Today we spent the entire day driving to and visiting Devil’s Tower. I took over 200 pictures of the Tower and the surrounding area. Needless to say this was the best monument/national park we visited this year. Here are a couple of the lower resolution pictures, as this wireless connection is not cooperating.





This trip I have discovered a fondness for prairie dogs. I spent some time in a field of them running all around me. I discovered I can make the same noise that they make, so I think they thought I was their God. Maybe not, but they performed some unique moves I have never seen before. I only have high res pictures of them and I cannot upload any of them. Do you think the cats would mind if I brought one home?

Right now we are at the Clarion Inn in Gillette, Wyoming. Tomorrow we will probably be in Scottsbluff, Nebraska near Chimney Rock. BTW: thanks for all of your comments.

Today we saw Wind Cave and Jewel Cave. On the way to Wind Cave we drove through many fields of buffalo and prairie dogs. My camera malfunctioned early in the day and I had to buy a new one. That was cool because I needed a better camera anyway. I bought a Canon Sureshot S21S and it rocks!! Much better than the old Olympus. The following pics are still from the old camera.

Well, I lucked out; our first hotel has wireless Internet. So here is a quick vacation update from Custer, South Dakota.

After driving almost the entire way from St. Louis to South Dakota on Friday night we arrived in the Badlands this afternoon about 1pm. In addition to touring the Badlands, we also saw Mt. Rushmore (no big deal) and Crazy Horse monument.

Mt. Rushmore is not a big as I imagined. You pay $8 to park your vehicle but the park is free.



Crazy Horse is a bigger monument than Mt. Rushmore but it’s not finished. It cost $25 to get in and you have to pay an additional $4 per person to ride a van to get closer to the monument. I thought that was kind of a rip off; if you pay $25 you would expect that to cover seeing the monument, right? Wrong. It covers the gift shop only and the craft shops. Big deal!

Badlands





Mt. Rushmore & Crazy Horse





I call this one "Ass Rock"

My whole life ass has followed me. When you turn onto the street going to my house, you turn onto ASSumption street. Everywhere I go I always see rock formations shaped as ass; this year is no exception.

Does anybody care about professional athletes taking performance enhancing drugs? Are you concerned about Barry Bonds passing Babe Ruth on the all time home run list? Do you actually care if Albert Pujols is taking drugs? If you answered “yes” to these questions consider our society; we live in a drug culture. If this era in baseball is considered the “Steroids Era” then this era in American civilization should be considered the “Drug Era”.

We have drugs for everything: concentration, sleeping, staying awake. shitting, eating, pissing, not pissing, not shitting, erections, pregnancy, heart problems, vein problems, hypertension, depression, quit smoking, gout, AIDs, cancer, diabetes, flu, cough, headaches, numbness, irritable bowels, anxiety, and everything else not mentioned. Are you hooked on drugs? No problem, we have a drug to get you off drugs. Of course these drugs don’t actually cure anything; they just keep you coming back for more pills.

Our entire society takes performance enhancing drugs on a daily basis to help concentrate better and to work more efficiently. So why does society seemed outraged at athletes for doing the same to help them work better. I wonder how many of these hypocrites who are complaining, take drugs to enhance their life on a daily basis. Probably most of them.

I also find it humorous that plants like marijuana are illegal. These plants grow in the ground and are as natural as a rose garden but yet they are evil. Give me a freakin break!!! Most of the drugs people take for the above mentioned ailments are more toxic than marijuana. Hell, alcohol and nicotine are just as bad as marijuana. Yet our government actually sends police into the forest to find and execute these plants.

They showed one of these “missions” on Cops and I laughed my ass off while watching it. They marched into the forest dressed in camouflage, jumped from helicopters like Delta Force, using the latest in technology gadgets as if they were hunting Al-Qaeda to find these evil plants. When the perpetrators were found, they were ripped from the ground and burned alive. This was a very serious “search and destroy” mission, because we are at war with ........plants! Maybe instead of burning, they should have taken some prisoners of war and moved the plants to Guantanamo Bay for "questioning" with the other terrorists.

If our Fore Fathers knew we were spending all these tax dollars hunting plants as fugitives they would rise from the grave, march to Washington and kick our legislatures in the balls. And after they ate the brains of Congress (which collectively would equal a little more than a small smack) they would migrate to Canada for healthcare. (I love zombie films!)

Why don’t they “search and destroy” plants that are really hazardous like poison ivy or poison oak? Those are worse than marijuana and cause more damage. I also have some weeds growing in my front yard that are destroying my grass. Why don’t they hunt and destroy those? Do you think if we smoked rose petals they would have "missions" to hunt down and destroy those too? Are they going to make mushrooms illegal too – those can get you feeling "good"?

The real problem with marijuana is the drug companies don’t make any money from the sales. They don’t want people cutting into their sales; that is the primary reason marijuana is illegal. So instead of smoking a natural plant which grows in the ground, the government would prefer you take some artificially manufactured drugs made from toxic materials. Did you realize there are more toxic chemicals in a Twinkie or a can of soda than there is in a marijuana plant?

Anyway, getting back to my original point, who cares if baseball players take growth hormones or steroids? Besides taking these drugs cannot aid a player in hitting a ball, you still have to have talent. But if you could take a drug and earn tens of millions of dollars, would you do it? I’ll bet 9 out of 10 would do it. It’s their body; if they want to take the risk then we should respect their decision. We take risks with every drug we take and many of the legal drugs have deadlier side effects than growth hormones. But if we do care, then we should clean up our own drug problems first. Let’s start with the American drug companies. I wish these sports geeks would shut the hell up and find something new to bitch about.

By the way this is probably my last post until June 6. I am leaving for South Dakota and Wyoming tomorrow and will not return until then. I will try to post some pictures while on the road but that all depends on the Internet access at the hotels. For new visitors check out the archives, I’ve posted some good love stories under “From the Heart” You’ll find more archived political essays and some paranormal stories if you look to your right.

I saw the DaVinci Code Friday night and I did like it; as it rated a 3.5 out of 5 stars. Tom Hanks did not play his character as perfectly as he played other characters and the chemistry with the female lead was not too good. The thriller was predictable and the supposedly shocking ending, I figured out within the first half hour of this extremely long movie.

What I did like about it was the history it presented about the First Council at Nicaea and the mention of the other Gospels excluded from the Bible. Even though this story is fictional certain aspects of the story have truths behind them. This Council did exist and they did exclude certain Gospels from the Bible because they did not glorify Christ’s divinity as well as the chosen Gospels.

No one will ever know if the Gospel of Phillip or the Gospel of Mary Magdalene was more accurate than the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke or John. What you choose to believe is your Faith. It is possible that any or all of these Gospels are either fictional or factual.

The reason some Christians are angry about this story is because in their mind like the First Council at Nicaea discovered, these other Gospels do not portray Christ’s divinity within their scope of what constitutes a divine being. I guess the possibility of Christ being married and producing children takes away from His ability to be God.

Was the Council at Nicaea flawed in its approach? Well to begin with it was overseen the dictator Constantine who was more worried about Rome becoming split because of different flavors of Christianity than he was with uncovering the truth behind Christ. So it is possible factual data was purposely excluded from the Bible in order to compromise and please everybody. If we were to get a group of different Christian Faiths together today we would have similar difficulties discovering the true Christ.

It is also important to realize the Gospels were written many years after Christ’s death from stories handed down from generation to generation. I think we all know what happens to stories when they are retold. While it is evident Christ existed, it is difficult to discover what He actually said because His message was probably censored and changed by man to fit man’s narrow minded scope of reality. A reality that two thousand years ago, was even worse than it is today.

Yet today, many theologians focus on the exact wording of the Gospels as if those exact words actually flowed from the mouth of Christ. This exact wording could never be known. It is more important to realize that Christ actually existed than is it to try to imagine what he actually said. Do you realize how many people have been killed over the exact wording of sentences in the Bible? Probably millions.

The most disturbing aspect of the story is the negative treatment of women by Christian men; this condescending treatment is not fiction and still exists today. Christianity treats women as second class citizens by not allowing them to obtain power. In most Christian Churches only men are allowed to preach or to become an Elder. Why is this? Are women a threat to the Church? Why would Christ want women treated as inferiors?

The most important thing is to follow both your heart and your brain to make sure the stories you are told adhere to the ring of truth. The ring of truth is a logical meter we all have which alerts us to deception. Like a judge questions a suspect, you should also be able to ask questions and judge the responses you receive from religious leaders and judge the documents you read. Failure to question things which seem unbelievable is failure to use the brain that God gave us. If He did not expect us to question things, He would not have given us this gift of a sophisticated brain. So failing to use this gift would be sin itself.

Revision

After reading this post I wanted my readers to understand that I am NOT saying the DaVinci Code or the other unaccepted Gospels are true. I am only trying to raise questions about this issue for discussion purposes only.

In order to combat the dangerously low stripper employment rates (if there is such a thing), the new Pussy Cat Doll will begin your six year old daughter’s odyssey to becoming Hustler Club’s next stripper. These dolls come complete with an edgy wardrobe and are sure to be a big hit with dad. But seriously folks are these dolls any worse than Barbie? Barbie is pretty hot these days.

If you really want to get upset over something how about these kiddy beauty pageants. Kids should not be paraded as sexy objects in front of anybody. I really question the motives of the parents who subject their kids to these “beauty shows”. As a father, your job is to keep your daughter off the poles not teach her how to use them.

Let’s look at the reality of our world; not that I like this reality much but I don’t have a choice in the matter. Women are taught to build their self image through beauty. Men are taught to have money, so the size of their bank account reflects their self image. Can you think of ways we can change this narrow minded approach to self image?

You could raise your child with no Barbie’s and no television and no video games and home school them. But by doing this aren’t you really raising a social outcast with no hope of real friends or any concept of reality. It would be nicer if we were all raised on Walton’s Mountain but sooner or later we would have to come down from the Mountain and then what is going to happen?

It seems we have two extremely dumbass types of parents in the world. On one extreme we have the dumbass parent trying to conduct the Walton’s Mountain experiment, where they shelter the kids from everything. On the other side we have the dumbass parent trying to buy their kids love. So they purchase their 10-year old a cell phone or their 16-year old their own Escalade. These kids are not taught to respect anything especially not the parents. But worse, they are instilled with the attitude of “the world owes me a living” so when they fail they will blame others because they have never been taught how to deal with failure and have never been taught how to provide for themselves.

We need a mixture of both of these philosophies. Parents who raise their kids and teach them how to make educated decisions based upon reality. These kids must also be taught their decisions have consequences. So they can be prepared if they make a bad decision, bad things are going to happen.

Parents, instead of being a “safety net” let your kid fall every once in a while. It is a valuable lesson in helping them build the confidence to make tough decisions and to realize the consequences of their actions. It can sometimes be tough to watch your child fail but maybe this experience will help them make better decisions as an adult. It also teaches them the most important lesson of all; how to get up after you fall; which builds self-confidence, which builds self-image.

So if the kid wants a cell phone then tell him to get a job and pay for their own cell phone. If they are not old enough to get a job and have a cell phone them tell them, “no”. It is almost taboo to tell kids “no” these days but sometimes “no” is the right answer. They also must understand if the grades slip then no more job. By doing this you are teaching them how to respect things and that responsibility comes before pleasure.

These lessons are almost impossible to teach to kids when the parents are never home. The television and the gaming console are the new babysitter and, because of this, the parents feel guilty so they buy the kid whatever they want. I think some parents elect to have kids not because they really want kids but because it satisfies an egotistical need to gain attention or to satisfy somebody else.

As a society we should be angered by double standards but we accept them without hesitation. Some of us even condone double standards and insist they are necessary. Double standards are blatant prejudice at work in a society where the people are mostly hypocrites.

Case in point, I was watching a recent Dateline where a 14 year old boy shot and killed his mother, father and sister. We would all agree this is probably the worse crime you could possible commit. The prosecution wanted this boy charged as an adult and sentenced either to death or life in prison. I don’t even want to get into the particulars of the case, it is only important to know that the prosecution wanted this child to stand trial as an adult because they believe a child at 14 can make a decision as an adult.

Do you believe a child of 14 can make a decision or choice as an adult? Would you agree if someone were to have sex with this child it would be child molestation? The basis for the child molestation charge is a child of 14 years is too young to make the choice to have sex. We all believe in this. We have all been taught this. So why the double standard? You cannot put a 14 year old child on trial as an adult and with the same breathe claim he or she is not old enough to have sex.

A 14 year old child is a 14 year old child. They are not adults and they cannot make a decision as an adult. Therefore, even if they commit a heinous act like murder we must all remember they are children and should be treated as children. Our society is so hell bent on revenge we actually kill our kids when they do something wrong. What does that say about us?

The following are more examples of hypocrisy at its finest:

The Christian CEO who goes to church every Sunday but on Monday lays off thousands of people even though profits are high. He just wants to squeeze out a little bigger bonus for himself at the expense of thousands of families.

Companies that employ workers with families that make life miserable for pregnant women by not allowing them to have adequate time off for birth or complications during pregnancy. The ironic thing about this is many of the supervisors that make like difficult for these women are female.

Pro-lifers that believe in the death penalty or that support the war in Iraq. Murder is murder regardless of who is killed. But murder has always been one of those negotiable sins in our society. If the person doing the killing is well-liked or wealthy it’s not really murder. If a poor person kills somebody they have almost no chance of getting any sentence other than death. I am not saying that all rich people get away with murder but you have a much better chance if you have money.

People almost never consider the hidden meanings their opinions reveal about them as there are many hypocrites in this world. I wondered as I watched the trial with the 14 year old boy if the prosecutor used her brain before she opened her mouth. But as I said earlier, these prosecutors are so hell bent on revenge and winning they can never see the big picture.

Our legislatures not only receive outrageous retirement packages and unrealistic cost of living increases but they also get many perks. In many cases these perks are more expensive than their salaries and further contribute to their inflating sense of entitlement. In part two of legislative compensation, we will look at more government waste at its finest.

In 1994 citizen anger was focused on Congressional excessive pay, perks, and expenses. This anger helped trigger the 1994 electoral revolution. The new Republican majorities in the House and Senate moved quickly to cut staff and expenses and eliminate many of Congress's exemptions from the law. Further steps are necessary, however, to reduce perks, reform pensions, and further trim staff. Congressional committees currently are considering some of these reforms, while others will likely be debated in the course of the appropriations process. But several problems remain.

These perks continue to insulate Congress from American citizens, frustrate political fairness, and promote legislative careerism and bureaucracy. Reforms in these areas will mean a more efficient, representative, and politically competitive Congress.

Pay (Revisited)

Congress should repeal its automatic pay raise and take direct responsibility for raising their pay, thus giving taxpayers a chance to voice opposition. But as it stands now, automatic pay raises are scheduled each year with no vote required, further boosting lawmakers' salaries, which already exceed $11,000 a month.

Given the recent adoption of the 27th Amendment, which attempts to prevent lawmakers from raising their own pay without taking responsibility for it at the polls, the time for ending automatic pay hikes has come. Because that amendment was drafted long before cost of living adjustments were conceived, the constitutionality of current automatic adjustments is debatable, but the amendment's intent is clear and gives Congress an additional reason to end the practice. Congress also should enforce existing federal laws that dock lawmakers' pay for unexcused absences.

Pensions (Revisited)

As we discovered in part 1, congressional pensions far exceed most private-sector plans, and benefits exceed those of most other federal employees. Congress should reform its pension system, which encourages careerism and is twice as generous as any private-sector plan. The current system of escalating benefits creates open-ended liabilities for taxpayers and should be merged with Social Security or a 401(k) funded exclusively by the contributions of members of Congress. New rules should apply to all legislatures elected or reelected in 1996 or later, forcing them either to leave office at the end of the 104th Congress under the old pension system or to continue into the 105th Congress under new rules.

Perks

Congress often abuses their perks. Taxpayer-funded mailings, travel, and other perks are abused to promote incumbents' reelection bids. Official franking (postage), travel, and media resources contribute significantly to historically high incumbent reelection rates. Congress should trim perks with an eye to eliminating unjustifiable campaign-related spending, especially the frank. At a minimum, the House should double the franking cuts recently authorized by its Oversight Committee.

Congress's ultimate goal should be to eliminate mass mailings either by cutting the funds available for franking or by regulating mass mailings out of existence. These mailings accomplish little other than serving as taxpayer-funded quasi-campaign aids. Subsidies for publications and services like calendars and recording studios that lack any legislative function should be ended, and such other perks as frequent flier miles accrued through official travel and free medical care from military hospitals should be disallowed.

Staff

Congress remains the most heavily staffed legislature in the world. This huge staff is expensive and opens the door to bigger and more intrusive government. The role played by aides in congressional elections should be curtailed or eliminated entirely. A cut in personal staffs, so far untouched by the new Republican Congress, would force lawmakers to make more decisions directly instead of leaving them to subordinates.

Conclusion

The current Congress has made an impressive start on franking and committee staff cuts. However, to complete the reform effort, they must reform their automatic pay raises, fat pensions, taxpayer- funded perks, and large number of personal staff. Until they do, the overgrown Congress will remain less efficient and effective, further insulating themselves from the voters.

Warning! Warning! Rant ahead!

When analyzing the recent disturbing trends in government surveillance; please remember this is a bi-partisan issue. Carnivore, the primary tool used by the CIA when conducting this surveillance, was started in 1994 by the Clinton Administration. This was even before 9/11 and The Patriot Act. They have been snooping on us for years and Clinton started the freakin program!! So I don’t understand why the Democrats are clamoring for George Bush’s head on a stick.

This just goes to show you, it doesn’t matter who is in the White House or who is in Congress, “their” agenda will not be undone. I believe if Al Gore had won in 2000 or Kerry in 2004 absolutely nothing would have changed. We would have seen the exact same events unfold in the exact same way, just different heads delivering the speeches.

I get angry at Bush for allowing our manufacturing to dry up and move to China, Mexico and where ever else labor is pennies on the dollar but, in reality, it was Clinton who signed NAFTA to kick-start this process. He could have vetoed it but he was on “their” team too. In fact, we really do not have any leaders on “our” team and we haven’t since FDR (maybe JFK).

As long as lobbyists are allowed to buy laws and big business is allowed to buy elected officials we will never have any leaders on “our” team. Remember when they say something is “good for America” they are not talking about good for us. They mean good the richest Americans. We are needed only to carry buckets of shit from point A to point B. At least until they can bring in the immigrants to carry them cheaper, then we’re really screwed.

We seriously have to start thinking about electing Independents. I would like to see a true Labor Party in America. We could have one but they would probably all be outsourced.

One of the ways we have to fix our country is to remove the sense of entitlement our lawmakers have regarding their importance. We have to rally together and demand all Americans get the same opportunity, regardless of class and we have to begin with our elected officials.

The federal government offers a level of benefits unmatched in most of the private sector; legislatures qualify for some of the government’s earliest and most lucrative retirement packages.

The following essay explains the lucrative retirement program of the lawmakers and why it is best for America that Social Security be the standard retirement program for all government workers including our lawmakers. How do we expect them to fix Social Security when they have no incentives or vested interests to do so? I will also introduce a new concept called the Wage Fairness Act so these legislatures cannot give themselves raises while they deny lower class Americans that same luxury.

Federal lawmakers' salaries have been a source of controversy since the early nineteenth century. When Congress passed its first pay raise in 1816, furious voters replaced nearly two-thirds of the House of Representatives -- a turnover rate unsurpassed until the controversies over slavery that led eventually to the War Between the States. The next Congress responded by repealing the pay raise. Perennial controversies over lawmakers' pay have led Congress to experiment with establishing independent panels to set pay scales, providing tax deductions for lawmakers' Washington living expenses, and attaching congressional pay raises to bills adjusting all federal workers' salaries. They put lots of effort into establishing how big of a raise they should get but almost nothing into also giving the poorest families a raise.

Currently, the taxpayer pays each member of Congress a base salary of $133,600 yearly. This can be increased for particular jobs within Congress. The "ethics reform" passed by Congress in 1989 provided for annual cost of living adjustments (COLAs) derived from the Bureau of Labor Statistics' index of wages and salaries in private industry so that lawmakers would never have to vote on politically explosive pay raises. (Note that the COLA raises for lawmakers violates the 27th Amendment but that will be explained in a different post.) Pensions are determined by a lawmaker’s age, annual salary, year in the office and other variables, so exact figures for each lawmaker are hard to come by.

Below are some examples of the pension packages enjoyed by our lawmakers, along with a look at what members in leadership positions would get if they retire at their current term. As you read through these consider what your retirement will be compared with theirs:

Senator Harry Reid, D-NEV
Senate Minority Leader
Length of service: 28 years
Estimated Pension Eligibility: $124,800 per year

As the top Democrat in the Senate, Reid earns a salary of $183,500. He was first elected to the House in 1982. He was first elected to the Senate in 1986 with his current term expiring in 2011. Although he is showing no signs of retirement he is easily eligible for a full pension payout of $124,800 per year. This figure would be supplemented by Social Security as well as any money he placed in his Thrift Savings Plan, the federal government’s equivalent of a 401(k).

Senator Ted Stevens, R-Alaska
Senate President Pro Tempore
Length of Service: 40 years
Estimated Pension Eligibility: $139,100 per year

The Senate’s president pro tempore, who presides over the Senate in the absence of the vice president, is elected by Senate colleagues and customarily the senator if the majority in part with most continuous service. He is the longest serving Republican Senator and earns $183,500 annually. He would be eligible for $139,100 if he retires after his 2009 term expires. This figure would be supplemented by Social Security as well as any money he placed in his Thrift Savings Plan, the federal government’s equivalent of a 401(k).

Rep, Nancy Pelosi, D-CA
House Minority Leader
Length of Service: 19 years
Estimated Pension Eligibility: $54,000 per year

Rep. Dennis Hastert, R-IL
Speaker of The House
Length of Service: 20 years
Estimated Pension Eligibility: $63,600 per year

Any Senator with a length of service of 30 years would get an estimated pension of $109,500 per year.

Any Senator with a length of service of 16 years would get an estimated pension of $39,600 per year.

The maximum Social Security Benefits collected in 2003 by the American retirees regardless of their income earned is $12,466.80. You can find this information here. Notice the maximum Social Security benefits allowed for the American taxpayer is far below the pension of our political leaders.

It is comical that most of these Congressmen will receive more in retirement than full-time, working taxpayers. Remember the taxpayers pay these salaries. Is it any wonder the Congressmen want Social Security eliminated? They do not benefit from it so in their eyes it is not necessary. They do not understand the burdens working class families endure while retired.

I find it equally comical that many of these Senators and Representatives have called the Social Security system a form of “welfare” but yet continue to collect taxpayer’s money from their own “welfare” system. Their system is a true “welfare” program because they contribute nothing to it, but we pay into Social Security so technically it is not “welfare.” Apparently “welfare” is good for them but not good for the rest of the American taxpayers. These lawmakers have a mindset that is a sense of entitlement where they truly believe they are better than us and they deserve more than us. It is proven by legislation like this.

Instead of legislatures receiving their own special retirement program, all the programs should be combined into Social Security. Then they will be forced to fix the system if they want benefits. This will force our lawmakers to have a vested interest in Social Security instead of looking at it as another “welfare” program. Also, you only get back what you pay in so let’s end this free ride program.

We should also have a Wage Fairness Act to link the wages of the lawmakers to the minimum wage laws, so both wages move up or down together. If Congress gets a pay raise then the minimum wage also gets a pay increase.

Do you think our elected officials get too lucrative of a retirement package? Do you think if we rolled their retirement into Social Security they would fix Social Security instead of abandoning it? Do you think we need a Wage Fairness Act so if legislatures get a raise the minimum wage gets a raise?

Please note: From now on I’m going to use the term “sith lord” to represent whenever one of our idiot leaders takes away from the poor to gives to the rich and becomes sort of an anti Robin Hood.

I was having trouble sleeping the other day so I turned on CSPAN to help. I watched some conference about healthcare led by a Republican committee and they were discussing how to fix the healthcare crisis. Emperor Bush anointed a sith lord subcommittee to investigate ways to manage healthcare and to create a plan to "help" Americans with their healthcare burdens. Translation: His big business friends are paying too much for healthcare, so he want to find a way to eliminate this cost and pass it onto the workers.

At the time, I was thinking, “Wow!! Kudos to President Bush for taking an active position and creating a subcommittee on this issue.” I soon changed my mind when I heard the nonsense, and at one point, I actually laughed out loud when they divulged the number one problem with healthcare in America. Would you like to guess before I tell you what it is?

Could it be the privatization of the hospitals in the mid 1980’s that drove up healthcare costs because the corporations that own these hospitals are earning billions from the sick instead of being non-profit?
NO!

Could it be 46 million Americans are uninsured because the US is the only civilized country on the planet without a national healthcare program?
NO!

Could it be because the insurance company profits are at an all time high? Maybe they are robbing the consumer like the thieving oil industry?
NO!

Could it be because Americans cannot afford healthcare and most of the time do not take the medication they need or seek the healthcare the need?
NO!

Could it be the enormous hospital bills the uninsured Americans receive if they do get life saving care are the number one cause of bankruptcy or losing their home?
NO!

According to this committee, the number one problem with healthcare is the consumer does not realize how much healthcare costs. So they are going to “educate” us by passing legislation to end healthcare “welfare” programs provided by governments and corporations. They suggest the consumer pay their own healthcare and are suggesting legislation to pass all healthcare costs directly to the consumer. Translation: if you get sick there is no medical help from the likes of Medicare or Medicaid. You’ve lost your healthcare benefits from your job so now you have to pay a $500,000 bill on a $20,000 a year salary. WOW! What a great idea!!

This is exactly what happens when you put several sith lord multi-millionaires in charge of a middle class problem. How do these Senators get so out of touch with the people they represent? They are only responding to corporate cries for healthcare reform and are not even considering the effects this issue has on the little guy. Now I understand how the French could storm the castle and behead everybody.

So now they are going to pass laws further ensuring no national healthcare, while increasing deductibles and limiting employer contributions. I have to find out the names of these sith lords so we can remember them in the next election. I hate to sound prejudice but they were all Republicans.

They kept using terms like “welfare” in substitution of national healthcare and corporate provided benefits. If is important to note that these subcommittee members get free healthcare provided by the federal government but they want everyday else to pay for it. It’s alright if they receive “welfare” but not anybody else. What a bunch of hypocritical jerks! But what can you expect from a bunch of sith lords.

With gas prices soaring above the $3 mark and expecting to soon eclipse the $4 mark, people are wondering who is to blame. There is no individual company or person to blame for this problem but there are plenty of individuals responsible.

Supply Lines – Limited Blame

In this article, Saudi Arabia’s oil minister stated supplies are not a problem because there is plenty of oil being produced. Saudi Arabia contributed 9 million barrels per day to the world supply and is expected to increase production to 12.5 million barrels by 2009. But he admits if the price of crude oil is to stabilize then other suppliers will have to increase production and the world will have to have better conservation methods.

Where is all of this oil we were supposed to get from Iraq? We were told we could pay for this war with the oil we got from Iraq only I don’t see any oil. Can you imagine how the price of crude would tumble if Iraq also produced 9 million barrels of oil per day?

American Consumers – Most of The Blame

Let’s face reality here; America uses most of the oil produced. You can complain about increased demand in China until you are blue in the face, but the reality is the American consumer uses most of the world oil supplies. Oil demands by the American consumer grow so fast production cannot keep up. By comparison, demand in most European Nations is up only slightly.

Therefore, the primary culprit of the soaring gas prices are the knuckleheads that still purchase gas guzzling automobiles. I am not talking about someone who owned one before 2004 (although there is some blame for them), I am talking about the idiot that bought one this year or last year.

Even though gas prices are at record levels, SUV sales are declining but only by 30%. Who are these knuckleheads that are still buying SUVs even though the outlook on gas prices is horrendous? The people that purchase SUVs in today’s market are are mostly responsible for the rising gas prices.

Every time I see one of these “Darwin award recipients waiting to happen” on the news, filling up their monstrosity of a gas tank and complaining how it cost $120, I laugh out loud. Just once, I would like it if the reporter would bitch slap them and say, “Idiot! Why do you think gas is so high?!!” They never do.

Another disturbing report stated RV sales and rentals have shown a slight increase in demand. These vehicles get between 5 and 8 gallons per gallon, thereby proving the knuckleheads that buy or rent these are solid idiots. I’ll bet these people also have 2 SUVs in the driveway. The next time you see one of these mental giants driving down the freeway, you should thank them for contributing to the $4 gallon of gas by extending the finger to them.

Refining Companies – Much Blame

The refineries are a big problem because bottlenecks in production translate into more profit for them. We have known about the bottleneck in the refining process for at least a decade but yet absolutely nothing has ever been done to remedy the problem. It is a known fact that every spring the refineries close a large portion of their production to do “maintenance” which contributes to the spike in prices in April and May.

Why doesn’t the government force these companies to do their “maintenance” in the fall or the winter when demand is very low? Why doesn’t the government force these companies to build more refineries? Because we all know as long as big business profits are high there is no incentive to do anything except lay off people to make even more money.

Commodities Traders – Much Blame

These are the people largely responsible for setting the price of oil per barrel. Do you remember hearing the reason for the rising oil prices was “because of rising tensions in the Middle East” or some other ridiculous reason that eventually never happened? Well these are the clever capitalists responsible for that. When our government looks into price gouging instead of looking at the gas pump they should look at these vicious sharks. The true market never sets an accurate price because these cajoles always find an excuse to keep prices high.

Our Government – Much Blame

Our government should be responsible for keeping the industry honest but they have not done a very good job. Here are a few ideas for the guys and gals in Washington:

• Keep the refineries on-line during peaks in demand.
• Hold the refineries responsible for increasing production as demand increases.
• Set higher standards for fuel efficiency for the auto makers. The American consumer has proven they are too stupid to act responsibly so we might have to start regulating this.
• Allow Tax breaks for people that buy hybrids. How about no sales taxes for cars with fuel efficiency ratings over 30 miles per gallon? You can make up the difference by up charging taxes for the purchasers of vehicles with a fuel efficiency rating of less than 22 miles per gallon.
• During peaks in demand the government should lessen or eliminate all gas taxes. If it’s true that Exxon earned $8.4 billion in one quarter from 9.5 cents profit per gallon of gas, then the government with taxes running over 40 cents per gallon earned close to $40 billion during that same quarter.
• The federal government also needs to end the state regulated gas formulas and mandate one formula for all. Because each state can mandate is own custom gas formula, supply is always an issue because refineries cannot keep up with all of the different mixtures. They have difficulty enough with keep up supply without this added burden.

American Auto-Makers – Much Blame

Do you realize that since the first Model-T rolled off the assembly line we have not made any significant improvement in gas mileage? The Model T got 34 miles per gallon. They have invented plenty of other costly improvements; mostly only in comfort areas. But they have never invented something to help save the consumer’s money only improvements to help spend the consumer’s money.

The primary reason the auto industry still produces large quantities of SUV’s is because they make more money from those models than from smaller more gas efficient automobiles. New smaller cars can sell for as little as $8,000, while their larger counterparts can sell for as high as $50,000. You can see why the auto industry does not want American tastes to change and will not promote these changing tastes. If not for foreign auto makers, they would still be producing the muscle cars from the 1970’s because consumers would not have any other choices.

But the worst decision of all is the auto makers’ insistence in staying with the internal combustion engine. You would think that after nearly a century they could produce a better engine. I don’t know if the oil companies are partially to blame but this engine should have gone the way of the dinosaur many years ago.

Patriotism

If you really want to be a true patriot and do your part to help the country; then conserve energy. You can start with changing your tastes from huge inefficient automobiles to smaller more fuel efficient ones. Take smaller trips or consolidate your trips in the car.

Remember, every time you fill up your gas tank you put money in the hands of the Arabs. Eventually that money finds its way to terrorists.

Conclusion

The bottom line is there is no simple solution to combat the rising gas prices. Even if you don’t drive you will pay higher prices for other goods; there is no way to avoid inflation. Who is to blame for high gas prices? There is plenty of blame to go around. Some of us only need to look in the mirror to find someone to blame.

The Mumps virus has returned to the Midwest. In fact, we had a documented case in the city of St. Louis. Also, just across the river in Edwardsville Illinois, there was another reported case in a local school.

So this family of mental giants has a daughter that attends the school were the mumps outbreak was found and decides to send their daughter to school. The problem with this family’s decision is their religious beliefs prohibit vaccinations. School officials notified the parents ahead of time and told them the child would not be allowed back in class until either she was vaccinated or until the incubation period ended. But these parents are not very intelligent, so they sent her anyway. As a result, the daughter was escorted from school and taken back home by the police.

Most teenagers are embarrassed by their parents. In fact, my son gets embarrassed easily and usually over minor things. I can only imagine how embarrassed he would be if he had to be escorted from school by the police because his parents are complete idiots. And it’s one thing to be a complete idiot, but to admit it to whole world and in front of their daughter's classmates is on a whole new level of stupidity. Just when you think you have found the bottom rung on the human evolutionary scale, someone like this comes along and opens up another mineshaft leading even further down.

First of all, let me say I am a believer in social Darwinism. When stupid people kill themselves it makes life better for us all. The problem I have with this case is the daughter is an innocent. Because of the parent’s ridiculous and potentially deadly religious beliefs, they are almost offering her up as a sacrificial lamb to the mumps virus. How could you do that to your own child and not be mentally challenged in some way?

I am glad we have religious freedom in this country but religion often blurs the line between sane and insane; this is a classic example of insane. I just wonder how you could send your child to school without any vaccinations when there was just a mumps case reported a day ago. Do they not love their child? Do they not want to keep their child safe?

If this child catches the mumps, the local district attorney should press child abuse charges against those parents. I do not have a problem with the senseless hurting or killing of oneself, but the senseless and hurting or killing of another is a felony.

A couple of nights ago, a friend and I were chatting about the differences between the right wing and the left wing philosophies and trying to figure out the fundamental differences. Our conversation opened my mind to think about who I am and where I came from.

I am a reformed conservative that changed when I graduated from college. This change was not fast but slow and subtle. Being raised Roman Catholic, the Christian fear and guilt was deeply instilled within me. It was a long and tough road to open my mind to even consider other opinions and beliefs but it was worth the journey. Today I am not liberal, not conservative but consider myself an active moderate. I support candidates from both conservative and liberal camps and I almost never support ultra right-wing or ultra-left wing opinions. I use the term ultra to mean the extreme version of either side.

I would rather have a mixture of both parties in power and never want an overwhelming group of either party in control. The problem today is the Republicans have obtained too large of a majority so the legislation is too conservative. We would have an identical problem if too many liberals were in control, except they would promote their liberal legislation.

The fundamental difference between the conservative and liberal ideology is simple. A liberal is usually open to receive a variety of opinions. A true liberal can even consider a conservative viewpoint because of this open mindedness. A liberal also can separate their ideals from the ideals of others to promote a system of toleration. This is how a liberal can be a personal pro-lifer but also agree to your right to be pro-choice. A liberal has little difficulty separating church from state.

The conservative is quite the opposite. They do not separate their beliefs from the beliefs of others. So if they are pro-life everybody else must be pro-life because pro-choice is fundamentally wrong. In their mind, toleration is not acceptable because toleration means they must compromise a system of beliefs that are uncompromisable. Usually these beliefs are based upon religious codes. This is why they cannot accept any new or different ideas. New ideas are a challenge to their religion and, as a result, they are very fearful of change. A conservative has difficulties separating church from state.

Conservatives also hold everyone responsible for the errors of the few by reducing all people to the lowest common denominator. So if somebody is or can take advantage of a program, then the entire program should be eliminated. For example, the government is trying to expand FMLA by including paid time off. Conservatives are against this because some people could abuse the system. Even though this would be a good thing for the entire country, conservatives are opposed to this because of potential abuse by a few people. Liberals understand people are going to cheat but do not want the legitimate needy to be held accountable for the errors of the few lawbreakers.

You will find that if you remove the issues and simplify everything, these are the root beliefs and differences between the two mindsets. There are no absolutes so these categories will work with most conservatives and liberals but not all. I have met ultra-liberals that reminded me of conservatives because of their fearful natures and their unwillingness to open their minds to differing opinions. However, these are the exceptions and not the rule.

Anyway, this is just an observation I wanted to share with everybody. I did not intend to discriminate or to tease any particular side.

If all things were equal I would have no problem with immigrants coming to America. But all things are not equal so the flood of immigrants to this country is harming lower class, unskilled Americans by taking their limited supply of jobs. Many immigrants, especially the illegal immigrants, will work for less than minimum wage with no benefits and thus the unskilled American worker cannot compete.

The unskilled American worker has already lost their manufacturing job to China. So now they are trying to get jobs in infrastructure but now those are being taken by immigrants working for less than a living wage with no benefits. There is no place left for these unskilled workers to go. Let’s face it, not every American can get a college education but they should still be able to get a job to support their family.

Illegal aliens should not be permitted to stay in America as these people are here illegally. There should be no argument here; illegals are illegal. If businesses are found to employ illegals then those businesses should be heavily fined and, in some cases, the owners put in jail and the business closed. If you take away the income from these people provided by business, then you will stop the problem.

Who should we blame for this mess? We should blame the greedy, blood sucking businesses that leech onto cheap labor and suck them dry. We should not blame the illegal immigrants for wanting to better their lives by coming to America; we should blame the businesses who prey upon them. Tougher labor laws are needed to protect American labor. So if we are going to punish anybody then put the business owners and HR people in jail for businesses that employ these illegal workers. It would be wrong to punish the illegals but they should be sent back to their country. If opportunity dries up then they will return to their countries or not even come here to begin with.

Our borders are not protected at all. It would be very easy for Al-Qaeda to penetrate our country through Mexico or Canada, yet no one is talking about that issue. Our borders need to be protected and people who cross illegally should be stopped. The Patriot Act was created specifically to deal with these people. I do believe the Patriot Act chips away at our rights but the reason we need it is because of the flood of undocumented illegals into our country. Perhaps if we could eliminate the illegals from our streets we will no longer have any need for the Patriot Act and we could then reclaim those lost rights again.

The H-1B visa program was created to help business combat the "shortage" of IT workers in America. It did not do that. What it did do was eliminate well-paying IT jobs. Jobs that paid in excess of $60,000 were quickly given to H-1B visa immigrant workers at $30,000 or less. Business would have you believe they need these H-1B immigrants because they cannot find American workers skilled enough to do these jobs. In reality, American workers are in abundance but not at $30,000. This is a microcosm of the problem with immigrant workers.

Pro-business politicians would have you believe these immigrants are needed because Americans will not perform any of these jobs. That is a false statement. Americans will work any job but not at less than market wages. Now you can see how the flood of immigrants both legal and illegal is harmful to lower class and middle class America. Americans already have enough problems finding work without having to compete with immigrants who will work for less than a living wage with no benefits.

You cannot look at this issue through the emotional eyes of the immigrant. The immigrant is trying to better their lives and the lives of their families by coming here and we should all respect that. However, we should be looking at this through the emotional eyes of our poorest American families that cannot find work because an immigrant worker is doing the job for much less than minimum wage. We should always protect Americans first.