DADvocate

Coming off a 35-14 victory last Friday night, my son's football team reaped the reward of being the top ranked 3A team in the state of Kentucky. No matter how the season ends, I can't fully express my pride in my son and his teammates.

Alex, my son, began playing Knights football (Maysville's version of little league football) in the 4th grade. This is the 8th season I've watched many of these guys play. Sometimes together, sometimes against each other. The most fascinating aspect has been watching them develop as a team. The players support each other, encourage each other and inspire each other. They're willing to work hard, practice hard and play hard because they know they're teammates are doing the same.

I was asked to include a video of my son blocking. Below is a video in which both tackles line up on the left side of the line. My son is number 79 and one of his best friends is the other tackle to his left, number 51. Combined they make up over 500 pounds of linemen. This is a simple power play where the two tackles bulldoze the defensive line. A pretty good display of power.



There is still a long season ahead but they've already reached a level few can ever attest to. Congratulations to the Mason County Royals football team!

Bill O'Reilly wrote in Parade magazine about what kids need to learn from Barack Obama on August 8. I was amazed at the the hate-mongers harsh word.

Thus, our modern age presents vast challenges to children, and they need to learn lessons quickly in order to prosper. And who better to teach them than the President of the United States?

As has been widely chronicled, Barack Obama had a tough childhood filled with instability and loneliness. However, that did not stop him from rising to become the most powerful man in the world. His breathtaking achievement presents five important lessons for all children.

O'Reilly breaks his points down into 5 lessons.

• Lesson One: Forgiveness
• Lesson Two: Respect
• Lesson Three: Persistence
• Lesson Four: Hard Work
• Lesson Five—perhaps the greatest lesson the President can teach children: In America, anything is possible

O'Reilly's final thought:

That adds up to one simple truth that every American child should be told: "If Barack Obama can become the President of the United States, then whatever dream you may have can happen in your life."

It all depends on lessons learned.

Of course, the other lesson to be learned here is that you can vehemently disagree with a person's politics and still respect them as a person and recognize their accomplishments and positive traits. I wonder if Rachel Maddow or Keith Olberman is capable of this.

From Jim Geraghty in National Review

The night offered a few lessons as Congress prepares to return, most notably that criticism and avoidance were the exact wrong response for the Democrats to make to the town-hall protesters. Since the first exhibitions of public skepticism and fury over the president’s proposed health-care bill, many members have found a newfound appreciation of “tele-town halls” or invitation-only events.

It’s easy to forget that all of these members asked for the job of representing their districts, and presumably knew full well that listening to constituents came with the territory. In a world where even a Little League umpire hears some boos, a lawmaker too delicate to withstand salty variations of “the bill stinks” and “you stink if you vote for it” probably ought to contemplate the lucrative options of post-elective life. There are few things in today’s politics more unseemly than lawmakers’ expressions of terror at the thought of departing their hermetically sealed environment of civility and obsequiousness populated by agreeable staffers and favor-seeking power brokers.

Of course, people who truly deplore violence would be more concerned about the violence of the left.

Writing at Pajamas Media today, Jennifer Rubin touches on some of the same subjects I wrote of yesterday, "It's the Personal Liberty, Stupid"

Now, as Matt Welch of Reason magazine points out, fear of big government is all the rage — and is cause for rage. He writes:

This isn’t about liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican. A majority oppose Obama’s policies because they fly in the face of this country’s bedrock values of personal liberty and limited government. Robbing Peter to pay Goldman Sachs does violence to that fundamentally American ethos.

And increasingly, Obama administration policy does violence to European values, as well. The continent has for the last two decades been systematically disengaging national governments from domestic industries. Top officials from Sweden, of all places, complained about Washington’s auto bailout, tersely announcing that “the Swedish state is not prepared to own car factories.”

The contrast between the parties is especially great for young voters who were swayed to vote for the hip, young guy over the grumpy senior citizen in 2008. It turns out the hip guy wants to force them to buy health insurance, load debt and an enormous future tax burden on their backs, and raise energy prices. It’s not very 21st century. As Michael Barone observed after ticking off the list of statist policies at the core of the Obama agenda, “The larger point is this: You want policies that will enable you to choose your future. Obama backs policies that would let centralized authorities choose much of your future for you. Is this the hope and change you want?”

---

But that goes for Republicans as well. The pressure to find some middle ground on cap and trade, ObamaCare, financial regulation, and an uber-consumer protection agency will become intense. But the Republicans would be foolish to provide cover for and assist Democrats in pursuit of a goal — more government — which is at odds with the wishes of a majority of Americans, including those critical independent voters. And oh yes, it’s never a good idea to vote in ways contrary to your party’s stated core message.

---

And finally, Republicans would be well to make the case that larger government not only means less personal freedom but more corruption, influence peddling, and “rent seeking” as interest groups and industries inevitably must seek to sway government representatives and bureaucrats who would hold enormous power over their economic destiny. It is not just that Nancy Pelosi faces a slew of ethics inquiries that have snared her closest allies. It is that by crafting legislation, most clearly cap-and-trade and ObamaCare, which would supplant millions and millions of private-sector decisions with government edicts, the opportunities for mischief making grow exponentially.

More from Michael Barone:

And there is health care. The intention here — Obama said it back in 2003 and hasn’t denied it since — is to send us down a road that leads to government-provided health insurance. His latest trial balloon is a centralized medical procedures board that would decide which treatments the government would pay for and which it wouldn’t.

---

The larger point is this: You want policies that will enable you to choose your future. Obama backs policies that would let centralized authorities choose much of your future for you. Is this the hope and change you want?

Mark Tapscott looks at, among other things, how Henry Waxman(D) is using the force of government to intimidate insurance executives in what appears to be an attempt to control their salaries.

Ever notice how Henry Waxman's cherubic face pops up so often? Most recently, he's been in the news with his letter to 52 health insurance executives demanding that they cough up mountains of data about their compensation, expense accounts, retirement benefits, travel schedules, and shoe sizes.

Okay, not that last item, but you get the drift here. Recipients of the Waxman letter - which was co-signed by Rep. Bart Stupak, D-MN - have no choice but to comply. So if Waxman - who is chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee - finds even the faintest whiff of scandal in the furthest corner of the health insurance industry, expect to be treated to the hollow spectacle of yet another congressional show trial.

Soft tyranny is never so happy as when its beaming countenance is brightened by possession of a federal subpoena and the prospect of jail it poses for those who defy the order from on high to produce whatever is demanded.

---

Health insurance executives are amateurs at living high on the hog at the expense of others. Government bureaucrats and Members of Congress are the unchallenged champions at this game. Hardly a day goes by without multitudes of commercial airliners bearing row upon row of federal bureaucrats jetting off to exclusive locales like the five-star Biltmore Hotel in Phoenix, always on a pretext like "training" or "team-building."

According to Sen. Tom Coburn, R-OK, the U.S. Department of Justice alone "spent at least $312 million over seven years on conference attendance and sponsorship. In 2006, the agency sent 26,000 employees (one fourth of its total workforce) to conferences and spent $46 million in the process."

Just yesterday, my Examiner colleague David Freddoso reported that "a group of 18 major federal agencies that includes Justice spent a combined $2 billion on conferences" in a seven-year period ending in 2007.

David further found that "Department of Defense was the biggest spender at $515 million, but others in the group include the Agriculture Department ($91 million), the Environmental Protection Agency ($104 million), the State Department ($164 million), and the Department of Health and Human Services (at least $349 million)."

---

Last time I checked, there was a D beside "Waxman" on the House roll call. Something else goes with Waxman - the congressional version of the Federal Employees Health Insurance Benefits Program (FEHBP), the gold-plated, tax-paid health insurance coverage congressmen defiantly refuse to give up. They won't turn it loose because then they might have to use the same government-run program they are foisting on the rest of us.

For those who value personal freedom, these are trying times.

Fighting the Obama/Democrat health care "plan," many claim we are being lead into socialism. But, it's not socialism. It's totalitarianism.

Totalitarianism according to Wikipedia:

Totalitarianism (or totalitarian rule) is a political system where the state recognizes no limits to its authority and strives to regulate every aspect of public and private life wherever feasible

---

It attempts to mold the private life, soul, and morals of citizens to a dominant ideology. The officially proclaimed ideology penetrates into every nook and cranny of society; its ambition is total.

---

In a comment about the similarity of religion to totalitarianism Christopher Hitchens has said "the urge to ban and censor books, silence dissenters, condemn outsiders, invade the private sphere, and invoke an exclusive salvation is the very essence of the totalitarian".

A brief investigation easily shows that much of the Obama/Democrat agenda contains strong totalitarian features. One could argue that Republican policies also have totalitarian features. But, the presence of these features is fewer, although I would prefer they be even less.

the state recognizes no limits to its authority and strives to regulate every aspect of public and private life wherever feasible...

Looking at the implementation of the TARP program we see government reaching into private companies "too big to fail" and controlling salaries of upper management. The cap and trade bill along with the health care "reform" bill would allow the government to reach further into the daily lives of individuals, businesses and other entities. On state and local levels, government continually intrudes into the operation of businesses via smoking regulations and such. Red light cameras add an Orwellian touch. Smoking in your own home can cause you to lose custody of you children in a divorce. The food police are just over the hill with fatty, salty, sugary foods in their sights.

The type of light bulb we use, the characteristics of the cars we drive, how much water or electricity we use are becoming more regulated by government each day. You must watch your speech as you can easily be labeled racist or sexist. Opposing illegal immigration or certain health care proposals earn accusations from elected government "servants" that you are a Nazi, racist, etc. Ask the wrong question of a presidential candidate and government officials start investigating your records.

Indeed, we are seeing a great deal of action that resembles Christopher Hitchens' comment, "the urge to ban and censor books, silence dissenters, condemn outsiders, invade the private sphere, and invoke an exclusive salvation..." The White House email to report "fishy" reports regarding health care reform, the left wing boycott of Whole Foods, a company that should epitomize responsible corporations, because the CEO dare speak out against Obama's health care reform, the left wing campaign to get Glenn Beck's sponsors to abandon him. (If you even slightly think tea parties are organized by the Republican Party, you're a complete fool if you don't think the Democrats strongly support these actions. Look at the tax money they insure ACORN receives.) Indeed, Obama himself is using religion to promote his view of government as religion.

Of course, it's all for a noble cause. I'm reminded of the one Shakespearean speech we all had to memorize in high school.

For Brutus is an honourable man;
So are they all, all honourable men--

Yes, they are all, all honourable men. But, don't let that fool you.

Michelle Obama takes the girls out for burgers and other patron's have their cell phones confiscated.

MICHELLE Obama, like her husband, enjoys a good burger, but not as well done. The first lady brought daughters Malia and Sasha to former "Top Chef" contestant Spike Mendelsohn's Good Stuff Eatery in DC for cheeseburgers, onion rings, fries, and milkshakes. "They got the burgers medium," says a spy. (President Obama was mildly ridiculed after ordering a burger medium-well in January.) "Three starving Secret Service guys were literally standing over the grill as Spike made the burgers, but didn't eat," our source adds. Fellow patrons had their cellphones temporarily confiscated to prevent pictures from being taken.

I though this was a free country where unreasonable search and seizure is forbidden. Apparently Queen Michelle didn't want any pictures taken while they were eating. Welcome to our new post-egalitarian society. The ruling class can confiscate your personal property at their whim.

This action probably has no legal foundation according to nationally respected law professor. He links to a photographer's rights flyer.

People of small minds and little understanding or observational skills pose the question about the tea partiers and town hall protesters, "Where were they when Bush was president?" Over the past couple of weeks, it struck me where I, and many others like me, were. Attending to our families, working to earn money to provide for our kids, doing what people with real lives do rather than spend time and energy trying to tell others how to lead their live and promote the use of the force of the government to do so.

Looking at my co-workers in my department at work I see these people. My boss, in addition to full-time job keeping me in line, works part-time for a funeral home picking up bodies and delivering them to the funeral home plus farms on the side so that his kids have a full-time mother plus a comfortable middle class lifestyle.

Another co-worker scrimps and saves in order to pay his son's college tuition. This after paying for him to attend a top-notch Catholic high school. He also puts in hard hours around the house as his wife suffers serious back problems and is often wheelchair bound.

Another just graduated a son from college and helped in move to another city for his first job. This past weekend, he helped his next son move into his college dorm as an incoming freshman.

We coach our kids sport's teams. Help with Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, PTO, FCCLA, church activities and more. My schedule this past weekend was thus: Friday - buy a video camera so I can record my son's football games and my daughter's basketball games. I will send copies to my 84 year old mother to watch plus some of my son's to college football coaches to help him get a scholarship. Friday night I watched/recorded his game. My ex went to my daughter's basketball game in a city 50 miles away.

Saturday - I went to two of my daughter's games in the same city 50 miles away.

Sunday - My son and his band played at a church in the late afternoon as part of a teen activity.

Including all the organizing and other support activities, my days were full. And, my life is easy compared to many I know.

Talking with others at the two tea parties I attended, I strongly feel that most of them are like myself and my co-workers. The kind of hard-working, self-supporting that everyone pretends to believe in and support.

But what happens when the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back falls? What when these everyday, everyman, salt of the Earth Americans raise their voices in protest?

Politicians denigrate them. MSM pundits mock and dismiss them. Lefties sneer and call them names. The royalty can't tolerate the serfs believing they should have control over their own live.

Friday night my son's football team, Mason County High School (Maysville, KY) began their season with a roar. They faced a worthy opponent ranked in the top 10 of 2A schools statewide while Mason Co. is ranked in the top 10 of 3A schools. Most predictions were a toss-up. By half time my son's team held a commanding lead of 41-7. The final score ended up at 48-21 as the opponents scored two touchdowns in the final 1:13 against the back-ups.

My son played every bit as well as I had hoped, primarily at left tackle on offense. At 6' 3" and 260 pounds, he's the biggest guy on the team, agile and as fast as most of the linebackers. He only played 4 downs on defense and had 2-3 tackles and caused a fumble which his team recovered.

Here's a video I took of him causing the fumble.

Making a quick trip to RedState.com, I found post that blew me away. MSNBC ran a story about people carrying guns near an Arizona town hall at which Obama spoke.

One guy carrying an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle was a nicely dressed black man. (Pictures a the link.) You can see him below at about the 24 second mark.



However, MSNBC crops the video so you can't tell his race and launches into a discussion about "white people showing up with guns."



How dishonest can you get with "news" coverage? And, the MSM wonders why people view them with scorn and they are dieing.

Incredible.

The town hall meeting protesters have created quite a buzz. At times I'm not 100% sure I approve of yelling, screaming and disrupting these meetings. Yet, how do you communicate to arrogant, out of touch, self-serving, condescending, conceited public "servants" who refer to you as Nazis, mobs, racists and recruit thugs to physically attack you and intimidate you? Raising your voice seems like a logical response.

Like me. These are people who have had enough. People who are screaming the "We're not going to take it" refrain. These are people who have the audacity to tell the power mongers in D.C., "Nope. We've had enough."

Instapundit has lots of links regarding the protests.

Searching my blog, I came across an old post from 2005, The Politics of Polarization. Michael Barone of U.S. News and World Report has written a review of a paper by Bill Galston and Elaine Kamarck called "The Politics of Polarization." A few of the points caught my eye.

• "There are more conservatives than liberals."


• "The myth of mobilization: that if you bring out the base in large enough numbers, you win.
• The myth of demography."
• "The myth of language,....substance is the problem."
• "...38 percent of Republicans say they used to think of themselves as Democrats, while 22 percent, –a substantially smaller number, of Democrats say they used to think of themselves as Republicans."
• "The Democratic Party..."is made up of liberals who reject values and positions held by large majorities of Americans. "

Of course, demographic numbers can change greatly over time, sometime over a short time.

I believe the myth of mobilization needs to be kept in mind by everyone. The tea party crowd is mobilized. The Democrat astroturfers are mobilized. (The Democrats really don't want any discussion on health care reform, quite the opposite.) What will settle the question are the votes of a few Democrats who are willing to take a longer, more careful look at the problem.

"Substance is the problem." At this point we have little substance on either side. Sure, we have a thousand plus page bill but few in Congress have read it. No substance there. The Republicans have tossed out a few ideas but they need more development.

The other two show why the larger party, Democrats, lose presidential elections and why they can easily lose the health care debate. One paragraph I wrote shows how much things have changed in the past three and a half years.

Although I have gone Republican most elections in the past 20 years, I would love to see a stronger, healthier Democratic Party. It would be healthier for the country as both parties would have to focus more strongly on serving the needs of the populace. Currently, The Democratic Party is so far "out there" it lacks the voter base to gain any significant power. If enough Democratic politicians could let go of the issues of gay marriage, quit race baiting, and show some respect for religion, they could gain popularity.

Obviously, the Democratic Party is stronger but I wouldn't say healthier.

Ann Althouse points out a couple of questions. First, she points out David Kurtz's question, "Where Are the Doctors?"

I did not envision that we could get this far down the road toward fundamental health care reform with so little input in the public discourse from physicians. Sure, the AMA has come out in favor of the House bill that includes public option. But where are voices of individual docs whose front line experience with the impediments to delivering quality health care offer invaluable instruction?

---

So where are the family practice docs, the public health docs, the rural practitioners, those who staff the inner city clinics? I'm not suggesting they're purposely sitting on the sidelines, but they do seem to have been sidelined in this debate. Can we hear more from them? Have I just missed it?

Next Ann asks,

...where are all the horror stories about people suffering and dying because of the current health care setup? You'd think there'd be all sorts of compelling anecdotes offered up to sway public opinion about the need for a big change. Quite aside from whether the proposed changes would solve the problems, I do think we should have been shown a vivid picture of the need for change.

Keep in mind that Ann voted for Obama.

Often the question is more important than the answer. Ask the wrong question and the answer is useless.

I'm wondering if a system based on the community mental health center model should be explored. Community mental health centers provide services to anyone and offer discounted fees based on income. Yet, private counseling and other private mental health services are thriving (for now). The mental health centers are private not-for-profit entities that receive significant government funding, private donations and collect fees for services. State and federal agencies evaluate the centers annually and approve them for continued operation.

The mental health center where I worked provided excellent services and care. In many instances better than a private therapist would because of the greater staff input regarding diagnosis and treatment options.

Additionally, we need tort reform which, from what I've read, is not addressed at all in the health care bill. Seems no one should get rich off of health care except lawyers like John Edwards.

But we'll know the president and congressional Democrats are serious about reform when they're willing to take on one of their most reliable interest groups -- plaintiff's lawyers.

Obama has said he is worried about physicians practicing "defensive medicine" to protect themselves against malpractice claims, but he also has ruled out what he has called "artificial caps" on jury awards in malpractice cases. The primary reason doctors order up all those tests Obama has questioned is to cover their backsides in case of a lawsuit. Real savings from the health care system will be difficult to achieve as long as doctors and hospitals are so vulnerable to the legal system.

---

Between 1997 and 2007, the cost of dealing with medical torts nearly doubled -- from $15.5 billion to $30.4 billion.

---

In Britain, the loser in a civil suit must pay the costs of the winner, which cuts down on the filing of risky lawsuits, including malpractice. In France, malpractice claims are settled by a special panel, similar to Michigan's Workers Compensation Commission.

If Democrats are determined to give Americans a European-style health system with heavy government involvement, they should also make the American tort law system more like the European model.

Now, a humorous look at the violent mobs via Instapundit.

Today's anecdote from the right wing hysterics comes from jolly old England.

A MUM suffering chest pains died in front of her young son hours after being sent home from hospital and told to take painkillers.

Debra Beavers, 39, phoned NHS 24 twice in two days before getting a hospital appointment. But a doctor gave what her family described as a cursory examination lasting 11 minutes, before advising her to buy over-the-counter medicine Ibuprofen.

Family members claim the medic was abrupt and rude - and when Debra clutched her chest, he told her: "Your heart is on the other side."

Seven hours later, the mum-of-two collapsed and died from a heart attack in front of her 13-year-old boy.

Beside anecdotal evidence being a logical fallacy, unfortunately, these types of medical errors occur regularly in the United States under our present system.

When my father consulted with a hospital oncology unit, a lady entered who suffered from a terminal brain tumor. She had seen her personal doctor numerous times for headaches and he treated her as if she was a hysterical women and prescribed painkillers. During one extremely painful episode, she went to the emergency room at the hospital where the doctors quickly recognized the symptoms as that of a brain tumor. Although this form of tumor had a nearly 100% survival rate if diagnosed in its early stage, the lady died because it was caught too late.

In another instance, my father-in-law felt pain and discomfort in his stomach. He went to the local emergency room where they told him it was ulcers and gave him some ulcer medicine. After a couple of hours, he felt no better and called my (now ex) wife (being an occupational therapist she is a medical professional of sorts). She called a doctor he had been seeing in Lexington, KY who advised us to bring him to a hospital there. We took him and within 15 minutes they had diagnosed acute pancreatitis. He nearly died and surely would have had we hesitated to contact the doctor in Lexington.

A year later, nearly to the day, my father-in-law began experiencing the same symptoms. My wife accompanied him to the local emergency room and personally told the doctor of her father's previous acute pancreatitis. The doctor insisted it was ulcers, prescribed ulcer medicine and sent them home. This time we called the doctor in Lexington immediately and took my father-in-law there. Same result but without the near brush with death.

The crazy scare tactic coming from the left wing tells us that our democracy cannot survive if the town hall protesters keep it up. The absurdity of this claim should be self-evident. After surviving the Civil War, several presidential assassinations, McCarthyism, the Cold War, the civil rights and Vietnam War protests with their accompanying riots, the Carter administration, we're going to be taken down by a bunch of geriatrics yelling at town hall meetings. Get a grip.

Maybe this is a veiled threat that they will end our democracy if we don't shut up. Of course, in that case, either way, democracy is ended.

Of course, some Congresspersons don't want to hear anything they disagree with, even from a constituent who supports health care reform. Listen to the congressman's paranoia. Who sounds reasonable here?

I sincerely doubt that many of the liberal Democrats in Congress or Obama give a rat's ass about the protesters. They've shown all the caring and concern of the Nixon administration.

The liberal blog, Dissenting Justice offers some excellent insight and suggestions. Indeed, I'm probably closer to his position on health care than you might imagine. He makes an erroneous assumption, although I suspect it to be intentional on his part and that of many lefties, that "I found the groups' protests peculiar because their sudden concern for fiscal soundness seemed unprincipled -- or as Ron Paul would say, it made them look like 'born-again fiscal conservatives.'" Failure to recognize that there is simply a point, in this case the deficit going up by multiples rather than percentage points, in which enough is enough is a gross oversight intended to avoid the issue and denigrate the people.

Dissenting Justice claims

I have always been consistent on this issue. In fact, unlike many liberal bloggers, I never condemned the "tea party" movement.

(I'll take him at his word on this.)

---

Nevertheless, the tea party protestors have the right to organize, mobilize, protest and criticize fiscal policy -- even in a way that is unprincipled -- until they collapse from exhaustion. The protests, however, were self-contained; they took place in locations where they did not silence the speech of others; the groups did not seem to break any laws with their activities. Rather than flooding local government and shouting down proceedings, they staged their rallies in appropriate venues and brought public attention to their cause. That is a model of advocacy. I do not agree with the advocacy, but the form in which it occurred is sound! The healthcare protestors used a different and unacceptable model.

Nice to hear someone can be civil.

I fully agree that screaming and yelling at public forums in non-productive at best. But, the left's hypocrisy on this is undeniable. "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?"

A shout out to Nancy Pelosi for winning the name calling contest. Not only did she use Nazi references, she stole the conservative code word "un-American" and threw it back at them. 'Un-American' attacks can't derail health care debate By Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer. Whatta woman!

During my daily lunchtime walk yesterday, I stopped and bought an ice cream cone at a small coffee/sandwich stand in the Skywalk in Cincinnati. Since the ice cream was piled high and unsteady, I sat down at one of the small tables and began to read a weekly rag laying there, CityBeat.

Inside I found a column by Kevin Osborne, "Reviving a Vile Legacy." Osborne's column began with declaring states rights as a code word for racism. He then compares the tea party movement to the racists of the 1950s and 60s. He never really says how the tea party is about racism other than to imply that you must be a racist if you oppose the policies of a black president. Rather, he rambles with no point other than he hates anyone associated with the tea party movement.

Today I made my first visit to Instapundit and found a link to this article at CATO@Liberty. Seems Paul Krugman received the same talking points memo as Kevin Osborne.

Krugman chooses to measure the reaction to Bush's Social Security reform to the reaction to Obama's health care reform.

Some commentators have tried to play down the mob aspect of these scenes, likening the campaign against health reform to the campaign against Social Security privatization back in 2005. But there’s no comparison. I’ve gone through many news reports from 2005, and while anti-privatization activists were sometimes raucous and rude, I can’t find any examples of congressmen shouted down, congressmen hanged in effigy, congressmen surrounded and followed by taunting crowds.

Of course, he conveniently forgets the lefts treatment of Bush.



More HERE.

I guess the column proves that a Nobel prize winning economist can easily lose his way when talking politics and sociology.

The Dems and the left are intellectually bankrupt. They've created nothing new since the college days of Bill and Hillary. They've been relegated to childish name calling because they're ideas are empty. As a sign of the left's opposition to racism, thugs from the neo-socialist SEIU beat up a black man.

This video, in which an AARP member asks, "Do you work for us or do we work for you?", reminded me of my personal experience with AARP.



I joined the AARP a few years ago when I turned 55. I figured it would be a good way to same money traveling, eating out and on insurance. (AAA is just as good on all counts.) In one of the magazines they send out, I noticed a scholarship program for women. Women 40 years and older were eligible. I found this curious as one must be 55 to be an AARP member. Isn't the AARP an organization for retired persons?

I also wondered if they had any programs for men. I emailed them asking them if so. After a second email in which I told them I would not be renewing my membership, I received a non-answer response.

Thank you for taking time to send us your question about why AARP Foundation has a scholarship program for women. As an AARP member you may already know that AARP Foundation is AARP’s charitable arm and as such it is dedicated to enhancing the quality of life for all as we age. The Foundation’s work leads positive social change and deliver value to those 50 and older with emphasis on those at social and economic risk. The Foundation has more than 15 different programs providing services to improve the lives of America’s low-income people 50+. Women are 75 percent of the elderly poor and our goal with this new scholarship is to provide yet another tool for low-income people who are primarily women to secure their financial futures.

We hope you will choose to stay with us as we continue our work.

I let my membership lapse. More women attend college than men. 135 women graduate for every 100 men. There hardly seems a great need to provide scholarships just for women. But, men could use some help.

The unemployment rate for men between the ages of 20 and 24 is 10.1%, or twice the national average. There are almost as many men in jail, on probation, and on parole (5,000,000) as there are men in college (7,300,000). Men with college educations earn an average of $47,000 per year; those whose education ended at the high school diploma earn an average of $30,000.

This was written in 2005. Well before any sign of a recession.

The video above shows AARP workers being condescending to its members. The members are treated as if elementary school students in a classroom. Shut up and listen and only talk about that which I approve.

It's apparent to me that the AARP values pushing a left wing agenda more than providing services to its members. I'm glad I let my membership expire and haven't wasted any more money of this sham of an organization.

Reading yesterday's post, you can easily see the Dems and lefties are upset over the antics of the tea partiers. Maybe a little history will help them understand. Obama urged people to argue and "get in their face." The tea partiers are simply following the great leader's advice.

Obama says to tell people he supports the 2nd amendment, will lower taxes and "argue with neighbors, get in their face."



The left has no room to talk, witness Tom Tancredo at UNC.


The Dems and the left need to lead us out of this social morass. Show us how to protest in a pleasing but effective manner. Show us how to argue and get in people's faces and have them like it. We are willing to learn.

From today's Fred Thompson ShowVia RedState

Jeri: Posters of Obama depicted as the Joker have been popping up all over L.A. Is Obama actually like the Joker?

Fred: No. The Joker had crazy people and bombers as henchmen. Obama has them … more as mentors.

One thing Sarah Palin got right was a "servant's heart." Something sadly missing from most politicians and glaringly absent from the Obama administration. Today the White House and other Dems dissed, disrespected and dismissed, thousands of Americans practicing their Constitutional right of free speech.

The White House on Tuesday dismissed protests against President Obama's health care reforms in multiple states over the weekend as "manufactured anger" orchestrated by right wing groups and the Republican party.

"I hope people will take a jaundiced eye to what is clearly the Astroturf nature of grass-roots lobbying," said White House press secretary Robert Gibbs during a morning off-camera session in his office with reporters.

"This is manufactured anger," he said. (Source)

Proving his out-of-touch, elitist attitude, Gibbs stoked the anger even further with his thoughtless comments. How is it that these silver tongued devils make Bush look like a genius?

Not to be outdone, Dick Durbin and Chuck Schumer added there minus two cents worth.

Speaking outside the White House after meeting with President Obama, Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois and Chuck Schumer of New York both dismissed the significance of boisterous protesters who have been interrupting Democratic lawmakers' events.

"It is a small fringe group," Schumer told the Huffington Post, "and if we let a small group of people who want to monopolize the conversation and not listen to the facts win, you may as well hang it up."

"These town hall meetings have been orchestrated by the tea baggers and the birthers to just be a free-for-alls, make a lot of noise, go on YouTube and show discord," said Durbin. "I mean that is what they are determined to do. But that is not going to accomplish what we need to accomplish: real health care reform."

Imagine standing outside the White House calling a group of constituents "tea baggers" with it's sexual innuendo. (I actually don't know what tea bagging is but anyone who keeps up with the news knows it's some sort of sexual act. I can only imagine.) The arrogance and condescension drips off their very being. Disgusting.

The tone of this White House and the Dems reminds me of the Nixon years. Nixonites had their "Silent Majority" while calling their opponents "nattering nabobs of negativism" and "effete corps of impudent snobs." Nixon and his cronies convinced me not to vote Republican for 25 years. Clinton changed my mind. Obama is sealing the deal.

Obama and crew have an agenda they want to ram through. You and I be damned. Their greed for power poses a far greater threat to our well being than any person seeking money. Indeed, if I were to re-write the Bible, "For the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil,..." would be changed to "love of power."

A servant's heart. A quality tragically lacking in so many of our public servants.

The FBI's Common Fraud Schemes web page lists warnings.

Before you send money, ask yourself a simple question. "What guarantee do I really have that this solicitor will use my money in the manner we agreed upon?"

Always take your time making a decision. Legitimate companies won't pressure you to make a snap decision.

Never respond to an offer you don't understand thoroughly.

A few more pointers from the City of Jefferson, MO.

• Stop and think before handing over money to any person or company.


• Don't sign anything unless you understand it – see a lawyer if needed.


• Don't be pressured into making a decision right away.


• If they don't give straight answers to your questions, end the conversation.

Sounds like good advice in dealing with our governmental bodies. Will they use the money as they say they will, often they do not. Where's all the money supposedly set aside for Social Security?

How much are we hearing that health care reform must be passed quickly, fast, yesterday? How many Senators and Congresspersons are saying we don't need to read it or understand it, we just need to support it? How many aren't giving us straight answers?

Yep, most of Congress is a bunch of cons and frauds.

Cincinnati finished July without a single day of above average temperature and 28 days of below average.

DY	MAX	MIN	AVG	DEP
1	69	62	66	-9
2	70	59	65	-10
3	78	60	69	-6
4	72	58	65	-10
5	75	61	68	-8
6	82	57	70	-6
7	84	58	71	-5
8	78	65	72	-4
9	80	63	72	-4
10	85	66	76	0
11	82	69	76	0
12	82	68	75	-1
13	82	63	73	-3
14	82	60	71	-5
15	78	66	72	-4
16	84	69	77	0
17	78	61	70	-7
18	70	54	62	-15
19	74	53	64	-13
20	77	56	67	-10
21	81	56	69	-8
22	72	64	68	-9
23	77	64	71	-6
24	82	57	70	-7
25	79	65	72	-5
26	82	63	73	-4
27	82	58	70	-7
28	83	61	72	-5
29	79	67	73	-3
30	79	66	73	-3
31	81	61	71	-5

Here is the monthly summary:

WEATHER	OBSERVED VALUE  DATE(S)	NORMAL VALUE	DEPART FROM NORMAL	LAST YEAR`S VALUE DATE(S)
HIGHEST	85  07/10	86	-1	92  07/20
LOWEST	53  07/19	65	-12	47  07/01
AVG. MAXIMUM	78.7	86.4	-7.7	84.9
AVG. MINIMUM	61.6	66.1	-4.5	63.8
MEAN	70.1	76.3	-6.2	74.3
DAYS MAX >= 90	0	7.6	-7.6	6

My hometown of Knoxville, TN also suffered a cool July.

At Knoxville’s McGhee-Tyson Airport, the average high temperature in July was 83.2. Their normal average in July is 87.4. Amazingly, Knoxville hit 90 degrees in July only once. Their average during July is 12 days of 90 degrees or above.

Areas of the West and Southwest are having heat waves.

As we learned from the hysteria when Hurricane Katrina and Rita roared into the Gulf Coast, any deviation from normal is a sign of the Apocalypse. Mankind is adrift in the River Styx and the current is ever swiftening. We have entered the Gates of Hades. Give up hope all ye who enter here.

Global warmingClimate change is upon us. Yes, the end of the world as we know it looms near.