Second, where will the national records on health care be stored and what will they include? In addition to my medical history, will they have such items as my social security number, credit card numbers, health plans I pay for, age and other personal items? How will they be secured?  No computer system yet devised, which includes top secret military information, has been found completely safe from hackers. Does this mean an ingenious individual or nation will have all information on all citizens?

How much will this bureaucracy cost?

Current estimates claim 45 million uninsured Americans, of whom 20 million earn more than 70 thousand dollars a year. My third question is how will these people be forced to purchase health insurance? Every state of which I am aware has a law requiring automotive accident insurance, but every state has uninsured drivers also. Twenty percent of the drivers in California are estimated to be uninsured. Will uninsured medical people be refused treatment at hospitals? Or jailed? If jailed, then they will receive free medical treatment. 

One escape reported in Massachusetts which has, I believe, such a law, is to fine any person requiring medical treatment between 5 and 6 hundred dollars. My income is much less than 70 thousand and I pay approximately 900 dollars a month for myself and family. It would be much less expensive, and people in Massachusetts have found it so, to forget the insurance and pay the fine.

A second option, again I believe in Romney’s Massachusetts plan, is to require insurance companies to accept all applicants regardless of prior health condition. Again, the report I read said that many younger people aren’t bothering with health insurance until they realize they have a serious illness. Then they sign up. Following treatment, they drop their insurance. Again, being personal, I have paid for health insurance for more than fifty years, during most of which I never saw a doctor. I didn’t need insurance during most of those years. Under the Massachusetts plan, I wouldn’t have had to pay those tens of thousands of dollars over the years. When I finally realized I had a problem – a heart attack that I ignored - I could have signed up immediately and then dropped it when cured, which took about three months. Thus three months worth of premiums would have paid my 200 thousand dollar bill. Incidentally, but relevant, the report I read said this practice is driving the cost of insurance up for those who pay monthly.

Back to the third question, how will the government force people to buy insurance?

My fourth question is why are the estimated 17 millions illegal aliens to be covered and how? One article said plans are to reduce Medicaid payments. Thus I, and tens of thousands of other elderlies, will be restricted in receiving medical treatment while illegals receive full treatment. One of the penalties of being a citizen I suppose. 

Now for others. I am willing to bet anyone a cup of coffee, even an expensive cup, that a review of college campuses would find at least ten million young adults in full attendance who are over-age to be on their family policies and unemployed – other than as students – so unable to buy insurance. 

Fifth, at least one or two million people change jobs every year, taking them off of company insurance policies for a brief period of time.

Now let us add the numbers. Twenty million making over 70 thousand a year, 17 million illegals, 10 million students, 1 million changing jobs. Whoops! That is 48 million uninsured and I’ve forgotten to include the insane incarcerated in mental hospitals and the mentally ill considered harmless to society who wander the streets. Obama is underestimating the number of uninsured.

Truthfully, I believe Governor Sanford should be impeached by his state and disowned by the Republican Party. The idea that the head of a state could leave for five days without anyone knowing where he was, is much more important than what he was doing. It was dereliction of duty at the very least. What if a major emergency requiring the Governors decision had occurred in his absence?

Concerning Senator Ensign, he proved to me that Jim is right on one thing he claims, which is that if people elected to the Senate are not millionaires at the time, they quickly acquire those millions. Senator Ensign’s wife’s family was reported as paying almost a hundred thousand dollars to the woman for her to keep quiet. Obviously, the family thought that his being a Senator would profit them, profit them greatly. 

Early reports said the military overthrew Zelaya, “President” of Honduras, who was changing the laws of Honduras to permit him to be “President” ad infinitum. But those early reports were untrue. The Honduran Congress voted Zelaya out of office because he was disobeying Honduran law, the Honduran Supreme Court ordered the army to remove him – and the army did.

Castro, Chavez and Morales of Bolivia immediately condemned the military and argued for Zelaya’s restoration. That is understandable. He was their friend and only following their examples. Castro was elected President of Cuba, and then used his power to intimidate and imprison opposition and become “President” indefinitely. Chavez was elected “President” of Venezuela and has been using his police to quell dissent and continue as “President.” Morales is following their example as we know Zelaya was attempting to do.

All of these men hate the United States and the culture its democracy has created.

The name given to these men who are elected in a fair election and then use their power to maintain their positions indefinitely is “Caudillo.” 

Obama also condemned the action of the military in obeying the orders of the Honduran Congress and Supreme Court in overthrowing the man who was using illegal actions in attempting to become the permanent “President” or Caudillo of Honduras. 

I would have been happier with President Obama if he had condemned the military and paramilitary suppression of the people protesting the “election” in Iran immediately and supported the action of the elected congress in Honduras. 

The Congress has just passed, at President Obama’s request, a bill providing him twenty million dollars to bring Hamas refugees to the United States. Aren’t those the people who drove Jews and Christians out of Palestine and stood in the streets waving their guns and cheering when Muslims blew up the twin towers in New York and the Pentagon in DC killing over two thousand Americans? Why should taxpayers welcome and support them?

Michelle Malkin has a worth reading essay (Townhall.com, July 8, 2009) in which she criticizes the excessive mourning of the death of Michael Jackson. In a way, I agree, but in another I don’t. I believe the nation SHOULD mourn, not the death of Michael Jackson, but a family and society which took a youth of talent and turned him into an unhappy, drug-addicted man who hated his own race so much that he went through numerous surgeries and treatments to look “white.”

Our son Stephen has been on a roll recently. The other day I was complaining about how much money Medicare and Blue Cross had spent on me in the past two years. Stephen, listening to my conversation with Sheila, spoke up and said, “Let’s face it, Dad. It costs a lot to restore classics.” Then, today, again talking to my bride, I complained about all the medicines I’m taking – seven pills a day (counting two “baby” aspirin) and still not being allowed to do any meaningful work. Again, Stephen interrupted a conversation with, “To save an old wreck you have to put it up on blocks.” When we finished laughing, I gave him a job to do. 

I have been promoted (?) from three days a week in Cardiac Rehab to two days a week in what I fondly call the Cardiac Club. Receiving my certificate I said that I had it on good authority that Mary Ann and Tammy had gone to the administration and demanded combat pay if they kept having me for three days a week or else they were going to put in for psychiatric disability as a result of emotional stress. Mary Ann said the administration had promised to keep that secret.

Stephen caught six mice in his corn bin. Not wishing to either free them or kill them himself, he took them to the front yard and the cat. Baxter, who leaps our fence with ease, accompanied him. One by one, Stephen turned the mice loose. Our cat was uninterested. Baxter caught and killed four of them, only one escaping his attentions. I have an otherwise worthless seventy pound Rottweiler who is a mouser! (If the numbers don’t add up, the one the cat sniffed at ran free also. 

For murder mystery lovers, Sheila and I recommend M. C. Beaton’s Hamish Macbeth mysteries.  There is always humor, the murder victim is always a person you don’t like and the murderer is one who you are happy to see punished. We consider her “A Highland Christmas” the best of all. 

I was sitting on the front porch on our recent 90 degree Fathers’ Day, in clothing that would have had me arrested in any city, reading a card my bride had given me. It said, “You don’t know how I feel when your arms are around me.” I looked at her and asked, “Hot and sweaty?”

Sheila has been “hinting” that a two seated rocking bench at the Mennonite store would be nice to have, so, this morning, She and I drove up to price it. There was no doubt it was comfortable, sturdy and would fit on the porch. When I found out the price was $129, I told her I could afford it, it would be her birthday present. Then, looking at Mr. Yoder, I said, “Her birthday is coming up on the 29^th. Sheila said, “My birthday is in July, not June, and it’s on the 21^st not the 29^th.” I said, “I was thinking of our anniversary.” Her reply, “We were married in August.” “Well, August the 30^th.” “No, August the 17^th.” Then she looked at the amused owner and said, “We’ve only been married 30 years, he’ll learn in time.”

Returning home, relaxing on the porch, my bride said, “I’ve always heard about those husbands who can’t remember birthdays and anniversaries. You are so much better. If I played my cards right, we could celebrate birthdays and anniversaries every month, on the 17^th, the 21^st, the 29^th….”

Sometimes, Sheila’s sarcasm is not overly subtle, so we wandered on to the Mennonites – who are wonderful newcomers to the Furnace – and churches we have attended. I confess my problem with all of them is that I seldom see them relate Christianity and its beliefs to the problems we face in the world today. Sheila and I agree that Christianity is under steady attack in our nation and that we need more ministers – and churches – to speak out against these attacks cleverly concealed under innocuous sounding laws such as the Hate Crime legislation, late term abortion “rights” and diversity rulings - all of which sound good, but have been and are used to attack practicing Christians. 

Just as a side note, I believe it is much easier to attend church than it is to be a Christian.

I read that Obama has promised to create 500,000 new jobs this year. Yes, five hundred thousand. I didn’t realize he would need that many new government workers for his programs.

People who are old, which now includes me, and who grew up in a Christian nation can recall the joke about how a child, caught doing something that he or she knew was wrong, would say, “The devil made me do it.” The current Democratic leadership, their hands too often appearing in the cookie jar, has changed this. The new excuse is, “Bush made me do it.”

Obama is talking about putting a salary cap on top executives. Will that apply to Congress and entertainers such as Oprah and football and basketball stars? If not, why not?

The brilliant Biden, well known for being consistently wrong on important issues over the years, has been bragging about the increasing diversity of the United States. Ignoring the problems of every nation or area that has diversity (Northern Ireland, the Baltic States, numerous African nations) has anyone ever heard of the Tower of Babel? In the book of Genesis, the nations all agreed to come together in one place. The result was disaster. What is the future of a United States with multiple laws and multiple languages in which Muslims control one area, Hispanics another etc.? Brag on Biden.

The United States Constitution decrees that Congress shall make the laws and the Executive, under the President, shall enforce them. As a check on the President’s powers, all persons appointed to top level government positions by the President must be approved by Congress. Former Presidents have appointed “Czars,” who report only to the President and exercise Presidential powers, to solve emergency problems. Usually this requires only one or two during a Presidency. President Obama has appointed more in his first six months than all other Presidents combined. Articles I have read have given estimates between 15 and 21. All of these Czars report directly to Obama.  He has asked for, and received, Congressional approval on none of these appointees.  To date, only Senator Byrd of Virginia, a Democrat, has complained that Obama is usurping the powers of the Congress by placing appointees in positions of power without their receiving Congressional approval.

Am I alone in remembering that when Clinton became President one of his first acts was to fire all of the Inspector Generals and replace them with people of his own choosing? There was no outcry and little publicity from the press or television news at the time. Then, when Bush became President he fired three Inspector Generals for not doing their jobs. He was roundly criticized in major newspapers and television news programs for this act. There was no hint that they were investigating any people that he liked, in fact there was no hint they were investigating anything. Now, Obama has fired two Inspector Generals, both of whom were investigating, and in one case finding proof of, misdeeds on the part of persons who were wealthy and politically prominent Obama supporters. I have not seen this reported by the mass media, only by the Drudge Report.  So much for the news reporting system which supposedly provides an informed citizenry.

I have read is that Obama declared himself a citizen of Indonesia at one college. Critics are now challenging his Constitutional eligibility to be President. I put little credibility into the value of these challenges. Everyone knows that Obama will lie for his own good at any time or place, why should he have been any different when it helped him get money as a college student?

I enjoyed the cartoons on Townhall.com today (Jun 22), but thought the one could have been improved. It showed an older couple looking at a beat-up, rusted pick-up truck surrounded by weeds with the caption, “…buy some gas and turn it in for our $4,500 clunker payment.” With my broken chest, bad heart and aching back, I thought a better one would be to have two women standing looking at an aged, bearded man in a rocker and wondering, “Is that $4500 clunker payment restricted to cars?”

Similarly, everyone has had the experience of dealing with a few salespeople who knew the qualities of what they were selling and took care that their customers received what they needed. Most, however, simply sell what customers believe will satisfy their needs, whether that product will do that or not. And then there are those who can’t seem to be bothered to do their jobs, leaving customers to wait while they pursue other, non-business interests on their cell-phones or in some other self serving activity.

While almost every adult has had the experiences noted above, the majority have elected a President and a Congress which promise to do everything for them: run their banks, manage their industries and care for their health. But “government” doesn’t do anything. People working for the government do things. Governments do not pass or enforce laws. People pass and enforce laws. 

Are people working for the “government” different in kind than those we know as teachers and sales clerks? Not in my experience, which began with my return from combat in Korea when I tried to get a driver’s license in Missouri. The people in the St. LouisCity Hall pointed out that I had to have a receipt for income tax to obtain a driver’s license. When I pointed out that men in combat were not required to file income taxes, they said I would simply have to get one. (This problem was resolved when my father telephoned a union president whom he knew who was also a prominent Democrat.)

I spent eleven years working for the government. Many of the people there were like those at the St. LouisCity Hall. They enforced the rules they wanted to enforce to their own advantage. In fact, in mass, they were lazier and less competent than the workers I have known in civilian jobs. There is good reason for this as we found out when we tried to fire a drug addicted secretary from a position that required secret clearance.  It is almost impossible to fire a federal employee. (It took a year to fire our drug addicted secretary and it helped that she was in jail.)

Of course, I also met many hard working, dedicated men and women in the Federal service. But that doesn’t mean they were perfect. Just as all people make good decisions at times, all people make bad decisions at times.

This is the problem with the federalism or socialism or Communism – whatever you wish to call government control of businesses and lives - the greater the distance between the persons in a position to pass and enforce laws, the less possible it is to correct bad decisions.

Living in Cumberland Furnace, if I don’t like some action taken by the Community Center or Historical Society or Volunteer Fire Department, I can go to one of their meetings and tell them so – and why. If they agree with my reasoning, they will change; if they disagree, I can lump it. Similarly, it is easy to telephone or visit the CountySheriff, the County Tax Assessor, or any of my other local officials. So can all of us. If they don’t satisfy us, or if they make too many wrong decisions, we can vote them out of office. It is more difficult at the State level, but I have found my Senator and Representative and their secretaries helpful when needed. Recently a friend, Dee, angered by the insistence of local veterinaries that dogs receive rabies shots every year when the manufacturer says the shots are good for three years, managed, with considerable effort, to get the State to issue a public policy of three-year vaccinations.

But now consider the federalization of our industries, banks and health care. Does anyone really believe that some worker, regardless of status as clerk or executive, in Washington D. C., is going to be as knowledgeable or as helpful to people in need of help as their next door neighbors in places like Cumberland Furnace or, for that matter, St. Louis or Dallas or Seattle? I don’t.  They don’t even help the children in DC obtain a good education. They simply send their own children to private schools.

Memorial Day is two weeks past, but this has been a difficult essay to write.  In my youth, Memorial Day was wonderful:  it was the end of school and the swimming pools were open.  Those days are past.

A friend, Ed Duemler, sent me an e-mail asking if we in Cumberland Furnace were doing anything special for Memorial Day.  The answer, which I never gave him until now, was “No.”

About the same time, my VFW magazine had an interesting article on how psychologists, and (I assume) social workers and psychiatrists are working with returning veterans who have “post traumatic stress disorder,” normally a result of combat (June/July 2009).  It was quite an interesting article and some imaginative techniques are being used in an effort to help service people and veterans who need it.  But I don’t believe it will work.

I have some experience in this area, from two directions.  A licensed psychologist, I did volunteer work at Fort Campbell in the social work department for several years.  I developed a high regard for this department and for Major St. Pierre who ran it.  In fact, as a psychology professor at Austin Peay State University, numerous students would come to me with personal problems.  My first question to them would be if they had any relationship to the fort.  If they did, I automatically referred them to the social work center there instead of to local psychiatrists, psychologists and social workers.

From the other direction, I have six months “up front” (not counting the week I arrived on line in December).

The first two were reasonably relaxing; I served as a radio operator at regiment – within range of artillery but not under direct enemy observation most of the time.  During the first month I had five days “on line,” and the second month two weeks.  Then I volunteered for the scouts and for the next four lived and worked on the front line.  This primarily consisted of patrolling with occasional problems, but did include some heavy fighting, such as Out Post Harry where, during an eight day battle, slaughter really, we lost about 2300 men and killed an estimated 7000 Chinese.  

I was still on line when the truce was declared.  Believe it or not, I was unhappy with this.  The front had become my home, I was comfortable there.  All you needed to do to stay alive was to be ever watchful, quick, combat-smart and lucky.  I was confident that I had three of these and I had been extremely lucky on several occasions.  If, I figured, the fighting had continued and I had stayed up front, I would have been sent home in just two more months.  All I had to do was stay alive.

With the truce, life changed.  I was fine during the day, as long as I was up and working, but when I would lie down at night I would get these terrible headaches.  Nothing seemed to help them, although if I bit my lip hard enough, that pain seemed to reduce the headache.  These head aches lasted for years, gradually decreasing in frequency.  I had the last one when I was forty-one.

I had other problems of adjustment also, but these gradually disappeared.  Only two remain.  I don’t like to sit with anyone behind me.  My wife knows this, so we maneuver in restaurants to a place where my back is against the wall.  Another one, silly now, is my inability to walk anywhere without looking on both sides as a walk, whether it is open fields, between houses or in people’s windows.  This one irritates me.  Several years ago I tried to break it.  Walking down the hallway in a school to the principal’s office I told myself, “Do not look in the classrooms.”  A third of the way down the hall I had to return and start over, carefully checking the rooms on both sides of the hall as I passed them.

You wouldn’t think that a short six months of your life would do this to you, I lived a year and a half in Williston, North Dakota and have only fleeting memories and no changes in behavior arising from that.  But those six months were different.

I describe those months in detail in my book, “We Were Innocents,” so there is no point in describing them here except for two or three things.  In combat you are always alert – always – awake or sleeping.  Carelessness costs.  The tension builds so gradually that you are not even aware of it, it is simply “normal,” Quite different from the excitement of patrolling.  Then, when working, not simply watching or waiting, you must see everything and nothing dangerous can be left behind you.   So, at age seventy-nine, I still watch everything and don’t want my back unprotected. 

I would like to tell those working with combat soldiers that they aren’t going to help them much.  It is possible for a psychologist or psychiatrist to help “erase” imaginary problems from the mind, but combat is real.  Memories and life protecting habits from combat are simply something you have to learn to live with.  With the years they will drift into the back of your mind. I seldom have bad dreams anymore, except on Memorial Day. 

Obama’s stimulus checks are going to some interesting people. According to the news, one person who has been dead for forty years received one. In another case, an Italian, long dead, who left the United States in 1930 and never contributed to Social Security received one. Our efficient Federal Government (which will oversee our nationalized health care) estimates that between ten and twenty thousand checks have been sent to people now dead, which probably means between twenty and forty thousand checks. But, who’s counting? I suggested to a friend at the Cardiac Club that perhaps they were using the Democrats’ voting lists, but he argued they were simply having ACORN determine who should receive them.

Obama’s seizures of the banks and firing executives at General Motors is a nationalizing trend. Does he plan to stop with multi-billion dollar firms or follow the Socialist pattern of dictating all production and money exchange? The outlines of his medical care proposal make one fear he plans to run all aspects of our lives. The ultimate ironies are the Jackson day rallies in which Democrats pledge their allegiance to the doctrines of President Andrew Jackson. Jackson opposed nationalization and destroyed the National Bank.

The captain of the ship seized by pirates has been rescued. That is one small step for man. Now let’s take a large step for mankind. Obama should send the Navy, in strength, off Somalia and attack the harbors known as pirate hangouts. Everything floating should be sunk. Several docks should be destroyed, as well as all warehouses and dry docks. When that is over, the total cost of the operation – men, munitions, ships – should be determined. Whatever it is, thirty, sixty or whatever millions of dollars, should be determined. Then that bill should be sent to the leaders of Somalia saying, “We know you didn’t want those pirates so we have removed them for you. This is the bill. If you don’t pay it, we might think you were for the pirates and have to come in and do some serious damage. Sincerely,….” I wouldn’t expect to see any money, but neither would I expect to see pirates in that region attacking our ships again.

A news report said that Obama sat “stoically” through a diatribe by “President” Ortega of Nicaragua blaming the United States for all of Central and South American ills.  Why an article implying that Obama would disapprove? Obama had said, basically, the same thing a few days earlier. In fact, consider the persons Obama has accepted as political “friends:” Iran’s Armadinejad, Cuba’s Castro, Venezuela’s Chavez and Russia’s Putin; all of whom are despots who have or are in the process of destroying beginning democracies. Why should anyone be surprised at this choice of persons to admire, consider those whom Obama admired in earlier years such as Reverend Wright and Bill Ayers. What all of these men have in common is their hatred of the United States and a desire to destroy its democracy.

One of Obama’s little mentioned ideas (by the Democratic News Media) during his campaign was to establish a national police force the size of the army. I expected him to transform ACORN into this, especially after he allocated millions of dollars in his stimulus package to them, but now it appears that his Homeland Security is taking over that role. Is this Obama’s new Hope and Change Society?

McCain’s top adviser during his Presidential campaign, Steve Schmidt, has emerged and is advising the Republican Party as to how to win the next election. Considering Mr. Schmidt’s past success, Republicans should listen carefully to what he says, and do the opposite.

Occasionally, but rarely, a political leader will say something in public that he/she normally reserves for conversations with fellow politicians of his own party. That happened recently. Ray Buckley, Chairman of the New Hampshire Democratic Party, commenting on the “T” Parties in his state said they, “…didn’t even know what they were protesting,” and, “…they looked like they had lost their minds.” Wonderful comment – for the Republicans. It says what the Democratic politicians think of tax paying citizens.

The attack on the right of honest citizens to own guns continues. Even Obama’s choice for the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of banning guns. I suggest gun-owners take a leaf from the radical Left-Wing Liberals. They rename things to make them more palatable. For example, terrorist attacks have become something like “human caused destruction.” Eliminate the word “guns.” Use the old fashioned term “Equalizer” instead. After all that is what guns do, they give honest citizens an equal chance against criminals.

Currently, we have one rabbit (Suzy), three banty hens, three worthless but loving dogs (Sheba, Yukon and Baxter) who love to be underfoot and sleep in doorways and three cats, Uff Da, Diablo and more about the third a bit further down. We have also had, for brief periods, frogs, turtles, raccoons and possums. These last two types were caught in a live trap we kept in the back by the chicken yard as a safety protection. When my two legged trials were younger, I would keep the varmints for a few days so the children could see them before releasing them a few miles away – I don’t like to kill anything. Stephen continues that practice for the same reason. 

Two or three weeks ago, Stephen came in and said, “You’ll never believe what I’ve caught this time.” Bored (we’ve caught our own cats and our own rabbit at various time), I asked “What?”

He brought the trap to show me. Inside was a white kitten with tan ears and tail, barely past the stage of opening its eyes. Backed as far from Stephen as it could get, that tidbit of a cat was hissing and showing its teeth. 

Where that thing came from, I haven’t the foggiest idea. I know it did not come from any of the three nearby houses, and the next house is at least a quarter of a mile away. Perhaps it was dumped, even so it is a long up-hill climb through brush and woods from the road to our chicken house.

Continuing a stupid practice we have followed for years with stray kittens, we brought the little beast into the house, trap and all. The way it was hissing, we didn’t try to get it out of the cage, but slipped some food and water into the cage for it. It would have none of that! It was not until the next day that the tiny terror decided the food might be better than starvation, but it still backed away and refused to eat if we approached.

Finally, we decided it was safe to open the cage and introduce it to friendly handling, a litter box and other in-house amenities – food and water dishes placed in convenient (for the kitten) spots. 

That kitten became a holy terror, a streak of lightning. It dashed from one place of safety, such as under a book shelf to another – under something else. On the way it would attack dangerous objects, such as bare feet and the tails of our disinterested dogs. With time, it became more courageous, dashing over and under things, from under the bookshelf to on top of a chair to under the computer table. It found hanging wires, such as the telephone cord, and those beloved dog tails particularly fascinating. One of my favorite incidents occurred while she was attacking Yukon’s tail. Finally, Yukon, trying to sleep, tired of having her tail batted about and raised it over her body. Like a flash this several ounce dynamo of cat leapt after it, only to land in the center of Yukon’s stomach. This aroused Yukon. With unexpected energy, she raised her head and looked at the kitten as it scampered off.

I named this newest member of the menagerie, with her white fur and tan tail and ears, after  Skitter, a pure bred Siamese and my pet for seventeen years (also the meanest cat I’ve ever owned). Stephen and Sheila have other names. Stephen’s name for her is Mayhem, Sheila’s prefers “Ferocious Engine of Destruction” as her name. Certainly both fit.

If Congress truly believed in the “global warming crisis” they would ban all carbonated beverages. Consider it, every time a bottle of soda pop is opened, carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere. Then look at the grocery carts in the checkout counters, they are loaded with cases of soda pop. The people consuming them are probably releasing much more CO2 into the air than they did driving their cars to the supermarket to buy them. 

Members of Congress, in their seemingly infinite ability to act stupidly, passed a law requiring all television broadcasters to stop using analog signals and switch to digital signals. Most people’s television sets won’t receive such signals. At the time, I swore I would not spend a thousand dollars to watch football games, about the only programs I consider worth watching on television. Then our “leaders” discovered that most television sets would not receive such signals without new antennas and a converter box. As a result, they offered free coupons to help people buy the converter boxes – using taxpayers’ money of course. Now a new glitch appears. A recent article in the Wall Street Journal by Amy Schatz (April 2, 2009) pointed out that many people will be unable to watch television when the bill banning analog because the digital signals do not travel as far as the analog signals. She cites an example of a person living 40 miles from Washington D. C., who is unable to receive television with his new converter box and antenna. Were I running for Congress against an incumbent this coming year in a rural area – more than 40 miles from a major city – I might mention this fiasco to potential voters.

Also instructive concerning the wisdom of our Congress is the requirement to use the new light bulbs, the ones which have worked satisfactorily for the past 70 years being outlawed. The new mercury light bulbs, despite being much more expensive, are supposed to use less electricity and last much longer. Whoops! Reports coming in cite numerous instances of these new wonder bulbs burning out much faster than those old faithfuls. There are other problems also. Because of the mercury, they cannot be put in the regular trash and, if one is dropped and broken in the house, instructions are to evacuate the room immediately, waiting fifteen minutes before re-entering and then use gloves to pick up the pieces. Congratulations Congress!

The federal government under Obama is now running the major banks and the largest two of the Detroit automobile makers. (They claim this isn’t really true, but when I was working for a living I considered anyone capable of firing me or adjusting my salary as being in charge – and that is what people in the federal government are doing.) But, back to the subject, we can now expect great things out of General Motors, Chrysler, and the banks. If you don’t believe that, consider Freddy Mac and Fannie Mae, in their years under federal control they have paid handsome salaries to their leaders, contributed heavily to Congressional supporters, and assisted tens of thousands of Americans attempting to purchase homes into bankruptcy.

Obama, in his tour around the world (while Pelosi and Reid run the nation) has apologized to nation after nation for our arrogance in giving them hundreds of millions of dollars in help when they needed it, bowed to King Saud of Saudi Arabia and described Islam as a nation of peace. Some conservatives have thoughtlessly criticized him for this. After all, if Islam wasn’t a nation of peace, Islamic terrorists would be killing innocent people around the world, in the Philippines, Pakistan, Iraq, Somalia, Holland and, perhaps, even one or two in the United States instead of sending charitable teams to help all people, not simply themselves. Why shouldn’t he bow to King Saud, isn’t the King the leading Muslim in the world? All Muslims bow to him. 

Actually, I like Obama apologizing to the world for all we have done to them. I only hope he follows through by changing this. We won’t need those tax increases when he stops interfering with other nation’s ways by giving them billions of dollars: in cash, material, and aid. He could start by stopping the hundreds of millions we give to the United Nations every year.

There are Internet articles on the same subject. Denver’s Rocky Mountain News is out of business. The Chicago Tribune has declared bankruptcy. The company which owns the Chicago Tribune also owns the Los Angeles Times, six other metropolitan newspapers and twenty-three television stations – all with financial problems. 

The New York Times is in deepening financial trouble. The Miami Herald has been put up for sale. The list goes on and on.  

The New York Time’s Richard Perez-Pena (October 28, 2008) reported that a survey of 500 newspapers across the country had a drop in circulation of 4.6 percent. Among the most heavily hit were the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The Houston Chronicle, The Boston Globe, The Star-Ledger of Newark, The Philadelphia Enquirer, The Orange County Register and The Detroit News. 

Similarly, a recent article (21 Jan 2009) commented on the loss of readership by Newsweek and Time magazines. Newsweek has dropped its “guaranteed” circulation to advertisers by half a million, Time has dropped its expected circulation by three fourths of a million. 

If you examine these figures in a different way, they become still more interesting. While those paying attention to the news media have been declining, the population has been increasing.  Several years ago, a local newspaper publisher told me that newspapers made their money from advertisements, not from readers and that his circulation had remained steady. But the population of the town had increased from approximately 100,000 to 300,000. Looking at readership as a percentage of population, he was selling about 1/3 of what he formerly sold. The same is true on a national level. When the New York Times reported that a survey of 400 newspapers reported an average drop in circulation of 4.6%, did they mean 4.6% of the newspapers sold or 4.6% of the potential audience? There is a big difference. 

Murdock, the major newspaper publisher, has proclaimed that “… there has never been more hunger for news …” That is true. But we are not getting it.

Too often the newspaper articles are inadequately researched or give a biased, one-sided account of the news. The worst papers print articles which are misleading or completely false. Didn’t a New York Times reporter receive a Pulitzer Prize for a “factual” article which turned out to be pure (but politically correct) fiction? Other newspapers have been found to have similar, if less sensational, problems as discovered by bloggers and reported on the Internet.

 Unfortunately, the majority of this imbalance favors “liberal,” or socialist political goals. When are we to receive complete and balanced reporting?  

 I believe that people will purchase and read newspapers which print news that interest and affect them. 

Our local, small town, newspaper had an editor for many years who routinely reported on the school board meetings, what was voted on and by whom and on county and city council meetings. He also printed articles submitted by our elected leaders, both state and national, in which they explained how and why they voted on different issues. It also, of course, included death notices, court reports and sports news along with other local news. People purchased and read that newspaper. Now, following a series of one or two year editors, half of the paper appears to be dedicated to high school sports with a few articles on local news and it has had a serious decline in readership. 

It is time for the “major” newspapers to accept that they cannot compete with the Internet for major, national and international news. We get that faster – and more accurately – on the Internet than it is possible for them to print it. Such stories are reported on an hourly basis. However, there are many area happenings which people would be interested in reading, and, I believe, would purchase newspapers in order to get learn what is happening in their area.  This is, basically, what the Washington Post and the Washington Times do, it is just that WashingtonDC “local” news affects all of us. Papers in other major cities do not have their advantage, but they could still report incidents of interest in their areas. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch does an excellent job of this. 

Another action major newspapers could take would be to provide thoughtful and fair analyses of the news on their editorial pages, provided they have persons capable of this. As a daily reader of the Wall Street Journal, I often find it reporting on events which I read about on the Internet the day before. However, their balanced editorial page, presenting thoughtful articles, keeps me reading, and purchasing, the paper. 

Where was her common sense? What were her morals? 

When people think of the word “morals” they normally, at least in the United States, think in terms of rules of behavior based on the Ten Commandments and the teachings of Jesus. But there are other sets of morals.

For many, money is their idol and constitutes their moral base. The more money, or possessions indicating money, that you have, the better you are as a person. At an easy level, consider some of recent revelations of the bonuses paid to themselves by leading industrialists. Less easy, as the news media avoid the subject, consider the leaks of how some of our leading politicians, such as Senator Dodd, have acquired wealth and privilege, while doing “good” for the nation.  I read one report that claimed that AIG distributed over eight million dollars to Congressmen, half to Democrats and half to Republicans.  Obama was reported as one of the recipients. Money is moral.

For others, power is what is important. At its most generally despised level, we find spouse abuse. Typically reported among the lower classes, abusers find righteousness in the ability to dominate, to abuse, their spouses. But it is not limited to the poor. While employed at WashingtonUniversity I did industrial consulting. The owner of a trucking firm telephoned and reported that his firm was losing millions of dollars every year. (He was a member of an extremely wealthy family.) We set up a battery of tests to evaluate his entire workforce. My assistant, an attractive young woman, did the testing. She reported to me that he offered to double any salary the University was paying her, but that she would never work for him. She said he treated his employees horribly: shouting and swearing at them. Employees also did horribly on tests. None of his mechanics scored better than the bottom ten percent of the population on the Bennett Mechanical Aptitude test, none of his secretaries could type faster than twenty words a minute. No wonder his trucks were always broken down and he was losing money. But he had power. (For the interested, we discussed this in the office and my boss, King Wientge, an experienced and accomplished psycholgist, said that he had best report the results, not me, inexperienced in such problems. He later told me that he had a very frank talk with the man, whose first response was to say he would fire everyone.)

Then there are those for whom notoriety is all important. If you make the front pages, then you are good. Watch the faces of some of the criminals, including murderers, during their trials. They are important: they are on television and they enjoy it. But you don’t have to be a criminal to enjoy prestige. Consider all the “beautiful” actors and actresses. As long as they are on the front page of the tabloids and the news media, life is good – any publicity is good publicity – and they receive it by exposing their bodies. For many, that is all they have to offer.

It appears that Jessie belonged to this group. Obviously, she valued her looks and her body. To expose what she appears to have valued most, could have led to the nude picture of herself that she sent to her boyfriend. His bragging rights led him to distribute it, sort of a “see what I have” approach. Then Jessica discovered, to her horror, that such fame could lead to unpleasant consequences. She was unable to tolerate this, and hung herself. But, how much of her behavior is a result of her home life? Time spent with parents, what they support and praise, is important.

Once, while teaching and doing volunteer work at the mental health clinic, a mother and her ten-year-old son came to my office and demanded my time. She said she had heard that I did free work and she needed help for her son, who was failing in school. Not only did she irritate me, I was in a hurry. The result was calculated cruelty on my part. I looked at the boy and asked, “When did you last read a book?” “I don’t.” “Do you go to the library?” “No.” “Do you have a library card?” “No.” “When was the last time your parents complimented you and for what.” After a long pause, he said, “Last summer, for riding my bicycle.” I turned to the mother and asked her, “Why should he care about school if you don’t?” 

Jessica’s mother is now starting, or attempting to start, a campaign to get the government to control the Internet and cell phones, I suppose to install government morals. There are cruel questions I would ask her. How much time did you and your husband spend with Jessie while she was growing up? Did you go camping together, or to plays or concerts together? Or were you and your husband busy with work, so as to provide measurable luxuries rather than that of companionship? Did you send Jessie to Sunday School or attend church with her, church where Ten Commandment type morals are taught? If not, who taught her the values and morals she learned?

I’m sorry, for Jessie’s mother, but the federal government in WashingtonDC cannot raise a child. It takes a family to raise a child to competent and happy adulthood, typically it is easiest (It is never easy!) in a family which includes both a mother and a father. It is from family that children learn what is important, what is moral.

Recently, my brother Joe must have been slightly annoyed by one of my blogs. It was a bit critical of Obama’s reign: his announced plans and accomplishments in contrast to his campaign promises. I quote Joe’s memo to me. “Darn it Bill, quit quibbling. Now that we are out of Iraq and Afghanistan, friendly with Cuba, have eliminated our dependence of foreign oil, opened up our closed government, and have a vice-president who speaks only the truth you have to admit we NEEDED change. But now we have it and everything is great.”

Sheila asked me if I understood the “toxic asset” plan. I said I thought so, that it appeared rather simple. Banks which made bad loans as a result of Congressional pressure (read Frank and Dodd with Pelosi’s leadership) now had money tied up in property that wasn’t worth much. Congress would buy (with taxpayer money) these worthless notes held by the banks so that the banks could make more bad decisions as to whom they should loan money. This would, of course, require the employment of large numbers of new federal workers, which would satisfy Obama’s promise to increase employment – he never said he would increase PRODUCTIVE employment. Then in another year or two, Congress would have more toxic loans to buy up. A great plan, it only requires new and higher taxes.

Almost two years ago, we agreed to take a large black rabbit – with cage – which someone at the Cardiac Club had to unload. After a few months, we were concerned about the poor beast spending all of its life in a small cage. For a change, we rigged a line across the back yard with the cage at one end. Then we put a harness on the rabbit, permitting it the partial freedom of running across the yard and sleeping in its cage. The problem was that the rabbit kept getting out of its harness and running the yard – and my garden – freely. By fall, the garden was destroyed and the rabbit was adept at avoiding us. So, we decided to simply let it run feely in the yard, which it enjoyed. It would come close to us to be fed – it liked apples and sunflower seeds, but avoided being touched. This spring I pointed out to the family that there was no point in my attempting to have a garden, much less to raise spinach and green peppers, with the beast running free. The problem was catching her to put her back in her cage. The other evening, when I, once again, told Stephen this, he went out and came back in a few minutes later, stating the thing was safely caged. It seems that when chased, which Stephen had experience in doing, our rabbit ran to the smokehouse and leaped into a hole that led under the building. Our Stephen placed a large rock over the hole. When the rabbit, being chased, raced for the hole and leaped to enter it, there was the rock. Stephen said he simply went over, picked up a stunned bunny, I suppose with a headache, and put her back in her cage.   We are still laughing about it, but I don’t suppose our caged bunny is.  I plan on planting my green peppers in the next day or two.

My other Democratic critic is Dee. We are Internet friends. Unfortunately, Dee is unlike Jim in that she is a nag. Ever since the “Octomom” stupidity came up, she has been urging me to write about it. At first, my emotions were too strong. Now? I surrender.

The words “stupid,” “horrible,” “reprehensible” and “irresponsible” are all too mild to express my feelings. The woman is a pig and the news people are no better. What is the big commercial hullabaloo? Lots of sows have from twelve to fifteen offspring, she had only eight. The doctor should be disbarred and the children, all of them, should be taken away and placed in homes where there are responsible adults. Instead, there is great publicity, hoards of volunteer helpers (Miss Suleman fired these after a few days, saying they were reporting her to child welfare) and lots of free goodies including a beautiful new home – which will probably look like it is an uninhabitable slum house in a year or two – or a week or two.

In addition to the new eight, Miss Suleman has six other children at home, ranging in age from two to seven. She says she is not receiving any welfare, just food stamps and disability checks, the checks totaling $2,379 per month. She also lived in her parent’s home for free. She claims she paid the $100,000 for fertility treatments by working double shifts at the hospital in addition to the disability money. (I think I would like a job in that hospital.) No mention was made in the articles I reviewed concerning who paid for the team of doctors and nurses who delivered the eight latest. I think I know why California is having financial problems.  The slightest bit of Welfare oversight would have revealed she was receiving disability at the same time as working double shifts. That makes no sense. 

Miss Suleman is planning on returning to university in the fall to work on her Master’s Degree. No mention in any of the articles was how she planned to care for those 14 children, the eldest being 8, while attending school. No mention is made as to how she plans to pay for this, and the care of the children while she is in school.

Possible fraud is not the real problem, however. What is another million or so taxpayer dollars in this case when so many are helping themselves to the seemingly bottomless, unpoliced, welfare well.   The true tragedy of this Octomom mess is the future of the children. Young children require a lot of care and attention, I claim expertise as a father of eight. They carelessly ignore danger to themselves and are casually cruel to brothers and sisters. They don’t mean to harm themselves or others, danger is simply meaningless to them. My daughter Lorene received a serious shoulder dislocation when she made a diving stop of her son Joseph as he raced down my driveway headed for the highway. On the casual cruelty side, I recall a situation when I was digging out a septic tank trench. I had a large pile of clay on one side and Andrew, about two, was sitting on top of one side of it. His brother Stephen, sitting about four feet away, was casually throwing lumps of mud at him. When I said, “Stephen stop throwing mud at Andrew,” he asked, “Can I throw rocks?” He meant it. He didn’t intend to harm or know the danger of a clump of hard clay, or a rock, hitting his little brother in the eye. I laughed at the time and still think of it as one of many funny such instances, but my children – all children – must be watched. How is Miss Suleman going to watch 14 children under the age of nine when those eight babies begin walking? There is a real possibility of harm in their interactions.

At another level, what sort of adults are these children going to become as they are raised by a mother who appears to have exploited all others; her mother and father who provided free housing and food as she bore the first six, volunteers who tried to help and the people of California through the welfare system. Is she raising fourteen more welfare dependent adults?

All of Miss Suleman’s finances appear interesting and none of them are very transparent. She deserves a post in the Obama Cabinet, perhaps as secretary of a department examining welfare fraud. She would fit right in.   

I have lived long enough to be aware of and read about other leaders who have decided to “change the world.” Some called themselves Communists and some called themselves Socialists, which has always struck me as different labels on the same can of beans. In both cases, the leaders of a powerful federal government decide what is best for other people.   

The first of these in modern times was Lenin, and he did change his country, he effectively destroyed a fledgling democracy. His word was Communism, an idea in which all the power belonged to the people, but in reality rested in him and a powerful, privileged, leadership. Then he was ousted by Stalin, who used military power to take over Russia and much of Eastern Europe. In the process, he killed hundreds of thousands who opposed him. As his power spread in Europe, the number killed increased to millions, mostly among the working middle-class. But the indolent and the criminal classes did not profit either, he established re-education camps in Siberia, where they learned to work for a living – or starve.  

A second person who set out to change his country and the world was Hitler. His dogmatism was Socialism. (Nazi stood for “National Socialist Party.) Following his election to leadership in the then Democracy of Germany, he used his goon squads to silence dissidents: early victims, who were imprisoned and executed, included the handicapped, Masons, peace loving Christians such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses and more than 800 Protestant ministers. Finally he turned his attention to the Jews. It was all for the good of the nation. He and those about him knew what was good for all. The consequence was catastrophe for Europe.

Mao knew what was best for the people of China. He executed over twenty million Chinese and, over the years, led the nation into poverty. It was only after his death, with the slow introduction of capitalism, which permits people to decide for themselves what is best for them, that prosperity returned for many, but it has been slow. 

Castro promised change. He was young, handsome and an excellent speaker – like Hitler. The people of Cuba needed change, and supported him. It was only after he gained control of the nation that they realized they no longer enjoyed the freedom to determine their own lives. Castro knew what was best. More than a million fled the nation and the others now live in poverty. Not, of course, the leadership. As in all Socialist (Communist) nations, the leaders live privileged lives in prosperity. 

Now Chavez has decided he knows what is best for Venezuela. Young, handsome and an excellent speaker, he won leadership. At first, the country prospered as Chavez reaped the profits of capitalism, now it is sinking into economic despair as industry after industry is taken over and directed by the government, but Chavez and the elite with whom he has surrounded himself still know what is best – and prosper.

Now we have Obama. Like Lenin, Hitler, Castro and Chavez, Obama is young, handsome and a marvelous speaker. He has been quoted as saying he will change the nation and the world. All of the major media supported him, and he won the Presidency. This has made me wonder how he might be expected to change the nation – and the world. This worries me.

I don’t want to change our culture.

I like the fact that in our nation all citizens have the right to participate in the selection of their leaders unless they, themselves, have lost that right by some action of their own, such as violating the law and being in prison. There was a time when many did not have this power through the vote. At one time, only property owners could vote. At another time, Blacks and American Indians could not vote.  Now all citizens have the right.  I don’t want to change our current system of voting, even though I know it is abused by some political machines, its basis is sound.

I like the fact that the laws are to apply to all people. If I get caught speeding, I get a ticket. If my friend, Mr. Murphy, who owns the grocery store is caught speeding, he gets a ticket. Even professional football players get tickets! I know there are some whose wealth and privilege permit them to avoid tickets, the Kennedys come to mind, but such abuse does not make the system wrong, its basis is sound.

I like the fact that all people are given the same rights before the law, to equal treatment in the courts. All can request a trial by a jury of their peers and the poor receive free legal advice.  While any person who follows the news knows that being wealthy, or having wealth and fame (certain football players come to mind) often results in special treatment, this special treatment is against the law of the land. The basic law is sound.

I like the fact that all children receive a free education and that it is possible for a child of the poorest background to attend and receive the highest education that his or her talent, interest and willingness to work permits. It is obvious that some schools are better than others at preparing children for life in our society, but that doesn’t change the basic premise, which is sound.

I like the fact that all citizens have the right to choose what vocation they wish to enter, the only true restrictions being their talent and energy, there being no way, anywhere, of ensuring opportunity. There have been nations in the past, and probably still are, in which the vocation and status of the father determines the vocation and status of his children. Sorry, but I like our current system, which is sound.

I like the fact that our Constitution specifically forbids enacting ex post facto laws and laws designed to punish specific individuals. This is under current attack in Congress as they seek to punish officials of AIG for accepting the bonuses that Congress itself authorized. I hope this fails. I don’t want my local County Council or State Government to decide that I should have paid more taxes than the legal ones I have already paid and confiscate my home in reprisal. Sorry, I like our current, constitutional, laws, which are sound. 

I like the fact that I can attend, or not attend, any church without punishment, the only coercion being that employed by family members and friends.  I am a Christian and approve of Christianity, which has given us the current culture and laws under which we live, but this same culture permits people to worship in other systems if they so desire. I may not approve of those, or of segments of those such as the subordination of women to men under Muslim law, but if there are men who need religious justification for this and women who are willing to accept it, why not. It is simply that I have no wish to change the culture which gives me, and them, the power to worship as we please.

Why would I wish to change our culture? What culture on earth is better? The implementation of laws written in accord with our culture have their flaws, as illustrated by the sorry arrogance of some members of Congress, but to the extent they reflect our culture, they are good. Why change them? Why change our culture?