Uncategorized

Race Horses and Jackasses

Published 4/14/2010

A race horse is a beautiful animal, treated with care and coveted by its owner and caretaker. In return for all of the positive attention this animal will run hard and fast, win races, and in some cases bring home millions of dollars in winnings. By contrast, a jackass is not as beautiful, he’s stubborn, and typically abused to get work done. My friend Barry once shared with me a saying his attorney told him about divorce court, “ex-wives should treat their ex-husbands like race horses and they will bring home the winnings. Instead, too many ex-wives take them for granted, don’t appreciate them, and make their lives hard, treating them like jackasses so they act like jackasses.” In my opinion, any relationship could be described the same way: employer and employee, husband and wife, parents and teenager. I would also say the same holds true in politics and the current members of Congress seem to have started treating constituents like mules to do work. Ironically it seems to be the party that uses a donkey to represent itself that has taken this approach.

I must offer, the poster child for audacity and egotism in the Democrat party is local Congressman Alan Grayson. Orlando television station WFTV reported his outburst at a Perkins Family restaurant where a small group of his republican constituents were meeting. There are two sides to every story, but Grayson continues to build a reputation built on insults, outlandish statements, and ignorance of his constituents. In the video he states he knows exactly what his constituents are worth when he says, “There are 308 million people that pay my salary ($174,000/yr). Do you know what that breaks down to per person?” A little quick math shows Grayson knows it is $0.0006 per person. To me, it sounds like Grayson considers his constituents valueless mules, not successful race horses.

The Democrats faced supposed name calling and threats as a result of passing healthcare. In the aftermath of disregarding the legislative process for the sake of unilaterally passing an agenda disliked by the majority of American people they have reacted with surprise to the dislike for their actions, both as a party and personally. But, hell bent on passage they treated the American people with disrespect and total disregard. Thus, not listening and treating constituents like jackasses instead of race horses that bring home winnings has come back to haunt them. In the days after healthcare passage the media reported how horrible treatment had been including threats and racial slurs against Congressmen. With thousands of people on hand, from both sides, that afternoon it is amazing not a single video or recording has been forthcoming offering proof.

From the Republican side the best example of failing to treat others like race horses would come down to the floor debates regarding healthcare. At the same time though, no personal attacks were made in that venue, but there are those on the blogging and reporting side that offered up more questionable statements.

As children we are all taught the Golden Rule. However, researching this column and having watched the recent political process I would assert the disregard for the constituency comes not from personal hatred but understanding how little we are valued when compared to the lobbyists offering millions of dollars. Even if every citizen of Volusia County pulled together against our own Congresswoman Kozmas, by Congressman Grayson’s math the influence on her would only be about $300. I guess Grayson, Kozmas, and every other Congressman can afford to treat constituents like jackasses.

What’s Happening?

Published in the Observer 4/7/2010

The last two weeks since the passage of Obamacare have been rather odd if you follow the news closely. But it is not just Obamacare driving the craziness around us; other issues have made it to the forefront of the news which should pique interest. I did note Reid and Pelosi appear missing and the President has become the spokesman for reassuring the American people they will be cared for life now. Covered in the Washington Post Saturday was President Obama’s 17-minute rambling explanation about healthcare and taxes in Charlotte, North Carolina trying to once again explain the benefits of Obamacare and why taxes must increase. Instead of trying to justify the 2,000 page Obamacare bill, the President Obama should learn from Thomas Jefferson, “I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”

As I write this article, I am watching a news report regarding the Catholic Church. The scandal rocking the church right now is nothing new though, it is the same pedophile acts that have made news headlines in the United States. I don’t understand how anyone can act surprised when it seems to be a disease of this religion, not just a new, isolated event. For example, movies have been made about past abuses and often the Priests are targets of jokes regarding children. This time, the scandal does not stop at a local Parish but appears to go to the highest ranks of the Vatican. Maybe change will come; for years it appears church members have struggled to speak out against these crimes and even now, the Church is working to stop media coverage under accusations of defamation. “All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent,” Thomas Jefferson.

In the world of crazy dictators both Chavez (Venezuela) and Ahmadinejad (Iran) made the news this past week. On one hand, it’s hard to take either dictator seriously, but yet they make headlines. President Chavez entertained Russia’s Prime Minister Putin, met with Russian troops and spoke to them through translators. Why would these two countries build a relationship? Because Russia has technology and Venezuela has oil monies. Last week the focus was a proposal for Russia to supply space and weapons technologies to Venezuela. This proposal is laughable as the country itself has energy problems, but should still be taken seriously. Chavez has increasingly built relationships with Iran, China, and Russia and worked to push himself away from the United States. Similarly, Iran’s President Ahmadinejad stated he is more determined than ever to make Iran’s nuclear program successful. Like a defiant child he is empowered by the threat to stop him and thus continues to aggressively pursue a nuclear weapons program. Although the United States publicly pokes fun at both countries, they continue to slowly work toward their goals and appear to achieve some success. “An enemy generally says and believes what he wishes,” Thomas Jefferson.

The commonality of Ahmadinejad, Chavez, the Catholic Church, and Obama is they all believe their demagoguery. Like Jim Jones, they want the people to follow them, and to question their actions is not seen as debate but as enemies of the state. I am hopeful people around the world, and here in the United States, have awakened to the rhetoric pontificated to us. “Enlighten the people generally, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like evil spirits at the dawn of day,” Thomas Jefferson.

Terrorism

Lately the news has focused on the Christmas Day underwear bomber and his attempt to destroy Northwest Flight 253 landing at Detroit. Fortunately, no lives were lost. However, I believe Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab succeeded as he has returned our focus to terrorism when considering the definition as “a state of fear and submission.” Sadly though, I would offer that citizens in America are not fearful, but instead subject to fear-mongering by the media and the government.

On September 12, 2001 I believe we were all stunned and wondered, “how could this happen?” President Bush moved to create a huge new government spending program with the formation of the Department of Homeland Security and the expansion of the Transportation Security Administration. The first DHS Secretary, Tom Ridge, created the threat level designations to identify the probability of attack, but it remains the same color, “Orange”, with no quantitative definition. In the post September 11th world we dutiful gave up civil rights in the name of safety, subjecting ourselves to demeaning searches at airports like removing our shoes, forcing little old ladies to forfeit knitting needles, and watching our children cry as they pass through the process. The ultimate idiocracy came with the subjection of infant formula and breast milk to potential disposal.

From there, the paranoia spread to other parts of our lives, all under the guise of the “state of fear.” We now attend sporting events and pass through metal detectors and have bags searched. Regardless of all the post September 11th expansion of technologies and counter-terrorism intelligence agencies, President Obama admitted there was a system failure; exemplifying the quote, “insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome.” But, like predecessors, President Obama and DHS Secretary Napolitano have proposed further expansion of security; spending monies on new high-tech imaging machines, explosive sniffers, more databases for comparing intelligence, and increasing TSA. Somehow they expect this will bring a different outcome, but yet they are repeating the same things.

In the new 2010 environment I have noted a radical shift in public opinion, there is no confidence in the government’s plans this time. Thus, we the people have caught on to the charade, doing the same thing repeatedly will not bring a different outcome. Even media sources supporting this Administration have had a plethora of critical columnists and articles examining these new security proposals. Furthermore, citizens are finally showing outrage over the proposed invasiveness of new search techniques and enhanced screening.

Handling terrorism is difficult, but it is war. Unfortunately it is not like wars of the past where the enemy wore a different color or fought along geographical boundaries. In this politically correct world it has been made incorrect to reference a “war on terror” for fear of inflaming those who attack us. I prefer to look at the problem from an economic and statistical standpoint and question why certain terrorists are unsuccessful. I recognize there are two contrasting views regarding how security and safety is delivered. One opinion is to willingly submit to any search in the name of safety and the other is to minimize the invasiveness to the average person and instead profile certain groups. I think we also have to use quantitative values and look at cost versus benefit of different methods. Lastly, if real terrorism were to occur I do not think any amount of effort could be done to stop it.

Constitutional Charity

I received feedback on the column I wrote, “Death and Taxes,” in September. Overall the reader agreed with my position, but found herself bothered by my lack of compassion for needy people. In the column I argued we do everything we can to avoid death, but not to avoid taxes. I accept we need to pay taxes to the extent we need to support a civilized society, but I take issue with tax collection for other purposes that are non-essential.

She said we have a duty to “take care of those in need” and this position was prompted by her values. I certainly agree with the desire and need to take care of others, and personally I have given time and money to charitable causes. This issue has always seemed to be a bone of contention between people with one side appearing to lack any compassion and the other giving away everything with no concern for consequences. However, I know I am not without compassion and through my actions I know I help those in need. But, I believe this should be done through charity and is not a role of government.

Fortunately, I believe I found the clarity to express my thoughts better; several weeks ago I read a weekly column by writer Frank Miele of the “Daily Inter Lake” in Kalispell, Montana. In his column, he used the historical example of Davey Crockett, the three-term Congressman from Tennessee in the 1820s who found himself confronted by an angry constituent, Horatio Bunce, about Crockett’s recent vote for a bill to provide $20,000 of federal funds fire victims ravaged and left homeless in nearby Georgetown. Crockett was asked, “Where do you find in the Constitution any authority to give away the public money in charity?” Like most of us, Crockett gave a list of reasons about helping others and doing the right thing, giving charity.

“You gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in the honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are not the man to represent me,” Bunce said. Upon review, it is obvious, the founding fathers made no accommodation for a constitutional authority of the government to transfer the wealth of one citizen to another through the process of taxation. Modern examples of this would be hurricanes and wildfires. Of course, other more questionable examples abound such as “Cash for Clunkers”, first-time home buyer subsidies, funding shortfalls to the New York unemployment fund, the health insurance reform proposals, and any other federal program providing direct payments and transfers of wealth from one group of citizens to another.

This past summer Tea Parties made headlines, unfortunately they were sensationalized for many wrong reasons. The idea for the Tea Parties was spurned by Rick Santelli on CNBC when he editorialized in outrage over the proposals for government stimulus programs. This outrage was not due to lack of compassion for those in need or lack of concern for America and the economy. It was outrage over the reach of government into individual wealth, no matter how big or small, and the desire to take it and transfer it to others.

Like Davey Crockett I struggle with my personal since of compassion versus constitutional intent. We have a strong document that was meant to create a sound democracy for centuries. Every time it is “interpreted”, ignored, and eroded for social purposes we take away our own liberties and freedoms.

Copyright (c)2009 John R. Nelson. All Rights Reserved.

Dying in the Ukraine..

Yeah, I am way out there, but….. the first time I ever heard about the Ebola Virus was on that crazy late night AM radio show (“Coast to Coast with Art Bell”). Sounded like sci-fi, but was real. For nearly two weeks I have been reading and watching the early signs of outbreak in the Ukraine – it started at 100,000 and is over 2,000,000 cases now. Tonight was the first time I saw a MSM article about it. The first link will prompt your interest, it has a picture of a dying man. this is the same way flu victims were described in 1918 (read the book this summer). The second link is from the web site I check everyday. The third is from Drudgereport.com. About 4 days ago I told Lee I was struggling with fact or fiction, what is real. NBC, ABC, and CBS have not covered this issue. But, it continues to grow. It will be interesting to see if it continues and actually makes the news.

Dying Man

Report on Ukraine

From Drudge (UK paper)

Cable, Cellular, and Lawyers

It is amazing how certain industries seem to survive, regardless of the quality of service they deliver. As a consumer I am pretty easy going, but I do believe in accountability. Basically, I am just old-fashioned, deliver on your word and do what you promise. There are three industries though where this does not to be the case: cable television, cellular telephones, and law.

My experiences with cable and cellular companies began about 20 years ago. This is when I discovered the cable company could promise you an installation arrival time, but that was unrelated to the reality of when they might arrive. Throughout the last 25 years I have planned a day around “getting cable” and found myself at the mercy of the cable company regarding my time. If promised 9:00 am -noon, I have patiently waited and realized at 1:15p no one was coming. What do I do next? Leave? Call? And of course, once cable is installed if it fails or you need upgraded services one will be trapped in automated voice mail systems, in long lines at their offices, or without television.

Cellular telephones were supposed to make my life easier. I bought my first phone in 1988, a Panasonic Transportable, about the size of a dictionary and weighing a couple of pounds. The idea was I would not have to stop at a pay phone to call ahead, reschedule, or stay in touch with my family. As much as it was a novelty at that time, with my $1.50/minute charges, it was a business tool to serve the purpose of making phone calls. However, the phone dropped calls. Every two to three years for the last 20 years I have bought a new phone, always hoping that the latest model would not drop a call. But, the same problems continue today, dropped calls and lousy connections. I learned and never make critical calls on a cellular phone while moving. I have paid thousands of dollars to various companies, after considering all of the mergers, and yet the most basic service piece, making a call, has not been satisfactorily delivered.

Furthermore, the cellular companies have continued to miss the mark as buying a phone is not about telephone service, but cameras, MP3 players, and texting. I just want to make a call. At the same time each of us is personally robbed everyday we use our phone. We are forced to listen to voice mail system prompts that run up our charges. The next time you make a call to a cellular phone, pay attention to how long it takes to wait for the voice mail announcement to complete and leave a message. Or, call your voice mail to retrieve messages. Why can’t I skip the message? After years I know the routine and what to do. But, I am convinced this system is designed to collect a few minutes more from each of us, resulting in millions of profits for the cellular companies.

Attorneys are often the target of jokes and attacks. Most likely this stems from the perception of the lack of quality in the service they deliver. Unlike any other industry I know, this is a professional industry where a non-refundable payment is required before service is rendered. Regardless of the quality of service delivered, your non-refundable retainer has been captured. You have no mechanism to question the quality of service or the process that was used. I am convinced that attorney’s know they deliver the shoddiest services because of this payment process.

Are these rants? I don’t think so. Instead, I believe we are all entitled to a respectful relationship with the vendors and service providers whom we engage. However, when monopolies begin to exist, there is no competition, or there is no process for client satisfaction the quality of service degrades rapidly.

When Should Citizens Fear Their Government?

I recently bought a bumper sticker, “I love my country, but fear my government”. With shocking reality I realized I have more in common with the granola-eating, hemp-wearing, Volvo-driving hippies of the 1960’s counterculture than I do with the citizen conformists I thought I was like. The First Amendment guarantees our right to associate and assemble freely. However, I believe our government is now taking steps to significantly erode this freedom, among other civil liberties, at all levels, federal, state, and local.

Naomi Wolfe, author of “The End of America,” makes a compelling case for fascist America as she compares the Bush Administration’s “War on Terror” actions and passing of various legislative pieces to the dictatorships in 1930’s Europe. Personally, I have always been bothered by “The Department of Homeland Security”, domestic wiretapping and surveillance laws, and the overreaching methods of TSA at airports. I had a letter published in another newspaper about the “SS” like methods in use following 9/11 and thereafter found myself on TSA’s watch list. This seemed like more than a coincidence to me. Vigilance is important, but giving up liberties for the perception of safety is the biggest mistake anyone society can make.

In October 2008, for the first time ever, the United States Army stationed troops domestically. The guise of this deployment is to provide a federal response to assist with disasters, terrorism, and crowd control. During Katrina, the private security force “Blackwater” was enlisted to police and enforce martial law. Blackwater has forces stationed at the headwaters to the Great Lakes and on the California border. Each state allows the Governor to call on the National Guard to assist with disasters, or more importantly enforce martial law. In all of these instances our citizenry is allowing civil rights to erode in the name of perceived safety. Do you trust Blackwater?

When the G20 met in Pittsburgh my concern was raised again. Local police in battle regalia carried military assault weapons to use against American citizens. Of more concern Pittsburgh police used an audio cannon manufactured by American Technology Corporation, a San Diego-based company, to disperse protesters outside the G-20 Summit , the first time its LRAD series device has been used on civilians in the U.S. This weapon is funded to local police departments nationwide by grants from the Department of Homeland Security; thus there is no record of which police departments are in possession of this weapon, what training they have undergone, or ability to monitor their plans to deploy these weapons.

With the H1N1 virus creating an atmosphere of unknown possible outbreaks states have seized the opportunity to modify legislation to create quarantines, martial law, take property, and criminalize failure to follow department of health orders; Massachusetts’ Senate approved bill S.2028 (Pandemic Response Bill) is the most appalling example. Nationally, police and military have trained for roadside checkpoints, and the city of Boston has tested an RDIF tracking system for vaccinations. In October police chiefs endorsed spying on neighbors and the Department of Homeland Security and FBI issued circulars to business owners alerting them to watch for possible purchases of certain chemicals and report these purchases as possible terrorism.

Regardless of political view, the erosion of our civil liberties from both sides of the aisle and all levels of government is obvious. Slowly, we are becoming like the countries of Eastern Europe. Am I the only one that sees this resemblance? Sadly, we appear to be willingly giving up our civil liberties in the name of safety.

No Insurance Mandate

As the debate regarding health care insurance rages around me I have found myself frustrated by comments and concerns made by friends and family and the threat of insurance mandates. Currently, I have no health insurance. Arguably, this may not be the best decision in my case, but it is my current situation. I understand I am now “self-insured” and if something happens I have to pay for it.

Crazily, I have friends and family who cannot imagine a life without health insurance. The government is also contemplating an insurance mandate; if you fail to buy insurance you will be fined. Since the IRS is the enforcer of this, I see it as a tax increase, especially considering the amount is approximately $3,800/year. What really bothers me is the idea of an insurance mandate when insurance, by definition, is coverage by contract in which one party agrees to indemnify or reimburse another for loss that occurs under the terms of the contract. Mandating a contract erodes the market forces that should lower prices.

This summer I was vacationing with my family and found myself in need of emergency care. I mentally debated for several hours my options: do not seek care, self-medicate, visit an urgent care, or head to the ER. Ultimately I spent seven hours in the emergency room, received outstanding service and a plethora of intravenous medicines. The doctors clearly discussed with me options of spending the night, further analysis, and how to proceed. Market forces were at work – no unnecessary tests were made, and I full participated in the decision making process. Upon returning from vacation the bill was waiting in the mailbox. At first glance the amount concerned me, but I quickly analyzed the numbers and realized the amount due was equal to two months of former family health care premiums. Since I had not made premium payments in prior five months I knew I was better off., and more than likely, I will not have any significant events before the end of the year.

I was disgusted when one family member recommended we not pay the bill. She said that she just ignores them and the hospital will ultimately write it off as indigent or uncollectable. Of course, they will just have to pass these costs onto others. Another friend was appalled that we do not have insurance and wondered what we would do if we had to go to the doctor. I made the economic argument above, it is cheaper to have high deductible insurance and pay as you go, but it fell on deaf ears. Of course, she depends on doctors for everything, has significant monthly prescription requirements, and does not have savings of her own to pay.

People make life choices and I believe too many consumers choose to live for the moment: buying a boat, car, cable television, or even a cellular phone. Losing material possessions due to an illness is sad, but not catastrophic, it’s just stuff. Failing to take personal responsibility should not result in mandated insurance programs and erosion of personal freedoms. My reforms and solutions are much simpler: require people to pay for the services they use and hold them accountable, and yes they may go broke in the process, reign in the cost of malpractice through tort reform, and modify regulations to allow interstate purchase of insurance thus equalizing premiums across the states. No one will be denied quality health care and the market will adjust prices appropriately.

Copyright (c) 2009 John R. Nelson. All Rights Reserved.

What is Government’s Role?

Recently I engaged in an email discussion with a close friend regarding the health care debate. The more interesting aspect was the redirect from her attacking a position I had taken regarding privacy rights, unrelated to health care, to an attack stating that I did not think seniors deserved end of life counseling.

I have to be honest with you, before August I had never considered phrases like “death panels” or “end of life counseling”. But, as we all know, these terms hit the airwaves and became dinner talk for many of us. I personally felt Sarah Palin did a great service to everyone by bringing attention to just one of the many possible issues open for debate within healthcare reform legislation. At the same time though, Ms. Palin’s methodology of exaggeration damages her credibility and makes it tougher to engage in genuine conversation regarding a sensitive issue.

After several readings of my email reply to my friend I could not find anywhere I said seniors did not deserve end of life counseling. Carefully I crafted a reply to my friend, one that I want to share with you:

“First, I never said seniors should not have end of life counseling, how could you infer that from my note? But, let’s presume they should. The first question to answer would be who should provide it? I certainly would not want a government staff employee to provide this service. What would we base their performance appraisal on, the number of seniors that refuse future health care benefits or the number of seniors they counsel that argue they want to live longer? Furthermore, if the government is going to provide end of life counseling, shouldn’t there be benefits for marriage counseling, divorce counseling, parenting counseling and middle-age counseling to ensure you are on the right track? It is obvious any hazardous activity would have to be counseled.”

I do not think the founding fathers intended for the State to provide this level of counseling or care to its citizens. In 1776 I believe the focus of the founding fathers was on the concepts of liberty and freedom due to the recent tyranny and oppression which they had just escaped and shed blood to have independence. The founding fathers stood firm and fought for our freedoms. Unfortunately, I believe time has caused descendants of these men to forget why we are the best country on earth and why other countries want to be like us.

We must look at history to get perspective and context. The founding fathers wanted a limited government because they knew what happened when a dependency (junkie/dealer) relationship is created. Over time other statesmen have endeavored to remind us how to avoid becoming a victim of our own success and desires. Gerald Ford said it succinctly, “A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.”

I do not believe government health care reform should involve end of life counseling. My belief is not due to lack of sympathy or compassion, but because I believe it is not the role of the State to provide, fund, or facilitate that counseling. The role of government my friend is what we should debate.

Copyright (c) 2009 John R. Nelson. All Rights Reserved.

A short list of the last three weeks

It is almost hard to keep up with this whitehouse. Change is the right word. Change because they keep shifting, denying, and lying. What’s sad is most people don’t follow what is happening or the manipulation they are subjected to.

1) Van Jones resignation. Let’s see – leading whitehouse “czar” calls Republicans “a–holes”, and says big companies prey on poor neighbor. But, his involvement in a radical 9/11 group.

2) The Pimp and the Prostitute (aka ACORN). Now, the classic lie here is the president stating in a national television interview on Sunday that he did not follow this or have knowledge of what was going on with this issue. So, the guy worked for them, they raised money for him and he tossed them aside? Yeah, right.

3) While talking about ACORN – at least Congress acted with both the Senate and the House voting to cut funding. Lsat week it was the Census that cut ties and just today the IRS.

4) What about the NEA? Oh yeah, the teleconference call based on denial. Even the whitehouse jumped on this denial bandwagon but resignations are coming (and have occurred).

5) Talking to school children. I had a chance to read the original Department of Education post asking teachers to instruct their pupils to write essays about supporting the president before it was pulled. Of course, after the political backlash the whitehouse had a chance to change the speech to a “do good in school” speech. Wish we could see the original one.

6) Lockerbie Scotland Terrorists. Number 10 Downing Street took the heat for this and threw it back at America when Clinton and Obama denied knowledge of what the Brits were doing.

7) This week our president sold out Israel.

I will try to keep these lists up to date. Visit this web site for more: Obama Gaffes