One Citizen Speaking...

Dedicated to the wealthy and powerful who believed they were above the fray when they endorsed global warming …

For those of you who did not believe that global warming was a political power grab that features more government, higher taxes and a loss of your personal freedoms …

Of course, it is the operative procedures of far-left liberal democrats to make everything about victimhood: by class, race, ethnicity, gender, sex or other characteristics; so is it so hard to believe that the proponents of global warming wouldn’t attack the rich to push their bogus viewpoint?

Reuters is reporting …

“New climate strategy: track the world's wealthiest”

* World's richest emit about half of Earth's carbon

* Tracking the wealthy could break climate impasse

* New method would follow individual greenhouse emissions

“To fairly divide the climate change fight between rich and poor, a new study suggests basing targets for emission cuts on the number of wealthy people, who are also the biggest greenhouse gas emitters, in a country.”

“Since about half the planet's climate-warming emissions come from less than a billion of its people, it makes sense to follow these rich folks when setting national targets to cut carbon dioxide emissions, the authors wrote on Monday in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.”

I love it. Another purported scientific study that purports to lay blame for the natural variability of nature and never questions the actual science.

I cannot even begin to point out the political mendacity involved in this report, so I will simply remind the rest of us: the rich are insulated from the consequences of their actions.

As an example, I would like to point out that billionaires who support public policies are often exempt from their guidelines, insulated by political connections and lawyer/lobbyists …

“Oracle CEO Larry Ellison, spent more than $200 million to build a 16th century Japanese emperor's countryside home in Woodside. Yet such a home suffers from ‘significant functional obsolescence,’ according to an Ellison filing — that is, not too many rich folks would buy it — and so Ellison was granted a $3 million tax break. The local school district will reportedly lose some $330,000 in tax revenue.”

Make them show you the proof …

First, read the report that was suppressed by the EPA because it raised credible questions about the science of global warming.

Next, decide whether it is science or politics that is driving the agenda.

Then take action.

If you believe in the political agenda which is going to create a larger government, raise taxes for everyone, deprive you of your freedoms and impact your life by travel restrictions, then pay up.

If you are unwilling to sacrifice your freedoms and your hard-earned dollars to a bogus regime with a dark and destructive political agenda, then join the rest of us and vote the bastards out of office and demand that the new elected officials repeal non-productive and nonsensical legislation.

There comes a time when government steps over the line, propelled by a toxic ideology and a corrosive agenda. We are now there and it is up to you, the voter, to remedy the situation.

 

-- steve

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

Reuters AlertNet - New climate strategy: track the world's wealthiest

Inside the Posh Pads of Tech's Elite - CIO.com - Business Technology Leadership#slideshow

Proposed NCEE Comments on Draft Technical Support Document for Endangerment Analysis for Greenhouse Gas Emissions under the Clean Air Act -- Office of Policy, Economics, and Innovation; Office of the Administrator; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; Washington, DC 20460 (March 9, 2009) Based on TSD Draft of March 9, 2009

ARE YOU AFRAID OF SARAH PALIN? SEVEN REASONS!

After refusing to become just another ambitious lame-duck governor sucking the teat of political office, I cannot help but note that the democrats have now ratcheted-up their attack on Sarah Palin another notch to a more hysterical level.

What is driving these attacks?

1.  Sarah Palin is a normal person who was not born of privilege, was not educated at “elite” schools like Harvard, Princeton and Yale, and has worked for everything she has achieved. She is married to a normal guy and has an unremarkably normal family and relatives. Bottom line – she is one of the people, just like us.

2.  Sarah Palin is not about victimhood. She is not an affirmative action choice and has never complained about her gender. She may refer to the “old boys club,” but it does set her off on a fanatical crusade under the feminist banner. Because she does not openly weep about the historical excesses which may have been heaped on long-gone ancestors and extol the virtues of affirmative action legislation and reparations as a remedy for past transgressions, she is immediately suspect by those who want to enlarge their power base by pandering to the poor, the minorities and the illegal aliens.

3.  Sarah Palin understands both money and politics. She has proven that she is not about waste, corruption and mismanagement as she has served the citizens of Alaska well. She appears to be more honest and trustworthy than our current group of politicians who are hell-bent on lining their own pockets while they secure their powerbase for another three or four decades.

4.  Sarah Palin mirrors the morals and ethics of the so-called silent majority which comprises the bulk of American citizens.

5.  She is a patriot who loves her country. She is not a committed leftist or Marxist who blames America for the world’s condition. Unlike Hillary Clinton, she did not write a paean to Saul Alinsky.

6.  Sarah Palin is both telegenic and articulate. She does not need a TelePrompTer to explain her position, nor does she shy away from defending her core beliefs in any forum. Because she has core values, she does not require focus groups and spin doctors to know the difference between right and wrong, good and evil. She may not be a polished orator, but she delivers her Reagan-like message in a clear, unambiguous manner.

7.  She is more experienced than Barack Obama was when he took the Presidency. She actually has run a government entity, balanced a budget and solved pressing problems. She is not a no-tax zealot and knows when to hold ‘em and when to fold ‘em – all to the benefit of her constituents. Her lack of foreign affairs experience is not a problem: she knows the difference between good and evil, right and wrong, and has an entire cadre of willing career bureaucrats advisors should she want to explore pussyfooting nuance.

In short, she is your neighbor – albeit a politician – but more your neighbor than any of the asshats now serving in the Administration.

Preparing for the attacks …

The democrats, taking a page out of Marxist Saul Alinsky’s playbook will try to demonize her. Accuse her of waste, fraud, corruption and moral equivocation. They and they surrogates will slander, libel and do everything in their power to assure she does not become the Republican nominee in 2012. I would not even put it past the democrats to subvert the primary process by asking democrats to re-register as Republicans to insure than any one of her rivals is given the official slot. And for those who are positioning Sarah Palin as a quitter for leaving office, I find it both refreshing and admirable that she was able to turn the reins of power over to the next-in-command when she determined that her continued effectivness for the citizens of Alaska could be futher compromised by the swirling brouhaha over continuing democratic maneuvers and attacks.

My early choice …

Until I see a better choice that would serve America, all American and just not a coalition of disaffected victims for the Presidential race in 2012, it looks like Sarah Palin is the front-runner for the conservative wing of the Republican ticket. And I am hoping that she is not corrupted by those Rockefeller-style Republicans who want to keep milking our national treasury while they only pretend they support “fiscal responsibility.”

Should you wish to disagree, I am right here.  Use the comment section below or send me an e-mail using the link under my picture.

-- steve

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

Is the Congress prepared to whitewash the Michael Jackson legacy?

Resolution 600 introduced to House of Representatives by Representative (D-TX) Sheila Jackson-Lee is an abuse of the legislative process at a time when legislators should be dealing with the legislative nightmares that led to our current financial meltdown and whose current legislation threatens to bankrupt our nation into a third-world socialist republic.

While Michael Jackson should be remembered for his contributions to music, dance and short-form videos, let us not forget that this was one seriously disturbed, self-mutilating, drug-abusing human being who used his power and wealth to cover up alleged criminal activities and drug abuse which would have seen any other citizen behind bars. The fact that one could allegedly buy the key testimony of his victims for tens of millions of dollars, speaks more to Jackson’s self-protecting abuse of the system than it does to matters which would justify a Congressional honor.

The commercialization of a dead Michael Jackson is bound to be worth billions of dollars in the coming years and it is in the best interests of those promoters that Michael Jackson be portrayed as the child he never was and that Neverland be promoted as a sanctuary for ill-children rather than the world’ s largest child trap of a suspected pedophile.  The operative code words bandied about Jackson is that he was an abused “Peter Pan” longing for his lost childhood. Belying the fact that Michael Jackson was a “control freak” who got his way or threw a hissy fit. A person who was totally insulated from life’s consequences by money and a series of enabling handlers who would say or do anything to remain attached to the Jackson umbilical cord of fame, power and money.

It is unknown whether or not Michael Jackson’s works will temporally transcend celebrity-driven “pop culture” and rise to the greatness of a Mozart, but it is highly doubtful.  

Text of the Resolution …

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas (for herself and Ms. WATSON) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

---

RESOLUTION

Honoring an American legend and musical icon.

Whereas Michael Jackson was not only an accomplished recording and performing artist, he was a noted humanitarian;

Whereas Michael Jackson began his stellar recording career as the featured member of `The Jackson 5', which was the first act in recorded history to have their first four major label singles `I Want You Back',`ABC',`The Love You Save', and `I'll Be There', reached the top of the American charts;

Whereas the internationally recognized `Thriller' released in 1982, which became a smash hit yielded seven top-10 singles. The album sold 21 million copies in the United States and at least 27 million worldwide. It was a monumental moment in music history;

Whereas Michael Jackson was labeled `The King of Pop', Jackson's music is internationally recognized and critically acclaimed;

Whereas Michael Jackson was one of the few artists to have been inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame twice;

Whereas in the early 1980s, Michael Jackson became a dominant figure in popular music and the first African-American entertainer to amass a strong crossover following on MTV. The popularity of his music videos airing on MTV, such as `Beat It', `Billie Jean' and `Thriller'--widely credited with transforming the music video from a promotional tool into an art form--helped bring the relatively new channel to fame;

Whereas, on January 10, 1984, Michael Jackson visited the unit for burn victims at Brotman-Memorial Hospital in Los Angeles, and demonstrated his concern with people suffering from grievous injuries;

Whereas, on April 9, 1984, David Smithee, a 14-year-old boy suffering from cystic fibroses was invited to Michael's home, in response to a dying request to meet Michael. David passed away 7 weeks later;

Whereas, on April 14, 1984, Michael Jackson was single handedly responsible for equipping a 19-bed-unit at Mount Sinai New York Medical Center. This center is now a critical part of the T.J. Martell Foundation for leukemia and cancer research;

Whereas, on July 5, 1984, during the Jackson's press conference at Tavern On The Green, Michael announced that his portion of the earnings from the Victory Tour would be donated to three charitable organizations: The United Negro College Fund, Camp Good Times, and the T.J. Martell Foundation;

Whereas, on July 14, 1984, after the first concert of the Victory Tour, Michael met 8 terminally ill children backstage;

Whereas, on December 13, 1984, Michael visited the Brotman Memorial Hospital, where he had been treated when he was burned during the producing of a Pepsi commercial. He subsequently donated all the money he received from Pepsi, $1.5 million, to the Michael Jackson Burn Center for Children;

Whereas, on January 28, 1985 Michael and 44 other artists met to record `We Are The World', written by Michael and Lionel Ritchie, a project devoted to fighting global hunger. The proceeds of this record were donated to the starving people in Africa;

Whereas in 1986, Michael set up the `Michael Jackson UNCF Endowed Scholarship Fund'. This $1.5 million fund is aimed toward assisting students majoring in performance art and communications, with money given each year to students attending a UNCF member college or university;

Whereas, on February 28, 1986, after having had a heart-transplant, 14-year-old Donna Ashlock from California received a call from Michael Jackson. He had heard that she was a fan. Michael invited Donna to his home following her recovery;

Whereas, on September 13, 1987, Michael supported a campaign against racism. He made every effort to publicly support NAACP, in the fight against discrimination of African-American artists;

Whereas in October 1987, at the end of his `Bad Tour', Michael donated personal items to UNESCO for a charitable auction. The proceeds of his donation were allocated for the education of children in developing countries;

Whereas, on February 1, 1988 The Song `Man In the Mirror' entered the charts. The proceeds from the sales of this record went directly and exclusively to Camp Ronald McDonald for Good Times, a camp for children who suffer from Cancer;

Whereas, on March 1, 1988, at a press conference held by his sponsor Pepsi, Michael presented a $600,000 check to the United Negro College Fund;

Whereas on April 1988, Michael Jackson ensured that free tickets to three concerts in Atlanta, Georgia, were specifically set aside for the Make a Wish Foundation;

Whereas, on May 22, 1988, Michael visited cancer-stricken children in the Bambini-Gesu Children's Hospital in Rome. He signed autographs and gave away sweets and records to the young patients. He also announced his monetary donation of 100,000 pounds to the hospital;

Whereas, on July 16, 1988, Michael met the Prince of Wales and his wife Diana, where he donated 150,000 pounds for the Prince's Trust, and a check of 100,000 pounds for the children's hospital at Great Ormond Street;

Whereas, on July 20, 1988, Michael visited terminally ill children at Great Ormond Street Hospital. At a unit for less critical patients he stayed longer and to engage in story telling time with the children;

Whereas, on August 29, 1988, at his 30th birthday Michael performed a concert in Leeds, England, for the English charity organization `Give For Life', an organization designed as an immunization charity for children. Michael presented a check for 65,000 pounds;

Whereas on January 1989, the proceeds of one of Michael's shows in Los Angeles were donated to Childhelp USA, the biggest charity organization against child abuse. In appreciation of the contributions of Michael, Childhelp of Southern California founded the `Michael Jackson International Institute for Research On Child Abuse';

Whereas, on January 10, 1989, upon the winding down of his `Bad Tour', Michael Jackson donated tickets for each concert to underprivileged children, and made contributions to hospitals, orphanages and charity organizations throughout each stop on his tour;

Whereas, on February 7, 1989, Michael visited the Cleveland Elementary School in Stockton, California, a site of playground violence where 5 children had been tragically killed and 39 had been wounded;

Whereas, on March 5, 1989, Michael invited 200 underprivileged children of the St. Vincent Institute for Handicapped Children and of the organization Big Brothers and Big Sisters to the Circus Vargas in Santa Barbara. Following the event, the children were invited to his ranch to visit his private Zoo at Neverland Ranch;

Whereas in December 1991, Michael's office MJJ Productions donated more than 200 turkey dinners to needy families in Los Angeles;

Whereas in February 1992, within 11 days Michael covered 30,000 miles in Africa, to visit hospitals, orphanages, schools, churches, and institutions for mentally handicapped children;

Whereas, on February 3, 1992, at a press conference at the New York Radio City Music Hall, Michael announced that he is planning a new world tour, to raise funds for his new `Heal The World' Foundation. This Foundation was designed to support the fight against AIDS, Juvenile Diabetes, the Ronald McDonald Camp, and the Make A Wish Foundation;

Whereas, on May 6, 1992, Michael defrayed the funeral expenses for Ramon Sanchez, who was killed during the Los Angeles riots;

Whereas, on June 26, 1992, Michael presented the Mayor of Munich, Mr. Kronawitter, with a 40,000 DM check for the needy people of the city;

Whereas on July 1992, Michael donated 821,477,296 Lire to La Partita del Cuore (The Heart Match) in Rome and donated 120,000 DM to children's charities in Estonia and Latvia;

Whereas, on July 25, 1992, at his concert in Dublin, Ireland, Michael announced that he will give 400,000 pounds of the tour earnings to various charities;

Whereas in June 1993, Michael announced a donation of $1.25 million for children suffering as a result of the riots in Los Angeles;

Whereas on October 1993, Michael Jackson donated $100,000 to the Children's Defense Fund, the Children's Diabetes Foundation, the Atlanta Project, and the Boys and Girl Clubs of Newark, New Jersey;

Whereas on December 1993, in conjunction with the Gorbachev Foundation, Michael Jackson airlifted 60,000 doses of children's vaccines to Tblisi, Georgia;

Whereas in 1994, Michael donated $500,000 to Elizabeth Taylor's AIDS Foundation;

Whereas, on October 1, 1996, Michael donated the proceeds of his Tunisia concert to `The National Solidarity Fund', a charity dedicated to fighting poverty;

Whereas, on December 9, 1996, during the `History Tour' visit in Manila, Michael visited a Children's Hospital, where he announced that a portion of his concert earnings will be donated to the renovation of the Hospital;

Whereas the Millennium Issue of the `Guinness Book Of Records' named Michael as `the Pop Star who supports the most charity organizations';

Whereas in 2004, The African Ambassadors' Spouses Association, honored Michael Jackson for his worldwide humanitarian efforts, due to his fiscal contribution of more than $50 million to various charities, including many organizations that feed the hungry in Africa; and

Whereas we today mourn with and send our condolences to the children that Michael Jackson left behind: Prince Michael, Paris Michael, and Prince Michael II and his mother, father, brothers, and sisters: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives--

(1) recognizes Michael Jackson as a global humanitarian and a noted leader in the fight against worldwide hunger and medical crises; and

(2) celebrates Michael Jackson as an accomplished contributor to the worlds of arts and entertainment, scientific advances in the treatment of HIV/AIDS, and global food security.

Michael Jackson: a marketing opportunity …

The mainstream media is going crazy with Michael Jackson coverage. First, because it will attract a large audience and second , because it is relatively cheap to produce. Win-win as they say. Is it any wonder that the memorial was staged like a concert event. Complete with authorized and unauthorized vendors selling tschokes.

Already there are calls to produce a stamp honoring Michael Jackson; possibly with the acquiescence of the Postal Commission looking forward to a big, big payday.

There is no doubt that Michael Jackson will be bigger in death than he was in life. With his image carefully crafted as a young teen rather than a drug-abusing 50 year-old.

But we should keep Michael Jackson’s legacy in perspective. Personally I would prefer to honor the men and women who are serving in our armed forces as the real heroes that should be honored – not a man-made pop icon who was the furthest thing from honorable.

-- steve

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

Quote of the day: “If you measure a man by his pocketbook, his charitable contributions or his notoriety, then surely you must honor some of the world’s biggest murderers, scoundrels and thieves.” -- steve 

The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. -- Marcus Aurelius

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

Reference Links:

House Resolution 600|United States House of Representatives

Obama and Foreign Affairs: Is Obama's political ideology attuned with that of our enemies? (updated)

UPDATE: 07-07-09  IS OBAMA SELLING OUT OUR ALLIES AS WELL AS AMERICAN INTERSTS? 

Investor's Business Daily: Putin's Patsy?

Diplomacy: Russia's nondemocratic rulers over the years have shown an uncanny knack for detecting weakness in their foes. Russia's Vladimir Putin is continuing the tradition. President Obama no doubt believes he was dealing with honest brokers when he agreed with Russia's leaders to cut U.S. and Russian nuclear warheads to about 1,600 each. For the U.S., that's a cut of about a third.

"But please read the fine print. This is a 'preliminary' agreement. In order for it to go into effect, Russian leaders say they want the U.S. to give up its plans for a missile defense system.To do so would, in effect, be a unilateral disarmament by the U.S. against the most feared weapons on earth — nuclear missiles. It's an abandonment of our allies, including Poland and the Czech Republic. It's not an acceptable bargaining chip."

Looks like I am not the only one concerned about President Obama's naive foreign diplomacy.

UPDATE: 07-07-09 OBAMA WILL TAKE RUSSIA'S VIEWPOINT INTO ACCOUNT ...

Reuters is reporting ...

"U.S. President Barack Obama vowed at a meeting with Prime Minister Vladimir Putin on Tuesday to take into account Russia's view of its relations with Georgia and Ukraine, a senior Putin aide was quoted as saying."

Georgia and Ukraine represent the beginning of democracy in the region and the lessening of centralized communist Russian influence, something Putin wants to quash at all costs.

Original blog entry ...

One must wonder if President Barack Obama’s political ideology is more attuned with the Marxists. socialists, communists and anarchists than it is with the fundamental American ideals of limited government and maximum freedoms for its citizens? Considering Obama’s past associations with those who support a heavily Marxist viewpoint, we can’t be sure even though these associations are ascribed to political expediency or opportunism. Especially since the mainstream media abrogated their journalistic ethics to jump on the Obama bandwagon and failed to adequately vet Obama as a presidential candidate.

We are not even assured that Obama possesses the legitimate qualifications for the Presidency of the United States. Some point to Obama’s reluctance to provide certain key documents, including a signed copy of his birth certificate. Others point to the possibility that Obama was awarded a scholarship to Occidental College using his Indonesian name and his Indonesian passport. And, of course, others point to the fact that the Obama campaigns have spent at least $1 million dollars in legal fees to prevent the disclosure of records relating to his life prior to his Chicago political campaigns.

So we have the right to wonder about Obama’s actions with respect to Russia …

“Obama, Medvedev agree to pursue nuclear reduction”

The Associated Press is reporting …

“President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed a preliminary agreement Monday to reduce the world's two largest nuclear stockpiles by as much as a third, down to the lowest levels of any U.S.-Russia accord, and counter what Obama called ‘a sense of drift’ in the countries' relations.”

" ‘We must lead by example, and that's what we are doing here today,’ Obama declared in a Kremlin hall glittering in gold. ‘We resolve to reset U.S.-Russian relations so that we can cooperate more effectively in areas of common interest.’"

“The document signed by the two leaders at a Moscow summit, Obama's first in Russia, is meant as a guide for negotiators as the nations work toward a replacement pact for the START arms control agreement that expires in December. The joint understanding also commits the countries to lower longer-range missiles for delivering nuclear bombs to between 500 and 1,100.”

Does President Obama know what he is doing when it comes to foreign affairs and other serious questions …

I am concerned about President Barack Obama’s demonstrated naiveté in dealing with foreign affairs. An idealistic Jimmy Carter that gave us IslamoFascism. A Bill Clinton who assisted in building a nuclear North Korea.

Here is a man who stands up with dictator/despots Hugh Chavez and Fidel Castro against a Honduran leadership which is trying to preserve their Constitution from a would-be dictator bent on assuming a perpetual leadership role as was done in Cuba and Venezuela. Threatening to impose U.S. sanctions if the evildoer is not returned to office. 

According to the Wall Street Journal …

“…military's arrest of President Manuel Zelaya, as ordered by the Supreme Court, and his subsequent banishment from the country.”

“Mr. Zelaya's violations of the rule of law in recent months were numerous. But the tipping point came 10 days ago, when he led a violent mob that stormed a military base to seize and distribute Venezuelan-printed ballots for an illegal referendum.”

“All but a handful of my letters pleaded for international understanding of the threat to the constitutional democracy that Mr. Zelaya presented. One phrase occurred again and again: ‘Please pray for us.’" <Source>

According to the Associated Press …

We see Hillary Clinton, United States Secretary of State, preparing to meet the deposed Honduran leader in Washington, D.C. What sign must this send to freedom lovers throughout the world? <Source>

Here is a man who tells Israel that they must stop the build out of settlements in disputed territory although the only ones to dispute the territory are the Arabs which lost it in a war they promoted. All the while telling the world that it is not the United States’ role to interfere in the internal affairs of other nations.

Another Bill Clinton?

I am concerned that, like former President Bill Clinton, President Obama has an inherent disdain for the military and will continue to gut the budgets of the intelligence and military in order to render them more ineffective.

And I am concerned that, like other presidents seeking a media coup or a benefit for their ideological backers, President Obama has secretly given some quid pro quo payment or benefit to the Russians in order to stand before his cherished TelePrompTers and make this arms reduction announcement.

Bottom line …

In the final analysis, I wonder if the President understands that it is not the Russian government we need to worry about, its the rogue elements in Russia who might attempt to sell poorly-guarded nuclear materials to a nation trying to build nuclear weapons. We need to worry about rogue countries like North Korea and Iran. We need to worry about the Pakistani government falling to those who will convey nuclear material and/or technology to other wannabe nuclear nations or engage in a nuclear exchange with India. And most of all, worry about the introduction of nuclear weapons into the Americas; in particular, Cuba and Venezuela.

During the campaign, we all wondered if President Obama, with his lack of experience and radical leftist outlook, would be prepared to answer that 3:00 a.m. phone call.  Let’s hope and pray we never find out.

-- steve

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

Reference Links …

Obama, Medvedev agree to pursue nuclear reduction

Transparency and Accountability: Buzzwords in the government's arsenal of continuing deception ...

Government should be transparent. “Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing.  Information maintained by the Federal Government is a national asset. My Administration will take appropriate action, consistent with law and policy, to disclose information rapidly in forms that the public can readily find and use.  Executive departments and agencies should harness new technologies to put information about their operations and decisions online and readily available to the public. Executive departments and agencies should also solicit public feedback to identify information of greatest use to the public.” BARACK OBAMA <Source: White House>

The two most often words used by the Obama Administration in discussing the current state of our economy, other than the words George Bush, are transparency and accountability.

Ignore the talk, watch the walk …

So why isn’t the President of the United States, Barack Obama, or members of his Administration doing anything about a suppressed report which raised serious questions about global warming? Questions which could have drastically altered the debate over the Waxman-Markey Energy Bill.  Questions which raise serious doubts about the actions of the Administration and the Congress.

The big question: is global climate change natural or man-made and can man mitigate or reverse the current course of nature?

It was not so much that the report provided the answers needed to formulate public policy, but it questioned the underlying assumptions that were driving the debate.

“We have become increasingly concerned that EPA and many other agencies and countries have paid too little attention to the science of global warming. EPA and others have tended to accept the findings reached by outside groups, particularly the IPCC and the CCSP, as being correct without a careful and critical examination of their conclusions and documentation. If they should be found to be incorrect at a later date, however, and EPA is found not to have made a really careful review of them before reaching its decisions on endangerment, it appears likely that it is EPA rather than these other groups that may be blamed for this error.”

“We do not maintain that we or anyone else have all the answers needed to take action now. Some of the conclusions reached in these comments may well be shown to be incorrect by future research. Our conclusions do represent the best science in the sense of most closely corresponding to available observations that we currently know of, however, and are sufficiently at variance with those of the IPCC, CCSP, and the Draft TSD that we believe they support our increasing concern that EPA has not critically reviewed the findings by these other groups.”

This is a courageous document, not so much for disputing some facets of the global warming science, but because it seems to challenge a bureacracy following a leadership with a political agenda – regardless of the accuracy and trustworthiness of the underlying science – and flying in the face of media-driven opinion.

Even assuming that the report contained errors, misrepresentations and distortions … was it not incumbent upon our elected officials and members of Congress to at least read the 98-page report before they blindly signed-off on a major piece of legislation which they freely and openly admit that they have never read.

An even bigger question: Is a political ideology driving the Administration and Congress into using global warming to advocate for a political agenda which is damaging to the social and economic welfare of the United States?

Considering that the 1200-page-plus Waxman-Markey legislation, H.R. 2454, the “American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009” (ACES) comes with an estimated cost that is at least ten times more than its benefits, one can demonstrate that this bill is toxic to the American people.

It mandates a system which allows gross-polluters to continue to pollute as long as they charge their rate-payers and the general public for the price of political indulgences and agree to serve as an unofficial tax collector for Uncle Sam.

This bill amounts to the largest tax increase in the history of man and is quite likely to have little or no affect on reducing the mean global temperature.

So where is the transparency?

Where is the same type of analysis that is contained in a single 98-page report that would support the Waxman-Markey legislation?

Why was the last 300-page Amendment from the democrats crafted in secret, without the participation of the Republicans, and dropped in the hopper at 3:00 a.m. prior to the vote.

Why was this bill not presented to the American Public prior to the vote as per the rhetoric coming from Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi?

And where is the accountability?

We know that it is likely that some legislators will simply lose their elected offices over this legislation. But what about the members of the Administration and departmental functionaries who help craft and support this work?

What sanctions can be applied to those who were complicit or complacent in subverting the science, crafting special interest legislation and spending the taxpayer’s hard-earned money on a bogus cause?

Who will hold these people to account?

Right now, I will settle for removing our elected officials who have failed to represent the American people as they pandered to the special interests to achieve their own personal and political agenda.

It is time we took back our government from those on both sides of the aisle who have sold us out to the highest bidder – and it is truly amazing how cheap the price was.

It is now up to YOU to let them know that they are no longer representing you. It is doubtful that they will ever be held accountable in this life – but we can fix the system.

-- steve

 A reminder from OneCitizenSpeaking.com: a large improvement can result from a small change…

The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. -- Marcus Aurelius

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

 Reference Links …

Proposed NCEE Comments on Draft Technical Support Document for Endangerment Analysis for Greenhouse Gas Emissions under the Clean Air Act -- Office of Policy, Economics, and Innovation; Office of the Administrator; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; Washington, DC 20460 (March 9, 2009) Based on TSD Draft of March 9, 2009

MADOFF: INSIDER FIX AT THE SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION?

People are wondering how the United States Securities and Exchange Commission failed to detect and deter Bernard Madoff’s massive Ponzi-like scheme – even in the face of numerous credible queries posed by those who were expert in the subject-matter area of finance.

According to published reports, the SEC received credible complaints from knowledgeable industry people since 1999 and yet did little or nothing to investigate Madoff other than a few cursory interviews.

“I am the original source for the information presented herein having first presented my
rationale, both verbally and in writing, to the SEC ' s Boston office in May, 1999 before any
public information doubting Madoff Investment Securities, LLC appeared in the press. There was no whistleblower or insider involved in compiling this report. I used the Mosaic Theory to assemble my set of observations. My observations were collected first-hand by listening to fund of fund investors talk about their investments in a hedge fund run by Madoff Investment
Securities, LLC, a SEC registered firm. I have also spoken to the heads of various Wall Street
equity derivative trading desks and every single one of the senior managers I spoke with told me that Bernie Madoff was a fraud. Of course, no one wants to take undue career risk by sticking their head up and saying the emperor isn't wearing any clothes but. . . .”

“I am a derivatives expert and have traded or assisted in the trading of several billion $US in
options strategies for hedge funds and institutional clients. I have experience managing split-strike conversion products both using index options and using individual stock options, both with and without index puts. Very few people in the world have the mathematical background needed to manage these types of products but I am one of them. I have outlined a detailed set of Red Flags that make me very suspicious that Bernie Madoff's returns aren't real and, if they are real,
then they would almost certainly have to be generated by front-running customer order flow from the broker-dealer arm of Madoff Investment Securities. LLC.”

“Due to the sensitive nature of the case I detail below, its dissemination within the SEC must
be limited to those with a need to know. The firm involved is located in the New York Region.”

“As a result of this case, several careers on Wall Street and in Europe will be ruined.
Therefore, I have not signed nor put my name on this report. I request that my name not be
released to anyone other than the Branch Chief and Team Leader in the New York Region who
are assigned to the case, without my express written permission. The fewer people who know who wrote this report the better. I am worried about the personal safety of myself and my family. Under no circumstances is this report or its contents to be shared with any other regulatory body without my express permission. This report has been written solely for the SEC's internal use.” <Source>

Of course, as we now know, the source of the continuing series of complaints was  Harry Markopolos who “testified before the House Financial subcommittee that his warnings in 2000 to the Securities and Exchange Commission about Bernie Madoff went unheeded.”

In his own words …

Was there an insider in the SEC subverting the investigation of Madoff?

The Washington Post is reporting …

“An investigator at the Securities and Exchange Commission warned superiors as far back as 2004 about irregularities at Bernard L. Madoff's financial management firm, but she was told to focus on an unrelated matter, according to agency documents and sources familiar with the investigation.”

“Genevievette Walker-Lightfoot, a lawyer in the SEC's Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations, sent e-mails to a supervisor, saying information provided by Madoff during her review didn't add up and suggesting a set of questions to ask his firm, documents show. Several of these questions directly challenged Madoff activities that much later turned out to be elements of his massive fraud.”

“Walker-Lightfoot's supervisors on the case were Mark Donohue, then a branch chief in her department, and his boss, Eric Swanson, an assistant director of the department, said two people familiar with the investigation. Swanson later married Madoff's niece, and their relationship is now under review by the agency's inspector general, who is examining the SEC's handling of the Madoff case.”

“In early March 2004, Walker-Lightfoot shared her concerns with her supervisors, said a former SEC official and another person aware of the conversation.”

“Donohue, who still works for the SEC, was not available to comment for this article, an agency spokesman said. Swanson, no longer with the agency, declined to comment.”

“Swanson married Shana Madoff in 2007. The SEC has said he worked on reviews related to Madoff in 1999 and 2004 but he never did while he was involved with his future wife. SEC officials are not permitted to work on matters that involve people with whom they're romantically linked.”

“Madoff boasted at a business roundtable discussion about his close relationship with SEC regulators, saying ‘my niece just married one.’"

Conspiracy, Confusion or Incompetence?

The investigation continues, with very little likelihood of sanctions and prosecutions of government employees who either shirked their duties or turned a blind-eye to the Madoff affair.

What we do know is that the SEC appeared to be highly-politicalized and was more intent in prosecuting Martha Stewart rather than investigating other matters of substance. Whether or not this same agency will only suffer a “facelift” reform under Obama or be substantially reformed is yet to be seen.

Of course, considering the massive failure of the SEC to perform its regulatory duties which may have served to prevent or mitigate the massive financial system meltdown, one wonders if any government employee or elected official will be brought to account for their complicit or complacent activities? It’s too bad that there can be no charges for stupidity.

-- steve

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

Research Links …

SEC Investigator Raised Madoff Concerns Years Ago, Was Asked to Look Elsewhere

July 4th, 2009 -- PLEASE CONSIDER THE CONSEQUENCES OF YOUR NEXT VOTE

My fellow Americans,

Never before, in the history of the United States, have we faced such a crisis of confidence in our government, be it at the local, state or federal level.

The majority of our legislators, mostly lawyers and professional politicians, have violated their oath of office and sold out America to the special interests in return for access to power or the proverbial thirty pieces of silver. Crookedness and complacency are now the rule rather than the exception.

Whether backing a toxic political ideology spawned by the enemies of America, both foreign and domestic, or simply capitalizing on their public office for personal profit – we have representatives that no longer represent “We the People.”

It doesn’t even matter which political party you support – both sides of the aisle have been corrupted by money and power. Both will support candidates who will do or say anything to get elected – and then pay off their supporters; no matter how despicable or odious their beliefs. 

Our legislators pay lip-service tribute to our military which is actively in harm’s way – while decimating the funding for military support and equipment. They honor our dead while simultaneously holding them up as being engaged in an illegal war – as if our brave soldiers chose to die for some political pipe dream.

Our current political model is unsustainable. They are frog-marching American citizens down the road allegedly paved with good intentions – the road to hell. These are the people who embrace an Orwellian world, where evil is good, wrong is right and America is just another player on the world stage.

Recognize that the political forces have divided us along lines of class, race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, location and a multiplicy of other characteristics -- to divide rather than unite. To rule through a coalition gained by promising the biggest voter blocks access to power, funding and other legislative benefits. This is not America or the American way. We are a single people, with a single self-serving and humanitarian purpose -- not segments of society to be manipulated by those who seek political power.

We must, out of necessity, take action. Denying financial support for both parties and eliminating those who have sold their country down the drain from office.

Therefore, on this Fourth of July, I beg of you – consider the consequences of your next vote. The consequences of blindly supporting that “celebrity” candidate or voting on a single-issue cause. Of making political decisions based on a “them or us” basis as you would support a sports team.

Remember our representatives are supposed to represent us all, not sell us out for access to power and personal profit.

Do the right thing …

May our troops be safe and may they return to an America in which politicians honor their oath of office as representatives of the legal citizens of the United States.

Be well, be safe and take care of yourself and your family first.

-- steve

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

Obama's Middle East Policy: look good, read the TelePrompTer without error and say nothing of substance ...

Obama allegedly tells Israel that they must stop building settlements in disputed territory.

Obama allegedly tells Israel that the United States does not back any effort to bomb Iran’s nuclear research facilities which might be engaged in atomic bomb-making activities.

Obama cautions Israel … yada, yada, yada

Israel has attempted to promote “Peace in the Middle East” by ceding land and operational control to Palestinians. Did the overt targeting of Israel by the Palestinians stop? Of course not! The weaponized the ceded lands and resumed the attack anew.

Is Obama pro-Arab?

Without a doubt, any clear-headed person studying Obama’s actions and pronouncements show that he is considered to be pro-Arab, not as virulently as former President Jimmy Carter who is alleged to be an anti-Semite, but pro-Arab nonetheless.

Obama’s words and deed: details to follow …

President Barack Obama cannot be trusted to keep his word. He has often used a TelePrompTer’ed media appearance to sound Presidential while saying little or nothing. In fact, Obama has often said one thing and done the opposite.

Egregious examples include denying that they want to control the car industry and promoting the most massive spending in the history of the world as either a “stimulus” or as promoting “cost savings.”

In truth, most announcements emanating from the Obama Administration are heavy on rhetorical ruffles and flourishes and extremely light on details. Which should not be surprising coming from an Administration which seems to be making it up as it goes forward. Unfolding events, especially in the financial arena, has revealed that the numbers were only wild-eyed guesstimates without any formal or rational underpinning. Spin-tested in focus groups to sound good while not provoking undue public concern.

The acid test …

To truly gauge Obama’s effectiveness in overcoming generations of conflict and bringing about a so-called “Peace in the Middle East,” let him encourage the first step on the road to peace. A step which has nothing to do with rockets, land, settlements or anything to with the current hostilities between the parties.

Simply put: Let Barack Obama demand that all Muslim nations affirm Israel’s legitimate right to exist as a recognized state in the Middle East. With this affirmation should come charter resolutions renouncing past violence and the removal of any charter provisions which are anti-Israel in nature. And as a concrete demonstration of their beliefs, let all parties renew formal diplomatic relations with each other.

This single step should not be conditioned on any other actions. It is not a bargaining chip in securing a more favorable re-jiggering of boundaries or any other point of negotiation which may be on the table. We have seen Israel’s acquiescence to past United States’ demands regarding  “land for peace” and a moderation of military actions. What have we seen from the other Middle Eastern participants? Nothing expect more trouble, turmoil and tragedy.

Until this step is accomplished, Barack Obama is doing what he does best: Posturing for the cameras and reading canned speeches from a TelePrompTer. Blowing more smoke in what appears to be a continuation of his “smoke and mirrors” campaigning style.

-- steve

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

The real face of Barack Obama ...

We all know the smiling telegenic, well-spoken (with TelePrompTer) Barack Obama …

The President who smiles knowingly and assures us that the Bush Administration left the nation in shambles, but with the help of his team, we can and will recover.

The big question, of course, is what kind of nation will be left after Obama’s efforts to deal with financial reform, healthcare reform, combating global warming and dealing with illegal immigration. All overlaid with the enlargement of government, an increased penetration of unions into government and the private sector, the rise of government-funded grass-roots activism and a host of other government initiatives which will attempt to perpetuate the democrat’s one-party rule into the foreseeable future.

But do we know the serious, committed ideologue who is attempting to turn the American ship of state towards a socialistic one-party rule?

The man who seems to live by the Alinsky rules of social activism.

"Don't scare" the middle class”

"Rules for Radicals" dedicated to mankind's "first radical, Lucifer"

“"Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins -- or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom—Lucifer."

RULE 1: "Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have." Power is derived from 2 main sources - money and people. "Have-Nots" must build power from flesh and blood. (These are two things of which there is a plentiful supply. Government and corporations always have a difficult time appealing to people, and usually do so almost exclusively with economic arguments.)

RULE 2: "Never go outside the expertise of your people." It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone. (Organizations under attack wonder why radicals don't address the "real" issues. This is why. They avoid things with which they have no knowledge.)

RULE 3: "Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy." Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)

RULE 4: "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules." If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity's very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)

RULE 5: "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon." There is no defense. It's irrational. It's infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear.)

RULE 6: "A good tactic is one your people enjoy." They'll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They're doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones. (Radical activists, in this sense, are no different that any other human being. We all avoid "un-fun" activities, and but we revel at and enjoy the ones that work and bring results.)

RULE 7: "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag." Don't become old news. (Even radical activists get bored. So to keep them excited and involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.)

RULE 8: "Keep the pressure on. Never let up." Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-strategize.) The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.

RULE 9: "The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself." Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist. (Perception is reality. Large organizations always prepare a worst-case scenario, something that may be furthest from the activists' minds. The upshot is that the organization will expend enormous time and energy, creating in its own collective mind the direst of conclusions. The possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.)

RULE 10: "If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive." Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog. (Unions used this tactic. Peaceful [albeit loud] demonstrations during the heyday of unions in the early to mid-20th Century incurred management's wrath, often in the form of violence that eventually brought public sympathy to their side.) 

RULE 11: "The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative." Never let the enemy score points because you're caught without a solution to the problem. (Old saw: If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. Activist organizations have an agenda, and their strategy is to hold a place at the table, to be given a forum to wield their power. So, they have to have a compromise solution.)

RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it." Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)  <Source>

Thus it appears that Barack Obama has internalized the very same community organizing tactics that he successfully taught as a community organizer and is now successfully, I am sad to say, applying them to today’s issues. 

There is a defense …

The most feared man in the world is not the most well-trained, the most knowledgeable, or the most committed – it is the man who doesn’t have anything to lose and doesn’t care a rat’s ass what you think of him or his cause. In this manner, the most dangerous fighters are not Navy Seals, but people crazy enough to blow themselves up in a crowded area – because they have nothing to lose or have been promised rewards in the hereafter.

Without resorting to violence, the greatest defense that can be mounted against an ideologue is the “broken record defense.” Keep repeating the same mantra over and over, in every forum and at every opportunity. If they call you crazy (are you listening Glenn Beck), acknowledge that they may be right and continue on with your story. Feel embarrassed by your past actions, lack of achievement – acknowledge it and continue with your story. If they try to make you wrong, acknowledge the possibility and continue with your story.

To enhance your message, use engaging humor which mocks their premise and trivializes their pronouncements. Refuse to give weight to their pronouncements or acknowledge their power (see Alinsky Rule Number One).

Go viral, make or do something so outrageous that people are drawn to the spectacle and in the process absorb your message.

But most of all, interfere with their message and their fundraising. Mock those who give enormous sums of money to the cause and ask them what they plan to receive in return: ego-stroking, special privilege and access, a government contract? Even worse, find out if they are using their own funds and openly question whether communal funds or the funds of a public corporation should be used in this manner?

Make light of the public officials and corporate executives who are kissing political ass?

Two can play at this game. They have money, power and position – but you have nothing to lose, thereby achieving some measure of equality.

Personally, I started this blog because I was tired of yelling at the television and pounding the dash of my car. As I stated before, the purpose of this blog is to make me feel better and give me an outlet for my pent up anger at a government which is rapidly spiraling out of control. I am a selfish bastard and invite like minded people to join me – or mock me – as you wish. Other than select relatives and friends, what you may think does not really matter to me. If I can help you crystallize your thinking, either way, I have just that more additional satisfaction of knowing I may have made a difference in this topsy-turvy world.

It is not so much I fear the concept of socialism as the consequences of a corrupt and complacent elected official who sacrifices the public’s welfare for their own self-interest.

Just as I am sure that there are many God-fearing, good-hearted, hard-working illegal immigrants seeking to improve their lives, I believe that the sheer number of people pouring across our borders is lowering the literacy and productivity of our state and nation while increasing crime, poverty and destroying our educational, healthcare, judicial, retirement, social and cultural infrastructure. I want our elected officials to develop a comprehensive solution to immigration – but not for political purposes, not at an unacceptable cost and definitely not to advance the agenda of a foreign sovereign power.

I have come to the conclusion that Alinsky’s tactics, while extremely powerful, can be overcome by a very simple action. For five or six election cycles, vote the incumbents out of office and vote for the unknown over the professional politician. Ignore political parties and send the entire political world a message: you serve at the pleasure of the citizens of the United States and you will work, not for your personal benefit or to advance the special interests who have financed your campaign – but for the people. And you will be voted out, no matter how good, bad or indifferent you are, in the next election cycle. Perhaps we can return to the days of the citizen/legislator and part-time government. Probably not, but it’s worth a shot.

My answer …

Be well, be safe and take care of yourself and your family first.

-- steve

P.S. My best friend Al, and one who’s opinion I truly value, is likely to accuse me of tilting at windmills. My only answer to him is that is sure beats watching the starfish grow at the end of his boat dock.

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

Chilling words on healthcare: "so we don't continue to pay for things that don't work ..."

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said on Fox News Sunday …

“SEBELIUS: Well, the president won't sign a bill unless it lower costs for everyone. And he believes that the best way to lower costs is to have some competition in the marketplace, to make sure that we actually begin to bring down the overhead costs for providing insurance to everyone and change the payment system so that we don't continue to pay for things that don't work.”

Perhaps some of the most chilling words to be heard on the subject of healthcare.

Ethics …

First and foremost are questions regarding ethical considerations surrounding the medical treatment of human beings in our society; including the denial of care under given circumstances.

Questions surrounding the patient’s right to terminate their own lives if the quality of their life deteriorates beyond an acceptable point or to a point beyond the patient’s immediate control.

Questions regarding the artificial prolongation of life in circumstances when the patient clearly lacks a familial or societal support system to sustain the patient’s well-being in a post-procedure environment.

Questions regarding the allocation of scarce medical resources to those who may not be wealthy, powerful, politically connected or have some historical record of demonstrated achievement of benefit to society.

Questions of “line-jumping,” venue-shopping celebrities and others who are able to obtain vital medical services and organs by “gaming the system.”

Questions regarding age and the potential of the patient to continue to contribute to society before rendering advanced medical treatment or providing access to costly drugs.

If you think that the discussion of abortion is emotionally charged, consider the ethical implications of governmental intervention into the realm of healthcare; where clerks consult checklists and can override an individual doctor’s ability to render care to their patients.

Profits and Performance …

Second, consider the built-in conflict of interest in allowing the payor, be it the government operating in a single-payor environment or an insurance company, to earn a profit (plus executive bonuses) to reap the rewards for denying or curtailing patient care; perhaps to the point of causing death or additional health problems down the road.

Medicine is both an art and a science …

Because of the complexity of human organs and bodily dynamics, medicine is often more art than science; depending on the intuitive abilities of doctors to diagnose a multi-organ problems and to render effective assistance to the patience.

Most people who know me well know that I consider doctors, with very few exceptions, to be like any other consultants who render personal services. And medicine, as practiced by most of today’s doctors, to be akin to programming.

The doctor follows a flowchart or checklist (known in medical circles as protocols) to a logical conclusion; hoping that the patient recovers before running out of checklist items or the patient dies.

I have an intimate knowledge of both the medical and computer consequences of this course of action. To bureaucratically limit the amount of time a doctor can spend considering a patient’s problems or to restrict a multi-disciplinary approach to patient diagnostics and treatment because of cost considerations is, at least to me, highly suspect, questionable and, in some cases, unconscionable.

As an aside, I would like to mention the efforts of an unsung branch of medicine, gerontology, concerned with the treatment of senior citizens. Due to the compounding and often cascading nature of medical events as we age, today’s gerontologist must be a multi-disciplinarian and able to diagnose symptoms which may present in an atypical fashion in the elderly and/or deal with patients who may not be able to fully describe their own symptoms. My personal recommendation for an award as one of the best gerontologists in the nation is Dr. James W. Davis, Jr. of UCLA’s famed gerontology department.

“Best practices” or a code phrase for rationed healthcare?

There is no argument that we are facing the healthcare needs of an aging population. An aging population which may not respond well, statistically speaking, to certain types of medical procedures or medicines. Therefore, we need to ask ourselves, whether or not we, as a nation, can limit the payment of treatments to those procedures and medicines which positively affects a majority of patients while leaving others to face pain, suffering or a shortened life?

We need to determine if we will only allow the wealthy, the powerful and the politically connected to receive “experimental” or last-ditch procedures and medicines. To restrict powerful diagnostic tools to those who somehow are statistically identified as being younger, healthier or better able to contribute to society. To allow costly hip or organ replacements for younger, more medically fit, patients who may respond positively to such treatments.

What I do know …

It does not take a genius to observe that each layer of bureacracy and artificial treatment constraints placed between a doctor and their patients is to significantly alter the opportunity for a positive outcome.

It also does not take a genius to observe that our government’s intervention in healthcare has been responsible for the declining effectiveness of our medical delivery system and an escalation of costs.

Want to confront your legislator directly: simply as them why some of the billions of dollars sloshing through our financial bailout scheme was not used to subsidize the manufacture of more GE LightSpeed scanners (thus reducing their overall costs) or providing subsidies to smaller medical venues to allow for better care?  

And it certainly does not take a genius to observe that the current Administration’s attempt to manipulate the payment and delivery of healthcare is based on a political ideology of increased government dominance and the dependency of the average citizen on governmental largess.

What can YOU do?

Recognize that we have barely begun to deal with the ethical, legal and logistical requirements of healthcare systems before allowing an all-out government intervention into an area which is NOT CONSTITUTIONALLY MANDATED as a power of the federal government.

Recognize that the government is being manipulated by powerful industry trade groups and unions to secure their own advantages; often to the detriment of the American citizen.

It doesn’t matter what party you belong to or your current age: if we allow government to further interfere in the healthcare system for political purposes, we are doomed as individuals – and as a nation – from receiving first class healthcare by first class doctors.

I was, unfortunately, required to make a life or death decision that required me to consider the quality of life of the individual. While I believe that I made the right decision, I do not want this type of life-ending decision being made by a faceless non-medical bureaucrat that consults a mortality table and government guideline before deciding whether or not I will be left to die. This is a subject which affects us all and transcends politics.

We must act now. Throw the incumbent bastards, on both sides of the aisle, out of office and repeal their legislative initiatives before they ruin our nation and our health.

-- steve

A reminder from OneCitizenSpeaking.com: a large improvement can result from a small change…

The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. -- Marcus Aurelius

_______________________________________________

OneCitizenSpeaking: Saying out loud what you may be thinking …

Reference Links:

RealClearPolitics - Sebelius, McConnell, and Odierno on "Fox News Sunday"