is not a football game. Also, the argument that the other side does not have an alternate plan is patently false, since I have heard it from Representatives, Eric Cantor, Mike Spence, Tom Ryan, and Senators John Thune, John McCain, Mitch McConnell and many more. The alternate plan is much cheaper, gets at the real reform need to cut costs, and retains the quality of healthcare while providing more competition. It does not throw out the baby with the bath water or cost anywhere near $2.5 trillion.

    Why we need to rush this through in these economic times, no matter how damaging, and leave the mess it creates to future generations, is beyond me. The choice is between Obamacare and a better reform alternative, which Mr. Reid does not want to be heard.

    Thank God, he will be on the unemployment lines in 2010. I’m rooting for you Nevada.

    Wednesday, December 2, 2009

    Global Warming Uncovered

    This corner has previously written articles that address the “junk” science of global warming, the posts were on March 11th, June 11, and June 29th, in which I discussed some of the scientific facts to illustrate that labeling CO₂ as the culprit in climate change is a farce that has already swindled billions of dollars from the economies of Europe and the U.S., which now threatens to reach trillions should the cap and “tax” legislation ever succeed in the Senate. Thank God the recent revelations about how overzealous scientists have attempted to hide data and prevent the publication of conflicting opinions may have finally put the nail in this coffin.

    This is the story of how a very weak and fragmented climate theory has turned into a political ideology that has become a virtual industry in itself, while those who oppose it are considered heretics and obstacles to “progress”. It is a story of how misguided scientists, the media, and politicians can take noble environmental research and turn it into a money machine for their own self interests at the expense of those of us who are too busy living our lives to get informed.

    For centuries the climate has always changed, sometimes drastically, even when the level of CO₂ was but a fraction of what it is today. What you don’t hear is that the global temperature has risen a mere ½ a degree centigrade in the last century and there is no evidence that the human production of CO₂ has any relationship to global temperature. In fact, volcanoes produce more CO₂ than man does; and decaying vegetation and oceans emit almost all of the CO₂ on this planet. The theory that man-made emissions can impact this is ludicrous and arrogant. Particularly when we consider that CO₂ is a minor greenhouse gas which represents only 0.054% of the total, and therefore any human impact would be even far less than that. Water vapor makes up 95% of greenhouse gas.

    Regardless of all this, just follow the money and you will understand why the media and politicians continue to propagate this myth. Since many of these so-called reputable scientists elect to suppress and provide bias “peer reviews” of articles that refute this theory, there must be many research grants, consulting fees, books, and articles that provide a good living for them.

    With the uncovering of thousands of emails and files that illustrate how this secretive group of scientists has suppressed data, frozen open debate, and ignored freedom-of-information laws in order to protect their money tree, we now see the quality of the science we are dealing with. At least the discourse will now be more open and objective and more of you out there will see that this inconvenient truth is one gigantic fib.