A week ago a co-worker and I made an appointment to meet with a local business man and entrepreneur to discuss the patenting process. The reason we decide to meet with him was that he has over 40 patents registered with the Trademark and Patent office and his company spends over 6 million dollars a year on research and development so obviously he is an authority on the subject of patenting.
After walking into the lobby of his office, which was surrounded with portraits of great inventors such as Marchoni, Einstien, Oppenhiemer, etc., we were given a security pass and asked if we would like anything to drink. After a few moments of looking around the lobby we were escorted back to a humble office and invited to sit on a couch while Mr. S. finish a phone conversation.
Mr. S. profession is centered around mining, primarily coal. With the technology he has invented he spends a good amount of time dealing with the governments and businesses of China and Russia.
In his phone conversation he was explaining that because of China's willingness to mine and use coal as an energy source that they will continue to out produce us. That their middle class and therefore their economy will continue to grow and that the United States will not be able to compete. He said that what make s a nation prosperous is the manufacturing and exporting of goods and technology. It was what made the United States achieve and maintain its dominance as a world power after World War II and is now making China a economic and world power. This year alone Mr. S. said that China is constructing ten new coal burning energy plants. He also made the statement that what would happen to the world economy if China decides to raise the price on its manufactured goods. What happens if China starts charging for products what American manufactures have to charge for theirs. He said for America to regain is dominance as a economic world power we need to encourage companies to to manufacture its good here in the United States with less government regulation and interference and develop cheap energy (coal) to sustain this growth in production.
He also said that the current administration is slowly putting a noose around the neck of our economic system, with purposed legislation such as card check, cap and trade and other policies that discourage the growth of our manufacturing sector.
He also said that he had read some of Karl Marx's works during college and had begun to listen to some of them again on tape while he travelled. He said that he was shock how similar Pres. Obama's campaign messages were to the words and philosophies of Karl Marx.
It was extremely interesting to hear someone who isn't a politician or talk show host who is actually a person who is in the trenches make these observations.
His phone conversation lasted about ten minutes. But it was a pleasure to be allowed to eavesdrop on it.
Thursday, December 30, 2010
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Parents: The Key to Education
I live in a state that has a 40% drop out rate. This fact ranks us forty-ninth in the nation in regards to high school graduation. Not a statistic to be posted on the roof tops. Education has been a hot topic during this election year, particularly in the state's gubernatorial race. Of course each candidate promised to fix the education problem and both plans focused on education funding and how it should and shouldn't be spent.
Unfortunately neither candidtate understood that the cure for the education problem isn't the money, it's the family. The dissolution of the family unit. Until there is a concentrated focus on the strengthening of the family it wont matter how much money is thrown towards education there will still be little improvement. Now, there will always be some students that no matter what teachers and parents/ family members do that will always drop-out. But those are the rebels and the renegades and are a relatively small part of the student body population. The majority of those who do drop-out do so for the simple fact that there is no one at home who cares if they don't. I don't believe that of the 40% drop out students 100% of them are those kind of individuals who are the rebels and renegade, who aren't going to go to school no matter what anyone does. I would say maybe 5% of drop-outs fall into that category the rest are individuals who are apathetic to education, who have no parental or family support and as a result there is no driving force at home to encourage, motivate, discipline or hold these students accountable for their decisions. In my opinion money spent educating would have a better and longer lasting effect if it was used to strengthen the family unit. There is a reason the family is the fundamental building block of society.
Unfortunately neither candidtate understood that the cure for the education problem isn't the money, it's the family. The dissolution of the family unit. Until there is a concentrated focus on the strengthening of the family it wont matter how much money is thrown towards education there will still be little improvement. Now, there will always be some students that no matter what teachers and parents/ family members do that will always drop-out. But those are the rebels and the renegades and are a relatively small part of the student body population. The majority of those who do drop-out do so for the simple fact that there is no one at home who cares if they don't. I don't believe that of the 40% drop out students 100% of them are those kind of individuals who are the rebels and renegade, who aren't going to go to school no matter what anyone does. I would say maybe 5% of drop-outs fall into that category the rest are individuals who are apathetic to education, who have no parental or family support and as a result there is no driving force at home to encourage, motivate, discipline or hold these students accountable for their decisions. In my opinion money spent educating would have a better and longer lasting effect if it was used to strengthen the family unit. There is a reason the family is the fundamental building block of society.
Monday, October 11, 2010
The Art of the Coup
Currently our local government is in chaos. As a result of our recent recall election 3 city commissioners including the Mayor and the Mayor Pro-Tem have been removed from office only leaving two seated commissioners. Since there has to be three commissioners to have a quorum to make any official city decisions, we are effectively without a city government until a special election can be held to replace the ousted commissioners.
A few days after the results of the recall election were finalized some other city employees and I were having a discussion as to the ramifications of the election when I said this would be the perfect time to instigate a coup. They were confused as to what I went so I explained.
When there is an a weak, ineffectual government or anarchy the void created needs to be filled. This is the time for those in the right positions with the right connections to effectively over throw or seize control of the government.
I explained that the first thing to be done to accomplish a successful coup by plotters is to gain the allegiance/support of the military. In a country this is the army/national guard, in a city or town it would be the police. Once the military is on board you then arrest any political opponents and other government officials. In a public venue you execute the political opponents and those officials who have come out openly against the coup in front of those other government officials who have been arrested. This eliminates potential threats to power and shows surviving officials that non compliance is not an option thereby assuring their allegiance. Once this has been done the overthrowing party then puts its people at the head of every department at the same time contacting neighboring governments informing them that there has been a change in the government and demand them to recognize the new one.
With the change in power complete, the new leaders them go about assuring the public that there will be peace, security and prosperity. If the populace in general is in favor of the change things usually return to normal. However history has shown that what usually happens is the new power begins to exploit the area's resources and people, rounding up "undesirables", confiscating property and limiting personal freedom.
Regrettably this has been the plight of most third world and developing countries. We are extremely fortunate that our political system allows the voice of the people through the power of the ballot box to determine who will take governmental power.
As it looks we are set for a people's instigated coup this fall as the popularity of liberal/progressive view and policies is about to be executed in a coup of public opinion. Thank goodness.
A few days after the results of the recall election were finalized some other city employees and I were having a discussion as to the ramifications of the election when I said this would be the perfect time to instigate a coup. They were confused as to what I went so I explained.
When there is an a weak, ineffectual government or anarchy the void created needs to be filled. This is the time for those in the right positions with the right connections to effectively over throw or seize control of the government.
I explained that the first thing to be done to accomplish a successful coup by plotters is to gain the allegiance/support of the military. In a country this is the army/national guard, in a city or town it would be the police. Once the military is on board you then arrest any political opponents and other government officials. In a public venue you execute the political opponents and those officials who have come out openly against the coup in front of those other government officials who have been arrested. This eliminates potential threats to power and shows surviving officials that non compliance is not an option thereby assuring their allegiance. Once this has been done the overthrowing party then puts its people at the head of every department at the same time contacting neighboring governments informing them that there has been a change in the government and demand them to recognize the new one.
With the change in power complete, the new leaders them go about assuring the public that there will be peace, security and prosperity. If the populace in general is in favor of the change things usually return to normal. However history has shown that what usually happens is the new power begins to exploit the area's resources and people, rounding up "undesirables", confiscating property and limiting personal freedom.
Regrettably this has been the plight of most third world and developing countries. We are extremely fortunate that our political system allows the voice of the people through the power of the ballot box to determine who will take governmental power.
As it looks we are set for a people's instigated coup this fall as the popularity of liberal/progressive view and policies is about to be executed in a coup of public opinion. Thank goodness.
Thursday, September 30, 2010
In Defense of the "Bred"
Posted by the better half of The Vigilant American...
After reading Jonathan V. Last’s article “There Goes the Neighborhood” in the September 13 issue of The Weekly Standard, I have run a mental gauntlet of emotions. I sped through rage and over indignation only to be side-swiped by horror, then compassion, and what I was finally left with was a sense of responsibility. So I write now on behalf of the as-of-yet politically voiceless pre-reading citizens of the world—“the bred”—children.
First and foremost, I am a Mother. That is one of many jobs I have sought thus far, and one in which I am employed for a lifetime. I do not criticize those who do not seek this job. By all means, we have free choice in the United States of America, or at least we do for now. And I think every mother knows that being a mother is a somewhat thankless job without promotion or pay suitable to constant and varied duties (CFO, Personal Chef, Chauffer, Nurse, and the list goes on). Mothers are incredibly criticized and undervalued in today’s world. However, as a mother it is important that we advocate for our children as we are the front-line experts.
Perhaps it is first important to note that child development specialists agree that children obtain much of their future success based on their lives before age 3. Perhaps this is why “graylandgal” whose parents “did not inflict [her] on society until [she] developed continence, self-ambulation, and social skills” maybe needs a little more work. If her parents had gotten her out of the house a little more to interact with the human race before age 3, she might find her self-proclaimed social skills more apt to dealing with others, even small others. I call for a little childhood re-development.
To agree, though, I too am not happy when any child, even my own, with their little “grubby, crusty” hands attack something I am wearing, “Mommy Wardrobe” or not. And I even get a bit embarrassed when we are out and about and I notice the pudding on my son’s chin was never wiped off from lunch. However, these little people were born with rights, the same as any other citizen of our country. And they are not to be “confined to a fenced-in area of the park” as suggested by a dog owner mentioned in the article. Some parents may need to do better with child/societal interaction. Anyone who has let a dog off a leash knows that one cannot be exactly positive what the dog will do. Although I hate kid to pet comparisons, it is analogous. Each child has a unique personality and will that changes by ages and stages. But you can leave a dog home alone when you run to the store. Not so a child.
With any Christian religious background whatsoever, this anti-child viewpoint is absurd, and I would not toy with any reader’s intelligence by citing scriptural doctrine reminding us of the fact that we ourselves are always children in God’s eyes. However I feel great compassion for people who cannot see that the family is the unit of life. No matter if that family includes children, couples, or self alone. But we all come from somewhere, don’t we? People with children generally enjoy most time as a family, and venture out in society together both out of necessity and—gasp!—desire. Should a family not go out to eat for fear a child might actually LOOK at someone in another booth and smile? Give me murder and mayhem, but I truly can’t deal with a child looking into my booth.
I could also attack this ridiculous idea that there is “societal machinery which supports and encourages baby-making”. Really? I guess we parents do get a tax break per child. But I really thought it was nature that encouraged baby-making. Silly me. Maybe I’ve been doing it all for the tax break and those nice, sanitary baby-changing stations in restrooms.
Absolutely one can live childless by choice and love it. But I can live with children by choice and love it. It is absurd to even talk about how being “family friendly” hurts America. The poor coworkers who work so hard to compensate for “child-loving colleagues”? And when these childless people die, who will work? These children that are such an inconvenience now are the same adults that will run America in the future. To not see that is just plain senseless. Or perhaps just plain self-centered. And we wonder why narcissism is on the rise, more so now than in any previous generation.
As we age, we see ourselves return to the traits of childhood with perhaps less “continence, self-ambulation, and social skills” but by that time we have earned it, right? So it must be excusable. I do hope the poor people that are childfree by choice (loving it!) and cheated out of their true selfish life in America will love it when no one is around to take care of them in their old age. Or even care about them, period. They’ll have to hire someone to care. And when they have no voice of their own left, no one will speak for them. Maybe they will find themselves fenced in at the park; leaving us normal folks alone so we don’t have to watch them in this disgusting state of old age. Or maybe a child will run up, sit on their lap, and put their grubby hands on them with a smile.
After reading Jonathan V. Last’s article “There Goes the Neighborhood” in the September 13 issue of The Weekly Standard, I have run a mental gauntlet of emotions. I sped through rage and over indignation only to be side-swiped by horror, then compassion, and what I was finally left with was a sense of responsibility. So I write now on behalf of the as-of-yet politically voiceless pre-reading citizens of the world—“the bred”—children.
First and foremost, I am a Mother. That is one of many jobs I have sought thus far, and one in which I am employed for a lifetime. I do not criticize those who do not seek this job. By all means, we have free choice in the United States of America, or at least we do for now. And I think every mother knows that being a mother is a somewhat thankless job without promotion or pay suitable to constant and varied duties (CFO, Personal Chef, Chauffer, Nurse, and the list goes on). Mothers are incredibly criticized and undervalued in today’s world. However, as a mother it is important that we advocate for our children as we are the front-line experts.
Perhaps it is first important to note that child development specialists agree that children obtain much of their future success based on their lives before age 3. Perhaps this is why “graylandgal” whose parents “did not inflict [her] on society until [she] developed continence, self-ambulation, and social skills” maybe needs a little more work. If her parents had gotten her out of the house a little more to interact with the human race before age 3, she might find her self-proclaimed social skills more apt to dealing with others, even small others. I call for a little childhood re-development.
To agree, though, I too am not happy when any child, even my own, with their little “grubby, crusty” hands attack something I am wearing, “Mommy Wardrobe” or not. And I even get a bit embarrassed when we are out and about and I notice the pudding on my son’s chin was never wiped off from lunch. However, these little people were born with rights, the same as any other citizen of our country. And they are not to be “confined to a fenced-in area of the park” as suggested by a dog owner mentioned in the article. Some parents may need to do better with child/societal interaction. Anyone who has let a dog off a leash knows that one cannot be exactly positive what the dog will do. Although I hate kid to pet comparisons, it is analogous. Each child has a unique personality and will that changes by ages and stages. But you can leave a dog home alone when you run to the store. Not so a child.
With any Christian religious background whatsoever, this anti-child viewpoint is absurd, and I would not toy with any reader’s intelligence by citing scriptural doctrine reminding us of the fact that we ourselves are always children in God’s eyes. However I feel great compassion for people who cannot see that the family is the unit of life. No matter if that family includes children, couples, or self alone. But we all come from somewhere, don’t we? People with children generally enjoy most time as a family, and venture out in society together both out of necessity and—gasp!—desire. Should a family not go out to eat for fear a child might actually LOOK at someone in another booth and smile? Give me murder and mayhem, but I truly can’t deal with a child looking into my booth.
I could also attack this ridiculous idea that there is “societal machinery which supports and encourages baby-making”. Really? I guess we parents do get a tax break per child. But I really thought it was nature that encouraged baby-making. Silly me. Maybe I’ve been doing it all for the tax break and those nice, sanitary baby-changing stations in restrooms.
Absolutely one can live childless by choice and love it. But I can live with children by choice and love it. It is absurd to even talk about how being “family friendly” hurts America. The poor coworkers who work so hard to compensate for “child-loving colleagues”? And when these childless people die, who will work? These children that are such an inconvenience now are the same adults that will run America in the future. To not see that is just plain senseless. Or perhaps just plain self-centered. And we wonder why narcissism is on the rise, more so now than in any previous generation.
As we age, we see ourselves return to the traits of childhood with perhaps less “continence, self-ambulation, and social skills” but by that time we have earned it, right? So it must be excusable. I do hope the poor people that are childfree by choice (loving it!) and cheated out of their true selfish life in America will love it when no one is around to take care of them in their old age. Or even care about them, period. They’ll have to hire someone to care. And when they have no voice of their own left, no one will speak for them. Maybe they will find themselves fenced in at the park; leaving us normal folks alone so we don’t have to watch them in this disgusting state of old age. Or maybe a child will run up, sit on their lap, and put their grubby hands on them with a smile.
Monday, September 6, 2010
One Bad Apple...
I work in the public sector. The town I currently reside in is run by a mayor-commission form of government. There are 4 commissioners and a mayor all of which have a vote. When I took the position that put inside city hall it was two weeks before the previous election. One of the commissioner was mounting a coupe in an attempt to throw the balance of power in his direction with the hopes of being mayor. The candidate whose campaign he was endorsing (and financing) lost to the incumbent by two votes. Instead of bowing out gracefully the commissioner in question pushed his candidate to cry foul claiming election fraud and took the results to district court.
To make a long story short the people of our community had had enough of this commissioner's antics. So some citizens in town circulated a petition to have him recalled. In response to this the commissioner in question circulated a petition to get the the former mayor (who is now a commissioner) and the current mayor (who was the incumbent that defeated his candidate by two votes) recalled. So when the dust settled he, another commissioner, and the mayor are now on the ballot to be recalled. Now should all three be recalled there would only be two commissioners left which would not be enough to run the city (there has to be a majority (3) elected officials present to make any binding decisions). This would mean that the state would have to intervene until there could be another election to replace the recalled officials. So since the last election the city govt. has been in crisis mode and pretty much at a stand still. This is a perfect example of how one person can act as a human wrecking ball and, in his effort for personal glory and gain, cause others to suffer.
This commissioner and his cronies are the Barak Obama and Liberal Progressives of our community not caring what happens to other in an effort to promote their personal agendas. At least our community has had enough and is taking the necessary steps to fix the problem by voting him out. Lets just hope that the American People have had enough of the Obama wrecking ball to vote him and his henchmen out this coming fall and in 2012.
To make a long story short the people of our community had had enough of this commissioner's antics. So some citizens in town circulated a petition to have him recalled. In response to this the commissioner in question circulated a petition to get the the former mayor (who is now a commissioner) and the current mayor (who was the incumbent that defeated his candidate by two votes) recalled. So when the dust settled he, another commissioner, and the mayor are now on the ballot to be recalled. Now should all three be recalled there would only be two commissioners left which would not be enough to run the city (there has to be a majority (3) elected officials present to make any binding decisions). This would mean that the state would have to intervene until there could be another election to replace the recalled officials. So since the last election the city govt. has been in crisis mode and pretty much at a stand still. This is a perfect example of how one person can act as a human wrecking ball and, in his effort for personal glory and gain, cause others to suffer.
This commissioner and his cronies are the Barak Obama and Liberal Progressives of our community not caring what happens to other in an effort to promote their personal agendas. At least our community has had enough and is taking the necessary steps to fix the problem by voting him out. Lets just hope that the American People have had enough of the Obama wrecking ball to vote him and his henchmen out this coming fall and in 2012.
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
State's Rights
Along with the Gadsden Flag (Don't Tread on Me), Old Glory and the Betsy Ross Stars and Strips, I also fly the Confederate Battle Flag as part of my home flag ensemble. There are those who say that by flying the Confederate Battle Flag I espouse and endorse hate, racism and oppression. Unfortunately that flag has been hijacked by some organizations that do foster those beliefs as part of their credo. I personally do not adhere to those ideals or values. I fly that flag in commemoration of what it originally stood for, individual freedom and State's Rights.
Unfortunately contemporary views of history have misconstrued the cause of the Civil War as slavery. Although the issue of slavery contributed to this conflict the over arching issue was states rights.
Did the federal government have the right to tell individual states what they could and could not do? Only about 3% of the population of the South owned slaves and of those the majority where what was considered the landed aristocracy. Why would none slave owning, poor Southerns fight for slaves they didn't own and for a small group of people who in general despised them for their poverty?
The answer is not that they wanted slaves or that they loved the Southern Aristocracy but that they loved their freedom and their rights as an individual state to be free from the meddling of the federal government to decide what they could and could not do.
Do I believe in slavery? No. It is/was a horrible institution and a blot on our history as a nation that was founded on freedom and individual liberty. Was the Confederacy justified in taking up arms to defend their state's rights? Absolutely!
Given the times and issues we face today, I fly the Confederate Battle Flag to remind myself and other of the sacrifices a group of Americans made to defend their individual and state's rights.
I encourage everyone to do the same.
Unfortunately contemporary views of history have misconstrued the cause of the Civil War as slavery. Although the issue of slavery contributed to this conflict the over arching issue was states rights.
Did the federal government have the right to tell individual states what they could and could not do? Only about 3% of the population of the South owned slaves and of those the majority where what was considered the landed aristocracy. Why would none slave owning, poor Southerns fight for slaves they didn't own and for a small group of people who in general despised them for their poverty?
The answer is not that they wanted slaves or that they loved the Southern Aristocracy but that they loved their freedom and their rights as an individual state to be free from the meddling of the federal government to decide what they could and could not do.
Do I believe in slavery? No. It is/was a horrible institution and a blot on our history as a nation that was founded on freedom and individual liberty. Was the Confederacy justified in taking up arms to defend their state's rights? Absolutely!
Given the times and issues we face today, I fly the Confederate Battle Flag to remind myself and other of the sacrifices a group of Americans made to defend their individual and state's rights.
I encourage everyone to do the same.
Monday, August 9, 2010
The Will of the People
Last week a federal judge in California overturned Proposition 8, California's ban on same sex marriage instituted by the will of the people, as unconstitutional. Once more the will of the people has been over turned by the will of one. If this isn't legislating from the bench I don't know what is. What recourse do the people have when the legislative branch doesn't follow the will of its constituents, the executive branch feels they answer to no one, and the judicial branch can make laws with no one's input at all? All is left to do is to "throw the bums out" while it is still something that we can do. Once they take that away from us it is all over but the crying.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
What does it mean to be American?
Recently I heard a comment by Dennis Prager stating that the greatest threat facing America is that the Baby Boomer generation and its posterity haven't been taught what it means to be American. SO, what does it mean to be American?
To be American means to believe in the individual. It means to believe that all men are created equal and as such are endowed with certain unaniable rights. That a democratic republic government is an institution ordained by God, created by the people, for the people as a means of providing the necessary rule of law so that individual rights can be secured thus allowing all individuals the freedom to achieve their greatest potential. They also understand that this freedom however does not guarantee equality or the same results for each person.
To be American means to understand that with self government comes the necessity to govern ones self. That for an individual to take full advantages of the freedoms granted him/her there must be adherence to a moral code which would include responsibility, accountability (to themselves, others, and God), morality and charity. An American understands that as a "nation under God" without a national morality eventually the moral fiber of the country and the ability of self govern would erode and eventually cease to exist.
An American understand that no member of society is entitled to more than the individual freedoms necessary for them or anyone else to reach their full potential through the utilization of their God given talents and abilities.
An American understands that equality can be and often is the antithesis of liberty. And that the purpose of government is to guarantee and guard liberty and not ensure equality.
The Founding Fathers and the colonists who supported them were rugged individualists who challenged the greatest military power at the time not so they could have taxation WITH representation (and be equal to other British subjects) but so they and their posterity could enjoy the freedom of creating their own destiny according to their abilities, talents and desires.
In short an American believes in the exceptionalism and uniqueness of the American experiment in every aspect. From its humble birth to its influence as a world power, to be American means to recognises that at no other time in the history of man has there existed the level of freedom and potential for human progress and development as there does with the United States of America.
Isn't it great to be American?
To be American means to believe in the individual. It means to believe that all men are created equal and as such are endowed with certain unaniable rights. That a democratic republic government is an institution ordained by God, created by the people, for the people as a means of providing the necessary rule of law so that individual rights can be secured thus allowing all individuals the freedom to achieve their greatest potential. They also understand that this freedom however does not guarantee equality or the same results for each person.
To be American means to understand that with self government comes the necessity to govern ones self. That for an individual to take full advantages of the freedoms granted him/her there must be adherence to a moral code which would include responsibility, accountability (to themselves, others, and God), morality and charity. An American understands that as a "nation under God" without a national morality eventually the moral fiber of the country and the ability of self govern would erode and eventually cease to exist.
An American understand that no member of society is entitled to more than the individual freedoms necessary for them or anyone else to reach their full potential through the utilization of their God given talents and abilities.
An American understands that equality can be and often is the antithesis of liberty. And that the purpose of government is to guarantee and guard liberty and not ensure equality.
The Founding Fathers and the colonists who supported them were rugged individualists who challenged the greatest military power at the time not so they could have taxation WITH representation (and be equal to other British subjects) but so they and their posterity could enjoy the freedom of creating their own destiny according to their abilities, talents and desires.
In short an American believes in the exceptionalism and uniqueness of the American experiment in every aspect. From its humble birth to its influence as a world power, to be American means to recognises that at no other time in the history of man has there existed the level of freedom and potential for human progress and development as there does with the United States of America.
Isn't it great to be American?
Monday, June 7, 2010
Marine Funeral Honours
This past Sunday, after getting home from church, I was talking to the Mrs. about how we should kill some time before going to a neighborhood BBQ. She mentioned that we had received a "Netflix recommend" DVD called Taking Chance. I assumed it was some sort of BBC period piece that my wife and I (yeah, yeah, I know, I know) are partial to. It didn't take long to figure out it wasn't some period piece but a military movie. My interest was peaked.
As it turns out, Taking Chance is an HBO film that documents the events surrounding the transportation of the final remains of PFC Chance Phelps from Iraq to his final resting place in Du Bois, Wyoming. The film had a profound effect on me. Told from the view point of the Marine escort (Kevin Bacon) that accompanied the body, the film depicts the process and protocols followed by the Marine Corp when a Marine is killed in action.
It is a movie that every American should see. Apolitical, it doesn't push a political agenda. It simply honours those Americans how gave the last full measure of devotion and the men and women who see to it they get the honor an individual who gave their life for their country and countrymen deserves.
What had the biggest effect on me was the presentation of the flag to the next of kin. It is military tradition to give the flag that had been draped over the casket to the parents (family) of the deceased with the following statement: "On behalf of the President of the United States, the Commandant of the Marine Corps, and a grateful nation, please accept this flag as a symbol of our appreciation for your loved one's service to Country and Corps."
It infuriated me to no end to here the words "On behalf of the President of the United States". It disgusted to me think that this president or anyone in his administration would have anything to do with honouring these men and women. Our nation's servicemen and women have more dignity, honor, courage, discipline and respect than this commander in chief and members of his administration could every have. An individual(s) who is actively working to undermine the safety and security of our nation and the freedoms and principles that these people fight and die for should have nothing to do with leading or honouring them. The current president of the US compared to the individuals he has the privilege to lead is an oxymoron. In my opinion the wording should be changed to say; "On behalf of the Office of the President of the ...", that way when you have an incompetent, inept, self centered, narcissistic, Marxist in the White House it is not him or her who is bestowing the gratitude or appreciation but the most powerful office in the world.
Yeah, that might seem a little picky, but after knowing the sacrifices that people make serving in our armed forces they should not be afforded the least amount of disrespect.
As it turns out, Taking Chance is an HBO film that documents the events surrounding the transportation of the final remains of PFC Chance Phelps from Iraq to his final resting place in Du Bois, Wyoming. The film had a profound effect on me. Told from the view point of the Marine escort (Kevin Bacon) that accompanied the body, the film depicts the process and protocols followed by the Marine Corp when a Marine is killed in action.
It is a movie that every American should see. Apolitical, it doesn't push a political agenda. It simply honours those Americans how gave the last full measure of devotion and the men and women who see to it they get the honor an individual who gave their life for their country and countrymen deserves.
What had the biggest effect on me was the presentation of the flag to the next of kin. It is military tradition to give the flag that had been draped over the casket to the parents (family) of the deceased with the following statement: "On behalf of the President of the United States, the Commandant of the Marine Corps, and a grateful nation, please accept this flag as a symbol of our appreciation for your loved one's service to Country and Corps."
It infuriated me to no end to here the words "On behalf of the President of the United States". It disgusted to me think that this president or anyone in his administration would have anything to do with honouring these men and women. Our nation's servicemen and women have more dignity, honor, courage, discipline and respect than this commander in chief and members of his administration could every have. An individual(s) who is actively working to undermine the safety and security of our nation and the freedoms and principles that these people fight and die for should have nothing to do with leading or honouring them. The current president of the US compared to the individuals he has the privilege to lead is an oxymoron. In my opinion the wording should be changed to say; "On behalf of the Office of the President of the ...", that way when you have an incompetent, inept, self centered, narcissistic, Marxist in the White House it is not him or her who is bestowing the gratitude or appreciation but the most powerful office in the world.
Yeah, that might seem a little picky, but after knowing the sacrifices that people make serving in our armed forces they should not be afforded the least amount of disrespect.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
A Cog in the Wheel
The Obama Regime (to quote some conservative talk show hosts) offers so much material to comment on it is hard to decide what to address. But for this month's post I would like to comment on an aspect of Obama Care.
As one of the stipulations of the new bill, individuals or companies that do not or can not provide insurance for themselves or their employees will be fined $2,000 a year per individual uninsured. On average it cost a company 10 to 12 thousand dollars per employee per year to provide insurance. Now a business working under the principles of capitalism would see a 8 to 10 thousand dollar savings by not offering insurance and paying the $2,000 fine per employee. Now some might see this as a failure of Obama Care. Under this scenario there will be less people with health insurance and therefore go against the supposed goals of the Obama care in providing more affordable insurance for more Americans.
I argue that this is exactly the goal of Obama Care. More people without insurance makes more people dependent on the government for medical care. This in turn make more justification for a single payer system and the complete take over of Health Care by the government. This is just a cog in the wheel of total government control of health care and the real goal of the Obama Health Care Program.
As one of the stipulations of the new bill, individuals or companies that do not or can not provide insurance for themselves or their employees will be fined $2,000 a year per individual uninsured. On average it cost a company 10 to 12 thousand dollars per employee per year to provide insurance. Now a business working under the principles of capitalism would see a 8 to 10 thousand dollar savings by not offering insurance and paying the $2,000 fine per employee. Now some might see this as a failure of Obama Care. Under this scenario there will be less people with health insurance and therefore go against the supposed goals of the Obama care in providing more affordable insurance for more Americans.
I argue that this is exactly the goal of Obama Care. More people without insurance makes more people dependent on the government for medical care. This in turn make more justification for a single payer system and the complete take over of Health Care by the government. This is just a cog in the wheel of total government control of health care and the real goal of the Obama Health Care Program.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Democracy is Dead!
With the signing of the Health Care bill into law democracy in the United States of America died. People will argue the hereto and wherefores of how the bill got passed, and how the program will be funded, and was the change really necessary but the over reaching issue and the true atrocity of this bill is that it was passed against the will of the people.
In a democratic republic, which is what the United States used to be until the passing of this bill, representatives are elected by the voice of the people to function as their spokesman in the law making bodies of Congress. The representatives sole function is to relay the desires of his or her constituents and vote accordingly. To act in opposition to the will of the people who elected him or her is to negate the agreement under which he or she was employed and to usurp the power of the people. For the public servant to act on his own or against the will of the people is for the servant to become master and vise verse. That is what happened with the passing of the Health Care bill. With the great majority of the population (approximately 70% of Americans opposed the bill) opposed to the health care over haul it should have had no chance of making it into law. But with the overthrowing of the masters by their public servants and total disregard for the democratic republic process freedom and democracy died with the passing of the Health Care Reform Legislation.
Unless Congress is held accountable for this treasonous act the United States as our Founding Fathers knew will cease to exist. A sad day for us all.
In a democratic republic, which is what the United States used to be until the passing of this bill, representatives are elected by the voice of the people to function as their spokesman in the law making bodies of Congress. The representatives sole function is to relay the desires of his or her constituents and vote accordingly. To act in opposition to the will of the people who elected him or her is to negate the agreement under which he or she was employed and to usurp the power of the people. For the public servant to act on his own or against the will of the people is for the servant to become master and vise verse. That is what happened with the passing of the Health Care bill. With the great majority of the population (approximately 70% of Americans opposed the bill) opposed to the health care over haul it should have had no chance of making it into law. But with the overthrowing of the masters by their public servants and total disregard for the democratic republic process freedom and democracy died with the passing of the Health Care Reform Legislation.
Unless Congress is held accountable for this treasonous act the United States as our Founding Fathers knew will cease to exist. A sad day for us all.
Saturday, February 20, 2010
BCS: The Golden Age of Football?
In the Feb. 15th, 2010 issue of The Weekly Standard (a publication that The Vigilant American endorses), Jeffrey H. Anderson put pen to paper in defense of his Bowl Championship Series (BCS) against the onslaught of politicians who say that the BCS system violates anti-trust laws. While I support Anderson in his defense, particularly in the point that there are much more important things for politicians to concern themselves with than who is playing for the college football national championship, I do not agree that the BCS is a capitalist system where the laws of competition and free markets have full sway.
In most respects the BCS is more socialist by nature; it limits competition. Thus, it limits an individual team's potential, uses factors outside a team's control to determine its worth and potential, and makes it extremely difficult for teams to grow, improve, and build on past mistakes and failures. In essence the BCS system is a desire of the few to have control over the many.
So what would be the true capitalist/American system of determining who should be the college football National Champion? The answer--some sort of play-off system. College football is the only sport wherein the participants of the championship game are determined by poles and computer programs rather than some sort of play-off system. Proponents of the BCS say that it has created the best regular season of any sport because every regular season game matters. That may be true, but it has also created the worst post-season of any sport because only one game matters--the championship game. The post-season Bowl Game system is boring and a waste of time, with teams playing games that mean absolutely nothing. Even regular season games in a play-off system have more meaning than post-season bowl games. On the contrary, in a play-off system, regular season games still have significance. Excitement and importance build as a team progresses through the play-offs toward the championship game.
Now it does no good to criticize an idea without having a suggestion for improvement: Combine the BCS system with the play-off system. Use the BCS System to rank teams throughout the regular season. The top 16 teams at the end of the season go into a post-season playoff. The play-off games would still be "bowl games" with all the endorsements and fanfair, etc. of traditional bowls, except now they matter where as before they didn't.
By nature playoff games would be more entertaining because teams would be doing everything possible to win (trick plays, four down attempts, onside kicks, two point conversions, etc.). Taking the top 16 teams would allow for teams with 1,2 and possibly 3 losses in the regular season to make it to the play-offs, allowing teams who get off to a rough start to improve and have a chance to grow and develop into a national championship team rather than being out of the running at the first part of the regular season.
Scheduling: The regular season is normally over by the end of November. There would be 8 games the first weekend of December, 4 on Friday, 4 on Saturday. With eight teams eliminated, there would be four games the next week end, 2 on Friday, 2 on Saturday. They next weekend 2 games and the championship game 2 weekends later on the last weekend of December or the first weekend of January. This schedule would produce a more exciting off-season, more revenue for all entities involved (TV, sponsors, etc.) and a true national champion who has proved themself on the field. There could still be other bowls for teams that aren't in the play-offs but including the national championship game and all the play off games there would already be 17 "bowl games" that would mean something.
This combination of BCS and Playoff system would be a beneficial "happy-medium" for everyone involved, and it would produce a true national champion the American way.
In most respects the BCS is more socialist by nature; it limits competition. Thus, it limits an individual team's potential, uses factors outside a team's control to determine its worth and potential, and makes it extremely difficult for teams to grow, improve, and build on past mistakes and failures. In essence the BCS system is a desire of the few to have control over the many.
So what would be the true capitalist/American system of determining who should be the college football National Champion? The answer--some sort of play-off system. College football is the only sport wherein the participants of the championship game are determined by poles and computer programs rather than some sort of play-off system. Proponents of the BCS say that it has created the best regular season of any sport because every regular season game matters. That may be true, but it has also created the worst post-season of any sport because only one game matters--the championship game. The post-season Bowl Game system is boring and a waste of time, with teams playing games that mean absolutely nothing. Even regular season games in a play-off system have more meaning than post-season bowl games. On the contrary, in a play-off system, regular season games still have significance. Excitement and importance build as a team progresses through the play-offs toward the championship game.
Now it does no good to criticize an idea without having a suggestion for improvement: Combine the BCS system with the play-off system. Use the BCS System to rank teams throughout the regular season. The top 16 teams at the end of the season go into a post-season playoff. The play-off games would still be "bowl games" with all the endorsements and fanfair, etc. of traditional bowls, except now they matter where as before they didn't.
By nature playoff games would be more entertaining because teams would be doing everything possible to win (trick plays, four down attempts, onside kicks, two point conversions, etc.). Taking the top 16 teams would allow for teams with 1,2 and possibly 3 losses in the regular season to make it to the play-offs, allowing teams who get off to a rough start to improve and have a chance to grow and develop into a national championship team rather than being out of the running at the first part of the regular season.
Scheduling: The regular season is normally over by the end of November. There would be 8 games the first weekend of December, 4 on Friday, 4 on Saturday. With eight teams eliminated, there would be four games the next week end, 2 on Friday, 2 on Saturday. They next weekend 2 games and the championship game 2 weekends later on the last weekend of December or the first weekend of January. This schedule would produce a more exciting off-season, more revenue for all entities involved (TV, sponsors, etc.) and a true national champion who has proved themself on the field. There could still be other bowls for teams that aren't in the play-offs but including the national championship game and all the play off games there would already be 17 "bowl games" that would mean something.
This combination of BCS and Playoff system would be a beneficial "happy-medium" for everyone involved, and it would produce a true national champion the American way.
Monday, January 11, 2010
The system works?
In response to the December 25 attempted terror attack that occurred on an international flight, Janet Napolitano, head of the Dept. of Home Land Security, said that the system had worked. I'm not sure what system she was talking about because it couldn't have been the TSA. After all the check points and searches it was left up to the passengers on the plane to ensure their own security and had it not been that the bomb was a dud even the passengers would not have been able to prevent a tragedy.
Both of my sisters had horrible experiences with the airports during their holidays travels. One sister had her connecting flight cancelled because a pilot failed to show for work and they had no other fight available for 2 days resulting in her and her family renting a car and driving 8 hours to get to their destination. The kicker off the trip was when the lady working the counter at the gate said it wasn't her responsibility to help my sister and her family get to their destination. Whose responsibility is it? My sister and her husband had paid almost $1,000 dollars to an airline to fly them and their 3 children on Christmas day to be with the rest of our family. When one of their pilots decides not to show up for work they cancel their flight without another flight available for 2 days and the person at the counter says its not her responsibility to help them reach their destination. Another example of the people taking the responsibility on themselves because the people who were employed to do the job failed. Is that our system at work?
My other sister was told at the ticket counter on the way home from our family gathering that during her visit the airline's child car seats policy had changed and now cars seats counted toward the total number of check on baggage allowed. Instead of being flexible and understanding, the person at the ticket counter insisted on enforcing the policy even when my sister explained that she didn't know about the change and that the new policy hadn't existed when she left for the holidaysa week prior. Traveling by herself with an infant, this policy change make it extremely difficult for her to travel because she now had too much luggage to carry while caring for an infant. Was it not for a kind gentleman who observed her luggage carrying dilemma and helped her get to get on and off the plane, my sister wasn't sure what she would have done. Once again the people paid to be helpful weren't and it was left up to the people to resolve the situation. Is that the system at work? In conversation with my sister about her trip home she summed it up when she said, " I'm tired of paying people for services, government or otherwise and having to do it myself." Is that a comment from a person who thinks our system is working. To me it sound like someone who is frustrated with the system. I have a feeling my sister isn't the only one who feels this way. I think the nation as a whole is fed up. More taxes for less freedom, higher fees for less service, who wouldn't be fed up.
Both of my sisters had horrible experiences with the airports during their holidays travels. One sister had her connecting flight cancelled because a pilot failed to show for work and they had no other fight available for 2 days resulting in her and her family renting a car and driving 8 hours to get to their destination. The kicker off the trip was when the lady working the counter at the gate said it wasn't her responsibility to help my sister and her family get to their destination. Whose responsibility is it? My sister and her husband had paid almost $1,000 dollars to an airline to fly them and their 3 children on Christmas day to be with the rest of our family. When one of their pilots decides not to show up for work they cancel their flight without another flight available for 2 days and the person at the counter says its not her responsibility to help them reach their destination. Another example of the people taking the responsibility on themselves because the people who were employed to do the job failed. Is that our system at work?
My other sister was told at the ticket counter on the way home from our family gathering that during her visit the airline's child car seats policy had changed and now cars seats counted toward the total number of check on baggage allowed. Instead of being flexible and understanding, the person at the ticket counter insisted on enforcing the policy even when my sister explained that she didn't know about the change and that the new policy hadn't existed when she left for the holidaysa week prior. Traveling by herself with an infant, this policy change make it extremely difficult for her to travel because she now had too much luggage to carry while caring for an infant. Was it not for a kind gentleman who observed her luggage carrying dilemma and helped her get to get on and off the plane, my sister wasn't sure what she would have done. Once again the people paid to be helpful weren't and it was left up to the people to resolve the situation. Is that the system at work? In conversation with my sister about her trip home she summed it up when she said, " I'm tired of paying people for services, government or otherwise and having to do it myself." Is that a comment from a person who thinks our system is working. To me it sound like someone who is frustrated with the system. I have a feeling my sister isn't the only one who feels this way. I think the nation as a whole is fed up. More taxes for less freedom, higher fees for less service, who wouldn't be fed up.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments