Or at least that's according to a principal at a Taunton Mass elementary school who sent a child home for drawing a stick figure of Jesus on the Cross.  The boy was asked to draw a picture of what reminded him of the Christmas holiday.  The boy has been order to under a full psychological evaluation as the picture which had X's for Jesus' eyes to indicate that he had died.  The picture was labeled "disturbing" by the boys teacher and inappropriate.  

   I guess the teacher was expecting a picture of Santa, Rudolf or even Frosty-the-Snowman but instead had to endure a picture with religious overtones.  What!  Christmas is a religious holiday too??   The boy obviously sees more in Christmas than just a baby wrapped in swaddling cloths and lying in a manger.  He see's past the quaint view of shepherds and wise-men and to WHY Jesus came at all and that was to die a horrible death on a cross for all of mankind.   Offensive?  Yes to those who don't want to be saved.   Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 1:18, "For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing but to us who are being saved it is the power of God".   The boy sees that without Easter, you have no Christmas.  Without Easter, Christmas is just another poor child being shunned by an uncaring world ... yadayadayada.."  

   I am appalled by how this boy is being treated.  He is ridiculed for his faith and treated like there is something wrong with him.   Yet I believe that God speaks through little children such as him.  Jesus was ordered in the temple to to have the little children who were following him singing praises to him to "be quiet", but Jesus showed them that their child-like faith was based in scripture.  "Have you never read 'From the lips of children and infants you have ordained praise' "  

   This boy has faith beyond his years and beyond many adults.   He is why Jesus also order the worst of punishments for those who would hurt the faith of one such as this when he says "But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believes in me to sin, it would be better if a millstone were wrapped around his neck and he was cast into the midst of the sea."   Not that Jesus was telling his disciples to go around throwing people into the sea (as he says "would be better") but was saying their standing before God will not go well and that being thrown into the sea " was like saying "better not being born at all". 

    It reminds me of the "Charlie Brown Christmas" cartoon we watch every year.  Linus gives the MOST impacting sermon in the fewest words possible by quoting Luke and the story of the shepherds.  His monologue to this day still gives me a lump in my throat as he delivers the "good news for all people" and reminds Charlie Brown what Christmas is really all about.  But sad to say, today Linus would be chastised for quoting scripture to his fellow students in a public setting paid for my public tax dollars.  He too may be sent for psychological evaluation for believing in "myths" and his parents may be called into question for their way of raising him and filling his young impressionable mind with ridiculous ideas of a gracious God who loves all mankind so much he is willing to die for them.

   

   Yesterday my wife and I watched a episode of Oprah (more my wife than I).  In the show, she interviewed a NY Times writer by the name of ____ who has spent much of his time and energy on atrocities of Africa and their treatment of women and girls.  I must say, it was an interesting show and much must be done to improve conditions in these countries.   I began to question, however, WHY Africa has taken center stage in AMERICAN politics. 

   Back in the 1960's, Harlem was at the center stage of politics in our country.  TV and Newspapers highlighted the conditions in the inner-cities (much of it created by our own government)  and discussed drugs, prostitution, gangs, unemployment, poor medical care etc.  But now we seemed to be having our attentions turned to other countries.  Have we solved the "Harlems" of our own nation and so we have no need to address them anymore?  Absolutely NOT!  Today the left is promoting the idea of the "Global Village".  We see commercial after commercial saying "Look at how small the world is".   We in the U.S. are seen as the only ones who can fix these problems.   We are the "rich kid on the block" and therefore we are the "solution" for all the ales the world around us.   Forget about being the world's "policemen".   We are now the world's police, fire and (if healthcare passes) medical providers. 

   Watch out America!  Your sovereignty is slowly being sold.  Obama himself has said he sees himself more as a citizen of the world than as an American and has already passed President Bush in the number foreign trips abroad.  Politicians who push for amnesty for illegal immigrants say borders are artificial in nature and are meaningless in the 21st century (what right do you have to say where someone else can live or not live?)   Congress is slowly selling our rights as a country as they increase our debts to other countries and thereby making us subservient to dictatorships like China.  Our Supreme Court has hinted at aligning our constitution and laws with that of other countries to make us more like them.   Political Correctness puts ethnicity before nation with all of its african-american, mexican-american, chinese-american to separate and divide us into little factions that can be manipulated and controlled.  Under the disguise of "climate-change", some are proposing a world-wide "cap-and-trade" type of plan that would force the redistribution on a global scale.  

   Now I am not saying we should ignore places like Africa altogether.  As individuals if we want to help change these countries for the betterment of their people then so be it.  But that is not what many in Washington and on the left have in mind.  They have great disdain for our way of life here in American.  To them, it's unfair that we have clean water and plenty of food while other countries don't.  They don't want to bring other countries UP, but instead want to bring us DOWN to their level.   Tired of dealing with budgets in the billions, they want to control budgets in the trillions.   Power always wants MORE power.   It's a disease that left untreated will eventually destroy our country and our way of life. 


  

    Well now we have the mirror opposite of Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" story breaking in recent weeks as emails have been uncovered by some of the most "reputable" scientists on the subject of Global-Warming (notice they often use the term Climate-Change now....hmmm).  These emails show a shady side of these so-called scientists as they discuss:

• Destroying evidence (emails, documents) in case there is a Freedom-of-Information request
• Falsifying data to cover up a lack of warming
• How to prevent other scientists who don't buy into their view by keeping their papers from being published

   We have always regarded scientists in an almost religious manor in our society putting their ethics up there with priests and doctors.  But now the curtain is being pulled back and revealing someone less than the "great and glorious Oz" behind the scenes.   Men, not armed with facts and data but instead with a political agenda.  These scientists are riding a wave of political ideology rather than following the truth.  They  know there is more money to be made by government grants searching for the global-warming boogy-man rather than letting the dat speak for itself.   In the end these men will have not only destroyed all arguments for global-warming, but will have also destroyed the credibility of their craft.  We now see that even scientists are not above reproach and are given to the same vices as the rest of us.  That they to can lie, cheat and deceive as much as the rest of us.  Maybe even MORE than the rest of us as they most often reject the idea of an all-knowing, all-seeing (and yes even all-loving) God!   For if there is no God, then there are no reprocussions of my behaviors which may include lying to the rest of the world and causing un-founded fear, panic and the spending of TRILLIONS of dollars to fight a non-existent problem. 

   Of course this is not the first time scientists have been caught lying to the public.  About 20 years ago a small team of scientists claimed to have found "cold-fusion" in a chemical reaction.  Of course their findings could not be replicated and they were chastised as having jumped to a conclusion in order to make headlines.  But in this case, science did the RIGHT thing and did what it is supposed to do by checking their findings by could replicating the results.  When they could not be replicated it was denounced.  Therefore the scientific-method prevailed as it should.  But what differs in this case is that here we do not have the scientific-method being allowed to be used.  Instead we have scientists actively attempting to thwart the scientific-method and to cover up their TRUE findings by tweaking data and destroying evidence.  In the case of the cold-fusion scientists, they were only guilty of jumping the proverbial "gun" and announcing their findings before they could be corroborated by their fellow colleagues because they didn't want to get beaten to the press.  Also, their lies (or half-truths) caused no real harm to society except to their own careers and reputations.  The global-warming scientists should be brought up on charges of misleading the public and possibly causing mass panic and alarm (if I were a more of a litigious person, I could see suing them for causing psychological and mental stress and anguish by saying The earth is warming! The earth is warming! .... doesn't this fall under the law that prevents a person from yelling FIRE! in crowded room??)

   We also need to take a closer look at the policies that caused this to happen.  Where did the train come off the tracks in this case?  Was it politicians (ahem.... Al Gore) with agenda's and fist fulls of cash from the government that could have been the culprits?  Haven't we learned the politics, like salt-water, is a corrosive element.  It's very nature is to corrupt and destroy whatever it comes into contact with?  And why is that the case?   Without getting too philosophical here, it is simply because governments sits at the very top of society's grand pyramid.  Unless that society is governed (implicitly not directly) by a higher power (God), that government has the ultimate final say in what is ethical and acceptable.  It therefore itself becomes corrupt and thus having nothing to prevent it otherwise, it corrupts all who come in contact with it as well.   In the case of these scientists were corrupted by politicians with social and political agenda's to control their citizens and to redistribute their wealth.   Seeing that there was more money and prestige in making up data and covering up the truth these scientists denigrated themselves and their profession.

    But now we see that the lies don't stop there either.  As of today, hardly a word is spoken of this massive cover up that has been found by the computer hackers.   ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN,, MSNBC, CNBC have not made one mention of it on their news programs.  Fox News and the NY-Times have made mention of it (and maybe the Wall Street Journal...but I am not sure on that) have checked the story and are declaring it factual and the emails a reality.  I am sure now these stations are busy digging up dirt on the computer hackers to see if there were any laws they had broken and if they should serve any jail time for their offenses.  They may do an article or two on computer security in the 21st century and how easy it is to break in a steal information.  But no mention will be made of the lies these "truth-revealers" have uncovered and how the rest of us are being played as fools and that global warming is really...

A CONVENIENT LIE!

 

   If you recall from your high school chemistry class, the definition of a catalyst is a chemical that helps in the chemical reaction but remains unchanged in the process itself.  For example, chlorophyll aids in the process of photosynthesis by which carbon-dioxide is combined with water to form sugar and oxygen and water.  The chlorophyll itself does not change in the process, but the process itself would not be possible (or incredibly slow) without it.

   In regards to Sarah Palin, many are wanting to know if she will run for President in 2012 or not.  Those in Washington feel that the only way to elicit change is to become a player of the game and to get into the "inner-circle" of Washington.  But to me, that would be a job too SMALL for Sarah.  I think her role can be much, much bigger than that.   Yes! You got that right, bigger than the president!   Without getting to religious here, Jesus said, "Unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground it remains a single kernel. But if it is buried and dies, it yields a harvest 10,50 or 100 times"

    Now, how does that apply to Sarah Palin you ask?   To me it's simple.  Sarah could run for office and quite conceivably become the next President of the United States.  But she will still have to deal with an out of control Congress (Left and Right) that does not answer to majority of Americans (even in their own districts).  Her ability to effect change would be limited and her time in office limited to 8 years but her adversaries are not limited at all and would essentially just out live her in the end.   But if Sarah Palin is willing to put aside her political asperations for the betterment of the people, she could be a major catalyst for change our country has never seen.  She would in fact be the GOP's answer to Oprah and allow her star-power to give energy to newcomers to the political front that would never get past the GOP's front-door because they don't belong to the correct clubs or have graduated from the right schools.   She would be able to open doors for people like Doug Hoffman who before would have had ZERO chance of being elected to Congress.  She could effect a change in attitude that Washington has been needing for a VERY long time while herself never setting foot into the oval office. 

   In fact, I believe Palins "power" stems from the fact that she is NOT from Washington DC or New York City, or any other major metropolitan area.   Her roots are in Wasilla, and like some plants, which flourish in some climates and die in others.  She too needs to keep her roots there.  Any attempt to "transform" her into a more palitable candidate would in the end make her less appealing to those in middle-american that today are shunned and scorned by the ellites on the east and west coasts.  Wasilla-Palin has unlimited cultural and motivational power, whereas Washington-Pallin only has minor and limited political power. 

   Sarah Palin could also be the "voice of reason" that the GOP has lost since Reagan stepped off the stage.  She does not have to "channel" Ronald Reagan.  She merely must reintroduce us to the principles that guided him in office.  She can help short-circuit the dismantling of our Constitution by the progressives that are in our own party by discussing Constitutional answers to the problems we face.  She can help take back our culture and show that our families are our most precious resource we have.  She can be the voice that middle American has been needing to rise up and counteract the Progressive (communist) revolution that has been slowly imposed on us over the last century.  

   That is where Sarah Palin will have the biggest effect to me!

     I am often suspicious these days of "crisis situations" discussed on the evening news these days, for often they turn out to be more "red-herrings" than anything else.  The mortgage crisis pushed by congress last year was used as the motivational force behind the stimulus plan.  Today our economy is stalled, (but not tanking) but only about 10% of the 878 billion spent in the stimulus bill has actually been spent and of the 10% spent very little has been capable of growing jobs.  In fact so few jobs were created that the government is forced to look for "jobs saved" in order to not be embarrassed by the truth of how little it has done.  

    Back in April and May when the swine flu (now called H1N1 so as to not belittle pigs) much as made of this "pandemic" in the news.  Some said this was mostly to take our attention away from the stimulus bill and the taking over of major US companies like GM and Chrysler. It seemed that the flu had run its course and it had not turned into the pandemic is was played out to be.  But then comes August and September, and now Congress is fighting of all things the takeover of health-care in our country.  What is needed now, to them, is a crisis in the health-care industry to force us to hand over our freedoms once more to them.   You can't turn on the evening news anymore without their being 2 or 3 reports on the flu crisis and the inability to get vaccines to the at-risk-groups of the very young and very old.  I am sure the arguments for government run health-care will be:   "The un-insured are the most "at-risk" group in America.  We need the public-option (ie Obama-Care) to stop this group from dying in the streets from the H1N1 flu!  Past it NOW ... It's an EMERGENCY!"

    But the counter arguments for these absurde ideas are:

1. Obama-Care doesn't even start handing out care until 2013.  So unless H1N1 has a very long gestation period, you're screwed!
2. If government (which is already in charge of handling the H1N1 flu) cannot take care of one VERY small aspect our our health-care industry, who in their right mind thinks they can run all of  our health-care?
3. Unless we are going to expand Health-care to illegal immigrants (and the world for that matter),  passing the public optional will do very little if anything from stopping the flu's advancement

    We must face the fact that we are playing poker with a master of deception, who has bluffed his way to the top.  It's now time to start calling his bluff and stand up to these fake crisis situations.   Of course they will ague that our position will cost thousands their lives.  But so did the decisions of Franklin, Jefferson, Madison, Hancock etc..   Their decision to call King George's bluff cost thousands their lives, but gave millions their freedom.   I am will to take that chance.... are you?   I hope and pray you are!

   Today, whenever the issues of citizenship comes up, no one wants to nail down exactly what it means or requires.   Birth Certificate?  Driver's License?  Proof that you are living in a certain county?  But now it seems that congress has come up with at least ONE requirement for citizenship:  Proof of Heath-Care Insurance.   For the first time in our nations history, we as inhabitants of this land are being told that having proof of health-care-insurance will be required or else huge penalties will be slapped on us ... maybe even jail time.   What happened to "all men are created equal and endowed by their creator to have certain inalienable rights" ?   Did that just get forgotten along the way to socialism?    

   Arguments have been made that states do the same for registering your car at the DMV and requiring car owners show proof-of-insurance.  But these arguments don't fly as driving a car is optional and is deemed to be a privilege and not a right.  Living is not a privilege, but a right (at least the last time I read our constitution).   And where will this all end?  If my government can require this, the most basic aspects of life, then what can they NOT impose on me? 

   Frankly, I am fed up with all the government imposed "requirements" of the nanny-state.   Most of the laws are not so much invented to protect us, but to protect corporations and to keep them in business.   Let's take for example the child car-seat laws.   I, like many people my age, grew up in cars with no car seats at all.   In fact, seat belts were used as lethal weapons against our siblings sitting in the back seat  when mom and dad weren't looking.   Oddly enough, we made it to puberty and onto adulthood.  Then insurance companies got involved and lobbied state legislatures to mandate that we actually wear the seatbelts or else be fined.   Did our legislatures pass those laws because they cared so much for us, or was it because they cared so much for their insurance buddies who where stuffing thousand-dollar bills down their pants?   Did this stop here?  No!   Insurance companies got in bed with car-seat manufacturers and said babies under the age of 1 should be in specially designed carriers and it should be against the law to not use one.   This created a whole new market that was never there before.... the car-seat-market.   Seeing that there was gold in them-there-seats, the manufacturers began their own lobbying and pushed the age and height requiremetns higher and higher until its almost required for kids to be using them when they are going for their own driving test (sarcasm added).  Manufacturers also would "improve" the designs and make older designs un-usable so they couldn't be re-sold and forced parent to buy new ones.  This scam has been used on whole hosts of products ranging from bicycle helmets to heavy-work-equipment and the wheelchair-ramps in parking lots.

    What else could government mandate we buy to be citizens?

• Home computers

Argument: This can be thought of as an extension of the no-child-left-behind bill in that no child should be raised in a home without one.  Apple and Microsoft should lobby hard for this one and raise the minimum hardware requirements from time to time to insure a steady rate of new purchases.  

• Cell phones with GPS built in

Argument: a fair number of people get lost or kidnapped every year and by having one of these the government could more easily locate you if needed (of course they would NEVER use it for any illegal reasons like locating your where-abouts at a DC Tea-Party....no of course not!

• An American made car, van or truck

Argument: since so much of our countries GDP depends on the American auto industry,  buying one keeps people in Detroit employed and keeps the Amercan economy moving.

• A menmbership at a local health-club or gym

Argument:  Let's face it American, we are just getting too darn fat!  Have you been to Texas lately?   Your fat is impacting the mental and physical health of your fellow comrads... urr I mean citizens.  24-Hour-Fitness and other accepted gyms are there ready to help you get rid of that belly or butt fat you are holding onto.    Also, China says that they don't want to give more money to a bunch of fatties anymore so... shape up America!  Or China won't buy our next set of bonds.

• Join a UNION

 Argument:  It's not fair to all the union people to have to do all the picketting of businesses and corporations for you.  Here they are out there day after day after day.  Holding prefabricated signs.  Yelling prefabricated slogans. Marching in circles for hours at a time.  Doing all of this FOR YOU!   You need to be involved too.  You need to get off your rump and help them fight for the rights of workers (or their union bosses money).  

Note: Acutally this is part of the health-care bill. Did you know that if you belong to a union you won't get the health-care tax penalty?  It's true... it's in the bill.

• Volunteer your time

Argument:  Government workers can't do it all.  We need a well funded army of volunteers to do the government's bidding.  This is already being done in high schools across America as seniors are required to do various numbers of hours of "community service" in return for getting their high school diploma.  So why can't we extend this to becoming a voting member of society?    You want to cast a vote?   50 hours of community service please!  (500 if you are a evil Republican).  After all voting is a earned privilege and not a right!

    I am sure the list will not end here, but this is all that I have time to think up at the moment.  

   I am tired of hearing commentator after commentator talking about how the number of jobless claims is "slowing" (still RISING ... but SLOWING) and that may be a "sign" that the recession may be ending.  Yet no one sees that the reason for this is that the Christmas (I refuse to say "holiday season") is upon us.   In talking with various people, stores are hiring temp-jobs to fill in as they normally do.  But come January, where will all those jobs be?   GONE!  That's where. 

   Today the jobless level is at 10.2% (Obama said that without the stimulus we may see unemployment at 8.0%).  After Christmas I believe we will see that level go dramatically up and maybe reach levels of 11 or 12 percent.  Let's be real here.  Anyone who says the worst may be over is a fool.  The price of gold is rising faster than ever,  showing that many people (including myself) have no faith that all this spending is going to have a good effect on our economy.  With that level of pessimism, I think we are in for a rude awaking sometime in January or February and we need to stop deluding ourselves like the wife of an alcoholic husband that thinks he will stop drinking ... THIS TIME.   We take any good news they have to offer us as a sign that its all going to be alright soon rather than look behind the curtain to see what really is there.    

    I was at a zoo a few years ago and went to go see the monkey exhibit. Upon arrival we saw that the exhibit was closed because workers were busy installing a new fence.   Talking to one of the workers I asked him why a new fence was needed.  He exclaimed that the fences need to be redone about every 3 to 4 years as the monkeys who are very smart animals find ways to get out.   I asked if there was anyway to stop them and he said, "Oh yeah, years ago we could just electrify the fence to keep them from trying... but today that is considered to be too cruel.   But this also keeps the fence makers in business (he joked)"

    I think the same argument can be said about much of our own country.  We shy away from people being punished for their own actions.   Whether it's a kid who doesn't want to study for his tests to get good grades; or it's a home buyer that got in over their head with a variable interest rate mortgage; or it's an insurance company that made risky investments into derivatives.  We don't let natures own consequences take place.  We often call it "intervening" or "bailing out".   But whatever you call it, we seem bewildered when we keep getting the same problems occurring over and over and over again. 

    I was listening to Armstrong&Getty on the radio a few days ago and Joe Getty made the statement, "Stupid should hurt".  They were talking about people who made bad decisions with their life (drugs, alcohol, dropping out of school etc..) and how these people were able to eek out an existence on the government dime.   They had no incentive to improve their lives and they were content for the rest of us to pay their way for the rest of their pathetic life.  They were like the monkeys that had no incentive to stay away from the fences.  They would keep trying to get out until they succeeded.

    Pain is a wonderful solution to most of what ails our country.  For example,  the peril of having your company go bankrupt is what keeps most companies from being derelict with other peoples money.   Removing that consequence is like removing the electricity from the monkey-cage fences.  You now suddenly are left with the need to constantly re-build the fences by adding more and more legislation and restrictions to keep the possible offenders from going where you don't want them to go.  And like the monkey's in the cage, you won't find out about the problem until it's too late and the damage has been done.

    I believe you would have to be a complete and utter fool to think that you will be able to stop Wall Street with another set of regulations and governing boards.  Do you really think that Bernie Madoff is the only Ponzi scheme out there?  The problem with Wall Street has never been about regulation, its all about RISK.  Where there is high risk, there are fewer and fewer fools wanting to go there.  Take away that risk and you have an unlimited amount of fools placing their bets.  Risk is what makes capitalism work and its how capitalism regulates itself.  Some of course will get burned in the process, but we will all collectively learn a lesson from them. Reducing the risk of injury only perpetuates the problem (I once read an article that said risky driving has increased with the advent of driver and side airbags as more drivers feel more and more invincible behind the wheel). 

    Of course it seems we need refresher courses on these primcipals from time to time.  In 1929, we learned that if you want to invest in the stock market, you need to do it on your own dime and not someone elses.  Back then, people were investing by using "margin" (using loaned money from the broker) to buy stock.  The risk was low to these investors as it wasn't THEIR money they were risking.  We learned that lesson and stopped this ugly game.  But now here were again 80 years later only to find out that Congress had changed the rules again and allowed this practice once again.   

    The changes we need to make to keep bubbles like the one we just came through from happening again, are not more regulatory boards and regulations.  No!  What we need to put back into the capatilistic system is a good dose of RISK.  We need to:

1) End the options market, especially short-sales (a system of making a legal "bet" on a stock going DOWN in price rather than UP).
2) End the derivatives market (buying on margin) so  investors have "skin in the game" (their own skin of course). 
3) Take away "investment insurance policies" that large investors take out to hedge their bets that their investment decisions go south. 
4) Allow all companies to fail no matter how large they are.  Out of their rubble, better and more reliable companies can rise. 

    This last fix, brings up a point I would like to make.  In nature, forest fires are not only destructive, but actually necessary.   Old tree growths become weak and prone to disease and insects.   It is necessary for forest fires to burn them down on occasion so their pine cones can be burst open and have their seeds spread to make new trees.  Allowing the old trees to live would eventually lead to the death of the forest as disease can wipe out the forest , with no new trees to take their place.   So also with capitalism, recessions like the one we are experiencing now should allow poorly managed companies (usually old and rigid) to go under, thereby allowing younger and more pliable companies to take their place.    Bailing them out, as we did, will only put off their inevitable destruction.  And like the forest, killed off by disease, we won't have the seeds (money) to rebuild the forest.

   In conclusion, risk and consequences are the electricity we need to add to the fences of our market system.  Unless we do that, no fence (set of regulations) will ever be enough to keep the market-monkeys in.

    I was at a zoo a few years ago and went to go see the monkey exhibit. Upon arrival we saw that the exhibit was closed because workers were busy installing a new fence.   Talking to one of the workers I asked him why a new fence was needed.  He exclaimed that the fences need to be redone about every 3 to 4 years as the monkeys who are very smart animals find ways to get out.   I asked if there was anyway to stop them and he said, "Oh yeah, years ago we could just electrify the fence to keep them from trying... but today that is considered to be too cruel.   But this also keeps the fence makers in business (he joked)"

    I think the same argument can be said about much of our own country.  We shy away from people being punished for their own actions.   Whether it's a kid who doesn't want to study for his tests to get good grades; or it's a home buyer that got in over their head with a variable interest rate mortgage; or it's an insurance company that made risky investments into derivatives.  We don't let natures own consequences take place.  We often call it "intervening" or "bailing out".   But whatever you call it, we seem bewildered when we keep getting the same problems occurring over and over and over again. 

    I was listening to Armstrong&Getty on the radio a few days ago and Joe Getty made the statement, "Stupid should hurt".  They were talking about people who made bad decisions with their life (drugs, alcohol, dropping out of school etc..) and how these people were able to eek out an existence on the government dime.   They had no incentive to improve their lives and they were content for the rest of us to pay their way for the rest of their pathetic life.  They were like the monkeys that had no incentive to stay away from the fences.  They would keep trying to get out until they succeeded.

    Pain is a wonderful solution to most of what ails our country.  For example,  the peril of having your company go bankrupt is what keeps most companies from being derelict with other peoples money.   Removing that consequence is like removing the electricity from the monkey-cage fences.  You now suddenly are left with the need to constantly re-build the fences by adding more and more legislation and restrictions to keep the possible offenders from going where you don't want them to go.  And like the monkey's in the cage, you won't find out about the problem until it's too late and the damage has been done.

    I believe you would have to be a complete and utter fool to think that you will be able to stop Wall Street with another set of regulations and governing boards.  Do you really think that Bernie Madoff is the only Ponzi scheme out there?  The problem with Wall Street has never been about regulation, its all about RISK.  Where there is high risk, there are fewer and fewer fools wanting to go there.  Take away that risk and you have an unlimited amount of fools placing their bets.  Risk is what makes capitalism work and its how capitalism regulates itself.  Some of course will get burned in the process, but we will all collectively learn a lesson from them. Reducing the risk of injury only perpetuates the problem (I once read an article that said risky driving has increased with the advent of driver and side airbags as more drivers feel more and more invincible behind the wheel). 

    Of course it seems we need refresher courses on these primcipals from time to time.  In 1929, we learned that if you want to invest in the stock market, you need to do it on your own dime and not someone elses.  Back then, people were investing by using "margin" (using loaned money from the broker) to buy stock.  The risk was low to these investors as it wasn't THEIR money they were risking.  We learned that lesson and stopped this ugly game.  But now here were again 80 years later only to find out that Congress had changed the rules again and allowed this practice once again.   

    The changes we need to make to keep bubbles like the one we just came through from happening again, are not more regulatory boards and regulations.  No!  What we need to put back into the capatilistic system is a good dose of RISK.  We need to:

1) End the options market, especially short-sales (a system of making a legal "bet" on a stock going DOWN in price rather than UP).
2) End the derivatives market (buying on margin) so  investors have "skin in the game" (their own skin of course). 
3) Take away "investment insurance policies" that large investors take out to hedge their bets that their investment decisions go south. 
4) Allow all companies to fail no matter how large they are.  Out of their rubble, better and more reliable companies can rise. 

    This last fix, brings up a point I would like to make.  In nature, forest fires are not only destructive, but actually necessary.   Old tree growths become weak and prone to disease and insects.   It is necessary for forest fires to burn them down on occasion so their pine cones can be burst open and have their seeds spread to make new trees.  Allowing the old trees to live would eventually lead to the death of the forest as disease can wipe out the forest , with no new trees to take their place.   So also with capitalism, recessions like the one we are experiencing now should allow poorly managed companies (usually old and rigid) to go under, thereby allowing younger and more pliable companies to take their place.    Bailing them out, as we did, will only put off their inevitable destruction.  And like the forest, killed off by disease, we won't have the seeds (money) to rebuild the forest.

   In conclusion, risk and consequences are the electricity we need to add to the fences of our market system.  Unless we do that, no fence (set of regulations) will ever be enough to keep the market-monkeys in.

  Now some are going to click into this article thinking I am going to give some lecture on faith in God or the Bible.  To them, I apologize for misleading them. But I ask them to please read on as this is almost as important as those subjects. 

  Recently, a conservative in New York was able to oust a "moderate" Republican from a congressional race.  That person was Doug Hoffman.  A virtual unknown until a few weeks ago who captured the attention of our country and our party.   In recent years we have been convinced by so-called "party leaders" that true conservatives cannot win in elections today.  That we need moderates like John McCain to lead us and be able to "reach across the aisle" to get  things done.  But apparently no one told Doug this and he ran anyway.  His opponent, dropped out of the race for the "good of the party", but then later gave her endorsement to the DEMOCRATIC candidate.   I guess she was a GOP member in name only.... a virtual wolf-in-sheeps-clothing.   Evidently she was not a "true believer" in the true conservative principals of:

   - A free and unfettered market
   - A limited government
   - Lower taxes
   - Self Reliance
   - Self Control

   These principals are only just words to the likes of moderates like her. 

   So just what is a moderate?  To me it's someone who doesn't know what they believe.  They have a foot in the water and a foot on the beach at the same time (you are not going to have much fun there until you choose where you are ultimately going to be).   If I may quote a verse from the Bible, God says to the Church in Revelation 3:16, "So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth" and that is how I feel about moderate republicans candidates.  I love the taste of coffee ( I probably drink too much of it for my own good).  You can drink it HOT or you can drink it COLD (ice coffee), but if you have ever drank a coffee that has sitting out and has turned room temperature, it almost make you vomit it's so bad.  You have to either put some ice cubes in it or put into the microwave to make it desirable again.

   That is where we are at in the GOP.   Voters are giving the GOP the message:  Either you BELIEVE or you DON'T BELIEVE.  Ronald Reagan believed in the American dream and its ideals.  He lead with that belief and we gladly followed.   He didn't need think-tanks and marketing groups to word-smith his ideas to be palatable to 51% of the American public.   He believed that less government was BETTER government.  He believed in MAIN STREET and not WALL STREET.   He believed in everyday Americans and not in Washington. 

    Today's politicians remind me of a story on "faith" I read as a child.  In the story, a man traveling by foot in winter comes to a very large frozen lake and he needs to cross to the other side.  He decides that the "safest" way to cross is to get down on his belly and spread his weight over the most ice and slither across the lake.  After an hour of crawlling he is cold and nearly frozen, when he suddenly feels a rumbling underneath him.  Astonished he sees a man driving a team of 6 horses pulling a wagon full of lumber across the ice.  Who had more faith in the ice?  The man crawling on his belly and spreading himself out over the ice?   Or the man driving the team of horses?

    Our politicians are the man crawling on his belly. Trying to please everyone because they are too afraid of losing their jobs.  They have no faith in US, the American people.  They have no faith in the free market and capitalism.  They have no faith in the Constitution they are supposed to be guarding for us.  They have no faith in the freedom of speech and our ability to be civil.  They have no faith in our ability to protect ourselves and to limit our own use of guns.   And because THEY don't believe in thos principals, they think we don't believe in them either.   They only see us as sheep to sheered and manipulated and themselves as the enlightened ones.   They only see through focus groups,  infomercials, seminars and endless legislation and 2000 page bills.   They see themselves as our nations "saviors" and not us. 

   So my question to other GOP leaders and politiicans is this.....

   DO YOU REALLY BELIEVE?

I think today's politicians don't really see Red or Blue states.  Instead they only see GREEN.  I don't think we can make the assumption that our politicians truly care about US as Americans today.  What they do care about is their cushy jobs and in order to keep those cushy jobs they need one thing ... MONEY!

   When I used to write my representatives (house and senate) I would state my point and try to make the most logical (common sense) argument for my view and hope that it would make some impact on them and their decision.  I frankly don't believe that works anymore.  Today they need to be given a more compelling reason for listening to us.  Now when I write to Boxer or Feinstein, I mention to them that if they pass this healthcare bill I am prepared to give $500 to the candidate that runs against them in their next race ($1000 if they use the nuclear option).   Now it is a bit of truth-or-dare as they don't know if I am truly serious about this or not.  Do they want to take that chance?  If more of us made these threats in our letters I think they would listen more to what we have to say.  They know they have inflamed the opposition and we are angry as hell and not going to take it anymore.

    Several years ago, a series of books came out called "Where's Waldo?".  In them, readers were asked to spend time looking at highly detailed pictures of large groups of people and the object was to find a lanky looking young man wearing a striped shirt and hat by the name of Waldo.  He was somewhere in the picture and it was your job to find him. 

    Today, President Obama seems to be missing as well.  Decisions need to be made and he is no where to be found.  General McCrystal is needing a yes or no on his request for 40,000 more troops in Afghanistan.  Reid and Pelosi need his direction on Heathcare.  Is is for the public option or is he not?   He can find time to go to Europe to put in a few good words about Chicago for the Olympic Committee, but he can't be found to go to Berlin for the 20th anniversary of the falling of the Berlin Wall. So where's Obama?   Should we put his face on milk-cartons to see if anyone has seen him?   Should we put out an Amber-alert?   Where is he?  Maybe he is spending too much time watching Fox News to see what they are saying about him now and Michele needs to go in there and turn the TV off.  

    Of course we do know where he is.  He is in the Oval Office and probably meeting with various members of Congress.  But what we really want to know is, where is his leadership?  Remember back during the campaign, Sarah Palin chided him on being a "Community Organizer" and that a mayor was something "like a community organizer ... only with real responsibilties" thus calling into question Obama's ability to LEAD this great nation of ours.  He was rightly criticized as never having run anything in his life (not even a lemonade stand as a child).   Oh yes, there was the basketball team he played on in Hawaii ( they are really known for their basketball court skills there) and he had "run a multi-million dollar campaign".... but isn't that the campaign managers job?   Don't they get to make all the big decisions and just point you to your teleprompter?   We were told by John McCain that the presidency is no place for on-the-job-training yet that is EXACTLY what we got.  A president who looks great in front of a teleprompter but can't make the big decisions.  Now, I am not a big George W Bush fan, but I would rather have a bufoon in front of the camera (shown by David Letterman on a nightly basis) and a president who can lead and make the big decisions than a president who can make nice speeches but leaves our troops in harms way with no decision as to how to help them. 

Message to the troops: 
      Sorry men! The President is too busy dancing the samba with Jennifer Lopez than to give your General what he needs to help you.

I am sure they will understand!

     When a professional football team goes against an opponent they always have people high up in the press boxes watching the game and looking for clues and patterns of behavior that may help them know what the other team is planning.   From their high-up perspective they can see things that coaches down low on the field may not be able to see and then alert the coaches through their headsets what is going on.   For example, when the team puts the fullback directly behind the quarterback it may indicate a running play.   When he is off to the side it may indicate a pass play. (I know I am over simplifying the example).   You can see the results of these insights by noticing the second half scoring is much different than the first half of the game.   We often refer to this as "being on to their game plan".  Of course the ULTIMATE thing would be to somehow get hold of the other teams play-book so we can REALLY know what they are going  to do (some call this cheating,.... but I don't)

     The same can be said about politics.  We have 2 sides and they are pushing their agenda down the field. Each is trying to get "into the other coaches head" and stop their opponent from advancing.   We ask "Why are they doing X instead of doing Y?"   We try to see "patterns of behavior" so we can point out what is wrong with their views or ideas.   Today, we are in the 1st quarter of the Obama-game (also called "Socialism vs Capitalism").   We have had a chance to see how they have played the game so far and we have learned about some basic things about their plays

1) They love CRISIS situations.  After all, a crisis is a terrible thing to waste according to Rahm Emmanuel. 
2) They control the media as evident by Anita Dunn and also the NEA controversy. 
3) They hate greedy corporations and love unions

     But I think the play-book they are using is Saul Alinsky's book from the 1960's called: "Rules For Radicals" ; especially the play for defeating an enemy:  "Isolate and Ridicule".    In this play, you destroy an enemy by separating them from the pack.  This makes the group feel small  and weak.   No one wants to feel like an outcast, we all want to feel like we belong.   Making the  person or group feel alone is very important.  It's just YOU that feels this way.  EVERYONE ELSE feels differently from you.  This method has been used for years in high school and college class rooms across America.   By ridiculing the person or group you tap into their desire to be loved or liked.  This psychological brainwashing can be played out on a grand scale especially if you have the media on your side.  By constantly feeding the public with images of "right-thinking vs. wrong-thinking" you conjole people into thinking that somehow their views are out of step with the rest of America.  Hitler did this.  Muselini did this.  Mao did this.   Stalin did this.  And the list goes on and on....

    Recently the White House has openly attacked Fox News as not being a "real news network".   The claim that their news stories are slanted and can't be compared to other stations such as CNN or MSNBC.  Do you see the play?

     ISOLATE:  "Fox news is not like CNN or MSNBC"
     RIDICULE:  "...they are not a REAL news organization.  They are just an arm of the Republican Party"
     MESSAGE:  If you want to stay in our good graces, you won't run stories uncovered by the Fox News station

    Will this work? 

    I don't think so.  I believe this beacuse Saul Alinsky was before Talk Rado and the Internet (could be why Obama is so interested in controlling them as well).  His rules only apply where the media can be controlled 100%.  Back in his day, there were only 3 TV News stations and handful of national newspapers that you had to get your message out on.  But today with Talk Radio and the Internet (blogs and opinion websites), it is nealy impossible to isolate your enemy anymore as people can easily find MANY other people who believe like them and therefore not feel alone anymore.   Also, it is very difficult to dissect the media from the people.  You can't isolate Fox News without also isolating the viewers of Fox News.  Doing this will only further disenfranchize more and more citizens (many of which are independents who may have voted for Obama).   The only thing it may do is prevent other news outlets from following Fox and going after stories brought to light by them.  But eventually I think these stations will tire of being scooped on stories and having their ratings drop. 

The Obama administration uses this same "Isolate and Ridicule" strategy on other areas as well.

Tea  Parties:
     Obama: "You may see on certain news stations (Fox) where I am not very well liked.  People standing around waving "tea bags".  Well I am always open to having "serious debate" on how we are going to fix health-care in our country"

     ISOLATE:   Fox News and Tea Party goers
     RIDICULE:  "...standing around waving "tea bags"  (he also put his hand up in the air mimicing a person waying a tea-bag)
     MESSAGE:  If you watch THAT station and go to THOSE parties you are not a "serious" person (ie crazy, stupid)

Health-Care:  
     Health-Insurance companies who only care about profits are trying to block reform

     ISOLATE:  Evil Profit driven Health-care insurance (what company ISN'T profit driven?)
     RIDICULE: They don't care about YOU the average citizen.  They only care about their profits.
     MESSAGE: You can't trust what their arguments because they are just trying to protect their profits.

Cap-and-Trade: 
     The Oil companies are making billions in profit off the backs of the average American.  We need to take those profits and invest in smart-energy"

     ISOLATE:   Evil Profit driven Oil Companies
     RIDICULE: They are ripping you off and they are "NOT-smart-energy" (ie - can you say stupid-energy?) and making HUGE profits.
     MESSAGE: We need to strip them of their profits and let government run the energy industry.

So like the team that always does:

     - Pass on 1st down
     - Run on 2nd down
     - Run on 3rd down

You can start to predict what they are going to do before they even do it.   We need to be aware of these plays by the Obama administration and see how idiotic they really are.  We also need to also let others around us in on their playbook as well because Alinsky's "Rules for Radical" only works when the other side doesn't know the rules you are playing by.  Once the other team knows the playbook its....

GAME OVER!!

    We have all seen the movies where men with little or no necks walk into small businesses and talk to owner telling him that they are in the "insurance business".  They say it would be in the owners best interest to buy their "insurance" in case "something might happen in the future".  This form of racketeering is known as "the shake down".  It's wrong and it's illegal.  That is of course unless you are from the government (or a lawyer representing the "Disabilities Act"). 

    Our government today is acting much like the mobsters in the movies.  Shaking down businesses to make them cooperate with them.  For example, government through the "Community Reinvestment Act" (CRA) tells banks that if they want to be able to expand their business or they want to get a "good bank rating" they need to pay money to groups like ACORN or make loans to low income people who may normally be turned down (Hey isn't that how we got into this mess in the first place? ... hmmm..  I guess we don't learn our lessons).   Government treats the money in these banks as if it was owned by the banks themselves.  But its NOT the banks money!  It's OUR money they are playing with. 

    This racketeering has got to stop.  ACORN is nothing more than thick necked mobster arm of the Obama administration and they are using the CRA as a way to get around the halt of direct funding by the federal government.  This group needs to be shut down immediately and our government needs to stop acting as "thugs" and start acting as "servants" again. 

Letter to the President,

Dear Mr. President,
    In a speech before your adoring fans who were chanting "YES WE CAN" you said that "I don't quit... I am just getting started".   In less than a year you have

1) Taken over the banking industry (TARP 1.0 and TARP 2.0)
2) Taken over the car industry (Buying GM)
3) Indebted the country to the tune of 800 billion dollars through the stimulus plan
4) Lost over 10% of the jobs (you said we would only lose 8%)

You are now wanting to:

1) Take over the health-care industry (obama-care)
2) Take over the energy industry (cap and trade)

What else could you want to do?  Where will you stop?

1) Take over the media?  (FCC chairman wants to redistribute the wealth of talk radio with NPR?)
2) Take over the internet?  (FTC wants to limit what bloggers can say)

Well, Mr. President, I just want to say that as a fellow "Tea Party Patriot" (or tea-bagger as you would call me), I am just getting started too.  I get the feeling you are fighting the wrong war.   If you had the same attittude towards our fight in Afghanistan, you would have given our generals TWICE the number of troops they had asked for and Afghanistan would be solved by now.  But your war is not with the Afghanistans Mr. President.  It seems to be with the American people.   You can't stand the notion that there are people out there who do NOT LIKE YOUR IDEAS OR YOUR POLICIES.    I know you say you are at war with the "insurance companies", but we all know that is a smoke screen.   We know you have already made backroom deals with them.   You want to enslave the American people and you can't understand why we aren't greeting you with our arms reaching out to have our shackels placed on our wrists.

Is this payback  for slavery?  Is your plan to indebt the US so much to other countries that we become impotent "eunichs" to the rest of the world?    Do you want the dollar to be destroyed so a new "global dollar" can be ushered in?   That is where is appears you are taking us but maybe I am wrong.

Mr. President, we too are JUST GETTING STARTED.   I know that this will be a war of wills and who can last the longest. I believe their are more of us than there are of you and your followers.   The revolutionary war was not won over night.  It took years to defeat King George and his troops until they just gave up.   We too are prepared to fight but not with guns but with signs, letters, blogs, phone calls and peaceful (but assertive) assemblies.   Americans will ALWAYS FIGHT FOR FREEDOM Mr. President. 

WE WILL NOT GIVE UP!