Thothblog

First, let me start out by writing that I am a huge Dollhouse fan, I think the show is very good and like Firefly, I am sorry to see it end.

That being stated…STOP BEING POLITICAL IN YOUR TWEETS!  If people wonder why average citizens don’t want to hear celebrities be political I offer the following tweet posted by Eliza:

Aw, WOman: I want Martha Coakley for US Senator! She’s smart, honest, & on the good side of important issues! This is BIGtime

On the good side of important issues….I get not agreeing with someone’s political philosophy.  I get that.  But this whole tweet is sophomoric.  It would make sense if perhaps she were running against Stalin.  Maybe a former KGB officer looking to get back into the game.  However, she is running against Scott Brown, a Massachusetts National guard member (Lt. Col), and holds the Army Commendation Medal.  He also has a pesky Public Servant of the YEAR award.  I am not saying Scott Brown is a saint, but I am saying that maybe he is smart and honest and possibly cares about important issues just as I am sure Martha Coakley does

I don’t feel like I am asking much, I am simply asking that people who have loud voices for whatever reasons at least attempt to fire those silly brain neurons when they weigh in on important issues.  Eliza is rooting for Coakley, not because she has taken the time to learn the issues, nor because she actually knows what this woman stands for but she is rooting for Martha Coakley because she has a D after her name and because she will vote for the Health Care package.  A written package that is longer and more complex than anything ever imagined by this country’s founding fathers.  A package which right or wrong, 65% of the country wants nothing to do with it.  There’s no informed decision here.  Eliza, like many others, has a feel good mentality.  “YAY! we get to give healthcare to millions of uninsured!”  A mentality that is easy to come by when you don’t have to struggle between paying your electric bill and paying your mortgage because taxes went up again.

I plead with Eliza and others like her; before you rally your troops, of which you have many I am sure, can we treat our process and the people participating in the process with a little more dignity than that of a 5 grade recess “who started it” match.  Since Eliza was so fond of MLK day today, here is another quote of his that holds some meaning.

A nation or civilization that continues to produce soft-minded men purchases its own spiritual death on the installment plan. - Martin Luther King

Sorry Eliza, but consider your chops busted!

Friend-

When I took this job, I made a promise to visit every single one of our state’s sixty-four counties by year’s end.

And in nearly eight months, I’ve visited with folks in every corner of our state, not to talk, but to listen and hear first hand their concerns, ideas and aspirations for the future.

What I’ve found is that people in rural and urban areas across the state want the same things-for themselves and for their families.

They want to earn a decent living for an honest day’s work. They want health care coverage they can count on. They want access to a quality and competitive education for their kids and grandkids.

But they also want a serious conversation on the issues-and they want their opinions heard.

This desire to have a seat at the table is why I made my 64-county promise. It’s why I traveled over 8,000 miles to hear directly from folks across the state about the issues that are important to them.

Folks like Shelly in Frisco, who said we need to stop fighting each other and start fighting for the American people.

Or Dr. Higi in Durango, who told me the health care system we have is making it harder to provide his patients with quality care.

And Randy in Montrose, who’s being crushed by rising health care costs, but isn’t so sure Washington can deliver on meaningful reform.

These are the stories I’ve heard time and time again in my travels across the state-in all 64 counties.

And though I’d much rather stay in Colorado and continue these conversations (Susan and the girls would probably prefer that, too), I’m headed back to Washington all the more convinced that we have some serious work to get done.

Because people all across our state face serious challenges-whether it’s searching for a good-paying job, struggling to pay for health insurance, or trying to put their kids through college.

By putting aside our differences, we can find common-sense solutions to the problems we face and we can build a better future for Colorado’s working families and small businesses.

Sincerely,

Michael F. Bennet
U.S. Senator for Colorado

I am reminded of Ghostbusters II when i read this, as Egon told Louis Tulley, “Short but pointless”.  People want good wages and cheap products.  Really?!  Thank god Bennet went around(on the tax payers dime I would guess) to all 64 counties to figure that out.  People like Nancy Pelosi irritate me because they have shot so far past what is sensible and decent that at least I know if I dialogue with one of them they will be shoveling me shit.  But at least they stand for what they believe.  People like Bennet irritate me even more.  Michael, could you say less with more words???

I could rant and rave about how your policy voting record is shoddy or how you never met a fence you didn’t like to sit on but no real point.  You have once again shown why come the election in 2010 your own party is trying to oust you.  Pick side a man!  Consider your chops busted!

Have any of you had the chance to do this?  This is truly…enlightening.  After watching a daily show from last week tonight I got into quite a tizzy after listening to Henry Waxman bash all non-democrats.  If I were a democrat or republican and heard someone who “represented” me speaking this way, I would be ashamed.

So I came upstairs to email my congressmen and all that.  I got to looking at gov documents and came across the Greenhouse gas inventory EPA document (ended up there after trying to understand some of the earkmarks Degette is trying to put through).  So I am reading through this document, looking at some tables and what not.  Interesting reading.  So I get to this point and I have to reread this a couple times just to make sure I am reading this correctly.  Now unlike our government representatives I will actually present sources, but here is what the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) wrote.  I listed the acronym so no one would read this and think Elephant Pension Allotment or other such nonsense…

It read, talking about contributing factors to why the percentage is higher: “cooler winters and warmer summer conditions in 2007 than in 2006 increased the demand for heating fuels and contributed to the demand in increase for electricity.”
http://epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/downloads09/InventoryUSGhG1990-2007.pdf   bottom of page ES-3

So think about this for a second.  Greenhouse gases went up 1.4 percent supposedly.  Ok so this lead to it getting warmer…ok 1.4 percent must be a huge increase to change the temperature in such a measurable way, but I will give on the moment.  cooler winters and warmer summers increased the demand for heating fuels.  Ok so because the country was warmer we had to use more fuel to stay….warmer?!  Wait…what???

How does that work?  In what bizzarro world do warmer temperatures increase the need for heating elements?  What editor took of that day and who wrote this to begin with?  Thankfully the EPA is not burdened by that whole cause and effect situation.

“Johnson, get the numbers in the document and add these conclusions, On the double.”

“Uh, sir, these conclusions make no sense when they numbers are right before them.”

” HAH, sounds great Johnson, On the Double!”

Sometimes pointing out the stupidity of certain groups lacks of challenge….

The other day I had a very lively and spirited conversation with a friend of mine who is very much an enigma.  This is a guy who loved Ron Paul and would have voted for him in a heartbeat.  On the other end, he had no love for John McCain (many didn’t) and so when it came time to cast his vote he, like 52% of Americans, voted for ol’ Barry Obama.  I respect that he felt he was voting for positive change and hope in a better future.  Idealism is great and it can’t fully die or things like hope go away.  However, this is a guy who 3 month’s into the new regime is loving Obama’s policy changes and what is the most amazing thing? He is a business man by trade.  Unfortunately, his heart is bigger than his head.  His feelings and emotions control and supersede his more rationale thinking.  Typical debates evolve like this:

Liberal: “I love what Barry is doing because I want poor people to have healthcare and this is the best way to do it! And you won’t have to pay as much.”

Common Senser: ALERT ALERT…About to Leave Rationale Thought Zone!!!  At this point the Common Senser is thinking to themselves, what avenue do I go down first since we have 3 treacherous roads.  There is of course the “What do you mean this is the best way for everyone to get Healthcare?” or the “How am I going to pay less?” or the very dangerous, “Well, yeah everyone having healthcare is great but…”.  I believe we are all familiar with a similar line “I want everyone to own a home..”  That worked out well.

I generally begin with, “Currently I can walk into any hospital in the United States and by law, regardless of my economic standing, they have to treat me.  So you want to offer everyone free healthcare in addition to this, by increasing the budget by 680 billion dollars?  On top of that, I am going to pay less in taxes towards healthcare by doing so?  And the government is going to manage this entire system?”

This is always said with some skepticism and thus we begin the logically fallacious responses the average liberal will make:

1. Appeal to Emotion:  Poor people having health care makes people feel good, therefore this plan is good.
   When someone goes down this road, stop them damn quick.  This is a major one, because they like to invoke the”You don’t want socialized Healthcare for everybody, do you hate people?”  If you are attempting to have a discussion and this is the other side’s argument, stop the discussion now. You won’t get anywhere with them.  These people are too narrow minded on the helping people is good idea to actually contemplate the good and bad ways of accomplishing such a feat.
2. Appeal to Common Practice:  Europe has socialized healthcare therefore it is good.
   This is one of my favorite ones, because to an untrained eye it does make a little bit of sense.  Wow, if Europe is doing it and also Canada, Cuba, China and Russia, everyone else can’t be wrong, right?  WRONG!  Sadly, the fact that a majority of people choose to do something does not make it right.  Healthcare or really any governmental discussion worth having is too complex to resort to “But other people do it”.  When presented with this argument, try to get into the roots of that idea. Yes, many places may have socialized healthcare, but that doesn’t mean it works well or is better than the US system.  Get some facts in the quiver! Arm yourself with sources! You should be good to go.
3. Straw Man:  “You say we shouldn’t socialize healthcare?”  ”Why would you want to treat the poor people that way?”
   In this tactic, the liberal will change the argument of socialized health care being bad to not helping poor people is wrong.  The problem with this is that a Common Senser is arguing not that helping people is bad, but that socialized healthcare is a poor way to do it.  When this rebuttal flares up, bring it right back to center as quickly as possible.  Interject if you have to, but make sure to force the point that you are not discussing helping people, but socialistic healthcare is bad.
4. Ad Ignorantiam, the Burden of Proof:  “If socializing healthcare is so bad, what’s the better solution?”
   This is a tricky one because I have seen many a Common Senser get lulled into defending their position of why an idea is bad by having to defend some secondary idea that is “better” than the first.  Don’t let liberals do that.  Whether or not you have a better idea that is erroneous to the current topic of Socialized Health Care being bad.  Don’t get caught in this web. Politely remind your fellow discussee that the merits of your idea do not relate to the merits (or lack there of) of their idea.
5. Apogogical argument or Reductio ad Absurdum:  “If socialized Health Care is bad, then how come Cuba had one of the best healthcare programs in the world”
   This argument would normally apply to just a simple factual fallacy.  However, some of the arguments I have heard are so ridiculous that I have stretched slightly the reductio ad absurdum argument to include these statements.  This kind of argument is where you have to break out the knowledge on their ass.  I appreciate that people love to treat Michael Moore films as documentaries and fact check on Wikipedia.  This however is bad practice.  For the sake of this road I am going to map out some key points.

How do we meet the ridiculous statements epitomized by something like: Cuba has one of the world’s greatest Health Care Systems.
For that particular statement, try any of the following:

The Cuban government appropriates currently a smaller percentage of its budget to healthcare than Jamaica, Costa Rica, or the Dominican Republic.
Cuban Healthcare has been dubbed Medical Apartheid and is well established in “health tourism”
Check Section 1705 of the Cuban Democracy Act of 1992. Turns out the US embargo does NOT apply to medicine and associated supplies.
Now, those who really like to get into it, they may try the numbers game, so here are the numbers:

Cuba’s gross National Income per Capita is not available, Cuba doesn’t release that info, US is 44,070
Life Expectancy at Birth M/F:   Cuba is 76/80.  US is 75/80
Healthy Life Expectancy at Birth M/F:  Cuba is 67/70. US is 67/71
Probability of Dying under 5:  Cuba is 7.  US is 8
Probability of Dying between 15 and 60:   Cuba is 127/82.  US is  137/80
Infant Mortality rates are identical as of 2000.

Here are some sources too:
World Health Organization
Pan American Health Organization
Cuban American national Foundation

So the Barry administration is holding more meetings today…about the financial crisis…in regards to banking…and selective nationalization.  Since the vote of the people back in November, the dow has fallen more than 2000 points.  Barry also announced that by Wednesday he would make 15 billion dollars available for state Medicare costs.  So essentially the federal government is federalizing state Medicare.  Interestingly enough this will not create jobs.  However, it will make states dependent upon federal money for medicare costs over the coming years.  That’s a good precedent to set.  Barry will also be announcing how he is going to increase spending, cut the 2 trillion dollar deficit in half over 3 years, and increase the bejesus out of taxes.  While he is at…everybody gets a Unicorn!

I know not many people want to ask the question but I am going to be that guy:  WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU FEDERAL GUYS DOING?!

I was already a good deal aware that Barry’s administration was not that financially savvy.  After All, apparently no one in the inner circle thought to check all these cabinet postings tax status.  Although it might be pointed out that if one does not intend to pay one’s taxes, then raising taxes doesn’t really bother that person.  Its very similar to making more laws about gun ownership…to control how many and what type of guns criminals have…even though criminals are notorious for engaging in a lot of, well, crime…which normally involved breaking laws.  I digress.

The current actions of Barry’s administration are built off the premise:  We have to act, if we don’t, the economy will collapse…

This is what we in the know like to call a logical fallacy.  Their idea is to scare the crap out of the average citizen with the idea that if you don’t let the government step in and fix things for you; all we crumble and fall!!!  DOOOOOOM!!!!!  In truth, its the economy, we don’t know what is going to happen.  It is entirely possibly(and increasing with each “helpful” act) that helping could just make the economy worse.  If only we had examples of instituted socialism going bad…..

The federal government has become analogous to the idea of the father beating his child yelling: “Why do you make me hit you!”  Barry and company, STOP HELPING US!!  Recessions happen, let the market do what is is supposed to, correct, adjust, and move on.