American Daughter - Multimedia journalism with articles,pictures and graphics, podcast audio and video,slide presentations, live-blogging of events, and webcasting
California Chronicle - Published daily The California Chronicle brings you the top news and commentary of the day throughout the Central Coast, the State and the Nation.
Real Clear Politics - One of America’s premier independent political web sites. Updated every morning and throughout the day, RCP culls and publishes the best commentary, news, polling data, and links to important resources from all points of the political compass and coveri
TownHall - Townhall.com is designed to amplify conservative voices in America’s political debates just as the 2006 and 2008 election cycles begin to heat up.
Working Senior - The National Association of Working Seniors
New Years Eve celebrations never mattered to me. We stay home and watch the festivities on T.V. as they circle the globe, go to bed early. Boring, I know. But, it’s safe and sane and keeps us out of trouble. We stay off the roads and don’t travel.
So, what’s the point of this column, you may wonder. The point is that as each New Year rolls around, I try to focus on the future, not so much in the sense of making New Year’s Resolutions, most if not all of which I never keep, but my hopes and aspirations for the next year.
First and foremost, I look forward to another year of just living, spending time with my wife, our two dogs, and my friends and associates. I have been blessed with a long and fruitful life, filled with challenges and my share of hardships, I suppose. At 81-years-of-age, I am a living testimonial to the miracle of modern medicine and the talents of many fine medical professionals, who managed to get me through various health travails on numerous occasions, some of which were quite serious.
Following, in no particular order, are my hopes and wishes for 2010:
That our political leaders will come to their senses and stop spending money we don’t have. We are rapidly spending ourselves into oblivion at every level: national, state, local and individual, and appear to be headed into the worst of all economic worlds, hyperinflation.
That people around the world can somehow stop enslaving, torturing and killing one another, for whatever reason(s). I understand that there may be compelling reasons in some instances, such as defending oneself, but man’s inhumanity toward one another has been the hallmark of civilization throughout recorded history, and unless we find a way to control our baser instincts, we may well destroy ourselves. Some people think that might be the best outcome.
That we will somehow manage to get through the current economic downturn largely unscathed.
That we can manage to elect some people to public office who are principled and honest and are willing to serve for the common good rather than how they can line their own pockets. That’s a tall order, I know, but I can at least hope.
That our educators will find a way to reach a generation of indifferent young people, too many of whom are ignorant and self-centered to a fault. When a young person cannot make the simplest calculations to give change to a customer, something is seriously wrong.
That we can somehow find a way to lift our society out of the cultural morass into which it has sunk. Through the medium of modern communication: radio, TV, the Internet and print media, we have managed to reach the point where anything goes and there are no limits, debasing too many of our young people in the process.
That we catch or kill Osama bin Laden, along with the other bad guys.
That all of our military come home safely to their loved ones, their friends and their communities.
That science will find cures for the worst diseases, such as cancer, multiple sclerosis, muscular dystrophy, AIDS and the host of other conditions that plague the human race.
That we can somehow improve the desperate conditions in which far too many of the world’s peoples are forced to live.
That we do not have a severe earthquake in California.
That the techies among us will find a way to stop spam forever and catch the people who spew endless unwanted garbage messages at us.
That I get through another year without any serious health problems and that my wife does not break her other knee.
That my six grandchildren will inherit a better world than we have now.
That you will have the happiest, most successful and healthiest year you have ever had.
It may seem like I’m asking for a lot, but in the final analysis, you can probably sum up my hopes and aspirations in one wish, that, as beauty contestants so often say, I just want “world peace.”
Are we fighting a war or not? Sometimes I wonder. Wars are generally all-out efforts to kill the enemy and destroy their ability to fight. The goal is to win, and to do that it’s necessary to kill people and break things.
However, there are some rules, although not everyone observes them. The most widely accepted are The Geneva Conventions, which Wikipedia describes as follows:
The Geneva Conventions consist of four treaties and three additional protocols that set the standards in international law for humanitarian treatment of the victims of war. The singular term Geneva Convention refers to the agreements of 1949, negotiated in the aftermath of World War II, updating the terms of the first three treaties and adding a fourth treaty. The language is extensive, with articles defining the basic rights of those captured during a military conflict, establishing protections for the wounded, and addressing protections for civilians in and around a war zone. The treaties of 1949 have been ratified, in whole or with reservations, by 194 countries.
Protected persons are entitled, in all circumstances, to respect for their persons, their honour, their family rights, their religious convictions and practices, and their manners and customs. They shall at all times be humanely treated, and shall be protected especially against all acts of violence or threats thereof and against insults and public curiosity. Women shall be especially protected against any attack on their honour, in particular against rape, enforced prostitution, or any form of indecent assault. Without prejudice to the provisions relating to their state of health, age and sex, all protected persons shall be treated with the same consideration by the Party to the conflict in whose power they are, without any adverse distinction based, in particular, on race, religion or political opinion. However, the Parties to the conflict may take such measures of control and security in regard to protected persons as may be necessary as a result of the war.
Unfortunately, as terrorism has appeared on the scene, the generally accepted standards of The Geneva Conventions have fallen by the wayside. Terrorist combatants wear no uniforms, represent no specific nation and observe no rules, including attacking and killing women and children, even those in their own societies.
Furthermore, the forces of Political Correctness have influenced our military mindset to the point that the United States has exceeded the basic standards of The Geneva Conventions by imposing extraordinary Rules of Engagement (ROE) on our military, which can jeopardize their safety in combat zones.
Based on individual soldier accounts, WorldNetDaily reports that current ROE restrictions include:
No night of surprise searches.
Villagers are to be warned prior to searches.
Afghan National Army or Afghan National Police must accompany U.S. units or searches.
U.S. soldiers may not fire at insurgents unless they are preparing to fire first.
U.S. forces cannot engage insurgents if civilians are present.
Only women can search women.
Troops can fire on insurgents if they catch them placing an IED but not if they walk away from where the explosives are.
In addition, the ROE often require varying levels of approvals before action can be taken.
One company commander has been quoted as saying, “We can’t do anything if we don’t have the ANA or [the Afghan National Police]… We have to follow the Karzai 12 rules. But the Taliban has no rules…Our soldiers have to juggle all these rules and regulations and they do it without hesitation despite everything. It’s not easy for anyone out here.”
Imposing restrictive ROE’s is not just some theoretical exercise in winning the hearts and minds of the Afghans, that they have caused the loss of life is well documented. For example, in one case, four U.S. Marines (fighting in Kunar Province) twice radioed for artillery support during a combat action, which was refused. As a result, they were killed. Who knows why those in command would not or could not give their authorization?
So, while we are supposed to fight with one hand tied behind our backs by observing PC Rules of Engagement, our enemies are free to engage in the most heinous actions, torturing and beheading people, hiding among the local population, using them as shields, committing the most violent acts against both our military forces and civilians alike.
Under the circumstances, my conclusion is that we should be less concerned about the constraints of The Geneva Conventions than taking the fight to the terrorists without hesitation. The idea that we can fight a war in which we hamstring our military because of some PC notion that we are morally superior to our enemies is counterproductive. My sense is that they also believe they are better than their enemy, us, which permits them to win by any means possible, no matter how despicable.
When I was in high school in the 1940s, we were taught to believe that majority rule was best, that the function of government was to help us, that our system of justice was intended to be a “search for the truth.” These ideas were widely accepted as immutable truths. Today, over 60 years later, to my eye, they are no longer as true as we once thought. The cause may be directly attributable to our treasured democracy in action. That may sound cynical, but consider the evidence from the following perspective.
A brief examination of four major issues helps illustrate how the rule of a simple majority has been impacting our rights as American citizens: taxes, tobacco, health care and property rights.
Taxes: Everyone should pay their “fair share,” especially the rich. But, who are the rich? How many people do you know who think they are rich? Would you be surprised to learn that for certain purposes, “rich” has been defined by the U.S. Treasury Department as including those with incomes as low as $50,000 a year.
According to recent IRS figures, 50% of all taxpayers pay only about 3% of the total Federal income tax burden, while the top 10% pay around 66% of the bill. Almost half of all those who file Federal returns pay no tax at all, the top 25% contribute 86% of the total, and the top 1% pay about 39% of all income taxes collected. Is that fair enough? Or, should the “rich” pay even more? Remember, the definition of rich probably includes you, no matter how you view yourself, since taxpayers with Adjusted Gross Incomes around $55,000 are in the top 25% of taxpayers. So, is the “fair share” concept really fair?
If you complain about the amount of taxes you have to pay, you may be labeled “greedy” or selfish. Imagine that, being considered greedy or selfish simply for wanting to keep more of your own money. After all, it’s your money, not the government’s, although many politicians would have us believe otherwise. I don’t remember anyone ever calling people greedy or selfish because they favored lower taxes. I often wonder why politicians or bureaucrats are never called greedy or selfish when they advocate taking more of our money to expand an already bloated government and increase their own pay and benefits.
What happened? Simple: the tyranny of the majority. Over the past 60 years, a majority of the electorate has become convinced that “big spenders” are what we need in Congress, and with big spending came increased taxes. Republicans and Democrats are both at fault. There’s plenty of blame to go around, including the voters.
Tobacco: The tyranny of the majority also rules in matters involving the tobacco industry. Tobacco companies have been cast in the role of villains that should be punished for selling a legal product but lying to the public about the effects of smoking on their health. The power of the government has been used to levy a massive tax on the industry through litigation and settlement of court cases, in spite of the fact that cigarette packaging and advertising have carried warning labels for over 40 years. Whatever you may think about the tobacco companies, right or wrong, you should question the actions of Federal and state governments extracting money from any industry by this means and using it to fund pet projects that could not gain the necessary public support to increase taxes to pay for them. If they can do this to the tobacco industry and get away with it, which industry will be next: pharmaceuticals, automobile manufacturing, food businesses (as in MacDonald’s or General Foods), perhaps even the company you work for? This drives up the costs of doing business and ultimately impacts the public through increased prices. Where will it stop?
Health Care: Government intervention in health care has become a major focus. It is no longer possible to escape the consequences of “Big Brother’s” involvement in health care. Driven by the votes of a growing elderly population, the “tyranny of the majority” continues to expand government intervention in our lives with cries for government funding of health care for all Americans, in spite of strong evidence that national health care plans do not work as advertised.
Property Rights: Here too, the “tyranny of the majority” is at work. Do you actually own your real property? Your home? The apartment complex or commercial building you bought as an investment? Your ranch or farm? If you think you do, consider just some of the following limitations on your ownership:
The government can take your property if they want it for some public purpose (eminent domain). They are supposed to pay fair compensation for it, but the list of property owners who believe they did not receive full value for their property is very long indeed.
Even if your property is paid for, you still have to pay a form of rent - forever (in the guise of property taxes) - to keep it. If you fail to pay, the state will eventually take it from you and sell it at public auction.
Limitations on the use of your land can be forced on you for public purposes, such as riding trails, access to the beach, power lines, view corridors, roads and highways, maintenance of public areas, zoning laws that tell you what you can build - how to build it and what it must look like, how much you can charge tenants (rent control), what you can plant (landscape plans), removal of trees and a host of other restrictions too numerous to include here.
The answer to the question, “Who owns your property?” is – you don’t! Not really. You may have title, but your control is very limited.
It’s important to note that a majority is only “one” over half. One vote more than 50% is enough to win an election. One is enough to rule. And, that “one” often delivers the power to dictate to the other half. One-half plus one can truly be a tyrannical majority in every key aspect of life in America: taxation, gun control, abortion, education and school choice, defense, Social Security, health care, property rights and land use, you name it.
America’s Founders created a representative form of government, a republic, in an effort to guard against the possibility of a small majority gaining control and dictating their own terms of governance. Unfortunately, however, we seem to have morphed into the idea that a simple majority should decide everything for everyone. Are you convinced that our “democracy” is working the way you think it should?
Perhaps a “super majority,” say 60% or 65%, should always be required to pass certain types of legislation, such as tax increases, bond issues, etc.
I recently received the following email from a friend:
Harris: Why is it, do you think, that the terrible financial situation in the County (Santa Barbara), the State, does not appear to be any matters of discussion? In both cases, they are a disaster waiting to happen. Is that the reason? The State Controller stated that the state could not borrow any more money last week. Where is the public comment, the concern? Nationally, the situation in CA is a frequent subject of discussion. Not here though. Is the national scene so over-powering? What is going on?
I believe the situation is due to a combination of a number of things (in no particular order):
1) A media that is staffed by journalists who have no economic training or understanding and does not do its job.
2) An abysmally poor education in our schools, especially about economics, coupled with an education establishment that has come to view capitalism and free enterprise as bad or evil.
3) Political Correctness, which has taken over our schools and the media.
4) A large percentage of the population is fat, dumb and happy and is generally uninformed and indifferent to anything that does not directly affect them.
5) A general feeling of helplessness, even among those who do pay attention and care, that they can’t do anything about the situation, with the result that people tune out bad news.
6) A corrupt political class at almost every level of government - who make a career of holding public office. They have structured the system to make it easy to get re-elected, which also makes them indifferent to the opinions of most of their constituents.
7) The pension system at all levels of government, county, state and federal, is a major cause of the problem of runaway budgets that are rapidly putting the nation into bankruptcy.
In California, the process of expanding government has reached the point that most of what happens in the state legislature is not well reported or reported at all, except for a few columnists like Dan Walters and Daniel Weintraub. Much like Congress, the sheer volume of bills that expand government regulation is impossible to track and finally intrude on public consciousness only after it’s too late to stop them.
Finally, any legislation that may be the least bit controversial is often hidden from view in an effort to slip it past the public before they can react and resist, or it is passed with an implementation date in the future, which generally goes unnoticed by the public until it is too late.
A good example is the California Global Warming Solutions Act, passed in 2006, which established a cap-and-trade program that will become effective January 1, 2012. It is the first U.S. statewide program to cap all GHG emissions from major industries and includes penalties for non-compliance, requiring emissions to be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020, a decrease of approximately 25%.
The consequences of this legislation are likely to be so severe that it will impact every business in the state and will probably force many of them to go out of business, in addition to dramatically raising the cost of doing business.
The larger question is what happens when government continues to spend money it doesn’t have?
Speaking to this issue, Dr. Marc Faber recently noted, “Eventually, I suppose a lot of governments will be bust, including the U.S…Nothing has been resolved, it’s just being postponed…The ultimate crisis will not just bankrupt the banking system and financial as happened in 2008, it will bankrupt governments.”
States (in the U.S.) don’t have the luxury of printing money, so their only recourse is to borrow. Californians have carried this to an extreme, approving billions of dollars of bond issues in recent years, without regard to the debt service that’s required to pay them off, generally over 30 or 40 years, roughly doubling the cost in the process.
Governments can and do go bankrupt, repudiating their obligations in the process. They fail to pay debt service on the bonds they may have issued or the value of their currency may depreciate to the point that it becomes worthless.
In California, the consequence of failing to meet its obligations timely or at all will cause panic, leaving bondholders in the lurch, without the income they thought they were buying and locked in without a viable market for resale, except at huge discounts.
It appears that we have become so politically correct (PC) that we are beginning to let the few dictate the way the majority of Americans can now celebrate their holidays. For example, why is it that many individuals and businesses are opting to advertise sales or send Christmas greeting cards or invitations that no longer refer to Christmas, labeling such occasions instead as “Holiday” greetings, parties or sales?
Bah, Humbug! I say, “Keep your cotton-pickin’ hands off my Christmas!”
Those who know I don’t celebrate Christmas (for personal reasons) may think this is a strange reaction. I’m not a Christian, but I do care about our American traditions. And, one of the most revered in our society has always been CHRISTMAS. I also don’t believe it’s necessary to be a Christian to appreciate and support Christian values, which are an integral part of the foundation on which America was built.
Why on earth are we letting people who are anti-religion, such as atheists and the ACLU, dictate or attempt to dictate what our national values should be? That’s what they are, aren’t they? That is, people who are anti-religion? And, who made them the politically-correct police, anyway?
Just what is the “Holiday” if not Christmas? The very use of the term “Holiday” is shorthand for Christmas, isn’t it? When someone offers “Seasons Greetings” or “Happy Holidays” to us, doesn’t everyone understand that the person offering the salutation is talking about Christmas? Surely, they’re not talking in a vacuum, and they don’t mean “Merry Vacation” or “Merry Shopping.” They mean Merry Christmas, don’t they?
Even as a non-Christian, Christmas has always been a part of my life. I grew up during the depression, and I can still remember the importance of the Christmas season at a time when most people had very little. And, I can’t say that growing up and living in a Christian society has ever been a significant obstacle for me. As a Jew, I suppose I’ve experienced my share of prejudice along the way, but I don’t believe the fact that I’m not a Christian has ever prevented me from taking advantage of the boundless opportunities that America has made and continues to make available, regardless of our individual religious beliefs.
So why, I wonder, is Christmas such a problem for non-believers? What’s their game? Are they just perverse, or is there some larger purpose underlying their opposition to any recognition of religion in the life of our society, even Christmas?
Part of the reason, I think, is the excessive commercialization of Christmas, which has turned the occasion away from its roots and converted it into a giant shopping event. One of the most troubling aspects of this is the way in which the forces of merchandizing, pursuing an impossible goal of offending no one, are now causing many businesses to adopt the PC language of the non-believers by referring to Christmas as the “Holiday,” while they promote the celebration of other “Holidays,” such as Kwanzaa, which incidentally does not even mark a religious occasion, but was created by a single individual to celebrate African-American culture. Are Easter and Chanukah the next traditional religious celebrations that will be renamed “Holidays” to satisfy the PC crowd? Or, perhaps Ramadan?
This brings me back to the point that I’ve noticed a growing number of businesses that no longer invite people to Christmas sales or parties, but to “Holiday” events.
Question: Is it possible to avoid offending anyone by discontinuing all references to Christmas in favor of “Holiday”?
I think not! I, for one, even as a non-Christian, am offended by this effort to take Christmas out of the Christmas celebration. My guess is that for every person who is placated by references to the “Holiday” in lieu of “Christmas,” there is at least one person like me, who is troubled or offended by the obvious ploy of omitting any reference to Christmas in favor of “Holiday.”
Perhaps Ben Stein said it best when he commented, “I think people who believe in God are sick and tired of getting pushed around, period. I have no idea where the concept came from that America is an explicitly atheist country. I can’t find it in the Constitution and I don’t like it being shoved down my throat.”
Those firms that succumb to the PC version of the “Holiday” may well find that many of their customers will eventually see the situation as I do and take their business elsewhere - to a store or firm that acknowledges that Christmas is Christmas, Christ included.
Listening to the news and the constant complaints about how high prices are these days started me thinking about the cost of things in earlier years – and comparing the two.
To give the current crop of young people a sense of what life was like when I was growing up, consider some of the changes my generation has witnessed:
We were born before television, polio vaccine, frozen foods, Xerox, plastic contact lenses, and Frisbees. There were no pantyhose, dishwashers, clothes dryers, electric blankets, air conditioners, or drip-dry clothes. And, we were around before radar, credit cards, the A bomb, computers, cell phones, DVD’s and DVR’s, laser beams, ball point pens, penicillin and jet airplanes.
In the 60s, it took around 12 hours to fly from LA to Chicago in propeller-driven aircraft. Today it takes about four hours to make the same trip in a jet. And, the space shuttle and space station existed only in the imaginations of engineers and scientists.
I saw Neil Armstrong, the first man to walk on the moon – on TV - in July 1969. It was one of the most riveting and exciting moments of my life.
Technology has progressed to the point today that events in space are treated more or less as commonplace. But back then, nothing like it had ever happened, and most people thought they would never live to see it. Landing on the moon was literally science fiction, and seeing a man walk on the moon 40 years ago was like a living science fiction fantasy.
My first car was a used 1936 Ford convertible, which I bought for $300. If the cost is translated into the hours of work it took to earn that amount of money, around 750 hours labor was required (at the 1946 minimum wage of 40 cents an hour). Earning the minimum wage of $8.00 an hour in California today, it still takes about the same number of work hours to buy an equivalent car for, say, $6,000.
Another comparison: gasoline. At 20 cents a gallon in the 40s, about 30 minutes work was needed to earn enough money to buy one gallon, while at the current price of approximately $3.00 a gallon (in Santa Barbara, CA), it takes a little over 22 minutes to earn the cost of one gallon of gas (at the $8.00 per hour minimum wage in California). So, in terms of the amount of labor needed to earn enough money to pay for a gallon of gasoline, the price today is actually about one-third less than it was in the 40s.
A 1963 Thanksgiving sale ad for a local market where we live (Santa Ynez Valley, CA) offers some interesting price comparisons for common grocery items, then and now:
Then (1963)
Turkey: 39 cents a pound.
Eggs: 44 cents a dozen.
Pepsi: 49 cents for a six-pack, 8.2 cents each
T-bone steak: 98 cents a pound.
Yams: 30 cents a pound.
Coffee: 98 cents a pound, or 6 cents per ounce
Pies: 49 cents for a 9-inch pie, or $0.0544 per inch.
Now (2009)
Turkey: $0.99 cents per pound – a 153% increase.
Eggs: $2.29 a dozen - a 420% increase.
Pepsi: $6.29 for a twelve-pack, or 5.2 cents each - a 30% decrease.
T-bone steak: $14.90 per pound – a 1,392% increase.
Yams: 99 cents a pound - a 230% increase.
Coffee: $6.29 for 12 ounces, or 5.52 cents per ounce - a 15.4% decrease.
Pies: $4.99 for an 8 inch pie, or $06.24 per inch, a 14.7% increase.
It now takes about $6.72 to buy what $1.00 bought in 1963, so factoring 672% inflation into the analysis indicates that all the items in the foregoing list are cheaper today than they were 40 plus years ago, except T-bone steak.
Needless to say, other necessities are not included in this brief analysis, such as housing and clothing, along with a wide variety of other products and/or services that are generally included in the government Cost of Living Index. However, all things considered, I’m not so sure it’s much more difficult for people to get by today than it was in the 1940s or early 60s.
Perhaps we should stop listening to all the purveyors of gloom and doom about the economy who hold forth in the media these days. Comparatively speaking, things don’t look so bad.
usa online gambling? Play Online Blackjack For Money Usa online casinos accepting mastercard usa e wallet express casinos 25.
online spades gambling Australia Gambling online blackjack in usa
play online casino!
usa online gambling? Roulette Software Usa online casinos accepting mastercard usa e wallet express casinos 25.
online spades gambling Gambling In Michigan online blackjack in usa
play online casino! Playtech Bingo
