OBAMA: Disaster you can believe in!

Substance vs. style. It's a concept we all understand. We constantly have to make important, sometimes challenging judgments regarding those around us. A working mom conducting interviews of potential childcare centers; the parent of a teenage daughter (thankfully i'm 6 years and 10 months away from that...but who's counting) listening to the young man talking at the doorway while his girl gets ready upstairs; or even a small business owner desperate to hire a partner to help handle his growing workload. The childcare center, the boy, and the job-hunter all seem honest enough. They're funny, quick, and have a charming personality, but who are they really? Deep down, do they have true character, and are they qualified to meet your expectations? It's a fair question to ask about someone that may affect you or one you love, and it's more than fair to ask these questions of one seeking to become our next president! Any girl (outside of Rexburg, ID), would be considered insane to marry a guy she'd dated once or twice..but as a nation we're about to do the same thing. The country has fallen head over heels for a charming, young, very well spoken politician named Barack Obama, but NOBODY REALLY KNOWS THIS GUY, or perhaps more accurately, no one knows what he's accomplished to be worthy of leading our nation. yet we may be two short months away from giving him the presidency!

I've heard several radio and TV personalities challenge guests, callers etc to name ONE thing Obama has accomplished. They'll say..."get elected Senator" etc. Ummm, yeah that's something he did for himself, but what about an accomplishment for his consituents..............hear the crickets chirping yet?? Actually there is one thing he did. He earned "2007's most liberal senator" ranking according to national journal, a nonpartisan annual piece that ranks all senators on a liberal/conservative scale. This guy is extremely out of touch with the average American. Need proof? Look up his stances/record on partial birth abortion, including the sponsoring of a bill to kill the baby should it be born alive/survive the abortion process. What a guy. Other than that however, his resume remains thin. Contrast that with my guy Romney who had a resume a mile long, making you think the only adjustment he'd have to make upon getting elected president is raising the desk in the Oval office. I know, I know, that's just a biased opinion cause Romney's a conservative. Well I'll tell you right now I think Hillary Clinton had a great argument for president as well (in the experience catergory of course). I also argue that what little experience Obama does have is of minimal value because it is as a Senator. There is a huge difference between being a legislator/compromiser, and an actual executive making the tough decisions. That's why historically the country hasn't elected Senators president. Yes, McCain is a senator as well (yet one more reason I am dissappointed at BOTH our choices for president), but he does have many years of experience under his belt that Obama cannot claim. But inexperience certainly isn't the only problem with Obama. He is also very wrong for this country because what little we do know about him is exremely troubling. I will argue that, while his inexperinence and "mystery" factor certainly is troubling, the major reasons he is absolutely unfit to be president are his serious personality flaws and, oh......he's dead wrong on basically every important issue.

There are many important attributes I think every presidential candidate must show the American people he or she possesses; honesty/integrity (would've been nice Clinton), a good communicator (would've been nice Bush). But there are two attributes that I think are especially CRUCIAL at this time: experience and judgement, and Obama has proven he can't be trusted at all in this category. I can't fathom just how bad things could get under an Obama presidency. If we were any nation but the USA, we may not even survive 4 years under this guy. Let's discuss the first of Obama's character flaws; his judgment. They say you can tell alot about someone by who they choose to associate with. We all have made bad choices in friends, maybe romances, no one is perfect in this regard. Obama however, has consistently chosen to surround himself with people so high on the scumbag scale you can't help but question his judgment. In his youth for instance, he chose as his mentor a through and through communist named Frank Marshall Davis. Obama admits he was a great influence on him, and the influence of Davis (not to mention Saul Alinsky) has been revealed in his socialist leaning efforts as a communnitry organizer in Chicago. Another mentor Obama chose to listen to over and over and over again for years is a preacher named Jeremiah Wright. This guy is a real piece of work. He is Chicago preacher of black liberation theology, a hate-filled ideology that essentially blames the white man and racism for virtually all hardship facing present day African Americans. He's a shrewd fellow who deflected much of the media's coverage and subsequent shock of the nation by going to the famous "taken out of context" card. He minimalized the troubling clips of his sermons by asking "have you seen the entire sermon?" Well, I DID see it, and it's just as bad, if not worse in it's full context. I have seen interviews of other Chicago black ministers who admit this hate-filled teaching exists, and they are rightly concerned that good Christian "normal" congregations that happen to be predominantly black will get a bad rap. This guy is bad news, yet Obama continued to listen to him for years! Now you might think i'm being unfair. I agree religion should be off limits. Indeed, I was frustrated that Mitt Romney's faith was an issue at all (it shouldn't be) during his campaign. What then, is the difference? The difference is, black liberation theology is not "religious" at it's core, it's political. It's racist, hate-filled, and destructive with the intent to change the political course of the nation, not the spiritual course of the individual. In short, hate speech posing as religion is NOT off limits. Since most people I know are white, let me use the following example. Imagine you attended a traditionally "white's only" church. You arrive as usual on Sunday, and then you hear the preacher, (or Bishop if you're LDS) screaming from the pulpit that September 11th was America's own fault, especially "black America's fault" Would you stand for this? I doubt you'd sit there through the whole talk...let alone continue attending for year after year!!!

I could argue case closed on Obama's poor judgment from his association with Rev Wright alone, but oh there's more. Obama served on the board of Chicago foundation and became friends with "past" American terrorist William Ayers. In fact, in 1995, Obama kicked off his political career at Ayer's home. I won't take the time to go into Ayer's bio. Google it for yourself. People may soften his image using terms like "activist", and rationlize away his actions due to the "craziness of the times(meaning the 60's), but what Ayer's stood for is little different from Bin Laden, using violence against innocent people to achieve political objectives.

Then there's Tony Resko. This is another scumbag convicted of fraud and bribery who used political connections to advance his business. He has worked with Obama through the years, including a recent land deal, and donated generously to Obama's campaigns, but in all fairness Obama has never been suspected of directly being involved in any of Resko's illegal activity. He did however, accept donations from Rezko even after the businessman was caught doing some pretty shady stuff, like failing to heat his low-income apartments, and using a black business partner to obtain a minority set-aside (or special funding from the government for African American entrepreneuers).

But equally important are his stances on the important issues. So what then, are the issues this country faces at this time in our history? People of course will vary on their answers and the rankings of those answers, but hopefully a few things sort of universally top the list: islamic terrorism, the economy (including our massive debt), oil independence, and healthcare. Even modest research into Obamas positions on these four issues should lead any sane person to realize this guy would be an absolute nightmare. Let's take them one by one. First off, foreign policy.
Obama is either all over the place on his foreign policy positions, or he's consistently wrong. For instance I saw a timeline of 3 quotes Obama made over a 6 day period on Russia's invasion of Georgia. He changed his position each time, but prefaced his statement with one of his favorite lines "as I said before"......and the media gives this guy a pass on everything so he's not called on it. On the surge in Iraq? He not only expressed doubt, but KNEW it wouldn't work...well..it did work. Then when he does show some toughness, it's misdirected. He was willing to unilaterally invade a nuclear-armed ally, Pakistan, to hunt terrorist. Not smart. Another telling item, in my mind, to gauge the foreign policy "preparedness" of our next president, is actually their position on Iran.
Iran is quickly becoming our greatest threat. They have directly sponsored terrorist activity and violence against innocent Iraqi's and our own troops in Iraq. And their leaders won't rest until many more innocent lives our lost. Back in the 1930's much of the world turned a blind eye to the evil rising in Germany. Some argued that diplomacy was ALWAYS the answer, despite it failing with Hitler time and again. While dipomacy is the answer the vast majority of the time, evil must be exposed and confronted. Churchill got it right in WWII, and we have to be prepared to do the same with Iran. Obama has already stated that his way of dealing with Iran is to "sit down and talk" without preconditions. A great change of pace some might say, from the 'ol cowboy George W's policy of "shoot first, ask questions later" right? Not so fast. While, on the surface, negotiating with a radical islamic regime desperately trying to develop nuclear weapons may seem like the best option, suggesting that course of action reveals a clear underestimation of the enemy, an enemy that by every definition, is evil. To be clear, the two leaders of Iran, the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, believe to their very core that they have been called by Allah to destroy Israel and the US. They feel that by eliminating the world of Israel and the "great Satan" they could, as Joel Rosenberg puts it; "create the conditions that will bring the Islamic Messiah known as the Mahdi or the 12th Imam to earth. Puts their nuclear ambitions into greater perspective doesn't it? Scary, scary stuff. Just as frightening, Obama has absolutely know understanding of this threat. He thinks he will somehow sweet talk his way out of the conflict with Iran. Evil must be stopped. You don't sit down with the child molester next door you caught alone with your kid and discuss how, together, perhaps you can find more suitable alternative activities for him. Again, i'm not blasting dipomacy itself. It's a crucial part of any foreign policy, and is rightly named "the first option." My point is, that legitimizing Iran's regime with peace talks will not work. Obama has proven to us that his naivety at foreign policy could be very, very dangerous for us.

Secondly, how would Obama handle the economy and our national debt? In lieu of going into lengthy details, I will explain our current situation with an analogy. Basically our government is like a 16 year old girl with Daddy's credit card.... no, make that a 16 yr old girl that knows how to hack into Mastercard's servers and create her own credit cards, and distribute them to herself and everyone else in school in an effort to become more popular! Meanwhile, Obama wonders why the girl has to hack at all, and feels the solution is to give her easier access to the cash! Politicians on both sides, also in an effort to be popular with the voters, promise us all stuff we can't even come close to being able to afford. We are in serious, serious trouble, and our ONLY hope for the government to make MASSIVE spending cuts. Obama's solution???? Huge INCREASES in spending. If this whole essay were this one paragraph it would suffice for a strong enough case against Obama (man that would've freed up my evening). He also wants to do the other worst thing you can do to an economy....raise taxes! The federal government is bringing in a record amount of money already. It's only in debt because it spends so much more than it takes in. Raising taxes hurts the economy EVERY time it's done, and lowering taxes helps everyone, especially the middle class. How this is lost on Obama and the liberals is beyond me. Obama's one-two punch of higher taxes-higher spending might truly be the death blow to our battered economy.

When gas hit over $4/gallon, Americans began to wake up to just how bad our oil crisis is, and how vulnerable we are without energy independence. I fear we are starting to fall back asleep again, but the next president has to be proactive in this. We should be going all out, domestic drilling (including ANWR), nuclear, coal to oil, natural gas, wind, solar. We have got to aggressively tackle this problem. Obama's solution? I kid you not, he was pushing an "inflate your tires" message recently. Are you kidding me? He does NOT want domestic drilling (on or off shore), in fact he doesn't really want to do any of the above mentioned solutions. He is so tightly bound by environmental special interests that he's likely to even ban oil production from teenager's faces. (Hey, it'd solve their acne problems!) I love the liberal's argument that we can't move forward cause it'll take too long.....Bill Clinton failed to lift the ban on drilling back in 1995 despite heavy interest in favor. Leaders are supposed to look more ahead (and in this case....less at interns). Obama has no real solution to this problem. Thus one of our greatest crises will only get worse under his watch.
Finally, healthcare. I'm not even going to get into the absolute disaster that universal health care would bring to this country. I wrote extensively on the subject in an earlier blog, but many others alot smarter than I have too. The evidence is overwhelming. Universal health care doesn't work, but Obama will push for it hard.
Reason # 4, or more accurately, 4,873, why Obama CANNOT become our next president.

Emotion vs. Logic

Anyone who's read this blog or had a political discussion with me knows that I believe the difference between conservatism and liberalism is much more than a difference of opinion. This isn't like picking oatmeal raisin or chocolate chip, or rooting for BYU over Utah. This country is being pulled in two very different directions. One is right, the other wrong. Conservatism is desperately trying to preserve the strengths of this country, while unchecked liberalism would surely destroy it. Good vs. bad; it's that simple. Overeacting you might ask? Well this wouldn't be the first time in history that a democracy has slowly eroded away to the sublte onslaught of a dangerous ideology.

Some might argue there's always two sides to every story, that liberals make alot of great points, and they're not weakening the country, only changing it for the better (change is the word of the year after all). I wish I was overreacting, but in short the liberals are dead wrong on basically every major issue. The fact is, virtually all of their key arguments can be refuted, or exposed as just plain whacko with even the slightest research and/or context. How their ridiculous, harmful ideas gain, much less hold any ground at all is because they all have one powerful tool behind them.....emotional "surface" logic. For example, when I was younger my parents taught me about "urban legends." In particular, they explained how people were concerned because it was "well known" that children are occasionally kidnapped from Disneyland entrance lines because the large crowds and distracted parents created the perfect setting for an abduction! They laughed when they explained to me that a little research revealed this had never actually happened. It fit the criteria for surface logic perfectly because it had two key ingredients: 1) It "made sense" and 2) it played on our emotions (in this case fear). Similarly, it doesn't matter that liberals have no actual facts to back up their arguments (like "banning guns will make us safer"); if you have an emotional pitch, and you repeat it loud enough and long enough, it becomes true in the minds of the listeners.

It's perfectly natural to form an initial opinion when we hear one's viewpoint on something we were previously clueless about. That's a great start on the journey to the truth, as long as we don't stop there. As Americans, we have got to study these major issues with a little more effort. For crying out loud Shell and I spent hours researching a future vacation, or a possible furniture purchase, can we not do the same for much more important things? We owe it to ourselves and our fellow Americans to make truly informed decisions, whether on issues or the candidates themselves. If we're truly educated on such things as Anwar, the deficit, nuclear power, Iran, and above all the CONSTITUTION, then harmful politicians and ideologies can be exposed and held accountable. To explain the harm of surface logic, let me site a non political example from a con artist who operates a web sight on "strengthing your eyes through exercises." Essentially the site promises to cure you of your dependence on glasses if you buy their instructional video, and perform the included eye exercises daily. Their logic goes like this: "when other muscles of your body are weak, you exercise them to make them strong again, so why are the eye muscles any different?" Ooohhh, good point, i'll take 3 please! Without getting into too much detail, that argument is crap because refractive error involves no muscle at all, but
the curvature of your cornea. Anyway, they followed their point with many token testimonials and finally the ever reassuring money back guarantee. It's another scam like millions of others, but it'll probably sell big because it has that right touch of surface logic, an emotional "take charge of your life" appeal, and above all a bet that you won't do your homework! This is the essence of basically the entire liberal platform. To make my case, I will cite several examples below in a myth/reality format. Hopefully you will see for yourself where a little ol' forgotten thing I like to call the truth actually takes you.



MYTH: You're paying too much for gas because greedy Big Oil made ridiculously high profits!
(combine this with another related Myth: profit is evil!)



FACT: Big Oil profits are actually not that high taken in context, the profits they did make are a good thing for Americans, but most relevant to the argument, they have almost nothing to do with the high price of gas.


Hillary, Obama....all the liberals tell us that Oil companies make "too much" money. Yep, all these fat cats swimming in piles of money while the average American is left out in the cold.......
Well, big oil did make alot of money last year...ALOT. There's your crucial stat for surface logic. However, a little deeper digging reveals that they spent alot of money too. The amount of money it takes to obtain leases, get through red tape, drill, refine, and distribute the product is mind boggling. You can't accurately judge a company by looking at just one statistic. The more important stat is the profit margin, and it's actually only about 8 or 9 percent (averaging several sources). That's less than most food corporations like McDonald's, and way less than tech/internet big wigs like Google. Oh, and who do you think the majority of the profit goes to? Not the "big-wigs" (though they do make a hefty salary). Nope, the majority of a corporations profits go to middle-class shareholders...wait, I thought they were out in the cold??Yes, the profits trickly down to those meesly people wh0, ya know....INVEST! Great concept really. Instead of relying on uncle sam and good ol' social security, the average American can literally become PART owner in a major corporation and share the wealth.

Yet another reason profit for our American oil companies is good is it provides incentive for competive capitalism in a market that's CRUCIAL for all of us. Oil from the middle east is bad. If you care at all about national security, oil from American companies might be worth looking into. Now if you want oil, electronics, medicine, Big Macs, or any product to be of sufficient quality and price, you have to allow incentives for people to provide those things in the first place. Let's take Johnny high school grad for instance. Let's say Johnny works at Burgerland. I guarantee you he isn't going to step it up, bust his butt for years in school to earn his MBA, take a risk in opening up a small business like an even better burger joint, all to earn what he would have if he'd stayed at Burgerland and became assistant manager. What if, after growing his business to the point where he's hired (i.e. provided jobs to) others so he can cut back on his own workload and enjoy some hard earned wealth, the government cried foul and said Johnny was just greedy to take make the profits he did, because the price of fries was too high? (Never mind that the same government put rules and regs in place for the past few decades banning the planting of potatoes)! My point is, profit is healthy because it provides incentive for strong competition and entrepreneurship, for companies to take risks and grow, providing jobs to employees and product to consumers.


Finally, it doesn't take Grisom from CSI to find that Big Oil is not the real culprit in the crime of high gas prices. Here's a hint, the guilty party rhymes with the US schmuverment. First off, oil is traded worldwide in US dollars, so when the dollar weakens for many reasons like our massive deficits and the overprinting by the federal reserve, it has a strong inverse relationship to the price of oil.

But probably most profound, and frankly a concept anyone with basic knowledge of ecomonomics should understand, is supply and demand. China & India for instance, have seen their demand for oil skyrocket in the last few years with no signs of slowing down. And, as explained by the ficticous french fry example, our government has created all these ridiculous bans to stop US production, hense supply has not risen to meet that demand, and thus you have the perfect recipe for a price increase. Which leads us perfectly into the next myth:

MYTH: Drilling in ANWR is harmful to the environment and won't help our energy crisis. (but inflating your tires will help apparently).

TRUTH: Drilling in ANWR will have about zero impact on the environment and could make a huge dent in our dependence on foreign oil. I will summarize the key facts, but a recent article did a much better job than I can. Take a second and google "truth about heritage foundation ANWR foundry" But here's the deal. ANWR is a piece of federal land in northern Alaska a whopping 19 million acres in size, but the proposed drilling area is only 2000 acres of than, and while much of ANWR is breathtakingly beautiful, the tiny section for the proposed drilling site is a barren, unattractive section just down the coast from an existing drill sight called Prudoe Bay. We've been drilling in Prudoe bay for years, and not only has the site provided a sweet haul of oil, it's actually often surrounded by wildlife. In fact they often like to use the platforms for shelter. The estimated amount of oil at the proposed site is huge, think motherload folks, and the caribou will still have plenty of land to roam in. If it has such huge potential with minimal environmental impact, why are environmentalists so successful at blocking the drilling? They're the masters of emotion and surface logic, able to pervade an argument with almost zero facts or substance behind it. It's how they've convinced many that a bogus theory like global warming is actually real. Let me use a hypothetical parrallel to help explain how these environmental groups work. Since many who might read this are familiar with Utah; let's say you see a message from an environmental group showing the beautiful Wasatch mountains. The camera pans across a snowcapped Mt. Olympus, and then accross Eden and Park City, (sweet, classical music) a voice begins warmly "Utah, a majestic land, a precious land" Then the music changes...."but it could all go away"...the voice continues in that famous deep, serious tone: "Big Oil wants to drill in beautiful Utah, filling the landscape with Oil rigs...and just think what will happen to the seagulls?? (music straight out of a horror/slasher flick fades out).... Meanwhile, the oil companies scratch their heads because the facts paint a drastically different picture. They were actually planning to drill an area the size of about 10 football fields out on the south end of Antelope Island in the Great Salt Lake! Furthermore, they already have a drill site close by on the north end of the island that's been a jackpot for years. No mountains or seagulls threatened...large increase in oil production..everyone's a winner! That fictional analogy pretty much describes the true situation in the ANWR. Now this isn't the magic solution to our entire energy crisis. A MUCH more comprehensive strategy is needed. Nuclear, coal to oil, and of course technologies that reduce our dependence on oil overall are all key pieces to the solution; but in the meantime...drill away.

MYTH: But the oil industry, and the auto industry, pretty much every industry...oh, and you for existing and exhaling CO2, are all ruining the planet, killing off the Polar bears and causing Global Warming!

TRUTH: Industry does have it's faults, and any company that is environmentally irresponsible should be exposed. But by and large most are environmentally responsible (their reputation is on the line after all), but these same "evil" industries are what provides a huge amount of our quality of life! Talk about biting the hand that feeds you for crying out loud. American industry has been a huge blessing to the whole world. We gave 'em the car, the plane, television, and thanks to Al Gore, even the internet! They provide millions of jobs to the middle class, and so like it or not liberals their fate is tied to the average Americans pretty tighty... But the polar bears are dying! I love this one, in fact the Bush Administration even put polar bears on the endangered species list. But the truth is, polar bear populations have been growing for years! Thankfully good people are fighting this insanity. The governor of Alaska actually sued the federal government to have polar bears removed from the endangered list because having a species on the list when it's not even close to endangered could be used for deceitful purposes by say......oh, I dunno...those environmentalists who are just occasionally known for distorting facts to push their agenda. Which leads me perfectly into the final part of this myth trio...global warming. In short, global warming is the perfect example of the liberal agenda: pitching an emotional agenda with no facts to support it. Oh, liberals love to ignore real data, like recently released earth temperature reading revealing there has been essentially ZERO warming whatsoever since 1998, or that other planets in our solar system have seen warming (which, call 'em crazy, but some say could be related to the fact our sun varies widely in it's radiation output)Man-made global warming truly is the greatest scam in modern history. For MUCH more of my take on this, please see my essay devoted entirely to the global warming myth. Just scroll down this blog a few entries and look for the title "The sky is falling...and it'll cost ya."

Well I have many more "myths" to debunk, including banning guns makes us safer, negotiating with Iran (i.e. the Obama solution to peace in the middle east) will actually work, and even nuclear power is dangerous. We're just gettin started, but until then, to be continued........

A Bedtime Story

No i'm not trying to be an M. Night Shyamalan wannabe, but I do have a little bedtime story of my own. For the past few months the girls and I have had a little tradition where I tell them a bedtime story I usually just make up on the spot after they're all tucked in. I think this all started one night when the girls couldn't agree on a book for me to read to them. I finally gave up and decided to tell my own story. They really look forward to it and it's been alot of fun seeing their eyes so big with their imaginations going a mile a minute.

The story involves 2 princesses and their constant struggle to outsmart the mean werewolf. I'm including one of the stories below, and they all begin word for word the same up through the word "werewolf", then the adventure varies from night to night.

One time, there were 2 beautiful little princesses who lived in a castle. They loved playing in their castle, but most of all they loved the yard. It had a big meadow with lots of flowers, a waterfall, a giant trampoline, a waterslide, and a pool. They loved playing all throughout the yard, and they knew they could play anywhere except the forbidden place at the edge of the yard (Andie & Emma usually chime in on this part).......dark forest! Because in dark forest lived (again they chime in)....the werewolf.
The princesses were so excited because today was their birthday party. They couldn't wait for the cake, and presents, and seeing all their friends, but most of all they were so excited because a magic balloon maker was coming! When she finally came, the magic balloon maker gathered all the children around. One boy at the party asked for a balloon tiger! The balloon maker smiled as she began blowing up the balloon (I make a sound effect and action of blowing it up). As she handed the tiger to the friend, it instantly came to life, roaring and running around the yard. Another friend asked for a butterfly, and when the balloon maker handed the girl her balloon, it started fluttering it's wings and flying way up in the air. When it came back close to the ground, the girl jumped on it and it carried her up in the sky! She was having so much fun, she laughed and waved to all her friends below. She didn't realize though, that the butterfly was starting to carry her over the dark forest. The princesses stopped smiling, they knew their friend was in trouble. The werewolf would be waiting for their friend on the butterfly! The girls thought and thought...and then they got an idea. They ran over and wispered something in the magic balloon maker's ear. The balloon maker nodded and got right to work.
Meanwhile, the friend on the butterfly started to get scared because her butterfly was getting tired. She was flying lower and lower, and soon she was all the way down to the ground inside dark forest! She even got more afraid when she heard a growl coming from the shadows. It was the werewolf! She screamed as the werewolf crept closer and closer. "Ha Ha said the werewolf, now i've got you and i'm going to eat you." Just then, the princess girls came running into the forest on a big horse. "Wait werewolf" they said. "If you give us our friend back, you can eat our horse instead." The werewolf licked his lips, the horse was bigger and tastier than the little girl, so he said "fine. " The girls got off the horse and ran over to their friend. As the werewolf crept closer to the tasty horse, he forgot all about the 3 girls. "This will be way better anyway, then i'll just eat the girls after." It took him several minutes to sneak up on the horse, but finally he grabbed it. He smiled as he opened his mouth really big, but as he went to take a big bite, he heard a big pop. It was a balloon! He roared with anger, but it was too late, the princessses and their friend had already run back home! The werewolf would go hungry tonight, but not the girls...they had some birthday cake to eat!

So girls, if you're reading this when you're teenagers, you know there was one time in your life that Dad had something interesting to say! I'll enjoy it while it lasts!

Guam...the cliffnotes.

Tomorrow is a big day here on the island of Guam. There'll be a big parade, pretty much everyone has the day off, and it's all to celebrate a great day in our nation's history....liberation day! During WWII, the Japanese occupied this island from late 1941 until July 21, 1944 when the Americans invaded and liberated the island. I have spoken with many locals who were small children at the time, and they truly went through some pretty horrible times under Japanese rule. It's really interesting living on base surrounded by former battlefields and rich war history.
There's a whole lot more to this island and the people than war history though. After almost a year of living here, I wanted to summarize our experience on the tiny island in the pacific. Guam has about 140,000 people who live mostly in small villages scattered around the island. There is no real "downtown", and the villages are usually rather simple. No freeway, wal-mart or circuit city stores here, few American chain restaurants, just simple markets and shops. There is a main tourist area called Tumon Bay, sort of the Waikeekee beach of Guam. At the north tip of the island sits the Air Force Base, and our Navy base lies 1/2 way down the west coast. In fact, about a mile from our home is the westernmost tip of Guam, which is also the westernmost tip of the whole USA. The island has many thick jungles and warm, clear water great for snorkeling and scuba diving. The year has a wet and dry season, about 6 months each, and they earn their names!
The people here are great. They have their faults, but overall they are a very kind, friendly, patient people who seem to enjoy having us (meaning the military and just Stateside americans in general) living here. In fact just today a local patient of mine brought a huge bag of avacados and mangos fresh from his tree into the clinic. They are a giving people. They also serve in the miliatary at quite a high rate, in fact I treat local famlies all the time who have a husband/father deployed. They know how to make great food, their BBQ and fish is outstanding. They have some really neat traditions, like night spear-fishing, which locals in our branch have invited us to participate in more than once. They are a laid back people which can sometimes test our patience, but I think that's been a good thing. There are less flattering things here too. Alcoholism and unemployment is rampant here, especially among the male population. Teen pregnancy is also a big problem, and it's not uncommon to see a woman in her late 20's with 4 or so kids with 4 different men who never married. I don't know how many times i've seen a female patient in clinic who is my age and has a 16 yr old child. If there was ever evidence that government welfare programs do more harm than good....it's here. They have govt. subsidized housing here called Ghura housing, which is obviously income dependent. The more you make, the more rent you pay. Many residents there make no effort at all to find a job cause that would mean the food stamps and free housing go away. And to get an idea how many are on food stamps, just try going by a grocery store at the start of the month....mind boggling. Many of the youth grow up here learning that living off the government is just the way it is, so the cycle is not likely to be broken soon. I don't mean to imply they're a lazy society. As a whole they are hard working people who love their families and seem to find great joy in life.
The church has 3 branches here. Talisay has alot of great people. It's been a great experience even if we have a little heavier calling load than the average ward in the states (although a cake walk compared to Virginia Beach). We have also made some great friends. The Copelands are practically family, and the Bunch's, Casons, and Monsons have been a blessing in our lives. We have really enjoyed our time here and look forward to the next 2 years.
(visit the family blogsite for pictures/details.)

The sky is falling....and it'll cost ya!

Interacting with patients and their families each day is one of the best things about my job. I certainly see the whole spectrum of people, their concerns, questions, and yes...even jokes. It's especially interesting to hear the theories of parents on their kid's new need for glasses. I have seen many Moms for instance, who confindently assume the video games their son plays are responsible for the new need for specs. TV, and computer also often get tagged by parents confident... or desperate, to get their kid away from the unfavorable activities. (What's interesting is reading is never questioned). People see a negative, or perceived negative outcome, like their kid needing glasses, and quickly form a cause for the outcome that fits their agenda. I don't mean to rip on my patients. Seeing cause and effect relationships that benefit us in some way is human nature, and a concept any married person can certainly relate to. (Shell, did you know watching HGTV instead of sportcenter causes breast cancer?....Don't believe me? Go ahead and survey breast cancer patients and see which channel they watch more of!!!)


Ladies and Gentlemen, global warming is no different! I acknowledge the earth does seem to be warming slightly (less than a degree Celcius in the last 100 years), but to assume it is caused by mankind's activities is about as ridiculous as my HGTV example.Watching Gore's propagandumentery was the best piece of pick and choose your evidence work i've ever seen. First off, has anyone ever heard of the ice age? I'd have to look it up, but I could swear it happened a few years before SUV's were invented. News flash Al Gore, the earth has proven it's capable of MASSIVE climate change without any human input.....well caveman input I guess. Actually Gore does mention the previous ice ages, but of course THIS round of climate change is different! The scare tactics abound in this film. For one, Gore not so subtly suggests that every natural disaster can be blamed on human activity. For instance he mentions that rencently, Japan had 10 typhoons in 1 year, the highest number ever! That statistic is true, BUT he left out the very important caveat that the lower pacific regions, including the Phillipines, had many fewer typhoons, they just simply shifted more north that year. Of course the melting of Kilamanjaro is blamed on global warming too. The problem with this claim is Kilamanjaro like many other midlatitude glaciers,have been declining for well over a century. And Hurricane Katrina being mankind's fault? I remember in school learning about something called the scientific method....I thought there were certain steps required before a claim became a theory, let alone dramatic claims with no evidence becoming a theory. But why bother with theory even it all? Just skip theory and go straight to calling it fact, then denounce any skeptic to that so called fact as an ignorant, big oil sell out. That's alot funner! Back to the actual warming. That staggering 1 degree rise in the last 100 years is actually basically linear. That is, it raised as much from 1900 to about 1950 as it has from 1950 till now, despite that fact our "carbon output" has skyrocketed in the last 50 years. In fact, even according to Gore's graphs, temperature rises actually preceded CO2 elevation on certain occasions. Yeah i'm thinkin the whole carbon output=rise in CO2 levels=global warming equation has just a few holes in it. Any theory this emotionally charged so low on actual evidence to back it up just screams "agenda."


But let's get back to the evidence....or lack thereof. If a few scientists scream the sky is falling, do we take them at their word? Well they were sure screaming a few decades back. The funny thing is, not only were they singing a different tune, but the exact opposite tune. These "never wrong" scientists came out with a global cooling scare in the 1970's. You heard me right, cooling. (TAKE A FEW SECONDS AND GOOGLE "GLOBAL COOLING 1975" and read the Newsweek article listed. I dunno, sounds pretty convincing to me....) Why the change in scare tactic.. errr.....temperature? I guess "warming" sounds a little more terrifying (unless of course, you live in Utah presently, then warming sounds pretty good).


You would think from listening to Hollywood stars (who are experts on climatology by the way), and the rest of the media, that everyone who's anyone is on board with the theory, but the fact is there is ALOT of disagreement from climatologists on the subject (meteorologist and founder of the Weather Channel John Coleman for one). But, just like Mother Earth, the dissenters are sure feeling the heat. How would it be to have some of your fellow peers, and supposed unbiased journalist tell you you're the eqivalent of a Holocaust denier if you don't endorse the global warming movement? Ellen Goodman of the Boston Globe claimed just that. Then there's Heidi Cullen, a climatologist from the Weather Channel, who suggested that any of her collegues who dissent should lose their certification from the American Meteorological Society! Despite the pressure, many respected scientist do not put their rubber stamp on this ridiculous theory. Sanity is not dead!


Why then, have so many jumped on board? I think it's the garbage can effect. Let me explain; Today when I got home from work, I noticed the garbage can I took to the curb that morning was still full. It was then that I realized garbage day was tomorrow. The funny thing was, so many people had their cans out. My guess is, the neighbor saw us take our can out and thought, "I'm not certain they're right, but better safe than sorry, so I will too." Then, when our other neighbor sees two cans out, then it must be so....and so on and so on. As scary as it sounds, some people can see a blurb on the news, a celebrity or two cry "the sky is falling," and when a friend mentions "we just gotta stop global warming,", they think...."uhhh, yeah, yeah WE DO!)." Phenomonons can spread, for cryin out loud look how popular the Back Street Boys got!

So what's the big deal if mankind isn't actually causing global warming? What's the harm in people believing a bogus theory, especially if it motivates them to help clean the earth? First off, there are many global warming advocates...of say the Hollywood/Washington variety, who aren't really doing a whole lot to clean the earth. Mr. Gore's house for instance, consumes about 20 times that of the average American home. The hypocrisy of the messanger certainly doesn't negate the message, but it is worth noting. Secondly, there isn't a global warming skeptic out there who doesn't want clean air and water. To suggest that anyone who doesn't jump on the global warming band wagon wants polluted rivers and air is a little far fetched...even for this crowd. We owe it to our children to leave the earth better than we inherited it, and companies aren't just working for a better planet out of genuine concern, but also to protect their image. However noble or "greedy" their intentions are, the fact is a whole lot is being done, and will continue to be done to clean the planet...whether or not global warming is real. Yes there are scumbags out there still polluting the earth, but us nbelievers are working hard for a clean planet too!
The real reason the global warming movement is so scary is that it's gonna cost you-big time!
New Zealander's already pay an environmental tax with their electric bill. The Governator Arnold Scheiowroamomlrezz is pushing a similar program in California. John Mccain, the uhhhhh Republican guy for prez, proposed a roughly 30 cent hike tax on each gallon of gas to combat global warming. Startin' to hold some real relevence for ya now, isn't it? To further explain, what if I told you carrots do indeed help your eyes, but you need to buy the exotic, Andes grown carrots of South America, or you could go blind!!!! It's not hard to see that some people (South American carrot farmers for instance) would benefit from this, and have a vested interest in propagating this theory, while our own American carrot growers would be harmed as this "movement" gained momentum. Once you start looking at the economic ramifications of a theory, i'd say it becomes pretty darn stinkin important if it's real or not, and there may be people who become less intrested in the truth, and more interested in the momentum! This concern was voiced in a January 9th article in the New York Times, The article details the concern of the Federal Trade commission on certain companies profiting so heavily from carbon offset programs (some 54 million dollars last year alone..and i'm a conservative, I like profits....in this case however.....). Anyway, the article states: With the rapid growth of green programs like carbon offsets, "there’s a heightened potential for deception," said Deborah Platt Majoras, chairwoman of the commission. Yeah, no kidding.
At the risk of sounding like a paranoid, conspiracy theorist, there is a deeper problem with the global warming theory. On an international level, worthless organizations like the UN have consistently used Global Warming to leverage policies that directly harm the US economy. Basically, in a not-so-sublte way, the international folks are suggesting that wealthy, carbon emmitters should essentially shut down their industrial machine to stop evil carbon emmissions. It's not just subtle suggestions, formal treaties have been drafted so blatantly anti-American you'd have to be....(insert noun of choice here)....not to see it. Thank goodness GW Bush had the guts and the sense to reject the Kyoto treaty, which would have cost us an estimated 325 billion dollars, while hypocritically demanding nothing of China, a country who, within the next year or two will emit more greenhouse gasses then we are.
Here's the deal people. This hoax is not just annoying, it's dangerous. We can work hard to clean the planet through alternate energy programs and more earth friendly habits as personal consumers. We cannot waste billions of dollars, and agree to needlessly shut down vital parts of the American economy all to entertian the bogus notion that we control mother nature. I don't know if it'll take 5 years or 50, but eventually the chirade will come crashing down and man-made Global Warming will be revealed as the greatest hoax in world history. I just fear we'll have to endure some serious economic hardship first...... not to mention a Gore sequel: An inconvenienter truth...please, no!

A case for conservatism

All right, so I know i've ranted on about being a conservative in my earlier blogs, but just in case people still think me and other right-wing wackos are brainwashed Rush Limbaugh clones, then you just......wait until after his program tomorrow when I can find out from him what to say about that!
OK, in all seriousness, I do rip on the left, but I have great respect for many good Democrats. You might say there's several i'm very close to who I know have a great love for this country. I don't have all the answers, and the whole "the truth lies somewhere in-between" may indeed be true wisdom, but I firmly believe the principles of conservatism are the strength of this country, and that Democrats are the poster children for the well-intentioned who are doing more harm than good. That said, let me make my case.
Essentially, it comes down to the deep-rooted principles held on either side. When I say deep, I mean what the movements really stand for, not just what we hear on the surface. Politicians use stupid scare tactics, half-truths, and good ol spin to get people arguing and focusing on the debate itself, instead of the core issues. Democrats aren't traitors and Republicans don't hate poor and minorities, sorry to ebb the adrenaline flow of anyone ready to duke it out, but those are the facts. Most people in both parties are great Americans. I really believe that, but the PRINCIPLES behind Conservativism are what makes this country great, and the liberal/Democratic agenda, while well intentioned, is flat out harmful. You gotta look at what message your message, or agenda, is really conveying. In other words, you have to look deeper than the words, to the real message beneath.
For instance, Conservatives believe in low taxes, limited goverment, a strong defense, are generally pro-life, and favor harsher punishments for criminals. But on a deeper level, what it really means is they believe in personal responsibility, and that there are consequences for one's decisions; that freedom does not come from the government, but that it's the government's job to preserve the people's God given freedom. (In fact, all governments gradually take freedom away, some just do it more slowly than others).
Liberals on the other hand, believe in higher taxes, seperation of church and state way beyond what the constitution intended (i'll explain later), more often than not are pro-choice and favor lighter punishment for criminals in general. Liberalism, simply put, threatens prosperity and ultimately, freedom. It directly conflicts with core principles like innovation, responsiblity, acheivement, and self-reliance. In the end, it even puts government over God. It's no coincidence all communist countries shun religion. If people truly rely on themselves and their God, the government becomes less important, less powerful. Here are some specific examples contrasting the two very different schools of thought.

CONSERVATISM REWARDS PROGRESS AND ACHEIVEMENT, LIBERALISM PUNISHES IT. You need only to contrast the tax philosophies of the two parties to see this. People making 100,000 or more pay 80% of the taxes in this country, yet when a tax cut comes up for debate, you'd think conservatives were asking the less fortunate to sell their oldest child and give the proceeds to the nearest millionaire. The fact is, Democrats think the answer to all economic problems is to tax the "rich". In other words, the message is "if you're working hard and making a decent living for yourself, you don't really deserve it, and if you're not self-sustaining, you don't have to pick yourself up and get an education or a job, the government will just take care of you". Can we not see the inherent danger in this?
First off, most upper-middle class, in fact, most millionaires in this country did not find their better fortune through inheritence or luck, but through hard work, education, and wise spending and investing. Ask any financial adviser, and part of their little presentation explains this in great detail. Second, high taxes hurt the middle class, especially the small business owner. And folks, the small business owner IS the economic backbone of this nation. When they have more money in their pocket, and corportations have more money, it creates jobs. THAT is how you truly help the poor. Those struggling in society are never raised up by pushing everyone else down. Think of the country more like an elevator and less like a scale. Democrats, I hope you can understand that it's the upper and upper middle class that create the jobs for others. Punishing the wealthier citizens and corporations just does not work long term and about the worst thing you could do for this country econmocially.

CONSERVATISM REINFORCES PERSONAL RESPONSIBLITY, LIBERALISM DESTROYS IT
Recently, laws were enacted in New York to ban trans fats. In other words, it's not your fault you're a fatty on the verge of a heart attack, it's Nabiscos! I site this example because it reveals two BIG ways the liberal agenda threatens our nation: 1) Trying to have the government make your desisions for you (in this case what you can and can't eat), and 2) When something bad happens to you, there's always someone else to blame. The fact is, sometime no one's to blame.
Tell that to John Edwards, the epitomy of liberalism. The guy made his fortune off suing doctors who delivered children with Cerebral Palsy. He convinced juries that if Doc's had only performed a C-section earlier in the pregnancy, the kid wouldn't have that horrible condition. There was never any evidence for this, in fact his wack theory has since been disproven, but not before many physicians were financially ruined and malpractic insurance for OB/GYN skyrocketed. The greatest tragedy in all of this is however, is the message that it sends, to the parents and the public in general. Disclaimer: I am not a fan of malpractice attourneys. Yes there are Doctors and companies out there who really screw up, and they need to be held accountable, but what malpractice attourneys are doing to the country and it's litigation addiction is what the liberal agenda is more subtely doing to the nation, dissolving personal responsiblity. Remember the McDonald's customer who got millions for spilling hot coffee on herself? Please, make it stop!
As ugly as it sounds, the fact is a core principle of the liberal movement is erasing consequences of behavior. I've already mentioned poverty/taxes and litigation (the trial lawyer association is the single largest contributor to the Democratic party by the way), but we're just getting started. It's also no coincidence that Liberals are basically in lock-step with the Pro-Choice movement. Pro choice is a very sugar-coated way to say, "killing your unborn child to take away all consequences of your behavior".
The consequence erasing doesn't stop there, liberals are notorious for their empathy for the worst members of our society. Rapists, murderers, child molesters, ruthless dictators....according to liberals, they're not monsters, they're just misunderstood. Take good ol' Massachusetts, probably the most liberal state in the union. They were recently in the news for developing a field trip program for convicted sex offenders. I could ALMOST stomach it if the field trip was say, to a museum, or even a Celtics game, but they took them to a circus! The investigative reporter caught on tape these guys unsupervised surrounded by kids. It truly boggles the mind. Want another example? Take Roberston, Boyd, and Horton for instance. These are 3 guys you've probably never heard of, but they were all violent criminals who murdered people AFTER they were put behind bars. Mike Dukakis, a liberal who ran for Prez in 88 released these scumbags from prison throught the furlogh program, which basically let criminals out in society for the weekends to find a job, interact with society, and...you know....replay the good ol' times by Mudering on their weekend out on the town. The liberals incessant urge to pardon the undeserving at the expense of innocent Americans is almost difficult to comprehend.....that is, until you understand the deeper principles of the party.

UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE: HEY EVERYBODY....IT'S FREE!!
I could go on forever about the distastrous idea of universal health care, (which is anything but free in reality) In case you hadn't heard, free market capitalism ALWAYS makes a higher quality product and is more efficient than the Government. I have 6 letters for you: DMV, and IRS. The reason the free market works is simple, the right motivation drives it: profit! If you don't produce a high quality product, and do so efficiently at minimal, or at least acceptable cost to you, someone else will and you'll be gone! Look at electronics. When they first came out, VCR's were like $30,000! I exaggerate, but crazy expensive, but things get better, and cheaper. If Sony makes a good VCR, then JVC knows they've got to make one just as good, or even better! We think TV's, couches, and hamburgers when someone says product, but healthcare is a product too, and if you take capitalism out of the picture and put the government in charge, we are in a world of hurt.
Yes there are major problems with the current system, but the free market, not the government, holds the answer. If your NBA team is losing, you may need to fire the coach, but you don't replace him with a football coach, because the core principles of the game are still valid, they just weren't being done right. Likewise, just because problems exist in our healthcare system in the free market, you don't abandon it for Government run healthcare. In fact, football coach is a bad analogy. The government running health care would be more like a piano teacher coaching an NBA team. Bad, bad idea.
This should not be a revelation to anyone who actually does a little homework, especially since our friends in Europe and Canada already went down the foolish universal health care road. In Britain they actually have policies in place in the hospitals to no longer change bedding between patients to try and cut costs! And there's many more horror stories like that one, despite what Michael Moore says.
Low quality care isn't the only problem, there's also the accessabilty problem. For example: If the government came out tomorrow and said "gas is now 10 cents a gallon," can you imagine the lines at the pump? That's about how it is; the average wait list for a hip replacement in Canada is MONTHS.Many Canadians actually go to Michigan and other bordering US states for care, even though it means paying for procedures out of pocket, just to have the opportunity to get treated ...sometime in their lifetime! Once again, sounds good on the surface, but insert ANY logic whatsoever into the equation and this liberal idea, like every other, reveals it's true colors.


In conclusion....yes I am actually going to conclude, I'd like you to ponder a couple other things. I believe conservative ideas and principles not only make sense, but ring true to the majority of those who really listen to and study them. Conversely, liberal ideas make great headlines and talking points for campaigning politicians, but going into them in depth reveals their true colors and turns many away. It is for this reason I believe, that conservative talk radio thrives while liberal talk radio can't get off the ground. Liberal Air America was actually jumpstarted by funding in the millions, with celebrities like Jenneane Garofollo and Al Franken on the mic, and it died, along with MANY, MANY other attempts, while conservative talk radio continues to thrive across the whole country. In case you want to argue Conservatives are just radio junkies, we've got the corner on books as well. For every dollar earned by a liberal best seller, at least 3 come in on the conservative side. Fox News, which is weakly conservative at best, but the most right-leaning of all news networks, consistently leads in the ratings. I don't mean to sound like a cocky fan blurting my teams's statistics. It isn't a competition, but it is a revealing statistic that says something about the real strength of the message. So here's the meat and potatoes: Ultimately, The Liberal message is that we need the Government to take care of us, that the system is rigged for the greedy priveledged, that problems can be blamed on someone else, and our fate is largly tied to what the government can do for you and not from the consequences of your own behavior. Conversely, Conservatism is positive. Fundamentally, it tells you that you can succeed. By making wise choices, such as hard work, an education, and basic principles of responsibility and drive, anyone can experience the American Dream.

Republicans: the wayward party

So the GOP race seems down to 2. You would think the choice for Republicans is pretty obvious, but from the Florida results you've gotta wonder what affects the sun's radiation is actually having on the good citizens of the sunshine state. In one corner you've got basically the male version of Hillary Clinton......wait, that's Bill, I mean the really old male version of Hillary. You know, the one who threatened several years back to leave the Republican party to become an independent or even a Dem, who voted against Bush's tax cuts twice, authored McCain Feingold Hint #1: M.F is to free speech what Rosie O'Donnell is to pleasant conversation. A guy who just last year, came up with amnesty as the solution to the immigration program. Hint #2: In Washington, "comprehensive" pretty much means worthless. Oh, and he's a lifelong Senator (no, that's NOT a good thing).
Contrast that with Mitt Romney. His specailty is basically gutting inefficient organizations and getting results, oh and he did that in the real world. One vital conservative principle is limited government, and this guy will limit it guaranteed. He is for tax cuts, both individual AND corporate. Hint #3, that's a GOOD thing. Let me explain for a second. Our country has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. Now if you're Company X, and you could bring your operation with tons of jobs here and pay a boatload in taxes, or go overseas and pay less, what do you pick? Lower taxes only helping the rich is a big boatload of crap (and I know big boats, I'm in the Navy!). He is adament about staying on the offensive against islamic extremism. He is also for this not so radical idea called enforcing existing laws by securing our borders and... I dunno, stopping for example, the use of taxpayer money for in-state tuition breaks for illegal immigrants. Romney is the genuine article folks. A true conservative that that hasn't been seen for 20 years.
Now you probably realized by now I believe in conservatism. I truly feel that this country is the greatest in the history of the world because of it's people and the constitution, not the government. Yes government can do some good, and is necessary, but more often than not it gets in the way at best and hinders prosperity and freedom at worst. I could go on and on with statistics and rhetoric, but let me use just a couple examples. First off, if you look at wealth distribution, it has very little to do with what you were born into. The caste systems and rich-by-birthright Robin Hood times are gone. Crazy at it sounds, people succeed or fail in this nation largely because of the choices they make (for instance, having an illegitamate child is probably the single biggest factor in poverty risk, more than race-despite what the media says). People who are really hurting aren't that way because the goverment isn't doing enough, but there are people, in fact, even an entire party, that gains it's power by leading people to believe just that. Now that i've ripped on the Dems, I must say that the point of this piece is actually to rip on the right. That's right; the Republican party has been slowly going wayward since 1988, and we're looking at the point of no return now. For review: In 1980, the last true conservative, Ronald Reagan, was elected president. Now this republican actually acted like a conservative, consequently the country loved him, evidenced when he went up for reelection where he won by about the biggest landslide in history (49 of the 50 states). Since then, there's been a slow decay of conservative principles. In 88 George H took over. He was what you might call half-conservative at best...growing government...raising taxes...and he lost his reelection bid. The country then chose good ol Clinton..(note a common theme, repeated in 2006: when Republicans forget conservative principles, Democrats get elected!)I wont even go into Clintons's years, but needless to say conservatism took a back seat for awhile, except in congress. In 2000 George W takes over, but as a half...no....more like 40% conservative at best. Yes he led us wisely in the war on terror, for which I am grateful, and appointing judges to the Supreme Court with more exposure to the constitution than what they've seen on Jeopardy didn't hurt. He did lower taxes, but forgot that all important (i.e. most important) step of limiting goverment, and consequently the deficit is huge and people are a little upset. So here we are, 2008. The Crossroads of Conservatism (I should copywrite that). I may be overdramatic...in fact I HOPE somehow I am, but this Republican primary is huge, crucial, pivotal...you get the point. If we actually nominate John Mccain all hope may be lost. I've said it before, but Mitt Romney just has to win the white house this fall. Let the wayward party return!