What Did They Know That We Must Never Forget?

Answer: That rights have been conferred upon men by God and that governments must be established to protect those rights. Rights cannot legitimately originate in politics by the whim and will of men of power.

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776

"The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen United States of America:

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

-That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

-That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

-Such has been the patient sufferance of the Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government."

Politicians Orate, and I Go, Huh?

I want to try to get to bed early tonight so I’m going to try to clear my mind here of a few statements by the political leadership of the country that jump the rails of the logic lines most of us are born with.

Today, the president again stated that it is impractical to enforce the country’s immigration laws, given that there are 11 million illegals in the United States and the manpower is just not there to do the job.

Huh? Given that there are about 138 million taxpayers in the country, using the same logic, why wouldn’t he declare that it is impractical to enforce income tax laws in the United States? Presumably, it would take more manpower to enforce these much more complex laws. Oh, right, I just remembered, the government is hiring 16,000 more IRS agents to enforce compliance with the new health care bill. Perhaps that’s why there isn’t the manpower available to enforce immigration laws and provide border security.

Still, that is not the greatest inconsistency in his argument. There are three others:

1.) He supports a system that holds undocumented immigrants “accountable” by having them pay a fine, pay taxes, learn English and become citizens. Huh? If we cannot hold them accountable to existing immigration laws, what logic is there in assuming they will find it desirable to be accountable to a list of requirements they can already ignore? Especially, if enforcement manpower is impractical?

2.) The president further stated regarding immigration reform, “I’m ready to move forward, the majority of Democrats are ready to move forward and I believe the majority of Americans are ready to move forward… Reform that brings accountability to our immigration system cannot pass without Republican votes. That is the political and mathematical reality.”

Huh? Actually, Mr. President your Democratic party holds the Executive branch of the government as well as both bodies of the Legislative branch. You passed a widely unpopular health care bill under the same conditions. How can you say you don’t have the votes? The Republicans have been little more than eyewash since your election.

3.) He asserts that we cannot remove illegal aliens because they have become woven into the fabric of the country. Huh? Couldn’t organized crime syndicates be excused using the same reasoning? Have a look at the movie, The Godfather.

Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi is seen here on video stating that unemployment checks are the fasted way to create jobs. Again I say, huh? Do the unemployed use the money to help capitalize new businesses and industries, or apply it through investment to the most market-efficient allocation? That’s how jobs are formed. Otherwise, taking money from A (whether a current earner or one yet unborn) and giving it to unemployed B doesn’t grow the economy one dollar or create new, at least in any sustainable sense, jobs.

I’ve gotten used to politicians lying blatantly. What really disgusts me is when they treat us like morons, which they do when they speak in ignorance, factual error and logically inane statements, and then attack us with ad hominem insults when we disagree with them or call them out on their unsupported assertions.

And by the way, a tax increase at this stage, without iron-clad budget and spending reductions is like tying the economy to an anvil before throwing it off the bridge.

Is This Really Necessary?

The U.S., currently fighting in two undeclared wars in the Middle East, now has about a dozen warships being positioned in the Persian Gulf against Iran, presumably to be employed militarily in yet another conflict politicians have neither the will nor strategy for winning.

Senator Alan Simpson has said, viewable on video at youtube.com, that within the last month or so, the Social Security system started paying out more than it is taking in.

The Gulf of Mexico is being destroyed by oil and chemicals jetting out of the ocean floor at pressures that defy current technology’s capabilities to resist.

Joblessness and underemployment continue to weaken the economy and harm families’ abilities to manage themselves, while government “borrowing” reaches forward to enslave yet additional future generations under burdensome debt.

After adding another $3.1 trillion to the deficit, the economy is still faltering. Banks are failing at twice the rate of a year ago and the FDIC has used up its reserve funds.

In the face of this and other national problems of crisis proportions, the U.S. president has pushed for legislation to do what?

Create more walking paths and biking lanes. $1.2 billion dollars worth.

Setting aside whether or not this type of activity necessarily falls under the purview of the federal government, is this really the wisest utilization of resources by a government teetering on the brink of bankruptcy? Will this "investment" contribute to commerce and lasting growth in employment?

Perhaps this strikes others differently, but when I read of fiascos like this, I have to wonder if certain of our leaders are in touch with reality at all. My daughters, serving as babysitters in their early teen years, executed their duties far more responsibly.

Canada Makes Kona Newspaper Banner Headline

Yesterday’s local newspaper, West Hawaii Today, featured the top headline: Oh, Canada! Nation’s Economy Suddenly the Envy of the World.

The story reports: “The 20 world leaders at an economic summit in Toronto next weekend will find themselves in a country that has avoided a banking crisis where others have floundered, and whose economy grew at 6.1 percent annual rate in the first three months of this year.”

The article particularly notes that, “there was no mortgage meltdown or subprime crisis in Canada. Banks don’t package mortgages and sell them to the private market so they need to be sure their borrowers can pay back the loans.”

Grrr! Lucky so-and-so’s, who could've ever thought of running banks like that?

“The banks are stable because, in part, they’re more regulated. As the U.S. and Europe loosened regulations on their financial industries over the last 15 years, Canada refused to do so.”

Well, yearh, if you're gonna cheat! How are U.S. banks supposed to compete with that?

“The banks also aren’t as leveraged as their U.S. or European peers.”

I’m going to go out on a limb here and take a guess that Canadian banking system laws aren’t written by former Goldman Sachs executives now embedded in their nation's government.

“Our banks were better managed and we had better regulations,” says former Prime minister Paul Martin, the man credited with killing off a massive government deficit in the 1990’s when he was finance minister, leading to 12 straight years of budget surpluses.”

World leaders have noticed: President Barack Obama says the U.S. should take note of Canada’s banking system…”

Yeah, well, I wouldn’t recommend anyone holding his breath waiting for that to happen.

When You Need to Rent (Soccer) Fans, Who Ya Gonna Call?

Why, the Chinese, of course.



One of the stranger FIFA World Cup news stories to appear (so far) regards North Korea enlisting around a thousand PRC Chinese to pose as their “fans” during their soccer matches in South Africa.

Funny thing is, most of the Chinese who comprised the “fans volunteer army” knew next to nothing about soccer or the World Cup.

Evidently, the problem for the DPRNK was finding enough butts to fill their allocated seats at their games, butts that, presumably, could be trusted to return home at the end of the World Cup games. They managed to provide only a “group of 300 [who] had been carefully chosen by the North Korean Government.”

Being that the Norks were only able to “carefully select” 300 of their own people, they arranged for supplemental Chinese nationals to don the same red fan uniforms as their own people with the objective of providing support for their players.

You know, it has to be said, it’s bad enough when teams surreptitiously bring in ringers to play for them but when you have to fly in artificial fans, well, that that sets a new standard for the pathetic.

The London Evening Standard subject article reports, “Although they [DPRNK fan group] sang their national anthem loudly, the group tended only to cheer when directed by a man who stood before them like an orchestra’s conductor.”

Still, the Chinese were reported to be enjoying the games, cheering conductor and all. Can’t find any fault there. Lemons into lemonade: Wear a red uni and score free seats to a world class quadrennial sports event.

In a further botched attempt to endear North Korea to the world, the team’s “manager Kim Jong Hun rebuked a journalist for not using his country’s full name – Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea,” the same article reported.

Democratic People’s Republic, Banking Reform Bill... since when does a name of something have anything to do with accuracy of terms, anyway, right?

The saddest thing is, the North Koreans played decent soccer in their opener while losing to perennially strong Brazil by only one goal, and their back four defenders played very well together. You’ve got to give respect to the players. Obviously they’ve trained hard and have developed their skills, and playing in the shadow of an oppressive regime can’t be easy.

The Hidden Exposure of the Truth

The catastrophic oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico is the most devastating ecological disaster in U.S. history, and the repercussions will likely be felt around the globe for years to come.

While it's no laughing matter, I'm posting this video because the interviewee seems to so closely mimic the defensive replies, rather than solutions, or at the least, a timely, coordinated, national response by government and industry. Avoiding blame seems to have been the paramount concern by those who self-identify as leaders upon whom the public might be expected to rely.

As you watch this, see if anything truthful can be identified behind the obtuse response to questions.

The First Step is ...

... admitting you have a problem.

New York has had mandatory pre-existing condition coverage in its health care insurance system for over 15 years. Here's a report from the New York Times which, perplexingly, is not a subject of national coverage.

New York ... became one of the few states that require insurers within each region of the state to charge the same rates for the same benefits, regardless of whether people are old or young, male or female, smokers or nonsmokers, high risk or low risk.

Healthy people, in effect, began to subsidize people who needed more health care. The healthier customers soon discovered that the high premiums were not worth it and dropped out of the plans. The pool of insured people shrank to the point where many of them had high health care needs. Without healthier people to spread the risk, [odd choice of terms to me - ed.] their premiums skyrocketed, a phenomenon known in the trade as the "adverse selection death spiral." In other words, healthy people who don't need insurance must buy insurance at significant cost to help pay for the treatment of people who live in poor health.

Wouldn't true health care involve not settling for "spreading the risk" but, rather more beneficially, lowering the risk?

For a long time now, the government has created special income tax breaks for whatever, ostensibly, it deems important behavior ( e.g., buy an infant car seat, install a solar hot water system, give to charities, subsidize farmers, fishermen or multi-national corporations, et al.). Yet, contrarily, the health care bill ignores responsible behavior and treats everyone the same - an active twenty-year old of normal weight will incur the same premium costs as a four hundred pound 55 year old couch potato.

If congress applied the same taxation logic to health care as various existing special interests, there should be significant tax breaks for people of normal, age-appropriate weight, blood pressure and fitness. So, I ask you, why is this not the case?

Without a productive change in behavior, the health of a high-risk individual cannot improve. Some people would rather continue in self-destructive eating behavior. I say that is their right. But, the rest of us should not be taxed to subsidize their laziness and foolishness. Risky behavior, in any form, should not presume public subsidy.

Some people don't care about their health anyway, until it becomes a matter of life and death.

Fixing Women's Problems

As a natural born and always-have-been male, I always assume that when women share their feelings they are looking to me for advice as to how to fix their problems. Often, I’m able to do this in a quick sentence or two while rapidly switching between the three or four TV programs I’m watching all at the same time.

Amazing as it sounds, sometimes I can come up with advice before a particular woman has even finished speaking. Why waste time if the solution is obvious, right?

This extraordinary gift, which should be revered, seems to generate little gratitude in response. Baffling as it sounds, anger is the most frequent follow-up response I get.

I guess the only thing I could compare to it would be the response on the part of the populace to the passage of the health care reform bill.