Tuesday, June 09, 2009

Just a quick thought about our nations health care system. The current administration is wanting to nationalize our health care. Recently I talked to a person in this field that was an Obama supporter about the issue. This persons response was they wanted to model our system after the Canadian Health Care system.

I have a friend who is a medical researcher. For thier research they use Canada for their double blind because as he put it "for elderly patients, they have a placebo based system". In Canada, when you retire and become a non productive member of society, the waiting list for medical care can be years if you ever get it at all. Especially for orthopaedic proceedures.

Another fact I just discovered. There are more bone density testing machines in my little hometown of Gainesville, GA than in the entire country of Canada. Sad, just totally sad.

A wise economist once said, "there is no free lunch". There will be no free medical care either except for those indigant persons that already have it. For the rest of us we will just have our tax rate increased to pay for it and in the end get substandard health care which will be more expensive than if we had left it in private hands.

If you think the g-men can give you anything for FREE then you are plain ignorant. Everything has some form of cost. Some is just more obvious than others.
michael

Monday, January 05, 2009

Folks,
I am ecstatic about the imminent changing of the guard in Washington. Now you stupid liberals that voted for "change" are going to see the empirical evidence that there is not going to be any change. Of course, it will get sugar coated by the press and ya'll will swallow the pill that says it is still GWB's fault.

Nobama said he was going to pull the troops out of Iraq. At this point, he has had most of his CIA and Joint Chief's briefings. And guess what? the military is not planning on any troop reductions in Iraq. If they thought that the president elect was going to pull the plug on the operation, they would not already have plans to redeploy a gazillion troops to Iraq.

So ya'll just keep thinking that he is the new Martin Luther King messiah. I like to keep reminding the folks who say that his presidency is historical that the man is half white... The truth of the matter is he didn't change Chicago politics when he was there and he won't change Washington politics as president. He will be ineffective, the press will blame the minority Republicans and ya'll will swallow it hook, line and sinker. Chumps.

Nobama says he will pull the plug in Iraq.

[url]http://goobamanation.com/tag/troop-deploymentsl[/url]

The Army's recent Iraq troop announcements.

[url]http://www.army.mil/-newsreleases/2008/09/30/12834-army-prepares-for-2009-rotations-in-operation-iraqi-freedom/[/url]

Monday, November 24, 2008

Folks,
It seems the entire world is abuzz about the newly elected incoming administration. The liberal left is hailing it as the start of utopia while the conservative right is screaming the sky is falling. Which is the truth? As always, it will fall somewhere in the middle.

I believe the proponents of the President Elect's change platform are going to be let down but may not be capable of understanding the how or why. We are already getting a glimpse into how Obama is going to run the executive branch of the government. First is by his choice of a Vice president, Biden is an old school liberal and Democratic collaborator. Second are his early choices for cabinet members. The list is packed with former Bill Clinton advisers and other Democratic Party insiders. This is not what I call change... The same people filling the same positions, with the same beliefs and agendas.

Our second clue comes from him distancing himself from several of his campaign promises before the vote count was completed. He has already said he may have been to aggressive with his plan for change and some of his goals may have to be pushed into his second term. With that he can blame not having enough time to fulfill his promises to the people if he is not elected for a second term.

Will he see a second term in the White House? I believe he will. Just like with Bill Clinton, the same people that voted for him in the first term will return to the polls in four years. So be prepared to ride this administration for its full legally allotted time potential. But this is going to be o.k., our country survived Jimmy Carter and it will survive this administration. So much of his platform reeks of the initial Carter plan that I want to think all they did was make a few additions to a concept that failed ~30 years ago.

Is he going to bring change to Washington and America. Just look at the past and present to predict the future. Who raised so much of his campaign money? Raines and Johnson of Fannie Mae. They have proved that they are willing to stick their hands into the cookie jar. Greed is going to continue on capitol hill as it has for generations, thus the real power brokers are going to continue to be the lobbyists. The legislative branch will continue t do whatever the folks that take them on golf trips to Hawaii ask them to do.

It is going to be business as usual in Washington but with a new face to spin it as "change". There will be a lot of posturing and rhetoric. Proposed bills that will fail and be blamed on the Republican minority for undermining idealism. Thus, I am not that scared of our countries system being rebuilt in the name of socialism. With any luck, this administration will let down its constituents as badly as Carter did and usher in another 20 years of Republican control.

But if it does, we need a new Republican Party to emerge from the ashes. One similar to the ideals of Ronald Reagan but with even stronger party support. Not this purposeful shift toward the center that we have seen since Bush 1. We need to forget trying to emulate conservative or center Democrats and become true conservatives who are statesmen and not politicians. We need to abandon the "gool ol boy" network that has held American politics as a hostage.

So am I worried? Not really, but concerned none the less. For 36 hours after the November 4th election I was worried, appalled, and near despondent. Then when I realized that there was nothing else I could do so I knelt down and prayed. First I prayed for the outgoing administration, next I prayed for the incoming administration, then I received some insight from God. My wife and I have been studying from Samuel, Kings and Chronicles and the Lord reminded me of the teachings from these books.

The Israelites demanded a king from God. And God gave them a lineage of kings that the world has studied for thousands of years. According to the actions of the people they often received bad kings (actually more often than good kings) as their actions dictated. So now the people of America have the king they desire. Like most things, we soon find that they are not as nice as the television commercials depicted them. So as the saying from across the pond alludes, "the proof is in the pudding". What this new administration is made of will play out rather quickly as will be evidenced by the fruit of their actions. how the press spins it is all that will matter to the majority of the public.

What I do know is this. Whether you voted for the man or not. Whether you like his politics or not. He is now the commander and chief and some semblance of respect for the position is required. You don't have to agree with him but you do have to support our country by respecting its commander. I will probably disagree with many of his ideals, both privately and publicly. I will be more than willing to disagree with anything he does that I don't believe. But I am going to respect the office of the President of the United States, I am going to pray for him and for God to show him wisdom just as much as I have for G.W. Bush, Jr. The first Saturday after the election, my weekly prayer group spent a lot of time on our knees praying for Obama and his staff. We will continue to do this no matter who we may support in the next election. Hate will not change America or bring strength to our cause.
Michael V. Crowder

Remember this:
Luke 6:27-28
[27] "But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, [28] bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.

Romans 12:20
"But if your enemy is hungry, feed him, and if he is thirsty, give him a drink; for in so doing you will heap burning coals upon his head"

Tuesday, November 04, 2008

Folks,
Today I voted to keep the "change" in my pocket and out of Washington. Nuff said?!?!
michael

Monday, October 13, 2008

Howdy folks,
Long time, no rant. I have been dealing with some problems with my back, thus I have not really been too interested in extracurricular blogging. I am going to try and get back to ranting because it seems as the world has gone totally loopy and griping to my friends and family just aggravates them and doesn't really help.

Friday I had to jump start a new Cadillac and decided that owning a jump start box as opposed to cables might be a good idea. This morning I went to purchase a jump start box to keep in my primary truck. I first tried Wall Mart and they all said "made in china" so I figured I would run over to Sears "where America shops" and look at the Die Hard and Craftsman labeled stuff. They had about five different models. One said "made in mexico" and the other four said "made in china". I was apalled. So I called a local industrial supply and a local hometown auto parts store. Both places only had "fine china" manufactured jump boxes.

I have given up on buying one now. I would rather do without and use my "made in America" jumper cables as opposed to purchasing a chinese made jump box. Last week I needed to purchase some more NiMH rechargeable batteries for my small electronic devices. I went to four stores looking for U.S.A. made batteries. Once again, no luck. I did eventually find some that were made in Japan so I settled for a few of those to get me by until I can find some U.S. sourced batteries.

We are in the middle of an economic down turn that folks all seem to be in a panic about. But these same folks continue to purchase chinese products instead of looking for home grown products. If you purchase products without regard to where it is made and only look at price then you deserve to lose your job. How is the guy that works at the battery plant going to afford your services if his job is outsourced to china?

Ya'll can blame the big corporations if you want, but you would be wrong. It is the consumers fault that our manufacturing base is falling away. If you don't specifically buy American products as much as you can then you are the problem with our economy. If the American public would vote for local jobs with their pocket books in the isles of Wall Mart and other stores by leaving chinese junk on the shelves then the distributors would pay attention.

In recent memory we have had chinese pet food suppliments killing pets all over the country, Thomas the Tank Engine toys have showed up with lead based paint for your kids to chew on and most recently melamine (a really nansty chemical) is showing up in baby formula and non dairy creamers. Lipton had to destroy an entire shipment of creamers and nobody is talking about how much may have gotten through to the market place.

We have just approved offshore oil drilling to the dismay of the hippy peace freak tree huggers. Many people are outraged that we would allow U.S. oil companies to drill offshore. But these same reserves have been being exploited by the chinese. Who would you rather have drilling for oil near our coast? U.S. Companies or the chinese? At least the U.S. oil companies will have to follow EPA guidelines. The chinese have proved they don't care about us with food and toys, do you think they care about spilling some oil off our coast?

The chinese are the worlds worst polluters at present. Just look at the amount of CFC 12 they are producing annually. Look at their electric power production and across the board at all their infrastructure. So your worried about the U.S. economy or the world environment? If you claim to care and at the same time you purchase chinese products without regard then you are a hipocrite and a lier. Strong Words? No, just the plain truth.
michael

Tuesday, July 15, 2008

Folks,
Once again it has been a while since my last post. Over the past couple of months I have studied for and acquired my Technician, General and Extra Class Amateur Radio Licenses. It was an involved process that required a good deal of studying and even refiring all the math synapses in my brain that had gone dormant. But I made it through the tests and the FCC has seen fit to grant me all of my licenses.

As a result of my entering into the Ham Radio hobby the reasons that the Federal Government supports this endeavor have become very clear to me. In the event of any disaster a large burden of the emergency communications work is handled by hams in the civilian realm. Emergency communications are handled by several groups, two of which are ARES and RACES. These groups support local, state and federal government with coordination of key communications including the military.

Ya'll may have thought that the g-men had this covered but they don't. Almost every service uses different systems and frequencies the the ability to inter communicate in the event of a disaster is not there. The Amateur Radio Community pulls all of these government entities together along with private relief organizations such as the Red Cross and the North American Mission Board.

I have become involved in the RACES organization to help provide rescue communications and coordination. In the process of this I have had to take several FEMA courses to obtain my qualifications to help. These courses are available online to anyone who wishes to take them. I reccomend that everyone go through some of the information available at the FEMA website. Here is a direct link:

http://training.fema.gov/IS/crslist.asp

One of the things I already knew that has been reiterated time and time again is the the Federal Government is not legally responsible for your immediate safety or to rescue in times of disaster. Your first official line of defense is yourself. You are supposed to have enough emergency rations and equipment on hand to take care of yourself for at least 72 hours.

The second entity responsible for helping you is your local government then the third is the state. Federal assistance can not be provided until requested by your states governor. The Feds can't send anyone until that request is made. So if you think the G-men are going to be at your door in a few hours to rescue you in the event of a disaster you are dead wrong and may die while you wait. FEMA takes a minimum of 72 hours to start mobilization after the President declares a Federal Disaster. So you better be prepared to take care of yourself for quite a while. If you are not prepared to feed yourself, provide yourself with shelter and basic first aid then don't expect it from the government anytime soon.

In order to understand the process and better prepare yourself for an emergency I suggest that everyone take the FEMA IS-7 online course. Here is a direct link to the material:

http://training.fema.gov/EMIWeb/IS/is7.asp

If you don't take some steps to prepare yourself for an emergency and realize that you are on your on for at least three days according to how the system works then you may just find yourself going hungry for several days at best. At worst you could find yourself hungry, hurt and alone in the dark for quite some time and could die while waiting for help that you always assumed was just a phone call away. Prepare yourself for a potential disaster or be prepared to suffer the consequences.
michael

Tuesday, June 03, 2008

Folks,
This article was just way too interesting not to pass along. It comes from the Examiner.com and here is the direct link. http://www.examiner.com/a-1419425~Peter_Schweizer__Conservatives_more_honest_than_liberals_.html I normally just post the link but this is too good not to quote:



Commentary
Peter Schweizer: Conservatives more honest than liberals?
WASHINGTON -

The headline may seem like a trick question — even a dangerous one — to ask during an election year. And notice, please, that I didn’t ask whether certain politicians are more honest than others. (Politicians are a different species altogether.) Yet there is a striking gap between the manner in which liberals and conservatives address the issue of honesty.

Consider these results:

Is it OK to cheat on your taxes? A total of 57 percent of those who described themselves as “very liberal” said yes in response to the World Values Survey, compared with only 20 percent of those who are “very conservative.” When Pew Research asked whether it was “morally wrong” to cheat Uncle Sam, 86 percent of conservatives agreed, compared with only 68 percent of liberals.

Ponder this scenario, offered by the National Cultural Values Survey: “You lose your job. Your friend’s company is looking for someone to do temporary work. They are willing to pay the person in cash to avoid taxes and allow the person to still collect unemployment. What would you do?”

Almost half, or 49 percent, of self-described progressives would go along with the scheme, but only 21 percent of conservatives said they would.

When the World Values Survey asked a similar question, the results were largely the same: Those who were very liberal were much more likely to say it was all right to get welfare benefits you didn’t deserve.

The World Values Survey found that those on the left were also much more likely to say it is OK to buy goods that you know are stolen. Studies have also found that those on the left were more likely to say it was OK to drink a can of soda in a store without paying for it and to avoid the truth while negotiating the price of a car.

Another survey by Barna Research found that political liberals were two and a half times more likely to say that they illegally download or trade music for free on the Internet.

A study by professors published in the American Taxation Association’s Journal of Legal Tax Research found conservative students took the issue of accounting scandals and tax evasion more seriously than their fellow liberal students. Those with a “liberal outlook” who “reject the idea of absolute truth” were more accepting of cheating at school, according to another study, involving 291 students and published in the Journal of Education for Business.

A study in the Journal of Business Ethics involving 392 college students found that stronger beliefs toward “conservatism” translated into “higher levels of ethical values.” And academics concluded in the Journal of Psychology that there was a link between “political liberalism” and “lying in your own self-interest,” based on a study involving 156 adults.

Liberals were more willing to “let others take the blame” for their own ethical lapses, “copy a published article” and pass it off as their own, and were more accepting of “cheating on an exam,” according to still another study in the Journal of Business Ethics.

Now, I’m not suggesting that all conservatives are honest and all liberals are untrustworthy. But clearly a gap exists in the data. Why? The quick answer might be that liberals are simply being more honest about their dishonesty.

However attractive this explanation might be for some, there is simply no basis for accepting this explanation. Validation studies, which attempt to figure out who misreports on academic surveys and why, has found no evidence that conservatives are less honest. Indeed, validation research indicates that Democrats tend to be less forthcoming than other groups.

The honesty gap is also not a result of “bad people” becoming liberals and “good people” becoming conservatives. In my mind, a more likely explanation is bad ideas. Modern liberalism is infused with idea that truth is relative. Surveys consistently show this. And if truth is relative, it also must follow that honesty is subjective.

Sixties organizer Saul Alinsky, who both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton say inspired and influenced them, once said the effective political advocate “doesn’t have a fixed truth; truth to him is relative and changing, everything to him is relative and changing. He is a political relativist.”

During this political season, honesty is often in short supply. But at least we can improve things by accepting the idea that truth and honesty exist. As the late scholar Sidney Hook put it, “the easiest rationalization for the refusal to seek the truth is the denial that truth exists.”

Peter Schweizer is the author of “Makers and Takers: Why Conservatives Work Harder, Feel Happier, Have Closer Families, Take Fewer Drugs, Give More Generously, Value Honesty More, Are Less Materialistic and Envious, Whine Less ... And Even Hug Their Children More Than Liberals” (Doubleday).

Examiner
Hope ya'll enjoyed that as much as I did...
Michael


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]