About Me

Name: Tim Blessing
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Nixon's Political Order is Dead

Richard Nixon is regarded as a failure by historians, political scientists, journalists, and other such individuals.
 
Yet, his international structure is dead in terms of Islam and Russia/China.
 
Our alliances with Europe, Canada, Latin America, Japan, Korea, Austrualia, and New Zealand are sound.
 
But we face two major problems in the International Arena: China and Radical Islam.
 
His approach is sound, but the international order to need's to be redesigned.
 
Domestically, Nixon's issues were economic affairs and domestic affairs.
 
Our economic is stagnant at the moment. 
 
There were two major and intertwined domestic issues: Civil Rights for Women and Minorities.
 
These two groups ended up on the Liberal End of the Spectrum.  With women they divided up among the two parties.
 
These two groups have made tremendous progress over these last three decades to the point that they dominate the presidential primary campaign in the democrat party.
 
We are seeing a breakdown in the two party structure at the same time.
 
No one can deliver a knockout blow to secure the nomination of either party.
 
Obama has a secret service detail as large as President Bush.  That was on Inside Edition a little over a month ago.
 
That mean's he is facing a certain kind of problem.
 
I would not vote for Obama, but I know people find him entertaining.  But their are cold hard facts to deal with in that he is not qualified for the job.
 
Hillary is a strong female candidate that doesn't quite meet the criteria of a charismatic candidate.
 
She is like Moses in that she is bringing women all the way into the system, but she is not the first female president.
 
McCain does not have a lot of charisma, has a lifetime of service, and has no major hangups as far as I know.  He just isn't organized for a general campaign and is not able to close the deal with the Republican Party.
 
Huckabee is a good politician, but I wonder what he is going to say when McCain win's tonight.
 
Racism and Sexism are still in the body politic with the political structure Nixon built falling apart.
 
In essence, new coalitions must be put together to stabilize the political system.
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama and the Bush Endorsement

Barack Obama committed plagarism, but this not unethical.
 
It does indicate a lack of originality.
 
Joe Biden faced this question in 1988 when he was caught plagarizing his friend Neil Kinnock.
 
Kinnock was Labor Party in England at the time.
 
Senator Biden dropped out of the primary campaign almost immediately.
 
Rules of Politics apparently are more strick at the Presidential Level than at lower level offices.
 
If you were writing your dissertation for a Master's and committed this mistake and were caught.  You would be kicked out of the program.
 
Former President Bush has spoken for the all of the elder statesmen in the Republican Party by endorsing McCain.
 
To get McCain the money he need's he will have to talk to the major power brokers in the Republican Party.
 
Persuasion is a necessary skill in any endeavor, but in Presidential politics its a sheer necessity.
 
McCain is not the most popular man around, but he has demonstrated that can get people to vote for him.
 
I guess you would have to expose to the power brokers his behind-the-scenes role in dealing with Bush.
 
A Leader without a following like Reagan, a leader with better ethics than Nixon, a man with a plan unlike Carter, a man who has fought the good fight for 25 years in Congress, and yes he has made enemies along the way.
 
A Republican Candidate like Presidentt James K. Polk.  A doer not a talker.  A man who doesn't tell stories, but get's results.
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Education: The Human Resource Imperative

The Education goes from Kindergarten to Doctor's of Philosophy.
 
Basic Education is at a low ebb.
 
People do not have basic job skills.
 
We push homework on students that from a cost and benefit standpoint is not worth the cost.
 
Most kids need more balance in their education: math, english, science, history, and physical education.
 
Parents are too tired to care what their kids are doing at school, staff and faculty do not have authority in the classroom, and students have subconsciously done their own cost/benefit analysis and they do not see benefit.
 
Foreign Lanquages should introduce in grade school because it is easier to learn for some reason.
 
Kids in Grammar School need more fun.  Male Students need a different regimen than female students.  This is both gender specific and cultural specific.
 
In Middle School, vocational training need's to be introduce for males since that is where they will end up if they don't get a college education.
 
In the areas of manufacturing, skilled, and trade jobs.
 
I am not ruling out female students, but their numbers in these areas is minimal.
 
Female students will go to college more often than not
 
This may sound crude, but public education is mostly geared to females. 
 
The problem is we are educating students to be well rounded individuals, but we aren't accomplishing that point.
 
To teach three years of physics, biology, and chemistry for college when you won't remember it two months after leaving the class is a lousy use of taxpayers money
 
I would suggest let them take each course in a 12 week format in 9th Grade and when they determine the course they like concentrate on that area over the next 3 years.
 
Algebra I from the people I have talked to say it is a useful course.
 
The more advanced courses like geometry, algebra II, trigonometry, and calculus are for engineers and scientists.
 
English Literature is useful for most people if its relevant like say using Star Trek rather than say the book the Scarlet Letter.
 
English Grammar from what I remember was taught year in and year out in Public School, but its the same thing each year.
 
If you don't understand english grammar by the 3rd or 4th year its not going to matter.  And, I saw more than one English Teacher give it way too high a priority.  You need to take a foreign lanquage for some reason to understand english grammar.  At least that's what a College Spanish Instructor told me that his students told him.
 
Research Papers are worthwhile teaching, but I found that if you can't say in 5 pages what your going to say its not worth the education.  Particularly, when English Teacher spend's more time on grammar than substance.
 
History Courses or other Liberal Arts Courses have gone by the wayside.  Who is Vice President of the United States?
 
Basic Civic Courses should be reintroduced, but most public school students find them useless to the real world.
 
High School should start at 10:00 am because teenagers by nature go to bed late and get up late not out of any sense of laziness, but because that's how their wired.
 
Behavior Problems in students should not be settled with medication.  What male students need is some physical constructive regimen to get all that excess energy out of them.
 
Intergender relations is a topic of debate among academics, parents, and students.  Abstinence or a Condom.  We as a culture do not train our kids to be objective about the benefits and traps of teenage sex.
 
I never dated in Junior High School or High School or even into College.  I was shy early on, but once I got to college I concentrated on academics.
 
Why date?  Why have sex?  Why not learn?  I did not get my out of Middle School and High School due to the hostility of other students, regimentation of the course schedule, an environment that played to my learning weaknesses, and the long range view I took of my major goals.
 
The public education system is geared to the highly advanced students who will go to elite universities and those at the bottom who will end up in minimum wage jobs.
 
The Middle 80% of the student population do not get an education because of this dichotomy.
 
I spent 3 years on Hard Sciences and Advanced Math, but I got one hour in economics on how to maintain a checking acct. at a bank.
 
I was interested in Political Science, while the coursework offered me nothing tangible in that direction.
 
My education for the most part started at 2:00PM watching soap operas, reading the newspaper/magazines, watching the news, and watching entertainment shows each night of the week.  My family and I talked politics, business, sports, and on a whole range of subjects not covered at school.
 
In reality, I was 5 years ahead of where my classmates were at anyone time.
 
I have discussed public education with people who have experienced it in the distant past who are in agreement with me that a high school education in the 1950s is equivalent to a BS degree today.
 
We try to educate our students, but we do not do a good job.
 
Human Resources is where all the cutting edge research is being done for business.  How to get most out of trained employees rather than socalled educated people.
 
No, I did not care for what my public schools provided because I knew I was better suited for college.
 
I did not attend any social events, sports for the most part, and I did not participate in classes because I was bored with the subject matter and frustrated with almost everything related to my class and schools.
 
Today, a good community college can provide a good Associate Degree in a Technical Field and you can go back and get a 2nd AD and so forth.
 
Bachelor Degrees in Engineering and the Hard Sciences are good for 5 years or so then you need to go into management or go back for a Master's.  Some people defy this contradiction.
 
If your in business or liberal arts than you need to work at it for 5 years before you will make money.  In essence, your telling an employer you are trainable and broad minded.
 
How you perform in High School is no indication how you will perform in college or out in the real world?  I was in above average classes in Public School, I made low grades, and I ended up with far more independent success than the other advanced students who the teachers seem to think would turn out great.
 
I, myself, am interested in getting a PHD, but the monetary cost is Prohibitive and it say's your specializing.
 
Personally, I have a wide range of experience that has nothing to do with that halfway house I called Public Education.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

McCain and President James K. Polk

Senator McCain would be a different kind of President.
 
He talk's about Lincoln, Roosevelt I, and Reagan.
 
He's written a book recently about decisionmakers.
 
Personally, I think he symbolize's a different kind of president by the name of James K. Polk.
 
He's not charimatic like Reagan or telegenic like Kennedy or Clinton.
 
He's  something like Eisenhower, but Eisenhower was a General whereas McCain is Navy.
 
If he is like President Polk that mean's he's a goal setter, austere, workaholic, and never parties.
 
Polk said he would serve one term, get the Southwest from Mexico, solve the Oregon boundary dispute, and bring the Treasury under Presidential Control.
 
Viewed from the angle of pure results: Polk is the most successful president in history.
 
Unfortunately, he's passed over by Historians for more dramatic presidents like Lincoln and Jackson.
 
Polk is not rated in anybody's top ten list of great presidents.
 
John Siegenthaler of NBC News wrote a book on Polk in the last several years.
 
He's what you call a 2nd Tier President, but personally I think he should be rated higher than say Truman.
 
He became a Episcopal Priest after leaving the White House in 1849, but died 4 months later.
 
In essence, he worked harder than any President, got dramatic results, and had no charisma.
 
John McCain seem's to be like Polk in his drive and ambition.  Unfortunately, in our media saturated age Polk would not play well.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Budget and Government: What to do about the deficit

Deficit Spending is an ongoing curse of the Federal Governemt.
 
Prior to Roosevelt II, it was used mainly to finance wars.
 
Roosevelt II to Reagan, it was used to get the economy out of recessions.
 
Clinton nearly eliminated the national debt.
 
Bush II has set us back to pre-Clinton National Debt Levels.
 
Right now, the national debt stand's at $9.5 Trillion roughly.
 
People are basing their economic decisions on their credit cards.
 
The Federal Budget stands at $ 3 Trillion.
 
Then there is inflation, which all levels of government use to justify spending increases.
 
Can you slow the rate of government without harming anyone politically?
 
It depend's on what level of crisis we are at financially.
 
First, Bush is absolutely useless when it come's to spending.  If we stopped our participation in the Iraq War it would save us a lot of money.
 
Second, each Senator and Congressman has their own pet projects
 
Third, every special interest group has their pet projects.
 
Fourth, the American Public is not interested in solving the budget problem because it doesn't fit simply into Television.
 
I wonder if Congress could freeze spending at current levels for one year to see if the deficit come's down.
 
Fifth, business has got to get out from under all these complex regulations placed on them by the government agencies.  That would allow companies to generate more profits, which could generate more revenue for the Federal Government.
 
Sixth, I know the Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid funding problem has been solved through the gas tax.
 
Bush I called for a Flexible Freeze in terms of the Federal Budget.
 
What I suggest?  Is a one year freeze based on last year's budget or spending levels.
 
The national GNP stand's at $13.5 Trillion.  What's needed is to reduce the national debt back to a tolerable level.  Right now, it stand's at 60% of GNP.  A more tolerable level would probably be at 30%.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Tax Relief: What's needed

In 1947, if you made $ 100 a week then you paid roughl $ 3 in taxes.
 
In 1997, if you worked the same job with a paycheck based on inflation your pay would be $ 600 and your taxes would be $300 a week.
 
In essence, if you combine all forms of taxation then your effective rate would be 50%.
 
The majority of the money in this country is found in the middle class.
 
You have to find a way to raise revenue without burdening the middle class with more taxation.
 
Most poor people only pay indirect taxes, but are hurt just as much.
 
Rich people do not have all of the money, but they get the most relief from taxation.
 
The 1920s saw tax reform.
 
The 1960s saw tax reform.
 
The 1980s saw tax reform on 2 separate occasions.
 
The 1990s saw the tax issue monkeyed with on 2 separate occasions.
 
The 2000s have seen tax reform on 2 occasions.
 
Taxes are felt by almost everybody, but no one can figure out how to get the most revenue with the least pain.
 
There are several options: The Flat Tax, Tax Simplification, Reducing Marginal Rates, instituting more tax breaks, and a combination of approaches.
 
The one that would generate the most revenue would be the Flat Tax and it is the most honest.  It would hurt poor people and it has political implications.
 
Reducing Marginal Rates affect's the rich the most and help's everybody else the least.
 
More tax breaks appeal's to Congress and the Special Interests, but they seem to have no real world value.
 
A Combination Approach would probably survive the legislative process most easily.
 
Tax Simplification with 3 Rates and a fewer tax breaks serve's everyone's interest.
 
I would prefer a flat tax or fair tax, but the fairness issue would drive Republicans into their bunkers.
 
Democrats have their own vulnerabilities on taxes.  Big Taxers, Big Spenders, and are weak on defense.
 
Each Party has an image to maintain, but the governments at the various levels from city, county, state, and federal need to simplify their tax structures.
 
Again and finally, the money in the economy is found in peoples income.  That is what government people determined back in the days of Roosevelt I and Woodrow Wilson.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Media and Culture: What I like to do

I like to read different types of magazines, see different types of movies, listen to two types of music.
 
I guess the question is what impact all these different types of media have on the American Public.
 
Magazines can range from Hustler to Martha Stewart Living to Men's Health.
 
I do not think magazines carry the same impact today like they did 20 years ago do to the invention of the internet.
 
When you can download anything at anytime off the internet it kind of limits the impact of magazines.
 
Most magazines I think require a license to operate by the Federal Commnications Commission.
 
The only people who are really out on a limb on this point are the photographers who supply the scandal sheets pictures of the stars.
 
I like television news, smallville on the CW, Battlestar Galactica, and several other television entertainment shows.
 
But, I think the quality of shows has gone down on ABC, CBS, and NBC.
 
I am not critic like those individuals on Entertainment Tonight or the Morning Shows.
 
My point, is the fact that most prime time entertainment television shows do not seem to match up to their publicity.
 
However, I do not work a full time job so I am not tired at night so I need more analytic stimulation than most people.
 
Television shows go through phases it seem's when you get a lot of good shows at one time then there are phases when everything is in limbo.
 
I guess the point is can they get off the raw humor and more vulgar imagery on mainstream television.
 
Movies for me serve as an entertainment tool as well as an eduction tool.
 
The most recent tool of this type was The Kingdom with Jamie Fox.
 
I have been studying Saudi Arabia for several years, but there was not much visual material on the subject.
 
Most movies, I have found are more risque than Television and they do have more latitude to work with than TV Shows so I guess we have to cut them some slack.
 
As for Music, I think most people listen to the rythym and not the words.  I don't know anyone who can recite the words of these rock songs.  I know I can't.
 
I do like most of the more mainstream rock and roll musicians. 
 
I do not go in for hard rock, but then I am 41.
 
Finally, the main complaint I have of the entertainment industry is that seem's to cater to younger people rather than a more balanced approach.
 
Young people are spending their time on the internet and at movies, while middle-aged and older people are watching television.
 
I may be wrong on demographics, but I have alway's notice what I call an echo effect among the people.  In general, they are critical of the media in the abstract, yet, when they get specific they like this show or that show.  They say there's nothing on TV then proceed to watch TV.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Property Rights: Who's got the right away.

First, I think the Supreme Court made a mistake in their eminent domain decision a year or two ago.
 
Basically, the court overstepped its jurisdiction when it come's to property rights.
 
One last thing on the Supreme Court, the last word on the constitution is those state lawmakers who vote on Constitutional Amendments.
 
Property Rights are under siege by environmental groups, developers, industry, neighbors, and a whole host of other interest groups.
 
In the region of the state I live in there is a county that has a major highway through the center of it.
 
The County is half rural and half small towns.  They have a major highway to the eastern side of the county.
 
Basically, I would have suggested to the politicians in this county (I do not live in it) to zone off the upper half of the county to any further development, while preparing the eastern half between the two highways for development.
 
The point is simple: The Northern side of this county is highly inaccessible to development of any major type.  So, in the interest of working with environmentalists this area should remain wild, while the Property Owners in this area are financially compensated at current property values so they get a return on working with the government.
 
The Southern half of the county can be developed for housing, industry, recreation, or whatever else some person want's.
 
The key is to make it financially beneficial for property owners to give up the right to develop their property the way they want to.
 
Conservation take's many forms, but environmentalists have a bad reputation among Republicans.
 
Its one of those balancing acts we have to maintain between the environment and development.
 
Finally, if we want to restore the environment then we need to get natural resources from somewhere.  The biggest and one of the last undeveloped areas of the world is Eastern Russia.
 
There is a vast quantity of water, wood, oil, and other natural resources.  They are willing to do business, but we would need to restore our domestic environment in the meantime.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Immigration: The True Story

Immigration is a phenomenom that is currently being debated by all sectors of government, media, and general public.
 
It is a subject that used to be confined to New York, California, Ariazona, New Mexico, Texas, and Florida.
 
Now, Immigrants are moving into regions of the country not previously affected legal or illegal immigration.
 
Is there 12 Million Illegals in the U. S.?  The answer that I hear is no.  Its closer to 4 million.
 
Yes, its a problem, but not at the crazy estimate's some people portray.
 
There are illegals who cross the border to do manual labor jobs or agrigultural jobs then they return to Mexico.
 
Yes, there is migration back and forth across the border depending on the seasons and the demand for unskilled labor.
 
That figure I am not quite sure of.
 
They do not have health insurance or work permits and they do disrupt our social fabric and healthcare system.
 
Do we nationalize them or do we set up a guest worker program or ship them back to Mexico?
 
I think the answer lies in Mexico.
 
They want to set up system domestically to take care of their population.  No, they do not like NAFTA.  At least those on the left.
 
If they could sell us oil, which they don't at this time as I far as I know they could buy infrastructure products from us and consumer items.
 
I have had dealings with their low level leftist politicians.
 
They, again, want to set up a system inside Mexico similar to our domestic system, but because of nationalism they can't do a lot of business with us.
 
That mean's we can sell them infrastructure and consumer products, but that their socialists politicians do not want to go any further than that.
 
Again, they want to set up a true economy and welfare system along the lines of ours, but not integrate with us do to nationalism.
 
Finally, if they are successful in creating a successful system like ours then the illegal and legal immigrants will leave for Mexico and the disruption to our domestic system will end.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Fisa and Post Surge Iraq

 
FISA Renewal
 
Bush 's approach is my way or the highway on every issue.
 
I think Congress should suggest to him if he want's FISA renewal then they should make a list of what Congress want's like closing the GITMO Concentration Camp.
 
If he doesn't agree to it then deny him his FISA Renewal.  Both are popular, but Bush is a linear thinker and doer and there's no middle ground with him.
 
There's a book on this subject that has been published within the last six months called Dead Certain.
 
Bush is wrong 100% of the time and for some strange reason he can't admit he is wrong.
 
Iraq Surge
 
Let's start with a fact: those Muslims in Iraq listen to their clerics and not their politicians.
 
Bush can't understand that Muslim Populations seen their clerics as their government, while their politicians sit on the sideline.
 
He hasn't figured that out in six years.
 
If I was a psychologist, which I am not and I have taken a class or two in Psychology I would say he is obsessive-compulsive when it come's to Iraq.
 
Not a professional diagnosis, but an observation.
 
The surge has achieved a temporary solution rather than a permanent solution.
 
Muslims acted like this during WW II in North Africa when we were supposedly freeing them from Naziism and Fascism.
 
I know that because I have a good friend who was in North Africa at the time of Military Invasion.
 
Iraq is divided up into 3 main ethnic groups: Kurds, Shiites, and Sunnis.
 
Throughout recorded history they have fought amongst themselves nonstop and when an invader come's in from the outside they unite to drive out the invader and once they succeed they return to the preinvasion situation.
 
FYI, Iraq is the only country that appear's more in the Bible than Israel.
 
That mean's if you fear God then we should leave Iraq as soon as possible.  Anyone notice how strange the world has acted since we invaded Iraq.
 
I am no longer concerned with who, what, when, where, and how we got in, why we stayed, and why it is that Bush want's to contineu.
 
You cannot perform a counterinsurgency successfully if the local population is against you.
 
Finally, there are only 2 successful counterinsurgency operations within the last 100 years in Malyasia and the Boer War of South Africa and maybe in the Phillipines in Teddy Roosevelt's time.
 
Iraq is feed terrorists from the surrounding countries plus armanents so that won't change anytime soon.
 
In essence, the cost to us of Bush's/Cheney's Fortitude is to high to bear.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Slow Motion in Both Parties

The Republican Race look's like McCain is gaining the aura of an inevitable nominee, but Huckabee still has fight left in him.

Huckabee may be positioning himself for a future race like George Bush's father did in 1980 or Reagan did in 1976.

If that's the case, McCain should continue a dual track strategy: Raise Funds for the general election and continue a low intensity campaign with Huckabee.

Huckabee appear's to be a normal politician with what might be called foresight.

He may see that he can't win this primary contest, settle for the Vice Presidency, and with an eye on the 2012 or 2916 race.

He's young man relatively speaking and his and McCain's campaigns have highlighted their ideas without descending into chaos.

Let the primary campaign continue on the Republican side.  It energize's the base and hopefully will attract the general public's interest.

The Democrat Race

Hillary and Obama are locked in a fist fight.

During the Cold War, everybody used the analogy of two scorpions in a bottle.  Meaning, the then Soviet Union and United States were locked in a death grip.

Hillary and Obama will continue along this path battling each other to what appear's to be an Obama win in terms of press coverage, but in actuality is acutally a draw in terms of total votes that are cast.

Slow Motion in the Republican Party toward's the nomination and a slow bloodletting in the Democrat Party.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Homeland Security

I do not know how to say this, but the United States has a major domestic problem.

It does not fit the traditional definition of a Homeland Security Issue.

I know a man who worked in business during the Great Depression.

He said people in that era had personal problems, but they could not figure it out.

It was major depression because of stress due to the lack of work.

During WW II, a lot of people got divorces although this has not been widely reported.

In the 1960s, there were 2 forces at work on society.  One was the Vietnam War and the other was the Sexual Revolution.

The Vietnam War lasted 10 years, was widely debated, and was a national trauma.

This lead to the illegal drug problems and post traumatic stress disorder among the population.

The Sexual Revolution had a dramatic impact on a lot of our culture.

This lead to a problem called identity confusion.

These 3 problems and related mental problems affect upward's of 40% the American Population.

People in the Mental Health Field have been trying to develop ways unrelated to pill popping.

I read about such things because my grandmother suffered from alzheimer's disease for 4 years.

Most people do not have a sense of limits like that guy at Virginia Tech, those guys at Columbine, or those female teachers who have relationships with underage males.

These people are willing to use guns because they have no sense of  limits.

If I was a law enforcement type, I would say we have a army of insurgents within our borders.  A lot of people have personal issues that cannot be resolved through persuasion, negotiation, or reason.

I do not like dealing with hard heads because I am not sure what's appropriate or needed.

In essence, what my behavior should be in relation to theirs.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Health Care

If anyone is interested in learning about health care advances all you have to do is look at the National Institutes of Health for answers.

All areas of medical research have been receiving a lot of money from Congress over the last 9 years.

The main reason for all of this research is in preparation for the baby boomers retirement.

There are other areas Congress has been quietly funding.

The goal from what I read is to accelerate process of medical research to the point that medicine today would look like it would in 50 years.

I do not know of all the advances, but the American Public has problems shall we say.

Health Insurance is a small portion of the overall mix.

Its expensive or to bureaucratic or to impersonal.

Health Insurance for all is an ideal will never meet.

Young people do not get because they are healthy and do not make enough money.

Old people do not care what the economic cost is to adding more money to medicare.

Middle Age People want more health insurance because they are getting older, but will not take a pay cut to get it.

I would rather take a pay cut, higher premiums, higher deductible, and higher copays than go without health insurance.

If your running an organization with projected revenues not meeting actual revenues it would make sense to reduce people's income rather than their health insurance.

Health Insurance doesn't cost as much as personal income.  At least from what I can see.

Benefits kick in an emergency and not on a regular basis.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Second Amendment

I am not a member of the NRA, but I am a supporter of the second amendment.

To Provide for a well-regulated militia, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

That first part of the amendment is clear cut:  The National Guar of both the Air and Army.

That does not include the Army, Air Force, Navy, Marine, and Coast Guard Reserve, which are Federal.

The Right to keep and bear arms mean's that guns are the primary weapon that the second amendment protect's.

It mean's that gun sales cannot be stopped or regulated. 

It mean's in its original interpretation that it was limited to rifles and pistols.

Today, you have machine guns, walther ppks, knives, shrunkens, and other assortments of weapons.

I think guns are what its primarily meant for in all of its interpretations.

The National Rifle Association defend's the rights of hunters and people who believe in self defense through guns.

Remember, their the National Rifle Association and not the National Machine Gun Association.

Shall not be infringed.

That mean's guns sales and the use of guns cannot be regulated or production ended with them.

The NRA members have watched as Liberal Democrat Organizations have made a mockery of the First Amendment.

In essence, why are the Liberal Democrat Groups so expansive in their interpretation of the First Amendment, while so anti-second amendment.

A contradiction of the Liberal Democrat Groups.

I guess my question is this.  How many crimes have reduced by gun control?

How do you enforce gun control laws?

In essence, what is the cost and benefit of gun control?

Personally, I would not own a gun, but its political suicide to tangle with gun owners.

I have seen a lot of estimates on how many guns their are in the United States.

One estimate is in the hundred of millions.  How do you round them up without starting a revolution?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Abraham Lincoln and 1948

Abraham Lincoln was an interesting President wasn't he Barack Obama.

Your Hero, and George W. Bush's Hero.

He played dumb like you do Barack Obama.

He played reactive politics like you do.

His writings are among the best of all time.

He was lawyer in the State Legislature of Illinois.

Like you were Barack.

He was a lawyer by trade like you are Barack.

He had a hard time with women.

Like you Barack.

He was manic depressive or major depressive.

I can see psychiatric diseases in Barack.

Hillary can't pin him down because she isn't able to get at his idiosyncrasies.

How do you deal with a George Orwell type of individual.  Expose him to the public.

The Republicans

Huckabee want's to be President like any good politician.

The problem is a Baptist Minister or any man of cloth is caught in a contradiction when they enter politics.

Render, unto Ceasar what is Ceasar and render unto God what is God.

In essence, you can't serve two masters at the same time: the church or the state.

McCain is an anathema to the general conservative movement and they are coalescing around Huckabee.

1948

The 1948 Presidential Race saw a lot of flawed candidates running for President and the public was ambivalent about all of them.

Harry Truman got 49% of the vote and maybe a little more, but not 50%+.

My point is the same as it was last time.  The two parties are caught in a dual schism.

Where do those voters go?  It depend's on their economic situation social values, and thier current view of international relations.

A Plurality Election rather than a national election.  Regions as a rule rather than a national strategy.

Democrats are strong on the west coast, Northeast, and parts of the south west/new england and the Industrial Midwest. 

Republicans are strong in the Northern Rocky Mountain States, some of the Midwest, some of the New England area, and the South East.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive