IS THE PRICE RIGHT?

Owning a piece of the Earth and a home is the cornerstone of the American dream, but this major-for-most asset comes with these costs aside from the generally hefty mortgage:

*  boredom, stemming from looking at same views, shopping in same stores, driving on same roads, over and over again

*  inability to choose neighbors

 * exposure of level of personal financial worth (gauged by value of home)

*  pressure and cost of maintaining it

*  limited gifting opportunities

*  value dependent on others

*  nontransportability

*  vulnerable to misnamed acts of God (hurricanes, earthquakes, floods, wildfires)

*  subject to regulatory rules and taxation by governments (local.state, federal)

*  generates close-up, rather than panoramic, view of world and of one's life

No wonder they call its purchase "a closing".

PLEASE YOUR PALATE

PRESTIGE
POWER
POSSESSIONS
POPULARITY
POSITION
POSITIVITY
PROPERTY
PROFIT

PRIDE
PERFECTION
PRODUCTION

PARAMOUR
PARENTING
PERFUME
PRINCIPLE
PASSION

PATIENCE
PEACE

PERSEVERANCE
PIZZAZZ
PRACTICALITY
PRAISE
PROGRESS
PLEASURE

NAME SHAME?

Some people are upset over the use of the word "Redskins" by the Washington professional football team. Some think it racist and derogatory, some think it denigrates American Indians and conjures up the outworn and misguided image of them as savages. I disagree I think it is a tribute to them. First of all, it is a descriptively true word. It is not insulting anymore than New York Giants insults tall people. Here are some insulting names: the Boston Red Sox and the Chicago White Sox (stinkin' footwear), the San Antonio Spurs (something you kick horses with), the Minnesota Timberwolves and Chicago Blackhawks (killer animals), the Charlotte Hornets (stingin' wasps), and others. Many have come to realize that most Indians were good people who were wiling to live and trade with "the white man", that there were many intermarriages...and that if some today do not correctly understand the very interesting culture of the American Indian, it is due to the way America's history is erroneously taught in schools. Fans don't root against a team, they root for a team. Millions of fans root for the Redskins and if I were an American Indian I would see it as an inclusive name and a good thing. The way I would see the Juneau Jewboys.

AN OPEN LETTER TO A CLOSED MIND

OPEN LETTER TO GERALDO RIVERA

I heard you say on your radio show today that you hope obama succeeds in fixing the obamacare website because if he succeeds we all benefit  REALLY?  You think taking away my freedom to decide for myself whether I want to have health insurance, what coverage I want, from whom I wish to purchase it, is something that is good and you want obama to succeed in doing that?  The fact that the website isn't working is not what is bad about obamacare, it's what is good about it.

Whom else are you rooting to succeed?  UNDERWORLD HIT MEN? They also want to take away someone's freedom.

You said  "of course, people who have cancer should get treatment even if they can't afford it".  Well, in a free society. you are free to donate to a charity to help them, but you are not free to FORCE me to do so.  Do you know the relationship between freedom and force.  THEY ARE DEADLY ENEMIES.

(What else is on your should get treatment list.  If someone is dying from heart disease, tuberculosis, malaria, emphysema , blood clots?  And what about those who can't afford food, clothes, a place to sleep, education, transportation? Should they be treated with money?  Just wondering.)

Oh, yes, soon your freedom to give charity will also be taken away.  A new law being proposed would make it illegal to donate money to any charity for any reason.  The reasoning is that the government is better able to take care of needy people and that private charities undermine the authority of the government.  THE PENALTY FOR GIVING CHARITY WILL BE A FINE EQUAL TO TEN TIMES  THE AMOUNT GIVEN TO CHARITY FOR THE FIRST OFFENSE, AND JAIL TIME FOR EACH SUBSEQUENT OFFENSE EQUAL TO ONE YEAR FOR EACH $100 DONATED.  I am going to assume you hope the president is successful in getting obamacharitycare passed.

Oh, yes 2.  The president is concerned about some people not being able to have children and is trying to get a bill passed that would limit us to having two children.  Under the bill, if you now have more than two children, your excess children will be taken away from you and given to those less fortunates who are childless.  The government will choose which ones you will lose.  The president thinks that this redistribution of children will help transform America into a happier, more humane society.  I understand you have five children, so I assume you are rooting for Obama to succeed in getting obamakidcare going because if he succeeds, we all succeed...including the kids.

Great show today.

JUST ANOTHER COVER-UP

Traditionally, there was, from right to left, capitalism (private enterprise, individualism), socialism (primacy of society, some private enterprise), communism (government control of all aspects of life, no private industry), fascism (dictatorial statist)government, use of military force to accomplish aims).

The words commonly used to define Barack Obama are progressive, statist.  They are euphemisms for communist, which is what he is, as manifested by his desire to control all aspects of our lives (see IRS spying) and the economy (see obamacare), and redistribute the wealth of the country..  He goes even further...cuting our credit and military strength and converting us into a tird world power.   The use of euphemisms was necessary if he was to cover up his real intentions and succeed in conning a sufficient number of voters to twice gain election.

Time to call a communist a communist.

BYE BYE BIRDIE

I wrote in the prior post that the idea of America is gone.  I say here that the idea of New York City will be gone next week when Bill de Blasio becomes mayor.

NYC was the capitol of individual opportunity and achievement, a melting pot of cultures, and energetic competition and limitless success.  As Sinatra sang, "If I can make it here, I can make it anywhere". 

de Blasio thinks otherwise.  He doesn't like the idea that some have more than others, and so wants to redistribute the wealth in the city via higher and higher and higher taxes on those who earn above his definition of enough...a la that other collectivist/statist/marxist in office.  He thinks the police may be racially influenced in their fight against crime, and wants to shackle all of them rather than just those who are.  He thinks government's job is to provide those who could use a bit more with everything they could use a bit more of.  Actually, it's not the government that ever does the providing...it's you and you and you and me.

If you think these views are "just another brand of American politics", that they are just minor variations on a theme, you are wrong.  They are a major junking of  the American way of life into the political garbage can.  And we know what garbage cans smell like.


Goodbye New York...been nice to know ya.

BOILING POT OF POURRI

The idea of America is gone because most Americans, I believe, are not interested in ideas.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Those who support abortions generally do so on the grounds that a woman has dominion over her own body.  Just curious.  Do they also believe she has a right to take whatever drugs she wishes (legal or otherwise), that prostitution should be legal, that she ought be free to work for less than a minimum wage, that she must cover the intimate parts of her body when she is out in public, that she may marry as many of whatever gender and species she wishes, etc. etc. etc.?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wasn't the reason for the separation of church and state that religious beliefs are subjective not objective, and that your subjective beliefs are not necessarily truths that ought be the basis of a political system imposed on me...so that bringing God or the Bible into discussions of gay marriage or abortion, or putting them into the Pledge of Allegiance, is wrong?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How did uneducated primitives survive without government for hundreds of thousands of years?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why do we require physicians, attorneys, accountants, architects, taxi drivers, etc. to pass qualifying exams, but not politicians?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There can be no good solution to any political or social issue that denies my freedom for one second or at the cost to me of one penny.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why do we add an "s" to make a noun plural (kite, kites), but delete the final "s" to make a verb plural (he reads, they read)...and why do we use the plural "are" when speaking to a single individual (you are smart)?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In approximately how many different ways can a teacher line up the 20 children in her class:
       240
       2,400
       24,000
       240,000
       240,000,000
       240,000,000,000
       240,000,000,000,000
       240,000,000,000,000,000

Wrong.  2,400,000,000,000,000,000

In how many different ways can 330,000,000 Americans define freedom?

REFOCUSING OUR MORAL LENS

This guy out in Colorado was caught robbing a bank.  At his trial, he argued as follows:

     He said bank robbery was good for the country.  Robbers had to buy weapons and bullets and that helped our economy.  Because he had been successful in robbing banks in the past, it had induced the banks to hire more guards, and that lowered the unemployment rate, and resulted in more income taxes being paid to the State and to the federal government, helping both to reduce their fiscal deficits.  Further, some of the guards who were hired could not afford to pay health insurance premiums, but were now covered under the Bank-paid insurance program under Obamacare.  And finally he argued that most of the money in Banks is deposited there by rich people, so all he was really dong was transferring money from those who didn't need it to someone who did.  Him.

The Judge agreed with him and found him not guilty, saying that  bank robbery was indeed good for our country, that the robber's arguments were precisely the same as those that support all of our country's great welfare programs, that the robber was doing no more than redistributing the wealth of the country and ought be commended for being such a good American.

There is a lot we can all learn from this wonderful story, don't you think?

CHANGING THE CURRENT

Politics, so goes the warning, is a subject not to be discussed over the dinner table, lest inflamed passions lead to indigestion.  Many have strong and typically immutable opinions on the subject.   And very few have`ever been known to change their minds about their opinions.  Yet the subject of politics is little taught nor studied in school nor on most people's reading list.

I believe that one fact explains this bundle of paradoxes:  Most people believe there are no rights and wrongs when it comes to the subject of politics.  There are no absolute truths here, is the pervasive view.  It all seems to boil down to personal feelings, opinions.  With that head space, how much is there really to teach, or to read about?  And the fact that it is not on most public school curriculums, no doubt reinforces the pervasive view that politics is just a part of the game of life.

But, alas, life is not a game.  Nor is politics, which impacts virtually every aspect of our lives.  Whether you live in a socialist society or a capitalist one, for example, makes a crucial difference in the quality of your life.

So, I have chosen to try to convert the view of no rights and wrongs in politics.  If you agree with me that there are rights and wrongs, you need read no further.  If you believe there aren't any, here is Question 1:   Do you think cannibalism is wrong?

If you answer Yes, here is Question 2:  Why?

To be continued. 

I WISH I HAD

A common regret I hear people say as they get a bit older is "I wish I had........(done or not done this or that in my life)."

I am particularly interested in whether the action we now regret was typically taken because of a lack of knowledge about ourselves at the time, whether that lack of knowledge was the fault of our educational system, to what extent do we consciously or subconsciously blame ourselves for the error and, if we do,  its effect on our self-esteem, and what ought we do now to (a) cleanse ourselves of our regrets, and (b) avoid making new errors.

I have decided to do a survey to get an idea of what are the most common regrets people have, and I am inviting all readers age 40 and over to complete this one sentence:

     I WISH I HAD ............................. BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE ..............................

Be as specific or not as you choose to be, and anonymous if you wish.  You may submit your response either by commenting to this post, or by emailing me at raynewman0025@gmail.com.

Thank you.

OUR POWER

A lot of talk these`days about political power, so I wondered exactly what power do the politicos, all the way up to the President, actually have.  And the answer was clear:  None, they have no power.

Power is the ability to force you to do something.  A`250 pond muscleman has power.  Obama doesn't.  All of the Demos and the Repubs combined do not.  They can pass all the laws they want, mandate whatever they want, but we don't have to comply, do we?  They personally cannot FORCE us, the people, to do it.  If 10 million or 20 million or 50 million of us choose not to do something, what can they do about it?  Nothing.  They can say they will seize our property if we don't do as they wish, but who exactly will show up at my home to seize it.  Not the President, not the Senate majority, not the Supreme Court justices.  They ain't coming.

Oh, right.  The police or the military will show up and physically throw me off my property.  They are the only two "political" groups that have the semblance of power...physical power...to accomplish anything.  And that is my point entirely...if the police and the military choose not to take action, the politicos are helpless.  Totally.  And even if the few million members of those two arms of the government do want to enforce government edicts, can they in fact be successful in doing so if tens of millions of us resist?

Point:  politicos have power only because we the public sanction that power, we go along with it.  It is we, not they, who have the ultimate power...and that is something we ought start thinking about pretty damn soon.

PS:  Isn't that the real reason so many politicos want to curtail our right to own guns?  And isn't that the real reason why the Founders of this country specifically enumerated that right in the Constitution?

We don't have to retake our country, as I so often hear these days.  We have to stop giving it away.

GIVE ME YOUR TIRED...

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free;
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless,
Tempest-tossed to me
Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free;
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless,
Tempest-tossed to me
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!


(from the inscription on the Statue of Liberty)

What is horrific about Obamacare is not just that it is`a flagrant renunciation of that inscription, but that so many politicos favor it.  Obamacare is just another in a long list of desecrations piled on top of the rubble that was once freedom in America.   Here are just 10 of the thousands of ways we are not free:

1.  I was drafted against my will into the military.
2.  I have to pay a tax to the government for the privilege of being able to buy something in the local store, and for the privilege of earning an income, and for the privilege of owning real estate, and for the privilege of giving certain gifts during my lifetime, and for the privilege of bequeathing my assets when my life is over.
3.  I can be incarcerated for putting certain governmentally-forbidden substances into my body.
4.  I cannot practice medicine or law or open a casino or provide a hundred other services without prior government approval.
5.  I cannot work for any wage I want to work for if it is below the minimum wage the government thinks I should work for.
6.  I am restricted by the government as to whom I may marry.
7.  I must be educated by the government, or by someone approved by the government, until I am age 16.
8.  I must put money away for my retirement, and the retirement of my employees, whether I wish to or not.
9.  I cannot legally change my name unless the government approves of the new name.
10.I must contribute funds to provide others with whatever the government thinks they ought have.

 I am one of those yearning to be free.

TALK, TALK, TALK

A couple of weeks ago, it was all about Syria.  Should we or should we not attack.  "Have to," said the President, "Syria has gone over the line.  I said if they do that, and we do nothing, we will look like fools."  We did nothing.  All talk, talk, talk.

This week it's all about raising the debt limit or our government defaulting on its obligations on Treasury notes.  But there can be no default since the Constitution specifically provides that those obligations must be paid first out of government revenues, and there are more than enough revenues to do that.  Just more talk, talk, talk in the form of scare tactics. 

Unless, of curse, the President chooses`again to go his own merry way and ignore the Constitution.  But didn't he take an oath to uphold the Constitution?  Sure did...and you guessed it, just more talk, talk, talk.

That's what America has come down to.  Aren't you proud?

I think we ought put some teeth into that Presidential oath and make it something more than talk:

1.  All politicos ought be required to take a test so we can see what they know of the Constitution.  And if they don't get a perfect score on that test, they are not qualified and cannot hold any government office.  An oath to uphold something they are not knowledgeable about, is meaningless.

2.  If any politico votes or takes any action...once...contrary to the Constitution, out of office they go! We entrust politicos with our fortunes and our lives, and the oath of office they take is their warranty that they will abide by our ruling document. 

As the President said:  All talk and no action makes us look like fools.

Which we seem to be right now.

NO-GOTIATE

The big word floating around our country these days is "negotiate".    House Repubs want to negotiate with the Dems on provisions of Obamacare, on border issues, on raising the debt ceiling, etc.  The President says "I will not negotiate, it's my way or the highway".  Impasse!

The problem is: they are all wrong.  Negotiation is fine if we are trying to arrive at an agreeable price for you to buy my car.  There is no right price.  I have an opinion as to what that price should be, you have an opinion as to what that price should be, and we can negotiate toward a mutually agreeable price.  But there is nothing to negotiate when it comes to my life, my liberty.  You have zero claims on them, nor do I have any claims to negotiate on your life, your liberty.      

Obamacare mandates what I must do with regard to my personal insurance and is a clear violation of my liberty to spend my money for things I choose.  Open borders threaten my life since it allows terrorists and diseases to freely infect our society.  Raising the debt ceiling impairs my financial security and net worth.  There is nothing to negotiate on these issues.  The President is right there should be no negotiation, but dead wrong because the guiding principle in a free society is not "my way or the highway" but "the right way or the right way".  "My way or the highway" is the mantra of a dictator, which our President mistakenly thinks he is.

Negotiate for one second on your life or liberty, and the game is over.  YOU LOSE BOTH!

POLITICAL BIKERS

The only difference between those bikers who harassed and then beat up and stomped on that innocent motorist driving his family in New York City the other day, and the Obama Administration and its horde of mindless thugs, is that the political mavericks claim to be running you over legally and in your best interests.  The bikers don't think you're stupid enough to buy that bs.

NOT NOT NOT

New Jersey Governor Christie  signed a bill allowing New Jersey casinos to offer online gambling beginning next month.  No sooner had he done so, he wondered whether he should have since it might promote addiction to gambling (unlike the permitted addiction to smoking), might result in some people losing the  money they need to feed the family, etc.

Of course it will.  And some will develop Poker Pee, an irresistible and uncontrollable desire to pee every time they hear the words "all in" or "double" or "ace high".  As I feel like defecating, every time I hear some jackass politician telling me what I can and cannot do.

Christie, you better sit down or this will shock you:

   You are not my caretaker nor my custodian nor my curator nor my conservator nor my shepherd nor my nurse nor my nanny nor my guardian angel.  With a little bit of luck, you wouldn't be my governor either.

How many times must it be said?

   THE GOVERNMENT'S SOLE FUNCTION IS TO SEE THAT WE HAVE AN ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH WE ARE FREE TO PURSUE OUR INTERESTS (INCLUDING POKER) AND ENJOY OUR INALIENABLE RIGHT TO LIVE OUR LIVES AS WE INDIVIDUALLY CHOOSE.

(And he wants to be President?)

THE ETERNAL PLAN

Saw a local theater production of "Fiddler on the Roof" the other day...and heard that question asked of God by Tevye in "If I Were a Rich Man":

     Would it spoil some vast eternal plan,
      If I were a wealthy man?

The implication, of course, is that it would not.  So why then, I wondered again, are we so fixated on the idea that in order for our individual lives to be meaningful, to  be of some great value, we must be a part of something larger, bigger, more important than ourselves...an eternal plan, a family, a society?

Why do we say foolish things like, "He did wrong.  He embarrassed the family"?  "You are a part of society, you have to give up certain things,"  "You are only one person, who do you think you are?"

Are those views not at the heart of  the socialist movement in our country, the terrorist movement around the world, all social, racial, ethnic, divides, all wars? 

And was the right view on these things not at the heart of America's founding, America's greatness?

Until we realize there is no eternal plan, that there is nothing greater than each individual life, and start acting accordingly, man will not survive into eternity.

EXCESSIVE FORCE

Something wrong with that incident in Washington, DC yesterday when a woman, with an infant in the back seat, drove her car up against one of the many barriers to the White House.  The car was immediately surrounded by a host of law officers, weapons drawn.  She backed up the car into a police car, and then, under a hail of bullets fired at the car, she took off at high speed toward the Capitol.  Officers caught up with her, and firing into the car, killed her.  She was unarmed.  It is not yet clear, but she might have been deranged.

What appears wrong to me is the fact that the law officers seemingly rushed to kill her.  Throughout the incident, she did not seem to be a major threat.  The officers could see that she was not firing a weapon at anyone, there was an infant in the car...and unless this was going to be a mother-and-child suicide bombing, it is at least possible that she simply lost her way a bit in and around the barricades.

Thus, to me, the killing of her was too quick.  When the car was first surrounded at the White House, why did the law officers not simply shoot the tires out?  That would have disabled the car and made it immobile.

I sense that, since 9/11, there may have developed a tendency to see every violent act, and every potentially violent act, as a terrorist act that might spiral up to catastrophic proportion...and perhaps that perspective has caused some law officers, in their zeal to protect us, to lose some of the care they must take not to harm innocent people.  Too often recently, innocent people have been mistakenly, unnecessarily, killed by law enforcement.  Once is too often.

And even guilty people should not be judged guilty and executed by law officers, unless absolutely necessary to maintain law and order.  Even the guilty have rights.  We have a very well developed judicial system to determine guilt and to impose punishment.  That is not a function of the law officer on the street.

LIGHTS OUT!

The Affordable Health Care`Act {(as misnomer a name as can be dreamt up) is as flagrantly unconstitutional as any law could be:

1.  It is a broad-sweeping MANDATE requiring us TO DO something (buy insurance) and that is a direct uncompromisable conflict with FREEDOM.  Does anyone out there not know that?  Then why have I heard not one word spoken about that in the media, in Washington, District of Clowns, anywhere?

2.  Certain favored groups are exempt from the law...a clear cut violation of the Constitutional requirement that all are to be treated EQUALLY under the law.

3.  The Act puts the federal government into the the insurance business, which is not listed as an enumerated power, and is thus a violation of the specified Constitutional provision that all powers not enumerated as being given to the federal government are reserved to the States and to the PEOPLE.

4.  The President on his own has chosen to amend the law, change the law, by granting exemptions from the law to various chosen groups, and unilaterally postponing the implementation of the law to other groups.  Problem is:  the President has no authority to make or rewrite law.  That is an exclusive function of Congress.  The President's sole function is to enforce our laws, not to make them...a responsibility he has sworn under oath to fulfill, and which he has repeatedly violated. 

5.  Etc.

Yes, the Supreme Court has declared the Affordable Act to be Constitutional, but that does not make it so.  SCOTUS, intended to be an independent branch of the government, has been politicized.  We no longer hear of "experienced, brilliant, legal scholars" serving on the Court.   What we hear is of "liberal or conservative judges"...another misnomer, since justices are meant to be OBJECTIVE, IMPARTIAL and PRINCIPLED, and not BIASED toward a political perspective.

The fact that SCOTUS has declared Obamacare constitutional does not make it so.  Slavery was once declared to be constitutional.

"And it came to pass that America's glowing light was extinguished"

A BLESSING

"Blessing" is defined as "something that helps you or brings happiness".

Today's shutdown of the federal government is a blessing.

The antonyms of a blessing are

anathema, curse, execration, imprecation, malediction

I'll add 'defecation'.

Know of any better way to describe our dishonest, overbearing, insidious, government?

One further thing:  On what day did God create government?