Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Formula for Slavery in the US

Imagine having fought a war for independence against a foreign power, then another war in which slavery ended up being abolished, coming out of that war and fighting for Civil Rights, only to end up with a return of the slavery institution.  It isn't far fetched and I have a devious formula for how slavery is starting to return in the US.   First, let me define slave from wikipedia.
Slavery is a system under which people are treated as property and are forced to work. Slaves can be held against their will from the time of their capture, purchase or birth, and deprived of the right to leave, to refuse to work, or to demand compensation. In some historical situations it has been legal for owners to kill slaves.
The number of slaves today remains as high as 12 million to 27 million, though this is probably the smallest proportion of the world's population in history. Most are debt slaves, largely in South Asia, who are under debt bondage incurred by lenders, sometimes even for generations.
The  key in the emergence of slavery in the United states is the idea of "debt slaves".  Anyone that has ever read this blog knows how much I detest debt, but I'm not referring to credit card debt or car debt or house debt.  Instead, I'm talking about the worst kind of debt you can have, debt to the government.  If you have ever owed money to the government, you know just how harsh and swift the government can be in collecting "their" money.  Citibank, while powerful, cannot swoop into your home and arrest you and have all of your assets seized.  Citibank does not have its own court system in which you must prove your innocence.  
Am I referring to tax debt?  Not at all.  What I'm referring to is some of the first debt many people take on, student loans.  Here is the formula.  The government with the help of the media has put out for decades the idea that a person can achieve nothing in life without a college degree.  Forget trade schools and apprenticeships or entrepreneurship.  To the left, these hold no value.  Primary and secondary education shifted from preparing children with the knowledge needed for life skills to the knowledge needed to pass a college entrance exam.  You are a captive audience for 12 years as you are told over and over again that the end result of everything is to go to college.  College has its purpose, but it is not and should not be for everyone.   For example, 50% of all millionaires have no college degree. Then consider the high drop-out rate for college students.  This statistic is very important in proving my case.  You see, graduation rates are not important, neither is the quality of education.  The main goal for the colleges is to make money, nothing wrong with that, but that money comes from kids that have no money and must incur debt to pay the college.  Another important statistic is the tremendous increase in the cost of attending college, which is far beyond the rate of inflation.  College is not a natural resource with a limited supply.  College is as it is, and it stands to reason that the rate of increase for college tuition should never exceed the CPI.   
So now we have generations of students that spend most of their working life paying off this debt.  Some even incur more debt by going back to school to delay having to pay the debt they already have.   How does such a financial system make sense?  When you understand that the goal is create millions of debt slaves, it makes perfect sense.  But the final piece fell in place with the passing of Obamacare.  Inside of that legislation was the government takeover of student loans from private banks, done to “protect” the students.   The actual result of this takeover is the indebtedness of millions of people to the federal government, which has the power of police and enforcement.  Oh, the benevolent government will forgive your debt so long as you provide a government service for a certain number of years.  Doesn’t this sound like indentured servitude or slavery?   The government spent 80 years getting 1 half of the population to be in debt to the government through government programs like welfare.  Now they are taking over the other half, formerly known as the producers, through debt slavery.  In 10 to 20 years, it will not be unrealistic for 90% of the population to be enslaved to the government through service or debt.  When will we lose America?  I say America has been lost already. 

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Obama Doctrine of Force or Harm

Obama delivered a speech about his incursion into Libya, about 2 weeks too little too late.   Let me first say that I am not a dove by nature, but have grown more so as a result of our lingering campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan.   I do believe in the use of force to protect and secure the vital national interests of the United States.  The operative word is "force".   George H. W. Bush used force to end Hussein's occupation of Kuwait, but this is the last instance of the use of force to accomplish our goals.  Now, Bush was second guessed for having left Hussein in power, but we can now see why the Bush team left him in place.  When force is used, there is decisiveness in the outcome, which is the key to being able to complete missions and keep our men out of harm's way.
Force is decisive.  However, force has been redefined as harmful.  Harmful can be like a treatable cancer or illness.  You have the cure, but choose not use it.  It is like taking just enough antibiotics for you to not die, but never taking enough to be healed.  This has been the existing doctrine of force in the United States ever since the first Gulf War.   Here are a few examples of how the new doctrine of force, or harm, have been applied:

  1. Sanctions.  I don't need to list any specific examples here, but history has shown sanctions have done nothing but harm the regular citizens and have never been effective in bringing about decisive change.
  2. Iraqi No-Fly Zone.  This thing lasted from the end of the first Gulf War until the beginning of the second Gulf War.  It had no effect what so ever.
  3. Somalia Relief.  No relief mission is ever decisive when the fundamentals that caused the disaster are left in place.
  4. Somalia Regime Change. As gallant and awesome as our elite troops are, and as much as leftist Presidents like to use them, you can't have decisive victory alone by sniping at the enemy.  Eventually, numbers matter.
  5. Bosnia No-Fly Zone.  So we saw "genocide" in Bosnia and decided to drops bombs from 15,000 feet.  Air alone cannot cause a decisive change.  It took boots on the ground to bring about the "desired" effect.
  6. Haiti Regime Change.  Remove the president and 18 years later you have the most impoverished nation in the world despite receiving the largest per capita distribution of aide.
  7. Afghanistan and Iraq.  Underestimate the threat and declare victory early.  Then, when the threat is realize, allow your men to die as they are overwhelmed and overstretched.  Throw in rules of engagement that are so limiting, you men's greatest fear is not the enemy, but being brought up on charges.
In Libya, Obama's doctrine is one of Harm.  We hope to harm the enemy, which we don't know who the real enemy is, which is one of the first rules of war.  We hope to harm the enemy so that whomever that may be will comply with whatever our actual goal is.  The group we have chosen to support, oddly enough, is the same ideological group that we have been fighting against in Iraq and Afghanistan, and has ties to the group that killed 2900 US civilians on 9/11.  Additionally, we have chosen to give up our leadership role over to NATO.  This is supposed to minimize our role in the conflict.  The only thing it does is put our forces under international control.  We aren't going to stop flying missions as you are supposed to believe.  We will continue to spend our resources and our money, just under international direction.  Isn't that what this is all about.  As I stated in a previous post, when you look at Obama's decisions through the point of view that everything he does is to diminish our sovereign power and increase our allegiance internationally, his position in Libya continues to make more and more sense.
As a final thought, I would like to add that Obama has done more for the oil business of foreign countries, through drilling, exploration, and now military intervention, than any other President has done for our own oil interests in the last half century.

Monday, March 28, 2011

Signs of Male Coming of Age in The United States

As the American culture homogenized from a mixture of religious and ethnic backgrounds, certain things were lost.  One of these things is the right of passage into manhood for a young teen boy.  One of the most recognizable ones still remaining is the Bar Mitzvah in Jewish culture.   But around the world, the rites can vary greatly from the catholic confirmation to a young sapling being split down the middle and a young boy crossing through the split sapling to signify a rebirth into manhood.  So how exactly does one know they have crossed that boundary when there is a lack of formal recognition?  Below, I have listed a few of the informal means of reaching manhood.

  1. Changing your animated movie or adventure series printed sheets to a bland color.  This is a very intimate and personal decision.  I remember when I no longer had my Charlie Brown sheets. 
  2. Swapping printed undies for regular tighty whities.  This one actually comes in two parts as you trade in your tighty whities for boxers or boxer briefs.
  3. Trading in your transformer plate set for a regular one.  For years you fight with your siblings over who gets the printed cup or plate or spoon, but eventually you just get the cutlery and dishes of the proletariat.
  4. No longer playing “guns” w/ your friends.  This one is especially delicate because it is a more public acknowledgement of your decision.   If you have a group of 5 to 6 friends that you play this with, one or more may make the decision to cease this activity.  The depletion in the number of people to play “guns” could cause premature maturation in the remaining group.  Fortunately, a method was found to help minimize the impact of premature maturation, paintball.
  5. Combing your hair.  This one might hit a little early, but for the most part, when a kid actually spends a few seconds worrying about their hair, they are emerging from the sapling. 
  6. Shelving the toys.  Who hasn’t seen the sad plight of toys as depicted in the Toy Story movies.  For boys, the elimination of toy time comes much later than for most girls.   Toys are an outlet for a fertile imagination.  When you box them up, you have made the decision to choose practical matters over imagination.  However, because video game playing into adulthood has become an accepted activity, this can often blur the line of maturity for outside viewers, especially woman. 
  7. Watching sports.  As a child, you watch sports because that is what is on the TV, but once you hit that mature age, you begin to watch sports.  You watch them to get ideas on how to play them, but mostly you watch them because by the time you reach middle school, every male will have identified himself with a college and/or professional team.   They show their maturity by wearing their favorite teams clothing.  In fact, when this particular rite of passage is at its peak, it is possible that the young male may not even own any clothing tops or hats that don’t relate to a sport team.  The odd part of this rite of passage is that it works counter to the next rite of passage, which is an interest in woman.  Think about how attractive a young man dressed in  a KU hat, Royal’s sweatshirt, and Chiefs printed sweatpants must look to a young woman.  Usually this rite doesn’t end for many until after college.  This may explain why many woman prefer older men.
  8. Interest in the opposite sex.  When teasing turns to flirtation, enough said.
  9. **Update**I almost forgot the most important one.  You know you have reached that rite of passage when you would rather sleep in than wake up.  As a younger kid, parents fight to get the child to sleep longer so that the parent can sleep longer, but once they hit maturity, then the parent fights to get the child to wake-up on time.   There is never a happy medium. 

We may not have an actual ceremony, but if you cobble together all of these experiences, it is clear when you can say, I’m a man.  

Wednesday, March 23, 2011

Bowling for Qaddafi


I remember during the 2008 campaign when Obama went to go bowling with the simpletons.  His bowling performance was classically atrocious.  Then I also remember his efforts at throwing first pitch.  The result was the stereotypically girly style throw of a wimp that would be depicted in a movie.   Either way, it was a naked revelation of just a few of Obama’s shortcomings.   Of course, when it comes to sports, who really cares at how well he can perform.  Unfortunately, the whole world is experiencing another one of Obama’s bowling moments, only this time it is in the form of our foreign policy with Libya.    The noviceness of his dealings and leadership is so disheartening as an American.  If this were translated into bowling, we have a negative score.  Per my previous post, it is clear that there is no military or moral mandate for intervention, but where I become disheartened is the blatant neglect and indifference he shows toward the gravity of what he has gotten us engaged it.  So far, we have spent over 100 million dollars bombing targets to help fortify a rebel alliance made up by people that are not friends of the US.  We have lost a 30 million dollar jet and put our service men’s lives at risk.  We have gathered a coalition so fractured that after only a few days, it is already falling apart, which will leave us with the whole burden.  He has committed us via the air when air alone has never gotten the job done, opening us up to a 3rd ground conflict.   His spokespeople have managed to state our position in every manner of contradiction, leaving everyone in the world wondering where the US does stand.  He has committed our country to a military action WHILE OVERSEAS, leaving him unavailable to questioning by Congress or any other domestic source.  He has usurped his own stated doctrine of what it would take to commit US forces in which consent of Congress would be requested first.    As a matter of fact, he has just side stepped the legislative branch all together. 
But while some would chalk this up to pure incompetence, I say it is deliberately done.  This is such a blunder for US foreign policy, its only effect is to weaken our position internationally, further hurt our economy, and further blur the line of what a President is allowed to do.    I’m starting to hear calls for impeachment.  Will this man even finish out his term.

Tuesday, March 22, 2011

Number One Warning Sign for A Bad Presidential Candidate

For those believers in change and for those of us that knew better, I think we have learned a very important lesson from the 2008 election when it comes to choosing any person for any political office.  Here is the number one warning sign you are dealing with a bad candidate.  If they say it is time for a (fill in ethnicity, gender, religion) president.  Once a candidate or potential candidate uses their ethnicity, gender, or religion as a means for advocating their candidacy, you know that person is lacking what it really takes.  Such a statement or position is very indicative of a lack of platform, or as a means of distracting people from an unpopular platform, i.e. "sure I want to raise your taxes, bankrupt the budget, balloon the size of government, socialize the economy, and diminish our strength around the world, but put those things aside, don't you think it is time for a ____ President."   Just in case you think I'm only thinking of one person, guess again.  Such a position is ideologically neutral.
The number 2 warning sign of a Bad Presidential Candidate is anyone that wants to run for the Presidency.

Monday, March 21, 2011

Obama's Stance on Libya. Morality and Strategy Aside.


There can be only one motivation behind our military involvement in the Libyan civil war, a weakening of US power and independence.  Getting involved in this specific conflict makes no sense when it comes to the strategic needs of our sovereign nation, nor does it match any moral means.  First of all, Libya is no threat to our nation.  As a matter of fact, Libya had just received diplomatic recognition at the end of Bush presidency as Qaddafi had made many strides in disarming his nation’s capacity to create weapons of mass destruction.  This is a very important fact when we examine the morality aspect.   Instability in Libya does affect global oil supply, which will affect already high gas prices.  However, as Libya accounts for some 1% of US oil, this effect on global oil could be offset in a dramatic way, without the single firing of a weapon or killing of a person, by the very real advocacy of domestic oil drilling.  When Bush announced the idea of oil exploration, oil prices dropped.  If we put some real meat into our words, I think oil would drop before the first well is tapped.   Therefore, there can be no military or economic threat to our nation from Libya.  Could the threat be terrorism?  As I mentioned earlier, Qaddafi had ended his wmd program.  He did this out of fear of George Bush.  However, it was clear early on that he does not fear Obama.  In fact, he considers Obama ‘one of us’.   It is possible Qaddafi could again actively pursue state sponsored terrorism as he did in the 80’s, but what Middle Eastern nation is not?  So this cannot be the grounds for our involvement in a 3rd war.  Oh, just to reiterate, under Obama, we are now involved in 3 wars.  Bush was the worst person to sit in the oval office because of 2, but now that we are in 3, shouldn’t Obama have that distinction.  As a friend of mine said, Obama has now fired more Tomahawk cruise missiles than any other Nobel Peace Prize winner.   But, I digress.
If we are not engaging in this action because of a military or economic threat posed by Libya, it must be on moral grounds.  I mean, Qaddafi is firing on his own citizens, citizens that had taken over several cities and taken up arms against the loyalist forces of Qaddafi, citizens whose goal is not known.  Do we have a moral authority to intervene in every countries civil war.  Would we have appreciated an intervention by British ground troops in our own civil war.   But, let’s take this claim at face value, that we have a moral duty to protect citizen against a hostile government.  If this was the case, why have we not intervened in Iran, as the very type of freedom loving protests we should support have been brutally put down?  Why do we not intervene in Bahrain, or Saudi Arabia?  Why have we not invaded North Korea to prevent the starvation of its citizens?  Why do we not protect the Christians and black Muslims in the Sudan?  Why do we not invade China for its government brutality against its citizens?  Why do we not invade our own country for the brutality conducted against our citizens still in the womb? 
Ultimately, it comes down to the age old question of what war is moral.   I don’t think I have the answer to that, but, I think the real hint as to why the dovish Obama is willing to drop ordinance on Libya is in the process.   You see, Obama has negated the role of our elected legislature in the authorization of force.  Instead, this action has been taken at the direction of the United Nations and the United Nations only.  If the United Nations had drafted a security resolution to bomb Malta, Obama would have been the first to launch the missiles because his goal is to show that we move to the beat and interests of the international community as led by the United Nations.  Let’s see how Congress will react.   When knowing that Obama’s goal is to tear this nation down both internally and internationally, our engagement in Libya is clear.

Monday, March 14, 2011

Beck Pulled From KMBZ. Time to Celebrate?

Today I heard a mixed bag of news.  The local affiliate in Kansas City has joined a growing number of stations in removing Glenn Beck from their line-up due to declining ratings.   Apparently, they are down in several cities, such as new york and philly.  Additionally, his fox news show is down 26% with a  chance of being yanked off the air.  Now, personally, I can’t stand Beck.  Not because of his conservatism, or even most of the stories he covers.  Rather, I can’t stand the melodrama.  I can’t stand the tears.  I can’t stand him telling us that the world is going to come to an end, and that buying gold will somehow solve everything.   I appreciate his audio and many of his exclusive stories.  I have only seen his tv show twice, and that was enough to let me know that I don’t want watch anymore.  I prefer to listen to Laura Ingraham in the morning over Glenn Beck.  When the affiliate’s stream that I used to listen to Ingraham no longer worked, I switched back to Beck.  It took one week before I had to find another streaming feed to listen to Laura.  So if I, as a conservative, can’t stand Beck, I’m not surprised by the post-election ratings drop.  It also doesn’t surprise me when I realize that there is no “tea party” activity as there once was 2 years ago.
However, my jubilation is tempered as I further read the story.  It appears that some of these decisions to pull Beck from the radio are based on boycotts.   When the story says that stations are “committing” to not air the Beck program, that tells me that something more than ratings are at play.  If this is happening due to his exposure of the leftists and communists with the government and non governmental organizations, then I fear more than I am jubilant.

Friday, March 11, 2011

Mowing Down Education and the deficit

I stopped mowing my own yard and started paying a neighbor kid.  He didn’t do it quite right, so I paid him more money.  He still didn’t do it right, so I paid him more.  The more I paid, the worse it got.  Should I keep paying him more $ until he gets it right.   Of course not, so why do we do this with education.  Why do we take this approach w/ government in general, but not in our own lives.  What do you think

Thursday, March 10, 2011

Next 3 Month Predictions

I project that despite the trend the white house has used to show unemployment decreasing by decreasing the number of jobs and not jobless, I believe that unemployment will start to take a gradual increase upwards.  The reason being is around the price of gasoline and other commodities.  Increases in the price of gasoline and increases in commodities causes the cost of doing business in general to go up.  If you are a small business that has hired recently, your margin will now be squeezed enough that you will have to let go of those recent hires.