Wednesday, December 10, 2014
Still Waiting for the Evidence
In my August 25, Wait for the Evidence post, I wrote about how so many people are jumping to conclusions without hearing all the evidence. A couple of weeks ago the grand jury refused to indict Officer Wilson in the death of Michael Brown. The crowds in Ferguson, Mo. and elsewhere protested, and many rioted. While doing so they gestured with hands up in surrender, while shouting "Hands up, don't shoot". All the while many were burning businesses, cars, trash and more. They were destroying what many citizens of Ferguson had spent time, sweat and money to build up.
So even when the evidence is known, the same people who prejudged the events of the day promoted a lie. That lie was that Michael Brown was shot while his hands were up and he was surrendering to Officer Wilson.
Several witnesses, three autopsies, and physical evidence collected and examined by police and FBI, all demonstrate beyond any doubt that Brown was resisting, and attacking Wilson, which forced Wilson to fire his weapon until the threat was no more.
I truly bothers me that people continue to lie, violently so, and many in the media, politics and all walks of life, refuse to call a lie, a lie.
Tuesday, November 11, 2014
Obamacare Should Be Out of Gas, But...
Obamacare is Running Out of Gas
The money quote from this column is this...
There’s more on the line in this challenge than the fate of Obamacare, as if that wasn’t enough. The legitimacy of American government hangs in the balance. If the people who draft laws can lie shamelessly about them, then rewrite the laws on the fly after they have been signed, in the interests of political expediency, we don’t have a constitutional government at all, and neither Obamacare nor any other bill signed in Washington is really a “law.”
This means that any law can and will be modified to suit the intentions of anyone in power at any time. That is not a constitutional republic that we are supposed to have. No matter what law, or how good that law is, we cannot allow this president, or future presidents of either party, to simply rewrite laws as they see fit.
The money quote from this column is this...
There’s more on the line in this challenge than the fate of Obamacare, as if that wasn’t enough. The legitimacy of American government hangs in the balance. If the people who draft laws can lie shamelessly about them, then rewrite the laws on the fly after they have been signed, in the interests of political expediency, we don’t have a constitutional government at all, and neither Obamacare nor any other bill signed in Washington is really a “law.”
This means that any law can and will be modified to suit the intentions of anyone in power at any time. That is not a constitutional republic that we are supposed to have. No matter what law, or how good that law is, we cannot allow this president, or future presidents of either party, to simply rewrite laws as they see fit.
Monday, November 10, 2014
Why I Vote Republican
I will vote Republican in national elections for president, US Senate and US House of Representatives almost always. In fact, I cannot remember voting for a democrat for those offices ever. I will try to explain why.
1. The democrat party thinks you cannot prepare meals for your family without government guidance. Michelle Obama's food police initiative is a prime example. Also, the war of sugars, fat and sodium in food, and claims of helping you fight obesity is pervasive.
2. The democrat party thinks the government should stay our of the lives of LGBT community, but cannot extract themselves from your dealing with fertility, birth control and abortion. The claims that republicans hate women because they refuse to pay for other people having abortions or using birth control are over the top ridiculous. Sandra Fluck and the animated Julia video prove the democrats definitely continue to have a say so in your bedroom.
3. The democrat party thinks you cannot choose for yourself where your children get their education, and refuse to support school vouchers. Instead, while they send their own children to private schools, they deny poor people access to higher quality schools by supporting the NEA and their opposition to vouchers.
4. The democrat party thinks black people cannot obtain any form of photo identification to show at the voting place. Even though photo ID is required for countless activities that blacks participate in daily, such as boarding planes, renting cars and hotel rooms, purchasing items with checks or credit, and entering public buildings like the capital, courthouses and federal buildings.
5. The democrat party thinks jobs a a function of government and not business. Hillary Clinton, presumed front runner for the democrat nomination for president in 2106 said as much while campaigning for other democrats.
6. The democrat party calls a 7% increase in the budget a cut because it was not an 8% increase. Basic math would be better understood if school vouchers were permitted.
7. The democrat party does not understand basic economics of the free market, and repeats the false narrative that republicans believe in the trickle down theory. In fact, no republican trickle down theory has ever been promoted. When Ronald Reagan proposed that if the government collected less in taxes, then people would keep more of their money and therefore spend more, the economy would grow. Liberal commentators called this the trickle down theory, and democrats repeated it, often.
8. Democrats do not believe that lower tax rates will generate more tax revenue. Remember that the rate is expressed as a percentage, and the revenue is the amount of money remitted to the IRS. John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush all proved that lowering rates will increase revenue, and yet democrats refuse to see this for what it is.
9. Democrats claim Obamacare is working and working quite well. While this is opinion, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA, or Obamacare) is not solving any of the problems it has been claimed to address. Rates are climbing for most, and higher than historical increases. People did in fact lose their health insurance and doctors despite promises form almost every democrat they would keep them. Most people in polls state they want to see Obamacare repealed. And the actions by President Obama to delay and/or wave multiple groups of citizens and multiple requirements of the law, proves this law does not live up to its billing.
10. The democrat party believes that the science of global warming is settled. This is patently false as more data comes into the public domain and more scientists profess opposition to the alarm-ism. To say the science is settled when so little is actually known about climate records and models, and when so many real scientists question to theory, is simply unscientific in nature.
11. The democrat party thinks guns kill people, instead of people killing people. The number of mass shootings has actually not increased according to FBI crime statistics, and several studies conclude the same. The fact that nearly all mass shootings occur in gun-free zones, where no one can shoot back, is proof that unarmed citizenry is at greater risk than an armed one. While any death by gunfire is horrible and tragic, the gun is not the cause, but the tool. When an armed citizen is nearby when a mass shooting begins, the shooting typically ends with fewer injured and dead, and there are countless examples of this scenario.
In general, the democrat party does not trust Americans to make decisions about their own lives on a daily basis, and does not think Americans can get along in life without persistent help from the government.
In general, republicans think that government should be seen and not heard, and should allow Americans to do what they do best: innovate, create, build and improve their lives for themselves, their customers and their families.
1. The democrat party thinks you cannot prepare meals for your family without government guidance. Michelle Obama's food police initiative is a prime example. Also, the war of sugars, fat and sodium in food, and claims of helping you fight obesity is pervasive.
2. The democrat party thinks the government should stay our of the lives of LGBT community, but cannot extract themselves from your dealing with fertility, birth control and abortion. The claims that republicans hate women because they refuse to pay for other people having abortions or using birth control are over the top ridiculous. Sandra Fluck and the animated Julia video prove the democrats definitely continue to have a say so in your bedroom.
3. The democrat party thinks you cannot choose for yourself where your children get their education, and refuse to support school vouchers. Instead, while they send their own children to private schools, they deny poor people access to higher quality schools by supporting the NEA and their opposition to vouchers.
4. The democrat party thinks black people cannot obtain any form of photo identification to show at the voting place. Even though photo ID is required for countless activities that blacks participate in daily, such as boarding planes, renting cars and hotel rooms, purchasing items with checks or credit, and entering public buildings like the capital, courthouses and federal buildings.
5. The democrat party thinks jobs a a function of government and not business. Hillary Clinton, presumed front runner for the democrat nomination for president in 2106 said as much while campaigning for other democrats.
6. The democrat party calls a 7% increase in the budget a cut because it was not an 8% increase. Basic math would be better understood if school vouchers were permitted.
7. The democrat party does not understand basic economics of the free market, and repeats the false narrative that republicans believe in the trickle down theory. In fact, no republican trickle down theory has ever been promoted. When Ronald Reagan proposed that if the government collected less in taxes, then people would keep more of their money and therefore spend more, the economy would grow. Liberal commentators called this the trickle down theory, and democrats repeated it, often.
8. Democrats do not believe that lower tax rates will generate more tax revenue. Remember that the rate is expressed as a percentage, and the revenue is the amount of money remitted to the IRS. John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush all proved that lowering rates will increase revenue, and yet democrats refuse to see this for what it is.
9. Democrats claim Obamacare is working and working quite well. While this is opinion, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA, or Obamacare) is not solving any of the problems it has been claimed to address. Rates are climbing for most, and higher than historical increases. People did in fact lose their health insurance and doctors despite promises form almost every democrat they would keep them. Most people in polls state they want to see Obamacare repealed. And the actions by President Obama to delay and/or wave multiple groups of citizens and multiple requirements of the law, proves this law does not live up to its billing.
10. The democrat party believes that the science of global warming is settled. This is patently false as more data comes into the public domain and more scientists profess opposition to the alarm-ism. To say the science is settled when so little is actually known about climate records and models, and when so many real scientists question to theory, is simply unscientific in nature.
11. The democrat party thinks guns kill people, instead of people killing people. The number of mass shootings has actually not increased according to FBI crime statistics, and several studies conclude the same. The fact that nearly all mass shootings occur in gun-free zones, where no one can shoot back, is proof that unarmed citizenry is at greater risk than an armed one. While any death by gunfire is horrible and tragic, the gun is not the cause, but the tool. When an armed citizen is nearby when a mass shooting begins, the shooting typically ends with fewer injured and dead, and there are countless examples of this scenario.
In general, the democrat party does not trust Americans to make decisions about their own lives on a daily basis, and does not think Americans can get along in life without persistent help from the government.
In general, republicans think that government should be seen and not heard, and should allow Americans to do what they do best: innovate, create, build and improve their lives for themselves, their customers and their families.
Friday, October 31, 2014
Is Ebola a "Black Swan"?
Black Swan Theory (Wiki)
I only became aware of this theory, which says there are events that take place without advance warning, but can have a large or extreme impact, and in hindsight, we should have seen it coming.
Many people are obsessing over Ebola, in turn fretting over who may have it, can I catch it, and what to do about all of that. The media lately is trying to convince Americans they are making mountains out of molehills. Are they?
Ebola was discovered and identified in Africa in the 1970's, where there have been repeated smaller outbreaks, relatively speaking. Now that world travel has lead to an unprecedented spread to the USA, many people are very worried, and rightly so. The disease has a high mortality rate, depending on a variety factors, such as general health of the patient at the time of infection. In African outbreaks the mortality rate is as high a 90%.
We are also being told that we can only contract the virus by exchanging bodily fluids with a symptomatic carrier. The incubation period is up to 21 days, after which you can be assured you have not been infected.
This all means we have a very low probability of catching the disease, but if we do, we have a high probability of dying from it. These attributes make Ebola a black swan of sorts.
Given what we do know, the question should be what policy is appropriate for dealing with potential infections. Should we quarantine people who have been near others we know to be infected? Under what circumstances should we quarantine people or not?
I only became aware of this theory, which says there are events that take place without advance warning, but can have a large or extreme impact, and in hindsight, we should have seen it coming.
Many people are obsessing over Ebola, in turn fretting over who may have it, can I catch it, and what to do about all of that. The media lately is trying to convince Americans they are making mountains out of molehills. Are they?
Ebola was discovered and identified in Africa in the 1970's, where there have been repeated smaller outbreaks, relatively speaking. Now that world travel has lead to an unprecedented spread to the USA, many people are very worried, and rightly so. The disease has a high mortality rate, depending on a variety factors, such as general health of the patient at the time of infection. In African outbreaks the mortality rate is as high a 90%.
We are also being told that we can only contract the virus by exchanging bodily fluids with a symptomatic carrier. The incubation period is up to 21 days, after which you can be assured you have not been infected.
This all means we have a very low probability of catching the disease, but if we do, we have a high probability of dying from it. These attributes make Ebola a black swan of sorts.
Given what we do know, the question should be what policy is appropriate for dealing with potential infections. Should we quarantine people who have been near others we know to be infected? Under what circumstances should we quarantine people or not?
Friday, October 3, 2014
Wednesday, October 1, 2014
Government Incompetence
Just in the recent past we have learned that the Secret Service has had multiple lapses in securing the life of the President. This is their highest priority mission.
On multiple occasions there have been individuals jump the White House fence and enter the compound without clearance. The second man actually entered the East Room of the mansion, where Presidents often hold ceremonies and deliver speeches.
In Atlanta, at the Center for Disease Control (CDC), and armed security guard from the CDC contracted security agency rode in the same elevator with the president. This was a violation of SS protection protocol.
The IRS routinely pays tax refunds to people who are not entitled to one. Recent estimates say this amounts to billions of dollars per year.
Medicare and Medicaid fraud annually is very high, and is routinely the subject of campaign promises of candidates for congress and the Oval Office.
TSA agents are often discovered as not stopping bombs that are actually tests to see how proficient they are at stopping bombs. At the same time they frequently are criticized for stopping small children, elderly, handicapped, and even military personnel for extra scrutiny at airports.
We all know about the lack of security provide State Department personnel in Benghazi, the IRS targeting of conservatives, the Department of Justice spying on members of the press, and the VA hospital scandal.
We also know that many "green" projects funded by the federal government have collapsed into bankruptcy.
High tax rates, excessive regulation, and arbitrary enforcement of laws all lead to a poor economy, while education declines.
Somebody tell me please, what does this government do to deserve our trust and support?
On multiple occasions there have been individuals jump the White House fence and enter the compound without clearance. The second man actually entered the East Room of the mansion, where Presidents often hold ceremonies and deliver speeches.
In Atlanta, at the Center for Disease Control (CDC), and armed security guard from the CDC contracted security agency rode in the same elevator with the president. This was a violation of SS protection protocol.
The IRS routinely pays tax refunds to people who are not entitled to one. Recent estimates say this amounts to billions of dollars per year.
Medicare and Medicaid fraud annually is very high, and is routinely the subject of campaign promises of candidates for congress and the Oval Office.
TSA agents are often discovered as not stopping bombs that are actually tests to see how proficient they are at stopping bombs. At the same time they frequently are criticized for stopping small children, elderly, handicapped, and even military personnel for extra scrutiny at airports.
We all know about the lack of security provide State Department personnel in Benghazi, the IRS targeting of conservatives, the Department of Justice spying on members of the press, and the VA hospital scandal.
We also know that many "green" projects funded by the federal government have collapsed into bankruptcy.
High tax rates, excessive regulation, and arbitrary enforcement of laws all lead to a poor economy, while education declines.
Somebody tell me please, what does this government do to deserve our trust and support?
Monday, September 22, 2014
Climate Science is Not Settled
Dr. Steven E. Koonin wrote this column in the Wall Street Journal, and explains how the science is not settled, and we need to remain focused on the scientific methods, not exploiting data to push any agenda.
Climate Science Is Not Settled
According to Koonin the degree to which climate data is collected and analyzed leaves us lacking in our ability to make climate projections. This means that we need to continue to do more research, and we also need to improve our modeling with more granularity in the data.
I believe that many politicians and others are attempting to stifle research and debate by scientists and the population, convincing you that we need to act as they prescribe. This amounts to a power grab, with the goal being income redistribution. They stifle debate by cherry picking data, omitting that which does not support the theory, and including that which does. Here is one example cited by Koonin.
"Even though the human influence on climate was much smaller in the past, the models do not account for the fact that the rate of global sea-level rise 70 years ago was as large as what we observe today—about one foot per century."
Remember President Obama's speech in which he said about his election, that this would be the moment when the rise of the oceans slowed? Koonin also cites the fact that Arctic ice may be lacking, but Antarctic ice is as extremely high levels. Al Gore and other climate alarmists won't concede that fact.
Koonin's main point is that we must continue the research simply because the climate does change continuously, and we should better understand the how and why of it. I agree. But if we abandon scientific methods we may regret what our plans may result in.
From the article is this statement which quite simply states what we're up against if when we debate this issue:
"While the past two decades have seen progress in climate science, the field is not yet mature enough to usefully answer the difficult and important questions being asked of it. This decidedly unsettled state highlights what should be obvious: Understanding climate, at the level of detail relevant to human influences, is a very, very difficult problem."
Climate Science Is Not Settled
According to Koonin the degree to which climate data is collected and analyzed leaves us lacking in our ability to make climate projections. This means that we need to continue to do more research, and we also need to improve our modeling with more granularity in the data.
I believe that many politicians and others are attempting to stifle research and debate by scientists and the population, convincing you that we need to act as they prescribe. This amounts to a power grab, with the goal being income redistribution. They stifle debate by cherry picking data, omitting that which does not support the theory, and including that which does. Here is one example cited by Koonin.
"Even though the human influence on climate was much smaller in the past, the models do not account for the fact that the rate of global sea-level rise 70 years ago was as large as what we observe today—about one foot per century."
Remember President Obama's speech in which he said about his election, that this would be the moment when the rise of the oceans slowed? Koonin also cites the fact that Arctic ice may be lacking, but Antarctic ice is as extremely high levels. Al Gore and other climate alarmists won't concede that fact.
Koonin's main point is that we must continue the research simply because the climate does change continuously, and we should better understand the how and why of it. I agree. But if we abandon scientific methods we may regret what our plans may result in.
From the article is this statement which quite simply states what we're up against if when we debate this issue:
"While the past two decades have seen progress in climate science, the field is not yet mature enough to usefully answer the difficult and important questions being asked of it. This decidedly unsettled state highlights what should be obvious: Understanding climate, at the level of detail relevant to human influences, is a very, very difficult problem."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)