Hi, Sparrows, I have just finished (mostly) moving this blog to WordPress. It gives me a lot more flexibility. I think you will like the look of it. It is MUCH easier to post and see comments. I also think you will like the "preview" of the links that "pop up" when you roll over them.
I will leave the past posts here as well, but all new ones will be at the new site only.
Let me know what you think of it. See you all there.
Lyn W-H
Monday, October 12, 2009
BRAINWASHING TACTICS EXPLAINED
The link to this video was forwarded to me by someone on the 9.12 list. (It was first posted by James, so a h/t to him.) It is an interview with a former KGB operative who later defected to the U. S. Although the interview was conducted in 1985, the tactics are timeless and still being used by the Left today. Currently, we are so numb to this insidious brainwashing that it rarely reaches our conscious awareness unless we are alerted to it.
I want to look into the CONTENT of the indoctrination of the Left in a subsequent post, i.e., the theories espoused, terminology used, etc. However, this video is a terrific introduction to considering specific content because it describes the PROCESS used. He is speaking in terms of the old Soviet Union, however, the tactics and goals remain the same no matter whether the label is communism, socialism, Marxism, statism, etc.
It is good to have the frame for the "big picture" before trying to fill in the details. This video provides that framework.
I want to look into the CONTENT of the indoctrination of the Left in a subsequent post, i.e., the theories espoused, terminology used, etc. However, this video is a terrific introduction to considering specific content because it describes the PROCESS used. He is speaking in terms of the old Soviet Union, however, the tactics and goals remain the same no matter whether the label is communism, socialism, Marxism, statism, etc.
It is good to have the frame for the "big picture" before trying to fill in the details. This video provides that framework.
Friday, October 9, 2009
THE NOBEL HOPEY-CHANGEY POPULARITY PRIZE
Obama received an early call this morning telling him that he had won the Nobel Peace Prize. The White House reported that he was “humbled by the recognition.” (If only that were true). The only shock here is that no one knew he had been nominated, or by whom. Perhaps a nomination in this case was unnecessary? Was there even a real competition once Obama’s name was in the mix? Or was this award simply an extension of the unhealthy and irrational adulation that has been demonstrated ad nauseum by those on the Left?
I pose this question due to the fact that the nomination was reportedly made back on February 1, 2009—on what basis? Campaign rhetoric? Guess this goes to show that if one is really good at telling others what they want to hear, you win!! Yessiree, that is the very thing we want to teach our children—you needn’t achieve anything, you needn’t consider the possible consequences of your words, you needn’t do the really hard work to reason out moral solutions, you needn't develop skills and demonstrate concrete success. Talk a great game, try to please everyone, and you excel because you are…you, you wonderful you!
Nobel Committee Chairman Jagland stated that Obama’s “initiatives have yet to bear fruit”. The PM of Norway, Stoltenberg said that “The exciting and important thing about this prize is that it’s given to someone…who has power to contribute to peace.” Huh, and here I thought that the Nobel Peace Prize was actually to honor accomplishments. (Even Al Gore made a movie, a bad one, but still….) So, it sounds like the prize was given for what it is hoped he will do, and because it is believed he has the power to do it. I’m with Walesa who commented, “So soon? Too early. He has no contribution so far.”
It can be no accident that those American politicians honored with this Prize, Carter, Gore and now Obama, all have extreme Leftist views. Perhaps we can change the name of the Nobel Peace Prize to the “Nobel Appeasement Incentive Prize”, or the “Nobel Hope Prize”, or the “Nobel Encouragement for Good Intentions Prize”, maybe the “Nobel Expectations for the Future Prize”. I am certain that we can devise names that much better describe the criteria upon which this Prize is being awarded. Let’s call a spade a spade here, this is not about establishing world peace. It is about selecting a popular figure who can best promote an agenda.
My conclusion is that the Nobel Peace Prize, (whose reputation was irreparably harmed by its previous, dubious recipients), is now officially a joke. Me thinks me smells a big, fat, disgusting rat-the fix was in. Are we surprised?
I pose this question due to the fact that the nomination was reportedly made back on February 1, 2009—on what basis? Campaign rhetoric? Guess this goes to show that if one is really good at telling others what they want to hear, you win!! Yessiree, that is the very thing we want to teach our children—you needn’t achieve anything, you needn’t consider the possible consequences of your words, you needn’t do the really hard work to reason out moral solutions, you needn't develop skills and demonstrate concrete success. Talk a great game, try to please everyone, and you excel because you are…you, you wonderful you!
Nobel Committee Chairman Jagland stated that Obama’s “initiatives have yet to bear fruit”. The PM of Norway, Stoltenberg said that “The exciting and important thing about this prize is that it’s given to someone…who has power to contribute to peace.” Huh, and here I thought that the Nobel Peace Prize was actually to honor accomplishments. (Even Al Gore made a movie, a bad one, but still….) So, it sounds like the prize was given for what it is hoped he will do, and because it is believed he has the power to do it. I’m with Walesa who commented, “So soon? Too early. He has no contribution so far.”
It can be no accident that those American politicians honored with this Prize, Carter, Gore and now Obama, all have extreme Leftist views. Perhaps we can change the name of the Nobel Peace Prize to the “Nobel Appeasement Incentive Prize”, or the “Nobel Hope Prize”, or the “Nobel Encouragement for Good Intentions Prize”, maybe the “Nobel Expectations for the Future Prize”. I am certain that we can devise names that much better describe the criteria upon which this Prize is being awarded. Let’s call a spade a spade here, this is not about establishing world peace. It is about selecting a popular figure who can best promote an agenda.
My conclusion is that the Nobel Peace Prize, (whose reputation was irreparably harmed by its previous, dubious recipients), is now officially a joke. Me thinks me smells a big, fat, disgusting rat-the fix was in. Are we surprised?
Thursday, October 8, 2009
OUT-OF-CONTROL OBAMATONS
How concerned are we about the stories coming out of Detroit where people lined up for what they believed was money from King Obama, (who obviously has a Royal Treasury about which the rest of us are unaware)?
There is a video here from the local Detroit network. The transcript of the WJR interview with one woman is posted, along with Rush Limbaugh's commentary, here. In the meantime there is another interview of a woman that was also asked about the origins of the money. It is not yet available on the internet. She said in part, "maybe he's getting it from his stash ... I don't know it's Obama money and he's givin' it to us ....that's why we voted for him."
And lest we forget that all of these folks were once children, you may want to watch school kids perform a song supporting the healthcare "reforms" desired by our "Dear Leader".
After watching and reading all these items, please remind yourself that there are still more of "us" than there are of "them". New Zealand really would not be large enough to accommodate all of us, trust me.
There is a video here from the local Detroit network. The transcript of the WJR interview with one woman is posted, along with Rush Limbaugh's commentary, here. In the meantime there is another interview of a woman that was also asked about the origins of the money. It is not yet available on the internet. She said in part, "maybe he's getting it from his stash ... I don't know it's Obama money and he's givin' it to us ....that's why we voted for him."
And lest we forget that all of these folks were once children, you may want to watch school kids perform a song supporting the healthcare "reforms" desired by our "Dear Leader".
After watching and reading all these items, please remind yourself that there are still more of "us" than there are of "them". New Zealand really would not be large enough to accommodate all of us, trust me.
WATCH OUT FOR THE CREEPY-CRAWLY HEALTHCARE BILL
We've all heard about ghosties and ghoulies and long-leggedy beasties and things that go "bump" in the night. (Good Lord, deliver us). Now we have a completely imaginary, and therefore scary, "CBO analysis" being reported by such news outlets as the Wall Street Journal and Fox News that supposedly will save us all kinds of money. BEWARE! If it sounds too good to be true...
On the Heritage Foundry Blog you can read about what this "CBO analysis" actually is. It also gives a very good summary of how Reid plans to jam it through the Senate with only 51 votes. There is further information about the "scoring" of what Red State calls a "Vapor Bill" in the second entry down on their home page. I especially encourage you to read Donald Marron's analysis, especially important if you interact with any liberal types. (The link to his analysis is the last one within the "Vapor Bill" entry).
National Review Online also has several very good analyses of the CBO "scoring" of the Baucus bill. All of them are worth reading to have a good grasp on what this bill would entail.
Check all of it out, then take a deep breath, say a prayer, (good Lord, deliver us is a good one) and carry on.
On the Heritage Foundry Blog you can read about what this "CBO analysis" actually is. It also gives a very good summary of how Reid plans to jam it through the Senate with only 51 votes. There is further information about the "scoring" of what Red State calls a "Vapor Bill" in the second entry down on their home page. I especially encourage you to read Donald Marron's analysis, especially important if you interact with any liberal types. (The link to his analysis is the last one within the "Vapor Bill" entry).
National Review Online also has several very good analyses of the CBO "scoring" of the Baucus bill. All of them are worth reading to have a good grasp on what this bill would entail.
Check all of it out, then take a deep breath, say a prayer, (good Lord, deliver us is a good one) and carry on.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
America: a dark city in a valley
Jean Kaufman at the Weekly Standard has written an article that compares and contrasts the language of Reagan with the language of Obama. As stated in my previous post on "words", one can clearly see how inextricably language is woven into worldview and subsequent policies. This one is a must read.
"WORDS, JUST WORDS"--REALLY?
After our fun (?) foray into Obama “Doublespeak” recently, I was curious about the roots of the language of the Left. Seriously, why do they seem to speak in code? Where does it come from? What does it mean? I know that all administrations have their messages and talking points. I know that certain words and phrases are purposefully chosen after being thoroughly tested on focus groups. Yet this language seems different in a qualitative way. As a friend of mine used to say, “It’s not only that they are on a different page; they’re reading a different book!”
All groups have their own “lingo”. It is what, in large part, gives a group its identity. We recognize that someone belongs to a group by how well and to what extent he or she knows particular “jargon” or catch phrases. However, as a counseling-psychologist myself, of the cognitive-behavioral school, I believe that language has greater potency than simply defining group character. Language shapes the way we think about relationships, events, oneself and the world. In turn, the way we think generates particular feelings. Those feelings lead to observable behaviors, (or in the political arena policies). Understanding resultant behaviors, (and/or policies), is impossible without first developing an understanding of the words, thinking and feelings that preceded them. It all begins with language.
Initially, we acquire our vocabularies, syntax, grammar and idioms/slang within our families-of-origin. Later, these are enlarged and refined to a great degree by our interactions with others. The nature of these interactions can be active, (as a conversation), or passive, (as in listening to or watching media). As we mature, our usage develops nuances and shades of meaning. We begin to understand that words are often used in less than concrete ways. Perhaps the most important impact on language acquisition and development occurs from reading the written word. “The pen is mightier than the sword.” A reader interacts with the material that is read on numerous levels. Words can paint pictures and inflame passions. A seemingly well-reasoned argument can influence, persuade and even radically change perceptions of reality. All of us are vulnerable to a speaker or writer who has a facility with the language. Words can manipulate. Words can mesmerize. Words can illuminate. Words can indoctrinate. Words can obfuscate. Words have power!
Consider the example below:
“Democrats can win if they stop being corrupted by cash and bullied by lies paid for by special interests. Democrats will lose if they remain cowed into fear by those who shout at town meetings, yell at joint sessions, rant on cable television, slander on talk radio, bring guns to greet elected officials, take surveys about violence against presidents, cheer when America does not win the Olympics and filibuster to preserve, protect and defend the despised status quo.”
(Budowsky was an aide to former Sen. Lloyd Bentsen and Bill Alexander, then chief deputy majority whip of the House. He holds an LL.M. degree in international financial law from the London School of Economics. He can be read on The Hill’s Pundits Blog. 10-5-09).
The above quote is filled with evocative language; language that is meant to arouse the emotions of the reader. What type of picture is the writer painting by using words and phrases like: corrupted, bullied, lies, special interests, cowed, fear, shout, yell, rant, slander, guns, violence, cheer when America does not win, filibuster, despised status quo? To me, it seems to paint a picture of a weak, victimized minority being coerced into submission by an unscrupulous, dangerous and vicious enemy! And, lest we forget, the Democrats possess control over, arguably, all three branches of the Government, as well as its bureaucracy and the Fourth Estate, an extraordinary amount of power-power that the Left wishes to not only retain, but to expand.
The current administration excels at using words in such a dissembling fashion. We “sparrows” would do well to be alert to these contortions of the language. And, as we will learn in coming posts, this insidious usage did not originate with the present Administration. Its roots are deep within the words that so influenced and shaped Mr. Obama—those of Marx, Baldwin, Ellison, Hughs, Wright, Zakaria, DuBois, Alinsky and Davis, among others.
It is crucial that each of us develops the ability to dissect, dig out, interpret and discern the true meaning of what the Left says in order to grasp how they will act-the future of our Country depends upon it.
All groups have their own “lingo”. It is what, in large part, gives a group its identity. We recognize that someone belongs to a group by how well and to what extent he or she knows particular “jargon” or catch phrases. However, as a counseling-psychologist myself, of the cognitive-behavioral school, I believe that language has greater potency than simply defining group character. Language shapes the way we think about relationships, events, oneself and the world. In turn, the way we think generates particular feelings. Those feelings lead to observable behaviors, (or in the political arena policies). Understanding resultant behaviors, (and/or policies), is impossible without first developing an understanding of the words, thinking and feelings that preceded them. It all begins with language.
Initially, we acquire our vocabularies, syntax, grammar and idioms/slang within our families-of-origin. Later, these are enlarged and refined to a great degree by our interactions with others. The nature of these interactions can be active, (as a conversation), or passive, (as in listening to or watching media). As we mature, our usage develops nuances and shades of meaning. We begin to understand that words are often used in less than concrete ways. Perhaps the most important impact on language acquisition and development occurs from reading the written word. “The pen is mightier than the sword.” A reader interacts with the material that is read on numerous levels. Words can paint pictures and inflame passions. A seemingly well-reasoned argument can influence, persuade and even radically change perceptions of reality. All of us are vulnerable to a speaker or writer who has a facility with the language. Words can manipulate. Words can mesmerize. Words can illuminate. Words can indoctrinate. Words can obfuscate. Words have power!
Consider the example below:
“Democrats can win if they stop being corrupted by cash and bullied by lies paid for by special interests. Democrats will lose if they remain cowed into fear by those who shout at town meetings, yell at joint sessions, rant on cable television, slander on talk radio, bring guns to greet elected officials, take surveys about violence against presidents, cheer when America does not win the Olympics and filibuster to preserve, protect and defend the despised status quo.”
(Budowsky was an aide to former Sen. Lloyd Bentsen and Bill Alexander, then chief deputy majority whip of the House. He holds an LL.M. degree in international financial law from the London School of Economics. He can be read on The Hill’s Pundits Blog. 10-5-09).
The above quote is filled with evocative language; language that is meant to arouse the emotions of the reader. What type of picture is the writer painting by using words and phrases like: corrupted, bullied, lies, special interests, cowed, fear, shout, yell, rant, slander, guns, violence, cheer when America does not win, filibuster, despised status quo? To me, it seems to paint a picture of a weak, victimized minority being coerced into submission by an unscrupulous, dangerous and vicious enemy! And, lest we forget, the Democrats possess control over, arguably, all three branches of the Government, as well as its bureaucracy and the Fourth Estate, an extraordinary amount of power-power that the Left wishes to not only retain, but to expand.
The current administration excels at using words in such a dissembling fashion. We “sparrows” would do well to be alert to these contortions of the language. And, as we will learn in coming posts, this insidious usage did not originate with the present Administration. Its roots are deep within the words that so influenced and shaped Mr. Obama—those of Marx, Baldwin, Ellison, Hughs, Wright, Zakaria, DuBois, Alinsky and Davis, among others.
It is crucial that each of us develops the ability to dissect, dig out, interpret and discern the true meaning of what the Left says in order to grasp how they will act-the future of our Country depends upon it.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
CURRENT STATUS OF REPUBLICAN HEALTHCARE REFORM--OR "JUST SAY NO"
IMHO, there is an important article over at National Review Online by Deroy Murdock. With the Congressional vote on a healthcare reform bill drawing ever closer, I believe that it is crucial to know how the Republicans are attempting to reform our healthcare system, because you will rarely hear about it from any mainstream media outlet. It is just as essential to know how the Democrat-controlled legislature is operating with respect to such things as:
-federal funding for abortion;
-senior citizen healthcare rationing;
-eligibility of recipients for federal healthcare dollars;
-waste and fraud in Medicaid
-giving individuals responsibility and control over their healthcare dollars.
I highly recommend that you read Murdock's article. It will not only give you the facts you need in order to speak cogently on the subject of healthcare, but it will also arm you with plenty of information should you wish to, yet again, write or call your elected representative about this critical issue.
-federal funding for abortion;
-senior citizen healthcare rationing;
-eligibility of recipients for federal healthcare dollars;
-waste and fraud in Medicaid
-giving individuals responsibility and control over their healthcare dollars.
I highly recommend that you read Murdock's article. It will not only give you the facts you need in order to speak cogently on the subject of healthcare, but it will also arm you with plenty of information should you wish to, yet again, write or call your elected representative about this critical issue.
THE GOVERNMENT CAN
A fun video by Tim Hawkins, (hat tip to Patti), it brought a smile to my face. We need every smile we can get these days. Enjoy!
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
STIMULATING...THE GOVERNMENT?
I simply could not leave town without posting about Obama's announcement today.
This morning, the POTUS announced that the NIH, a Government agency, will be receiving $5 billion, “with a B” from the Stimulus Bill passed earlier this year. The same Stimulus Bill that was supposed to “jolt” the American economy, create private sector jobs, repair our infrastructure through its use in “shovel ready” projects. Does anyone reading this understand how increasing the funding of the NIH, whose budget doubled between the years of 1998-2003 to $27 billion, meets the stated goals of the Stimulus? And, how will this new, higher level of funding be maintained once the Stimulus money is no longer available?
It seems to me that what happened today is that taxpayer money, OUR money, was simply shifted from one Government pocket to another, thereby having minimal, if any, positive effect on the growth of our economy or on the nearly 10% unemployment in this Country.
The Government taketh, and then it taketh some more. What are your thoughts?
This morning, the POTUS announced that the NIH, a Government agency, will be receiving $5 billion, “with a B” from the Stimulus Bill passed earlier this year. The same Stimulus Bill that was supposed to “jolt” the American economy, create private sector jobs, repair our infrastructure through its use in “shovel ready” projects. Does anyone reading this understand how increasing the funding of the NIH, whose budget doubled between the years of 1998-2003 to $27 billion, meets the stated goals of the Stimulus? And, how will this new, higher level of funding be maintained once the Stimulus money is no longer available?
It seems to me that what happened today is that taxpayer money, OUR money, was simply shifted from one Government pocket to another, thereby having minimal, if any, positive effect on the growth of our economy or on the nearly 10% unemployment in this Country.
The Government taketh, and then it taketh some more. What are your thoughts?
Sunday, September 27, 2009
ALERT-DELAY AHEAD
After experiencing some technical glitches, I was unable to post at the end of last week. AND, since I am off next week to help my Mom with her final downsizing and move out of the family home, I will not be posting next week either.
Please check back on Monday, October 5th when we will be browsing Barak's bookcase. Until then, straighten up and fly right, Sparrows!
P.S. While I'm away, take a look at the questions here about the various healthcare "reform" bills. Unless you register, you will be unable to actually "vote", but the questions are well thought out and would be useful for you to include when communicating with your elected representatives. Also included at the site are links to related articles. Check it out; I believe it is worth your time.
Please check back on Monday, October 5th when we will be browsing Barak's bookcase. Until then, straighten up and fly right, Sparrows!
P.S. While I'm away, take a look at the questions here about the various healthcare "reform" bills. Unless you register, you will be unable to actually "vote", but the questions are well thought out and would be useful for you to include when communicating with your elected representatives. Also included at the site are links to related articles. Check it out; I believe it is worth your time.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
SCHOOL INDOCTRINATION-THE MUSICAL
For any of you out there who remained skeptical about school indoctrination practices, even after seeing the videos posted yesterday, this video should remove all doubt. It aired, in part, on Fox News this morning, but this is the entire video. (I understand that it was taken down from YouTube earlier today). The sound quality is not the best, but listen carefully, and you will hear the line, "Red or yellow, black or white we are equal in his (Obama's) sight".
What do we think about all this, Sparrows?
What do we think about all this, Sparrows?
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
SCHOOL INDOCTRINATION-ALIVE & WELL
Do you ever wonder just WHERE kids pick up the ideas they have nowadays?
Recently, Tucker Carlson exposed how text books in our schools are decidedly slanted to the Left. Furthermore, they often delete, misstate and twist information. The program aired on Fox and can be seen on YouTube by searching for "Text Book Wars". It is well worth a look.
I was very concerned after watching "Text Book Wars". However, I believe that parents, once alerted, can be more than equally influential in comparison to a book. In fact, pointing out where a text book is in error can be educational in and of itself, teaching children to not believe everything they read, how to do independent research and how to be an active participant in their education, in short, how to think and arrive at reasoned conclusions.
But, what happens when "educational" videos are shown to children during the school day? How is a parent to know what their children are hearing or seeing? Moreover, what impact do these kinds of presentations have on various aspects of our children's thinking and development? I have linked to what I find to be a very disturbing video that is being shown in our public schools. It is called, "The Story of Stuff"-a fairly innocuous title; the content is anything but innocuous. Lee Doren, from the Competitive Enterprise Institute developed a critique of this video, so his commentary breaks into the video itself with helpful information. There are four parts to the video. You will want to watch it in its entirety. Pay special attention to the language that is used. There are many "code words" of the Left in the video, words that are a familiar part of Liberal speeches, writings, interviews, legislation, etc.
As I was watching the video, I was reminded of "educational" films that we were shown during Junior High School (as it was then known). I especially remember a series about life in the Soviet Union. One particular portion of the series was horrifying to me at the time; it still is. The segment showed how the children were being brainwashed with Communist propaganda, misinformation, distortions and lies in their schools. In the discussions that followed these films American liberties, free speech, access to the truth, etc. were all stressed as a contrast to these films. I never have forgotten those black and white films, and how I hurt for those children. They seemed to have no chance to ever know the truth or think for themselves. Their future was nothing more than to be imprisoned and oppressed by the Communist ideology.
Today, that ideology is still around. It is now our own children and grandchildren that are being indoctrinated into it under the green guise of being environmentally responsible; something I could have never imagined in Junior High School. Information is power; empower yourselves to protect the children from this sort of blatant anti-capitalist teaching.
Recently, Tucker Carlson exposed how text books in our schools are decidedly slanted to the Left. Furthermore, they often delete, misstate and twist information. The program aired on Fox and can be seen on YouTube by searching for "Text Book Wars". It is well worth a look.
I was very concerned after watching "Text Book Wars". However, I believe that parents, once alerted, can be more than equally influential in comparison to a book. In fact, pointing out where a text book is in error can be educational in and of itself, teaching children to not believe everything they read, how to do independent research and how to be an active participant in their education, in short, how to think and arrive at reasoned conclusions.
But, what happens when "educational" videos are shown to children during the school day? How is a parent to know what their children are hearing or seeing? Moreover, what impact do these kinds of presentations have on various aspects of our children's thinking and development? I have linked to what I find to be a very disturbing video that is being shown in our public schools. It is called, "The Story of Stuff"-a fairly innocuous title; the content is anything but innocuous. Lee Doren, from the Competitive Enterprise Institute developed a critique of this video, so his commentary breaks into the video itself with helpful information. There are four parts to the video. You will want to watch it in its entirety. Pay special attention to the language that is used. There are many "code words" of the Left in the video, words that are a familiar part of Liberal speeches, writings, interviews, legislation, etc.
As I was watching the video, I was reminded of "educational" films that we were shown during Junior High School (as it was then known). I especially remember a series about life in the Soviet Union. One particular portion of the series was horrifying to me at the time; it still is. The segment showed how the children were being brainwashed with Communist propaganda, misinformation, distortions and lies in their schools. In the discussions that followed these films American liberties, free speech, access to the truth, etc. were all stressed as a contrast to these films. I never have forgotten those black and white films, and how I hurt for those children. They seemed to have no chance to ever know the truth or think for themselves. Their future was nothing more than to be imprisoned and oppressed by the Communist ideology.
Today, that ideology is still around. It is now our own children and grandchildren that are being indoctrinated into it under the green guise of being environmentally responsible; something I could have never imagined in Junior High School. Information is power; empower yourselves to protect the children from this sort of blatant anti-capitalist teaching.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
REAL COST OF "CAP & TRADE"
It is timely to review the recently released Treasury document on the true cost of the pending "Cap and Trade" legislation. Timely, because today the POTUS spoke at the U.N. stating in part that more had been done in the last 8 months about climate change than ever before in this country. Of course, the "Cap and Trade" bill is the centerpiece of his claim.
Take a good look at what this Bill, if passed, will cost, according to the Treasury Department's own own review of the available analyses. Are you ready to be a "Have-not"?
Take a good look at what this Bill, if passed, will cost, according to the Treasury Department's own own review of the available analyses. Are you ready to be a "Have-not"?
OBAMA DOUBLESPEAK DE-CODED
Pull out your decoder rings and follow along, Sparrows. Below are my definitions for the list of Obama Doublespeak words from yesterday. If any of you have a better definition, or two or three, please feel free to submit them. Together, I believe that we can break this code!
Values: subjective assessment of what "feels" right in a particular situation, and/or what is politically correct, especially with respect to what supporters want to hear.
Distraction: any scandal, fact or data that threatens the "message" and that cannot be honestly explained without squirming.
Rude: any forthright and clear disagreement with the Administration, especially that which is reported in the media and raises subsequent uncomfortable questions. (Closely related to Distraction-see above).
Smear: using facts, video/audio tapes, speech transcripts, documents, etc. to prove background, associations, beliefs, votes, policy statements, positions shifts, etc. that show the Administration in an unattractive light.
Haves/Have-nots: the Rich/everyone else, especially designated special interest groups. (Also see Middle-class).
Middle-class: those who live one accident or illness away from bankruptcy; marked by hard work, little reward and exploitation by Failed Policies (see Failed Policies) and the Haves (see above). Needs constant Government intervention in order to survive.
Change: converting Democracy to Statism, free markets to central planning/regulation, and placing individual liberty under Government control.
Mandate: Government dictates to the individual, i.e. if you don't do something, it will cost you.
Fees/Revenue Enhancers: taxes.
Failed Policies: any policy of the Bush Administration. Used especially to deflect distractions, (see Distraction), smears (see Smear) and explain unsuccessful strategies.
Specifics: vague generalities, empty promises, emotional appeals and fabricated statistics followed by rhetorical flourishes to inspire support for something.
Transparency: misdirection, denial, stonewalling, a.k.a. smoke and mirrors.
Civility: complete agreement and conformity with any and all stated programs, policies and positions; unanimity.
Stability: security to not be without anything; guaranteed reduction of personal risk and rescue from the negative consequences of one's own choices and life in general.
Choice: that which the Government provides; it is always what is best for you.
Truth/Lie: synonymous terms; used interchangeably depending on the situation and desired effect.
Extreme elements: (see Rude).
Never again find ourselves...: (see Stability).
Definition: depends on what the meaning of "is" is.
Business as usual: (see Failed Policies).
Profit: nasty mammon produced as a result of successful business endeavors that exploits the Have-nots, (see Have-not), and the Middle-class, (see Middle-class).
Legitimate debate: a one-sided argument marked with Civility. (see Civility).
Fairness: that which the Government deems to be equitable-and also good for you.
Justice: removing any natural consequence of individual action and replacing it with Stability. (see Stability).
Empathy: acting out of emotion and Values (see Values) vs. considered rational judgment as measured against a standard, such as a law.
Okay, I've shown you my thoughts. Show me yours.
Values: subjective assessment of what "feels" right in a particular situation, and/or what is politically correct, especially with respect to what supporters want to hear.
Distraction: any scandal, fact or data that threatens the "message" and that cannot be honestly explained without squirming.
Rude: any forthright and clear disagreement with the Administration, especially that which is reported in the media and raises subsequent uncomfortable questions. (Closely related to Distraction-see above).
Smear: using facts, video/audio tapes, speech transcripts, documents, etc. to prove background, associations, beliefs, votes, policy statements, positions shifts, etc. that show the Administration in an unattractive light.
Haves/Have-nots: the Rich/everyone else, especially designated special interest groups. (Also see Middle-class).
Middle-class: those who live one accident or illness away from bankruptcy; marked by hard work, little reward and exploitation by Failed Policies (see Failed Policies) and the Haves (see above). Needs constant Government intervention in order to survive.
Change: converting Democracy to Statism, free markets to central planning/regulation, and placing individual liberty under Government control.
Mandate: Government dictates to the individual, i.e. if you don't do something, it will cost you.
Fees/Revenue Enhancers: taxes.
Failed Policies: any policy of the Bush Administration. Used especially to deflect distractions, (see Distraction), smears (see Smear) and explain unsuccessful strategies.
Specifics: vague generalities, empty promises, emotional appeals and fabricated statistics followed by rhetorical flourishes to inspire support for something.
Transparency: misdirection, denial, stonewalling, a.k.a. smoke and mirrors.
Civility: complete agreement and conformity with any and all stated programs, policies and positions; unanimity.
Stability: security to not be without anything; guaranteed reduction of personal risk and rescue from the negative consequences of one's own choices and life in general.
Choice: that which the Government provides; it is always what is best for you.
Truth/Lie: synonymous terms; used interchangeably depending on the situation and desired effect.
Extreme elements: (see Rude).
Never again find ourselves...: (see Stability).
Definition: depends on what the meaning of "is" is.
Business as usual: (see Failed Policies).
Profit: nasty mammon produced as a result of successful business endeavors that exploits the Have-nots, (see Have-not), and the Middle-class, (see Middle-class).
Legitimate debate: a one-sided argument marked with Civility. (see Civility).
Fairness: that which the Government deems to be equitable-and also good for you.
Justice: removing any natural consequence of individual action and replacing it with Stability. (see Stability).
Empathy: acting out of emotion and Values (see Values) vs. considered rational judgment as measured against a standard, such as a law.
Okay, I've shown you my thoughts. Show me yours.
Monday, September 21, 2009
The Long Retreat by Mark Steyn on National Review Online
The Long Retreat by Mark Steyn on National Review Online
This article is Mark Steyn's take on the ramifications of scrapping the missile defense shield in Europe. Well worth your time to read and ruminate upon.
Shared via AddThis
This article is Mark Steyn's take on the ramifications of scrapping the missile defense shield in Europe. Well worth your time to read and ruminate upon.
Shared via AddThis
PHILOLOGIST-IN-CHIEF
The title of this entry is lifted from an article in the Wall Street Journal. It is a delightfully descriptive noun for the POTUS. Keeping track of the way he defines particular words and phrases could actually be a full-time job. One that only Orwell, or fans of his, could really love.
I believe that words have power. Furthermore, the misuse and/or re-definition of words not only creates misunderstanding and confusion, but also cripples our very ability to clearly communicate. Which begs the question, "does the POTUS really WANT to clearly communicate his intentions?" Scan through the following list of words and phrases. We hear at least some of these everyday from this administration, and I do not believe that they are being used according to their true meanings. So what do YOU think that the new definitions of these are?
Bear in mind the old adage, "Republicans are afraid that you will not understand what they are talking about; Democrats are afraid that you will".
Values
Distraction
Rude
Smears
Haves/Have-nots
Middle Class
Change
Mandate
Revenue enhancer
Failed policies
Specifics
Transparency
Civility
Stability
Choice
Truth/Lies
Extreme elements
Never again find ourselves...
Definition
Business as usual
Profit
Legitimate debate
Fairness
Justice
Empathy
The list could go on and on, but these are enough to ponder for now. To paraphrase Orwell--our ignorance is their strength.
I believe that words have power. Furthermore, the misuse and/or re-definition of words not only creates misunderstanding and confusion, but also cripples our very ability to clearly communicate. Which begs the question, "does the POTUS really WANT to clearly communicate his intentions?" Scan through the following list of words and phrases. We hear at least some of these everyday from this administration, and I do not believe that they are being used according to their true meanings. So what do YOU think that the new definitions of these are?
Bear in mind the old adage, "Republicans are afraid that you will not understand what they are talking about; Democrats are afraid that you will".
Values
Distraction
Rude
Smears
Haves/Have-nots
Middle Class
Change
Mandate
Revenue enhancer
Failed policies
Specifics
Transparency
Civility
Stability
Choice
Truth/Lies
Extreme elements
Never again find ourselves...
Definition
Business as usual
Profit
Legitimate debate
Fairness
Justice
Empathy
The list could go on and on, but these are enough to ponder for now. To paraphrase Orwell--our ignorance is their strength.
American Thinker Blog: Obama: ACORN? What's that?
American Thinker Blog: Obama: ACORN? What's that?
Okay, so I was a little off about Obama's reaction to ACORN. Remember that I predicted, in my husband's words, that he would say something like, "these aren't the nuts I knew", instead he is saying something like, "I never knew these nuts". I can admit when I'm wrong.
Shared via AddThis
Okay, so I was a little off about Obama's reaction to ACORN. Remember that I predicted, in my husband's words, that he would say something like, "these aren't the nuts I knew", instead he is saying something like, "I never knew these nuts". I can admit when I'm wrong.
Shared via AddThis
American Thinker: 'Killing Granny'
American Thinker: 'Killing Granny'
Excellent and well-reasoned analysis of the most recent edition of "Newsweek". Take some time to digest it.
Shared via AddThis
Excellent and well-reasoned analysis of the most recent edition of "Newsweek". Take some time to digest it.
Shared via AddThis
Saturday, September 19, 2009
THE CONSTITUTION & HEALTH REFORM MANDATES
David B. Rivkin, Jr. and Lee A Casey have co-authored an article at the Wall Street Journal online. It is one of the best arguments against the insurance mandates that have been included in all of the Congressional Healthcare Reform bills. All of our elected representatives swear the "protect and defend" our Constitution. This article points out that mandates would breach so thoroughly Constitutional authority as to make it possible for Congress to regulate every single aspect of American life.
It is somewhat heartening to note that this provision would be fought in the Courts on the basis of the "Commerce Clause". (NOTE: I have also heard the possibility of invalidating at least parts of some of the bills on the strength of the "right to privacy" set up by "Roe v. Wade"-a delicious irony!) It is also somewhat DIS-heartening to note that the current Federal Court system has the reputation of being not only extremely left-leaning, but also activist in its rulings.
Again, it would seem so much better to step back from the current pieces of legislation and to formulate a Healthcare Reform bill that would address the real issues that need to be, and can be, fixed without dismantling an entire industry and eventually placing both it, and us, under Government control.
It is somewhat heartening to note that this provision would be fought in the Courts on the basis of the "Commerce Clause". (NOTE: I have also heard the possibility of invalidating at least parts of some of the bills on the strength of the "right to privacy" set up by "Roe v. Wade"-a delicious irony!) It is also somewhat DIS-heartening to note that the current Federal Court system has the reputation of being not only extremely left-leaning, but also activist in its rulings.
Again, it would seem so much better to step back from the current pieces of legislation and to formulate a Healthcare Reform bill that would address the real issues that need to be, and can be, fixed without dismantling an entire industry and eventually placing both it, and us, under Government control.
Friday, September 18, 2009
OBAMA+ACORN=RADICAL POLICIES
There is an article on World Net Daily today that describes the links between ACORN and Obama, ones that he has previously denied. I had been researching these very things early on in the 2008 election cycle, and was planning to post that research here. However, their article is an excellent summary and contains much of the same information.
I would direct you to the complete videos of Obama addressing the Community Change groups. The attendees included many community organization groups, including ACORN. The video is in two parts.
An article from Thursday by Stephen Spruiell at National Review Online, provides a good insight into how the theories that underpin ACORN also can lead to other policies, for example reversing welfare reform, all of which drag our Nation more leftwards.
Read, digest, learn and act!
I would direct you to the complete videos of Obama addressing the Community Change groups. The attendees included many community organization groups, including ACORN. The video is in two parts.
An article from Thursday by Stephen Spruiell at National Review Online, provides a good insight into how the theories that underpin ACORN also can lead to other policies, for example reversing welfare reform, all of which drag our Nation more leftwards.
Read, digest, learn and act!
Thursday, September 17, 2009
OBAMA DOCTRINE-ALLIES & ENEMIES
The POTUS announced today that the European missile defense program is being scrapped (my word) in favor of a new agile and mobile missile defense to be deployed on the sea. This new missile defense program will be "superior" to the former program, both President Obama and Secretary Gates agree on that. (Or, at least Secretary Gates agrees with it now). It will be lighter, stronger, smarter, cheaper, faster and...(wait for it) has the blessings of the Russians. Wow, what's not to like about all that? Sounds too good to be true. (Kind of like that perfect Obamacare plan). So why all the Polish and Czech consternation?
Ahh, we are all safer now. It's true. Mr Obama said so. Luckily, all of this has transpired just in time for President Obama to chair the U.N. Security Council Meeting next week. Great timing--wonder what it all means? Stay tuned.
Okay, all the foregoing is confusing enough, but here are some other foreign policy decisions that have me bewildered:
-wanting to talk with Ahmadinejad even after watching the Iranian people dying in their streets. The former is diplomacy, the latter is not "meddling";
-lending a sympathetic ear to the likes of Chavez and Castro, while rebuffing our ally Columbia and continuing to block the implementation of the Columbia FTA. (REALLY silly, since we may be in sore need of their produce soon, depending on the winner of the Farmer-Fish Water War in California's San Joaquin Valley);
-joining voices with the likes of Chavez and Castro in rebuking and castigating Honduras for their legal removal of the would-be dictator, and Chavez good-buddy, Manuel Zelaya; ummm, "meddling"?
-morally equating Palestinian refugees with the Holocaust; I do not have the words to describe that!
Hmmm, what do all of the above have in common? And, more importantly, what are the aims and the consequences of the ever-evolving "Obama Doctrine"?
Ahh, we are all safer now. It's true. Mr Obama said so. Luckily, all of this has transpired just in time for President Obama to chair the U.N. Security Council Meeting next week. Great timing--wonder what it all means? Stay tuned.
Okay, all the foregoing is confusing enough, but here are some other foreign policy decisions that have me bewildered:
-wanting to talk with Ahmadinejad even after watching the Iranian people dying in their streets. The former is diplomacy, the latter is not "meddling";
-lending a sympathetic ear to the likes of Chavez and Castro, while rebuffing our ally Columbia and continuing to block the implementation of the Columbia FTA. (REALLY silly, since we may be in sore need of their produce soon, depending on the winner of the Farmer-Fish Water War in California's San Joaquin Valley);
-joining voices with the likes of Chavez and Castro in rebuking and castigating Honduras for their legal removal of the would-be dictator, and Chavez good-buddy, Manuel Zelaya; ummm, "meddling"?
-morally equating Palestinian refugees with the Holocaust; I do not have the words to describe that!
Hmmm, what do all of the above have in common? And, more importantly, what are the aims and the consequences of the ever-evolving "Obama Doctrine"?
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
IT'S THE ECONOMY, STUPID!
Over at Bloomberg, they have a very informative article. Greenspan gives his take on the impact of politics on economic recovery. He also weighs in on inflation, the weakening dollar, possible "double-dip" recession, deficits, unemployment and regulation of the US financial system.
Sounds like we're not out of the woods yet.
AND, just when you've had a bellyful of "Obamacare", (wasn't the POTUS just in Pittsburgh speechifying about the greatness of health reform to the AFL-CIO? Hmmm), here comes
"Cap and Tax" again. Read about the cost of "global salvation", the central tenet of the evolving State "Green" religion.
P.S. If you HAVEN'T had a bellyful of "Obamacare", read this wonderful opinion piece by Joseph Phillips. It is one of the best I've seen with respect to laying out the real differences, and consequences, of the left and right on this issue.
Sounds like we're not out of the woods yet.
AND, just when you've had a bellyful of "Obamacare", (wasn't the POTUS just in Pittsburgh speechifying about the greatness of health reform to the AFL-CIO? Hmmm), here comes
"Cap and Tax" again. Read about the cost of "global salvation", the central tenet of the evolving State "Green" religion.
P.S. If you HAVEN'T had a bellyful of "Obamacare", read this wonderful opinion piece by Joseph Phillips. It is one of the best I've seen with respect to laying out the real differences, and consequences, of the left and right on this issue.
VOTE OF DISAPPROVAL?
How are we to interpret the "Formal Rebuke" passed by the House yesterday concerning Rep. Joe Wilson?
Here is my interpretation: If you are the President, it is okay to lie in the House Chamber, but it is NOT okay to point out that the President is lying, (especially if you are a Republican).
So, is this one of those "American Values" that we are to embrace? What a GREAT example of leadership to set for us and for the rest of the world. Thank you, Mr. President.
Here is my interpretation: If you are the President, it is okay to lie in the House Chamber, but it is NOT okay to point out that the President is lying, (especially if you are a Republican).
So, is this one of those "American Values" that we are to embrace? What a GREAT example of leadership to set for us and for the rest of the world. Thank you, Mr. President.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
OBAMACORN
Obama so mastered the workshops on power that he later taught them himself. On his campaign website, one can find a photo of Obama in a classroom teaching students Alinskian methods. He stands in front of a blackboard on which he has written, “Power Analysis” and “Relationships Built on Self Interest,” an idea illustrated by a diagram of the flow of money from corporations to the mayor.____________
For any "sparrows" out there who missed the information concerning ACORN that was published during the Presidential campaign, (possibly because you were relying on the mainstream media for your information?), check out the reprise of Stanley Kurtz's article. Be sure to take the time and read the two articles he links to within his article. Read them CAREFULLY, especially the first one, because it details how far the reach of ACORN goes--truly scary.
Lest we forget, the POTUS worked to train these folks, defend these folks and promised them a "place at the table" in his administration! (More on that in the coming days). Above are the Obama/ACORN pictures that I first stumbled upon back when I was researching Obama. They are difficult to find now, since they have been "scrubbed" off of the pro-Obama sites where they used to be, but I persevered, because a picture IS worth a thousand words!
I think that it is important to realize that ACORN has been under scrutiny for a while, but it finally took these undercover videos to have it removed from census work, and to have the Senate vote against funding for it. We can hope that the House will follow suit!
Monday, September 14, 2009
Obama on ACORN?
I can hardly wait for Obama to throw ACORN "under the bus" by commenting:
"These aren't the nuts I knew!"
(Hat tip to my hubby for this one).
Read about and watch the excellent expose here.
"These aren't the nuts I knew!"
(Hat tip to my hubby for this one).
Read about and watch the excellent expose here.
BITING THE HAND THAT BUYS OUR DEBT
The protectionist tariff aimed at the Chinese tire industry by the Obama administration has not received a whole lot of attention. Here are two links where you can read about the Chinese reaction, (not a very positive one). If this is how we treat our creditors, no wonder no one wants to buy our debt!! There is also a good WSJ editorial here.
For those of you who would like to know more about how these kinds of tariffs affect real-life economies, especially those that are financially fragile, I recommend two books. The Forgotten Man by Amity Shlaes is a history of the Great Depression. The entire book is very good, but if you simply want to understand how the Smoot-Hawley Tariff negatively impacted the economy, she includes plenty of information on it. (Smoot-Hawley is a very good example of a protectionist tariff). Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt devotes the entirety of Chapter XI to protectionist tariffs and who really benefits from them.
Information is power; educate yourself!!
For those of you who would like to know more about how these kinds of tariffs affect real-life economies, especially those that are financially fragile, I recommend two books. The Forgotten Man by Amity Shlaes is a history of the Great Depression. The entire book is very good, but if you simply want to understand how the Smoot-Hawley Tariff negatively impacted the economy, she includes plenty of information on it. (Smoot-Hawley is a very good example of a protectionist tariff). Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt devotes the entirety of Chapter XI to protectionist tariffs and who really benefits from them.
Information is power; educate yourself!!
Saturday, September 12, 2009
9.12 March on Washington-Can you hear us now?
Since I'm not sure how much coverage this event is going to have from the mainstream media, I am adding this link to Fox News where you can stream live video of the protest. It is also being covered on the Fox News cable channel. Looks like a large turn out. Fox is only showing the group in front of the Capitol at this time, however, there are other groups in Washington that are gathered a different places, depending where they were able to obtain a permit.
I so wanted to be there, but our budget just wouldn't allow. This is the best I can do to support these fine folks who are there to be a voice for all of us who are distressed by the policies and agenda of the present administration and how the implementation of these could negatively affect our Country for decades to come.
Please offer a prayer for the marchers for their strength and safety. Offer one for our elected leaders as well that their ears will be opened and their common sense be restored.
I so wanted to be there, but our budget just wouldn't allow. This is the best I can do to support these fine folks who are there to be a voice for all of us who are distressed by the policies and agenda of the present administration and how the implementation of these could negatively affect our Country for decades to come.
Please offer a prayer for the marchers for their strength and safety. Offer one for our elected leaders as well that their ears will be opened and their common sense be restored.
9.12 MUST READS
As I have been monitoring the 9.12 events in Washington and across the country, I recalled a group of articles from the "must read" list on the National Review Institute site. The last article is, IMHO, a "MUST, must read". The Hon. James Buckley writes cogently and persuasively about Federalism as an antidote to the cumbersome and costly Centralized Government that fosters special interests, lobbyists, corruption and spending other people's money, (OUR money).
In light of the recent scandals with respect to the "Czars", ACORN and the NEA (National Endowment for the Arts), Buckley's article is especially apropos. Enjoy!
In light of the recent scandals with respect to the "Czars", ACORN and the NEA (National Endowment for the Arts), Buckley's article is especially apropos. Enjoy!
Friday, September 11, 2009
9-11 MEMORIES
In the aftermath of the 9-11-01 attacks, I wrote the following. To a great degree, it continues to express my feelings, not only then, but now. May God bless and keep us all, this day and always.
We will never forget!
Here is my mind
partly clear,
partly confounded.
Take it.
Here is my heart
partly full
partly empty.
Take it.
Here is my power
fully false
and useless.
Take it.
Here is my past
both bright
and blackened.
Take it.
Here is my memory
both good
and horrid.
Take it.
Here is my spirit
somewhat bowed
somewhat broken.
Take it.
Here is my life
with its mountains
and valleys.
Take it.
Take it all.
And just--
be God.
I encourage you to explore the 9-11 remembrances that Andrew Breitbart has included on his "Big Hollywood" site. I highly recommend that you do not leave that site without watching the touching and inspirational video posted by Andrew Klavin from PJ.TV. It is worth watching more than once.
We will never forget!
Here is my mind
partly clear,
partly confounded.
Take it.
Here is my heart
partly full
partly empty.
Take it.
Here is my power
fully false
and useless.
Take it.
Here is my past
both bright
and blackened.
Take it.
Here is my memory
both good
and horrid.
Take it.
Here is my spirit
somewhat bowed
somewhat broken.
Take it.
Here is my life
with its mountains
and valleys.
Take it.
Take it all.
And just--
be God.
I encourage you to explore the 9-11 remembrances that Andrew Breitbart has included on his "Big Hollywood" site. I highly recommend that you do not leave that site without watching the touching and inspirational video posted by Andrew Klavin from PJ.TV. It is worth watching more than once.
UNITED WE STAND
In the aftermath of the 9-11 attacks, Michael W. Smith penned
"There She Stands". Listening to the song is, of course,
preferable. But the words alone deeply touch the heart
I hope they both touch you and renew your purpose.
God bless America.
There She Stands
When the night
Seems to say
All hope is lost
Gone away
But I know
I’m not alone
By the light
She stands
There she waves
Faithful friend
Shimmering stars
Westward wind
Show the way
Carry me
To the place
She stands
Just when you think it might be over
Just when you think the fight is gone
Someone will risk his life to raise her
There she stands
There she flies
Clear blue skies
Reminds us with red
Of those that died
Washed in white
By the brave
In their strength
She stands
When evil calls itself a martyr
When all your hopes come crashing down
Someone will pull her from the rubble
There she stands
We’ve seen her flying torn and tattered
We’ve seen her stand the test of time
And through it all the fools have fallen
There she stands
By the dawn’s
Early light
And through the fight
She stands.
by Michael W. Smith
HEALTH CARE & INFLATION
Inflation anyone? Do we think it's a good idea that our currency value is falling? And how will the inflationary trend be affected by even more borrowing to finance huge Government programs?
On September 8th, Larry Kudlow posted a very thought-provoking piece on his blog, "Money Politics". It is worth a read.
If you are not troubled enough by Mr. Kudlow, move on to the article by Thomas Sowell, the eloquent economist, "Charlatan-in-Chief". Also worth pondering is the article by Mona Charen, "O's Trouble with Numbers". Go ahead, I'll wait for you....
Now, can we connect the dots between Government borrowing and our general economic health? The latter is the kind of "health reform" I would like to see!
On September 8th, Larry Kudlow posted a very thought-provoking piece on his blog, "Money Politics". It is worth a read.
If you are not troubled enough by Mr. Kudlow, move on to the article by Thomas Sowell, the eloquent economist, "Charlatan-in-Chief". Also worth pondering is the article by Mona Charen, "O's Trouble with Numbers". Go ahead, I'll wait for you....
Now, can we connect the dots between Government borrowing and our general economic health? The latter is the kind of "health reform" I would like to see!
WHERE ARE THE ADULTS?!?
Over at "American Thinker", there was a post by Thomas Lifson called, "Conservatives Behaving Badly?" It carried a fairly obscure article from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch that reported on what at least two of the Democrats were doing during Obama's speech on September 9th. A lot was made over Congressman Wilson's outburst, but this is the first I had heard about Congressmen Green and Pascrell.
It caught my eye because Rep. Bill Pascrell, (8th District, New Jersey), is MY congressman. I have tried to correspond with Rep. Pascrell on a number of occasions. He is the master of the form letter. After I wrote him about the misrepresentations in his newsletter concerning U.S. energy resources, he stopped sending me the newsletter. (Perhaps, it was because I pointed out that using "Wikipedia" and Nancy Pelosi as references for his statistics did not raise his credibility in my mind).
He did give me an automated call to invite me to a telephone "Town Hall" on health reform. I dutifully waited by the phone, but the call did not come at the appointed time. Finally, I received another automated call some 20 minutes AFTER the "Town Hall" had begun. On it he said how very sorry I had not been available when they had called earlier. WHAT?!? (NOTE: I had been waiting by the phone with my questions for 90 minutes before Bill had said they would call--NO way that I missed the call). He went on to tell me that I could call his office to schedule a time to participate in the NEXT telephone "Town Hall". I wrote with my questions instead. Surprise! I have yet to receive an answer. Guess he must be too busy planning his antics.
When, oh when, will the 8th District voters wake up and boot this guy? Couldn't be soon enough for me!
It caught my eye because Rep. Bill Pascrell, (8th District, New Jersey), is MY congressman. I have tried to correspond with Rep. Pascrell on a number of occasions. He is the master of the form letter. After I wrote him about the misrepresentations in his newsletter concerning U.S. energy resources, he stopped sending me the newsletter. (Perhaps, it was because I pointed out that using "Wikipedia" and Nancy Pelosi as references for his statistics did not raise his credibility in my mind).
He did give me an automated call to invite me to a telephone "Town Hall" on health reform. I dutifully waited by the phone, but the call did not come at the appointed time. Finally, I received another automated call some 20 minutes AFTER the "Town Hall" had begun. On it he said how very sorry I had not been available when they had called earlier. WHAT?!? (NOTE: I had been waiting by the phone with my questions for 90 minutes before Bill had said they would call--NO way that I missed the call). He went on to tell me that I could call his office to schedule a time to participate in the NEXT telephone "Town Hall". I wrote with my questions instead. Surprise! I have yet to receive an answer. Guess he must be too busy planning his antics.
When, oh when, will the 8th District voters wake up and boot this guy? Couldn't be soon enough for me!
Thursday, September 10, 2009
RATIONALE & PURPOSE
Consider the sparrow, a small, drab, nondescript creature singing no real song that recommends it. The sparrow can only really be interesting as an individual. Yet as an individual, it is often overlooked altogether. On the other hand, when sparrows travel in a flock, they not only draw attention, but also can seem rather annoying. However, its power to fight and survive is dependent upon the sparrow keeping company with others.
Have you ever seen a group of sparrows fighting a cat or a squirrel? In order to protect a food source or defend its young, a sparrow can be quite valiant and tenacious. Together with its fellows, it is practically unbeatable.
Consider also that sparrows do not find it difficult to mix with all sorts of other birds. More often than not, one finds sparrows feeding, flying and roosting among a variety of “non-sparrows”. At times, a flock will adopt a “non-sparrow”, such as a canary or a parakeet, (an amusing and sweetly touching sight to behold), and completely accept it as an equal member. Demonstrating that “birds of a feather” means something more essential than mere color.
It seems to me that there is good reason for “His eye” to be on the sparrow, for God to feed them and for Him to mark when one falls. Perhaps, there is something that we can learn from these little creatures in this present age.
Recently, I have felt “sparrowish” in the face of the huge pieces of legislation that have spent, or propose to spend, enormous amounts on schemes with doubtful, at best, benefit, and potential negative consequences to our freedom. So, what is a “sparrow” to do, especially we human-type “sparrows” who “are of more value than many sparrows” of the bird-type? My answer is to become a wise (sapient) sparrow; one who understands the nature of the “cats” and “squirrels” who prowl our world.
In the daily life of a “sparrow”, however, there is limited time to gather such information, let alone investigate or assimilate it. Yet information is essential in order to defend ourselves against those who threaten our lives, liberties and our pursuit of happiness. Therefore, The Sapient Sparrow, seeks to be a tool that summarizes many sources in an effort to inform and empower the individual as each one seeks to form opinions, make decisions, explain positions and/or take action.
Three separate incidents planted the seeds, (if I can be permitted to stretch my metaphor), for The Sapient Sparrow. The first happened as I was discussing the “Cap and Trade”, a.k.a. “Cap and Tax”, bill with a group of friends. One lady asked me question upon question, until another one of my friends thought that she was trying to be argumentative and began to intervene on my behalf. The first lady told us that she was hearing this information for the first time and simply wanted to know more. She then turned to me and said, “How do you know all these things?” I told her that I watched, I read, I listened and I did research on the internet. “Oh,” she said, “I don’t know how to do all of that, and even if I did, I wouldn’t have the time.”
The second incident occurred a few weeks ago when I was speaking to a (liberal) friend about the proposed healthcare reform, and especially about the possibility of the “public option” it might establish. My friend was very supportive of such an option. I was arguing against it. She finally asked me what alternative I would support instead. I listed some of the points included in the various Republican Senate bills . (Check out these bills yourself). Finally she said, “Well, all that would work for you because you are extraordinarily smart and competent. You know how to compare plans and choose options and find out information. Most people are just not smart enough to do that. That’s why we need a government plan.” To me, her remark was jarring. I was rather shocked that she believes that “most people” are too incompetent (?), incapable (?), dumb(?) to make their own health care decisions. If these really are not “smart enough” to exercise their freedom to choose a health care plan, then I suppose that justified the Government taking care of that for them. (Excuse me while I shudder!) I would like to think that this point of view is specific to my friend; I suspect, however, she represents the majority view of liberals.
Finally, I had the good fortune to read the autobiography of Whittaker Chambers who was the principle witness against Alger Hiss in the late 1940’s. The book, Witness, is a thought-provoking narrative of how Chambers first joined and later defected from Communism. As I read, I found myself forgetting that the book had been written more than 50 years ago; his account was eerily familiar. At a point late in the book, Chambers offers this explanation for why the Government tried to stifle the investigation into Hiss. He first admits that some of the reason could have been “a manifestation of partisan politics”. But then he continued,
“The explanation lies deeper. The simple fact is that when I took up my little sling and aimed at Communism, I also hit something else. What I hit was the forces of that great socialist revolution which in the name of liberalism, spasmodically, incompletely, somewhat formlessly, but always in the same direction, has been inching its ice cap over the nation for two decades. This is not a charge. My opinion of that revolution is not at issue. It is a statement of fact that need startle no one who has voted for that revolution in whole or in part, and, consciously or unconsciously, a majority of the nation has so voted for years. It was the forces of that revolution that I struck at the point of its struggle for power…No one could have been more dismayed than I at what I had hit, for though I knew it existed, I still had no adequate idea of its extent, the depth of its penetration or the fierce vindictiveness of its revolutionary temper, which is a reflex of its struggle to keep and advance its political power”. (Witness, pp. 741, 742)
There really is “nothing new under the sun”, is there? I was particularly struck by Chambers’ observation that the “ice cap” had been moving to cover the nation for two decades—it has now been SEVEN decades!
Taken together, these three incidents have motivated me to fight, if in only a very small way, that creeping “ice cap” by also becoming a witness to the truth. My hope is that those who read the “Sapient Sparrow” will shape it by their own comments and questions about the subjects most important for them.
Have you ever seen a group of sparrows fighting a cat or a squirrel? In order to protect a food source or defend its young, a sparrow can be quite valiant and tenacious. Together with its fellows, it is practically unbeatable.
Consider also that sparrows do not find it difficult to mix with all sorts of other birds. More often than not, one finds sparrows feeding, flying and roosting among a variety of “non-sparrows”. At times, a flock will adopt a “non-sparrow”, such as a canary or a parakeet, (an amusing and sweetly touching sight to behold), and completely accept it as an equal member. Demonstrating that “birds of a feather” means something more essential than mere color.
It seems to me that there is good reason for “His eye” to be on the sparrow, for God to feed them and for Him to mark when one falls. Perhaps, there is something that we can learn from these little creatures in this present age.
Recently, I have felt “sparrowish” in the face of the huge pieces of legislation that have spent, or propose to spend, enormous amounts on schemes with doubtful, at best, benefit, and potential negative consequences to our freedom. So, what is a “sparrow” to do, especially we human-type “sparrows” who “are of more value than many sparrows” of the bird-type? My answer is to become a wise (sapient) sparrow; one who understands the nature of the “cats” and “squirrels” who prowl our world.
In the daily life of a “sparrow”, however, there is limited time to gather such information, let alone investigate or assimilate it. Yet information is essential in order to defend ourselves against those who threaten our lives, liberties and our pursuit of happiness. Therefore, The Sapient Sparrow, seeks to be a tool that summarizes many sources in an effort to inform and empower the individual as each one seeks to form opinions, make decisions, explain positions and/or take action.
Three separate incidents planted the seeds, (if I can be permitted to stretch my metaphor), for The Sapient Sparrow. The first happened as I was discussing the “Cap and Trade”, a.k.a. “Cap and Tax”, bill with a group of friends. One lady asked me question upon question, until another one of my friends thought that she was trying to be argumentative and began to intervene on my behalf. The first lady told us that she was hearing this information for the first time and simply wanted to know more. She then turned to me and said, “How do you know all these things?” I told her that I watched, I read, I listened and I did research on the internet. “Oh,” she said, “I don’t know how to do all of that, and even if I did, I wouldn’t have the time.”
The second incident occurred a few weeks ago when I was speaking to a (liberal) friend about the proposed healthcare reform, and especially about the possibility of the “public option” it might establish. My friend was very supportive of such an option. I was arguing against it. She finally asked me what alternative I would support instead. I listed some of the points included in the various Republican Senate bills . (Check out these bills yourself). Finally she said, “Well, all that would work for you because you are extraordinarily smart and competent. You know how to compare plans and choose options and find out information. Most people are just not smart enough to do that. That’s why we need a government plan.” To me, her remark was jarring. I was rather shocked that she believes that “most people” are too incompetent (?), incapable (?), dumb(?) to make their own health care decisions. If these really are not “smart enough” to exercise their freedom to choose a health care plan, then I suppose that justified the Government taking care of that for them. (Excuse me while I shudder!) I would like to think that this point of view is specific to my friend; I suspect, however, she represents the majority view of liberals.
Finally, I had the good fortune to read the autobiography of Whittaker Chambers who was the principle witness against Alger Hiss in the late 1940’s. The book, Witness, is a thought-provoking narrative of how Chambers first joined and later defected from Communism. As I read, I found myself forgetting that the book had been written more than 50 years ago; his account was eerily familiar. At a point late in the book, Chambers offers this explanation for why the Government tried to stifle the investigation into Hiss. He first admits that some of the reason could have been “a manifestation of partisan politics”. But then he continued,
“The explanation lies deeper. The simple fact is that when I took up my little sling and aimed at Communism, I also hit something else. What I hit was the forces of that great socialist revolution which in the name of liberalism, spasmodically, incompletely, somewhat formlessly, but always in the same direction, has been inching its ice cap over the nation for two decades. This is not a charge. My opinion of that revolution is not at issue. It is a statement of fact that need startle no one who has voted for that revolution in whole or in part, and, consciously or unconsciously, a majority of the nation has so voted for years. It was the forces of that revolution that I struck at the point of its struggle for power…No one could have been more dismayed than I at what I had hit, for though I knew it existed, I still had no adequate idea of its extent, the depth of its penetration or the fierce vindictiveness of its revolutionary temper, which is a reflex of its struggle to keep and advance its political power”. (Witness, pp. 741, 742)
There really is “nothing new under the sun”, is there? I was particularly struck by Chambers’ observation that the “ice cap” had been moving to cover the nation for two decades—it has now been SEVEN decades!
Taken together, these three incidents have motivated me to fight, if in only a very small way, that creeping “ice cap” by also becoming a witness to the truth. My hope is that those who read the “Sapient Sparrow” will shape it by their own comments and questions about the subjects most important for them.
INTRODUCTION
Although I grew up in the Great Plains, for the past 24 years I have lived in the Northeast. In between my growing up and my settling down, I have also resided in Missouri, Texas and Washington State. Each of these places, and their people, has influenced my outlook and thinking. However, the greatest influence has been, and will always be, my Christian faith. It informs not only my values, but also my very identity.
For almost 40 years, I have been married to my high school sweetheart. We have three beautiful children. Two of them are happily married. Our oldest child has a child of her own. (Partially, it is out of concern for the future of our treasured first grandson that I began The Sapient Sparrow). Our youngest child is our “forever baby”. She suffers from autism. Raising her, teaching her and caring for her has been both the greatest joy and the greatest heartbreak of my life.
My educational background includes undergraduate studies in both the Mid-west and the Pacific Northwest in the areas of both sociology and psychology. While in the Pacific Northwest, I had the opportunity to complete an internship at a battered women's shelter. That experience had a profound effect on my viewpoint. At NYU, I completed a Master’s degree in Counseling Psychology with a specialization in Thanatology (a fancy term for the branch of psychology that deals with death, dying and bereavement). I worked as a private practitioner in the area of Thanatology for 12 years. In addition, as an adjunct professor, I taught undergraduate courses in psychology. I have also presented numerous seminars, lectures and workshops on various aspects of human relationships and personal growth and development. From the time I closed my practice at the end of 1999, I have worked to develop curricula and techniques to educate our child with autism. She continues her studies, independently now days, and progresses in her own time and in her own way.
Politically, I have progressed through anti-war protests during the ‘60s to recent “Tea Party” protests. What do these have in common? Questioning authority, and fighting against big government control over individual lives. I applaud the ability of the free market to create prosperity, and the ability of the free individual to make sound decisions. I believe that in terms of Government, less is not only more, but more than enough. Federalism is my preferred form of government. Its dwindling presence has led to lobbyists with too much influence, special interest groups with too much control, and the rest of us with too little of either. I believe that the power of government should come from the electorate. Practically, I am dismayed that this is often not the case. Finally, I believe that whenever human values replace religious ones, and the worship of an ideology replaces worship of the Creator, the purpose of our Founding Fathers is confounded. Furthermore, I have concluded that the defeat of our founding purpose is indeed the “change” that is often touted today. Whether or not I engage in the fight, its outcome will surely affect not only me, but all those whom I love, as well as those I will never meet. I quote Whittaker Chambers:
“To put it in my own way, I like to trust that the God of Battles
has this Republic in His care.” (Witness, p. 743)
He then continues with a very important point:
“…in general, battles are won by the reserves.” (Witness, p. 743)
I am humbled by the first quote and strengthened by the second. The reserves will ultimately be called upon. Let us endeavor to be well prepared to engage the battle.
For almost 40 years, I have been married to my high school sweetheart. We have three beautiful children. Two of them are happily married. Our oldest child has a child of her own. (Partially, it is out of concern for the future of our treasured first grandson that I began The Sapient Sparrow). Our youngest child is our “forever baby”. She suffers from autism. Raising her, teaching her and caring for her has been both the greatest joy and the greatest heartbreak of my life.
My educational background includes undergraduate studies in both the Mid-west and the Pacific Northwest in the areas of both sociology and psychology. While in the Pacific Northwest, I had the opportunity to complete an internship at a battered women's shelter. That experience had a profound effect on my viewpoint. At NYU, I completed a Master’s degree in Counseling Psychology with a specialization in Thanatology (a fancy term for the branch of psychology that deals with death, dying and bereavement). I worked as a private practitioner in the area of Thanatology for 12 years. In addition, as an adjunct professor, I taught undergraduate courses in psychology. I have also presented numerous seminars, lectures and workshops on various aspects of human relationships and personal growth and development. From the time I closed my practice at the end of 1999, I have worked to develop curricula and techniques to educate our child with autism. She continues her studies, independently now days, and progresses in her own time and in her own way.
Politically, I have progressed through anti-war protests during the ‘60s to recent “Tea Party” protests. What do these have in common? Questioning authority, and fighting against big government control over individual lives. I applaud the ability of the free market to create prosperity, and the ability of the free individual to make sound decisions. I believe that in terms of Government, less is not only more, but more than enough. Federalism is my preferred form of government. Its dwindling presence has led to lobbyists with too much influence, special interest groups with too much control, and the rest of us with too little of either. I believe that the power of government should come from the electorate. Practically, I am dismayed that this is often not the case. Finally, I believe that whenever human values replace religious ones, and the worship of an ideology replaces worship of the Creator, the purpose of our Founding Fathers is confounded. Furthermore, I have concluded that the defeat of our founding purpose is indeed the “change” that is often touted today. Whether or not I engage in the fight, its outcome will surely affect not only me, but all those whom I love, as well as those I will never meet. I quote Whittaker Chambers:
“To put it in my own way, I like to trust that the God of Battles
has this Republic in His care.” (Witness, p. 743)
He then continues with a very important point:
“…in general, battles are won by the reserves.” (Witness, p. 743)
I am humbled by the first quote and strengthened by the second. The reserves will ultimately be called upon. Let us endeavor to be well prepared to engage the battle.
EXPLAINING THE "BOOS"
Here is a list of all the amendments that have been proposed with respect to abortion coverage, rationing and end of life coverage in the Senate healthcare bill. Note which ones failed. Now, ask yourself, was the POTUS really being truthful about these things? If so, why did the pertinent amendments fail due to his own party? And, why didn't he know it?
P.S. I would have "booed" too!
P.S. I would have "booed" too!
LIES?
With respect to Congressman Joe Wilson's outburst last night, you may want to read what William Jacobson has posted on legal insurrection.
Feeling more sapient yet?
Feeling more sapient yet?
EVIL INSURANCE EMPIRE
Lately, I'm sure you have heard quite a bit about insurance companies profiting on the sickness of others, hugely and immorally.
Let's think this through. Isn't it when someone is SICK that the insurance company has to PAY? In fact, they are betting (because, after all, insurance is really gambling), that you will stay WELL. So, I guess they are making these HUGE profits on our wellness? And, of course, according to the POTUS, on denying care and not paying claims.
Dr. Mark Perry has a great chart on his blog that documents these evil profits. Check it out and you, too, can be smarter than the President.
Let's think this through. Isn't it when someone is SICK that the insurance company has to PAY? In fact, they are betting (because, after all, insurance is really gambling), that you will stay WELL. So, I guess they are making these HUGE profits on our wellness? And, of course, according to the POTUS, on denying care and not paying claims.
Dr. Mark Perry has a great chart on his blog that documents these evil profits. Check it out and you, too, can be smarter than the President.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)