The paradox of the Internet …

Never before has so much information been made readily available to so many. 

Yet one of the surprising side effects of the Internet is that it’s making people more ignorant.

Access to all the information known to man doesn’t automatically make anyone more informed.  

The Internet has changed how we do even the most mundane things. Honestly, when was the last time you used a physical phone book?  Or went to the library to look up something? It’s faster, easier and more efficient to just search online. 

People don’t read newspapers much anymore, either. Or watch the news on TV. Or even listen to news-radio stations, except to get the weather and traffic reports. You can get scores, weather, traffic reports, movie times – whatever – in seconds on your smartphone. 

So what’s the problem? 

Most people are so eager to get their narrow answer they aren’t getting any peripheral information. You know, the stuff you might see while you were looking for what you really wanted. 

Stuff like national and local news.  Business news. Weather that’s not here now but is headed your way.  Things that could inform you in a broader sense and give you a wider and more informed perspective.  Things that might be extraordinarily useful at some point, but you’re not seeing. 

The type of information that might make you better equipped to understand what’s happening around you and what it means to you beyond this very moment. 

For the sake of expediency and immediacy, we’re sacrificing potentially important knowledge. 

We’re becoming more ignorant as a society as a result.  In fact, there’s a growing acceptance of ignorance as an admirable trait; almost an article of faith. It’s seen as the result of being “too busy” with “more important things” to be bothered with details. 

Like what?  Updating your status on social media sites? Sending pictures of your food? Taking duck-face selfies?  Viewing cat videos on YouTube?  Seriously … are those more important tasks than knowing what’s happening beyond you and your circle of friends?     

This is especially acute with the younger generations. The so-called Millennials may be the most broad-spectrum ignorant generation we’ve ever created. They have no clue – because they have no interest – in anything that doesn’t affect them personally, right now.  

They are clueless about what’s happening in the world, in this country, or even their own state.  They don’t even know what’s going on in their own backyard.  That’s because when they log on to the greatest assemblage of knowledge the world has ever seen they have blinders on. 

They’re not alone. Witness public polls, or impromptu man-in-the-street interviews. 

I’m not saying that the ordinary Flo and Joe Blow need to be policy wonks, or understand the intricacies of quantitative easing by the Fed, but they should at least know something about the world around them.  Most teenagers and kids in college don’t know much about current events, either – even events that could affect them directly. 

It’s not as if that information is hidden.  If anything there’s a deluge of information out there, readily accessible from any smartphone, tablet or computer with far more detail and background than you’ll find in any TV news story or on the radio. 

There are plenty of news sites with up-to-the-minute reporting and analysis of events here and around the world.  There are informative blogs on almost any subject.

Which brings me back to the paradox of the Internet.   

The Internet has allowed us to find almost everything about practically anything. Search engines evolved to allow a person to pinpoint precisely what they want and find it – which is both a blessing and a contributing factor to our growing ignorance. 

If you’re only interested in knowing when the Second Defenestration of Prague occurred, you can find that in seconds.  But if you don’t take the time to read the surrounding material, you won’t understand why it happened or why it was important.

You can also use this same awesome power to find the latest Grumpy Cat picture.  Or check out the latest posting from your BFF.  It’s up to you. 

The effect of the Internet on young people is open to debate.  Many parents think that because their kids spend a lot of time web surfing, their kids must be learning a great deal in the process.  The truth is that some are, but most aren’t.

One thing’s for certain, it’s fostered an era of ADD among the general population.  That might help to explain why more and more people don’t want to spend the time to understand anything beyond their immediate need – whether that’s directions to a restaurant, a recipe, or how to program their new smartphone.  World, national and local news take a back seat every time.    

Perhaps more problematic is that I think it’s helped create a false expectation that you don’t have to do any work of your own to get to an answer; you just need to know how to use search engines.  It’s like a virtual Cliff’s Notes for those too lazy or disinterested to learn.   

Don’t get me wrong – I love the Internet.  But I’m an information and news junkie.  Maybe because I grew up in an age when you got your day-old news from newspapers and just snippets of news on TV, I think the access to in-depth news and analysis in real time on the Internet is wonderful.    

Yet as much as I love it for myself, it scares me, too.  It worries me that for many its ready access to data out of context can become a substitute for actually learning what you should know.       

Merry Christmas to all …

It is the gentlest, kindest of holidays. 

It celebrates the birth of Jesus, born to Mary and Joseph in Bethlehem more than 2000 years ago.

Scholars can debate whether it was a Virgin Birth, what time of year it occurred, whether there were or weren’t three wise men who found the baby Jesus in a manger by following a star. 

It makes no difference.  The idea of Jesus is what matters. 

So whether you believe Jesus was the Messiah, our Savior, a Prophet, or just a man, also makes no difference.  Even the Bible offers several different stories about his life and death.

However, all those tend to paint a consistent portrait of Jesus’ life and teachings. 

That portrait is of a humble man, put on this Earth to remind us of God’s love for us all – sinner and pious alike.  He preached forgiveness, charity, compassion and redemption. He taught that we were all the children of God, equal in God’s eyes. 

That’s something worth celebrating, regardless of whatever faith you hold dear. 

So Merry Christmas to all.  

Ultimate Christmas letter

It’s that time of year.  And the Christmas letters have started to arrive.

Dear friends and family …

Greetings and Happy Holidays from the Smith Family!

To say we had an interesting year would be an understatement. 

As I’m sure I’ve told you, our brilliant son Scooter has been enrolled in an online school for the past 5 years, studying to become a licensed Life Coach.  (Or Phrenologist – he was undecided for a while.)   Well, it appears he’ll graduate this year and may be entering the workforce.  

It’s been a long, hard road for him – balancing his time between his studies, playing in his Steam Punk band – (The Mountain Oysters), and being a new dad.

That’s right, little Scooter is a proud papa. 

He and his high-school sweetheart, Heather, surprised us with a baby girl – named Gaga – in February.  After paternity tests confirmed Scooter as the father, we warmly welcomed Heather and the baby into our family.  Scooter, Heather and baby Gaga are living in our family room right now until Scooter finishes remodeling our basement into a home for them and band practice space. 

He’s always been handy so the work is going quickly.  We expect him to be finished by this time next year.  Once we get heat down there, it should be quite cozy. 

Heather has promised to get her GED in a couple of years.  Once she gets her GED, she plans on enrolling in the Springfield Academy of Beauty & Cosmetology (maybe you’ve heard of it) and study to become a Certified Eyebrow Waxer (CEW). 

You’d be surprised how much a CEW makes!  I know I was.   So between Scooter’s earnings as a Life Coach and her income as a waxer, they should be able to sock away enough to put a down payment on a nice double-wide they’ve been eying in about 5-10 years. 

In the meantime, we just love having them here. 

It reminds us of when Scooter’s big sister Brandy moved back with us after pursuing her dream of being an actress in Hollywood. 

For three years she and her boyfriend Butch and their two children – N’aasheen and Ta’neshai – lived with us.  When Butch violated his parole and had to go back in for a spell, Brandy and the kids moved into a very nice mobile-home community with her boss Spike from the club where she danced. 

Brandy doesn’t dance at the club anymore, but does a few private parties from time to time to help out her friends.  She always had a big heart.  She says she’s making a lot more money now helping Spike produce specialty videos sold on the Internet.  Not sure what those are but Brandy and Spike seem happy and are making a good living.

So that leaves Babs – our youngest – and Bud and me. 

And of course our dog Puddles and our cat Mr. Tinkles.  More on them later …

Babs is still into the whole Goth thing, I’m sorry to say.  Such a pretty girl underneath all that black eyeliner, tattoos and body piercings.  But we love her dearly and hope this is just a phase that a lot of 10-year-olds go through. 

Bud and I have been fine.  Bud retired this year from his Proctology practice after that stupid state investigation.  Somebody filed a silly complaint just because Bud was cutting up one day and said “Look, no hands!” during an examination.  Another complaint got filed when Bud – always a prankster – put his proctoscope in the freezer to have fun with one of his patients. 

Turns out some people have no sense of humor.

Anyway, it’s probably for the best.  He’s philosophical about it.  He has a part time job now at Wal-Mart.  He says working with the public and his coworkers there is pretty much like his proctology practice, but he doesn’t have to wear gloves.   I’m not sure I understand but Bud tells me to “just think about it.”  

Puddles and Mr. Tinkles have had a tough year.

Sadly, Puddles was diagnosed with Terminal Canine Flatulence. We’re hopeful that changing his diet will allow us to keep him with us for yet another year.  It’s not so bad in the warmer weather when we can keep the windows open.  We‘re relying on scented candles and Glade Plug-ins to try to make it through the winter months. Poor Puddles. 

Mr. Tinkles got into a fight with another neighborhood cat and lost part of his ear.  Then, with all the scented candles burning, he jumped up on the counter to investigate and his tail caught on fire.   He wasn’t seriously hurt but with half an ear and a bald tail he’s not going to win any beauty prizes anytime soon. 

Well, that’s it from here.  Hope you and your family enjoy the holidays!

With best wishes …

Madge, Bud, Scooter, Heather, Baby Gaga, and Puddles and Mr. Tinkles

     

A note to my liberal friends …

I am sorry.  I’ve really tried.  But I just don’t understand you. 

You’re convinced Obama’s been doing a great job.  ObamaCare makes perfect sense to you; you’re happy to see that a country like ours is finally getting around to providing healthcare for everyone.  You believe the rich should pay more in taxes, that companies have a moral responsibility to provide jobs, and that we should stop persecuting people who are here illegally. 

You firmly believe Obama is one of our greatest Presidents, ever; one who would have accomplished even more if Republicans hadn’t blocked him at every turn.  And the only reason Republicans oppose him is because he’s black and wants the rich and corporations to pay their fair share. 

You view yourself and your circle of like-minded friends as intelligent, progressive and compassionate to people of all walks of life, regardless of ethnicity, income, education, sexual orientation, gender or religious beliefs.  You see Republicans, and especially conservatives, as less informed, and much more intolerant than most Americans.  You are quick to dismiss conservatives as anti-science and anti-woman Bible-thumping racist xenophobes who only care about themselves and helping the rich stay that way.

You and your friends trust the New York Times and NPR – which you consider unbiased and middle-of-the-road – to tell you what’s really going on. You think Republicans and conservatives rely on hateful half-truths spewed by right-wing fanatics on Fox News and talk radio.  

Is that fairly accurate? 

Honestly, you baffle me.  You seem so intelligent.  You have a good education.  You read a lot. You’re articulate. You’re obviously pretty smart.      

So when did you decide to put blinders on?  When did you decide to close your eyes and ears to anything that might conflict with your beliefs? 

In short, when did you become what you ridicule – a narrow-minded, hypocritical bigot who rejects facts in favor of conspiracy theories and half-truths? 

Is it because you want to fit in with your well-off liberal friends? 

You know, your friends who probably work in academia, the public sector, or in firms that rely on government contracts?  The ones who still hate Bush and blame him for everything?  The ones who are so proud of voting for our first black President?  The ones positively thrilled that soon they’ll be able to make history again by voting in America’s first female President?

You know who I’m talking about, don’t you? 

If you’re only liberal to be liked by them, that’s just sad.  You can do better. 

I’m not asking you to become a conservative; I’m not in agreement with them on everything, either.  In fact, you might find that you and I share a lot of common ground between us.  So I’m not asking you to abandon your liberal principles.  Far from it.  I just want you to lower your defense shields a tad, get a slightly firmer grip on reality, and be a little more reasonable to talk to.  

You already know there’s something wrong with the limousine liberal crowd running things.  You don’t want to admit it, but it’s there.  You’re too smart to miss the signs, and you could always spot bullshit a mile away.  At least you used to be able to …

Once upon a time, not so many years ago, we could talk at length about all kinds of things.  Now I find it hard to have anything more than a purely superficial discussion with you.  You’re constantly primed to attack.  So most of the time I try to avoid you.  It’s not worth the aggravation. 

You seem determined to assert your liberal bona fides at every opportunity, and insert politics into practically every conversation.  Cordial quickly mutates into confrontational.  We can’t talk about the weather without you inserting global warming and/or climate change.  Rising prices are the fault of greedy corporations.  Friends are out of work because Republicans are stopping jobs programs.  The middle class is being destroyed by right-wingers trying to kill the unions.   A visit to the doctor becomes a lecture on ObamaCare. 

God forbid that we actually talk about politics.  Or alternative explanations for why things are the way they are.  You’ll have none of that.  You’re not interested in facts; you prefer half-assed, easily disproven conspiracy theories and stereotypes. 

Like that most Southerners are inbred redneck cracker bastards who don’t believe in evolution and are still intent on keeping blacks from voting.  That voter ID laws discriminate against minorities and suppress minority turnout.  That voter fraud is practically non-existent.  That Bush knew 9/11 was going to happen but wanted it to go forward so he could go after Saddam Hussein. 

Or that a stupid movie almost nobody saw provoked Muslims to burn down our embassy in Libya and kill our ambassador there.   

You used to laugh at crackpot stuff.  Hell, we used to laugh at crackpot stuff together. 

We’d joke about people wearing tinfoil hats to keep aliens from reading their thoughts. 

Now, when the NSA does essentially the same thing by screening our calls and e-mails and tracking us online it’s not a joke anymore.  But because it’s under Obama it’s okay with you. 

When Nixon bugged his political opponents and created an enemies list to be hounded by the IRS, we agreed he was a monster. When Obama essentially bugs AP reporters and lets the IRS target conservative groups you see nothing wrong. 

Nixon lied to the public and we wanted him impeached.  Obama lies to the public time and again – and gets caught in his lies – and you think he’s doing the right thing.  In fact, you keep trying to find equivocations and equivalencies to justify his lies. 

You’re not stupid.  You know he lied.  Baldly and brazenly.  He’s lied about the economy, ObamaCare, Benghazi, the IRS scandal and much more.  Yet you defend him.  I understood when you defended Clinton after he lied about Lewinsky – he was a fool, but it didn’t have much effect on his running the country.  But like Nixon, Obama lied to get re-elected.  That’s a much different thing.  

You can read and interpret data. You know what the labor participation rate actually means in terms of economic health.  You know that what happens on Wall Street has little to do with what happens on Main Street.  But you also know “quantitative easing” will have to end and the market will take a hit when it does. You know that the happy face being placed on everything is smoke and mirrors.  

You know that the longer someone stays on UC the less likely they are to find a job.  You know nobody in the U.S. – legal or illegal – has been denied medical care for lack of insurance for decades, long before ObamaCare.  You know most of the “enrollees” from the ObamaCare website are enrolling in free Medicaid rather than the for-pay plans.

I believe you know this.  You may not be comfortable admitting it, but you know all this is true.  Just as you knew the attack on Benghazi had nothing to do with a movie.  And that the IRS targeting wasn’t initiated by some rogue agents in Cleveland.   

So what the Hell happened to you? 

Why do you credit Obama for accomplishments he hasn’t actually achieved, while blaming Bush, Republicans and conservatives for everything bad?  Why do you praise Democrats for “standing up” to the Republicans when Republicans don’t have any real power? 

And what’s with you and the Tea Party?  How did this somewhat loosely organized group of people become the target of so much hatred?  They’re not really even a “party”; they are more of a movement trying to get government to be more responsible about taxing and spending.  As far as I can tell, they don’t have positions on anything other than taxing and spending.

As I said in the beginning, I’ve tried to understand you.  Really, I have.  But I have to give up. 

Even when I try to steer the conversation away from politics, you won’t give it a rest. You’re like a pushy salesperson who doesn’t know when to stop.  Worse yet, you don’t really know much about the product you’re selling – certainly not the facts.  Instead you blather on spewing bumper-sticker clichés in an attempt to bludgeon rather than convince me. 

Good luck with that.

I’ve had enough.  When you’re ready to talk rationally, I’ll be here. 

“All politicians lie … so what?”

This is one of the current Democrat talking points when confronted with Obama’s bald-faced lies about the Affordable Care Act, aka ObamaCare. 

So when he said that you could keep your plan, keep your doctor, and everybody’s premiums would go down it’s now okay for Democrats to acknowledge that he lied.  Proudly.   

For a while, his supporters tried to cover up Obama’s lies with a technicality.  They claimed he didn’t actually lie because no one ever told him that wasn’t the truth.  That’s the same approach they’ve used about the IRS, Fast & Furious, and Benghazi – nobody told Obama what was really going on. 

Really?  That’s like when the White House press office claimed years ago Obama never met his Kenyan uncle here illegally. Now they claim they put out that info without ever asking Obama, who more recently said he stayed with that uncle for a while when he was at Harvard. Oops …

That’s just so Nixonesque.  This all takes “plausible deniability” to a whole new level. 

However, there are ample reports that his administration knew early on in Obama’s first term that none of his promises about ObamaCare were true.  He had to know as well, but that didn’t stop him from repeating them at every opportunity.     

Democrats now have a new approach – of course he lied, but it doesn’t matter because all politicians lie.  Besides, telling lies to pass the ACA and to get re-elected should be viewed in the context of doing what’s right for America.  And in that bigger picture – and for the greater good –Obama did the right thing by lying. 

I’ll admit this new tactic caught me off guard.  It’s so outrageous it’s brilliant.  It taps into our popular culture where there’s no right or wrong, no taboos, and no shame.  It’s the ultimate expression of the ends justifying the means – the bedrock of Progressivism.   

I thought I’d seen it all when the Prevaricator in Chief – Bill Clinton – said:  “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is… “  

But this is new ground.  It’s exciting and breathtaking.  Politicians can now lie as enthusiastically as Obama, because everyone knows they lie anyway, so you can’t hold them accountable. 

It’s open season on the truth.  You don’t need to tell the truth anymore, once you establish that others like you can’t be trusted.  You’re innocent by association; a first. 

In the end, what’s the big deal?  Who are we to judge someone else? Saying whether something is right or wrong, or the truth or a lie, is so … well … judgmental.  

And since this is about Obama, it’s probably racist, too.  Wait for that shoe to drop  …    

What’s wrong with making promises you know can’t be kept?  Breaking or not enforcing laws you don’t agree with?  Not honoring agreements?  Tossing your allies under the bus?  

It’s just politics.  And all politicians lie.  So what?  

Lightning round II …

Okay, I’ve dealt with the recent stuff from Harry, Nancy, Oprah and Obama and his minions …

So let’s move on.

The Knock-out Game

If you need more proof that we are descending into madness, this is it. Black kids are seeing if they can knock someone out with a single punch.  And it’s overwhelmingly – if not virtually exclusively – black kids doing this.  They don’t know the people they are punching.  But they are happily recording their greatest hits and posting their videos online or sending these to their friends so everyone can share their magic moment of mindless violence.  

People have been seriously injured.  At least one person has been killed.  But the media are going out of their way to pretend this isn’t another instance of black kids run amuck.  So they are now trying desperately to find reports that non-blacks are also involved in the knock-out games. 

They have been able to find one or two.  But that’s about it.  This is a black thing, by young black thugs, targeting innocent people, for no other reason but sport and bragging rights. 

Sharpton finally emerged to say this was wrong.  Good for him.  But these thugs aren’t going to listen to Sharpton.  Nor do they think there’s anything wrong with it – it’s just fun.  They call attacks on whites “Polar Bear Hunting”; attacks on Jews in New York are called “Punch A Jew.” 

These are racist attacks by a young black element that’s increasingly out of control.  Please stop with the BS that blacks can’t be racists.  Please stop with the BS that proportionally more black men are in prison simply because the system discriminates against blacks.  Please stop the BS that if we spent more in the inner cities young blacks would cease being violent criminals. 

And above all, please stop the nonsense that it’s unfair to engage in racial profiling as a predictor of potential criminality.  If the stats show that young black males have a much higher probability of committing violent crimes than other racial groups, then go ahead and focus on them.  In high-crime areas stop and frisk young black males and subject them to more scrutiny. 

Screw political correctness. 

Maybe if we do this we’ll slow the trend.  If we don’t it’s only a matter of time before one of these thugs picks the wrong target – some citizen with a carry permit who isn’t playing the game.  Then the Sharptons and Jacksons of the world will howl about racists with guns. 

The rest of us will shrug.  

Census Bureau cooking the books

Honestly, is anyone surprised at this? Of course the books were cooked to make it seem unemployment was going down right before the last election – a claim Obama was happy to publicize.  Leading financial people and economists couldn’t see how unemployment could possibly be down then, based on the data they had.  The numbers made no sense. 

Now we know why they were down.  Census Bureau folks faked the data.  

It’s long past time for Americans to wake up and realize that the government and government workers aren’t politically impartial.  The government is an entity unto itself, with its own rules.  And the primary rule is to protect the status quo against any change, or any threat to the sweet deals government workers and government contractors enjoy. 

So when Republicans propose to reduce the size of government, Republicans become the enemy of the government and government workers.  When conservatives talk about reducing waste in government – read:  cut pay, benefits and jobs of “non-essential” government workers – they also become the enemy of government and government workers. 

Government and government workers much prefer Democrats who promise to increase the size of government.  That’s also why government-worker unions are solidly behind Democrats. 

And it also explains why the Census Bureau cooked the books to support Obama, the IRS targeted conservative groups, the State Department withholds Benghazi data, and the Justice Department withholds information on embarrassing programs.

Get used to it.

Martin Bashir and Sarah Palin  

Our pals at MSNBC hit a new low when one of their on-air commentators – Martin Bashir – said that Sarah Palin was an idiot, and for making a reference to slavery someone should defecate in her mouth and urinate on her. 

Don’t know about you, but I think that trumps Rush Limbaugh’s references to Sandra Fluke in the context of a slut and a prostitute on the outrage meter. This takes it up a whole notch or so.   

What Sarah Palin originally said was this:  “Our free stuff today is being paid for by taking money from our children and borrowing from China. When that money comes due – and this isn’t racist, but it’ll be like slavery when that note is due. We are going to (be) beholden to the foreign master.”

I’m not a huge fan of Sarah Palin’s and sometimes she does say dopey things.  This wasn’t one of those times.  It certainly didn’t warrant Bashir’s comments.   Of course a lot of folks on the looney left didn’t see anything wrong with what Bashir said. 

You see, the far left can get away with saying anything because – as we know – they have the moral high ground.  So they can call Laura Ingraham a slut and it’s okay.  And say that someone should defecate in Sarah Palin’s mouth and that’s okay, too.  

But call Sandra Fluke a slut and it’s an outrage.      

Bashir did apologize.  Well then, everything’s okay, right? 

ObamaCare ads

Don’t get me wrong, I like sexy, provocative ads.  But when the government runs ads featuring a young woman hoping to bed a cute guy, and thankful that she has free birth control because of ObamaCare, that's not sexy; that's silly. The only thing these will provoke is ridicule.     

Sure, I know they are trying to get young people to sign up. They NEED young healthy people to sign up to balance out all the old, sick people frothing through their dentures to get coverage.  If the plans end up with just the old and ill, it will be a disaster.  Rates will skyrocket. 

But really, do they think young healthy women are going to sign up because birth control will then be free?  I think the current generations aren’t all that smart – not nearly as smart as they think they are, and certainly not as smart as their mommies and daddies have told them all their lives.  

However, even an idiot can see that paying a couple of hundred bucks a month just to get $10 worth of birth control pills for free is a bad deal. 

Or maybe not.  If they can’t, perhaps we’re all better off if they don’t reproduce.    

More to come …

Lightning round …

The other day a good friend asked why I hadn’t written anything recently.

I told him there were just too many crazy things to choose from … it’s hard to pick a target. 

With Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Democrats in general, Obama, Oprah, the Knock-Out Game, Census Bureau election hijinks, Martin Bashir and Sarah Palin, and the ObamaCare ads … there’s just an embarrassment of riches to work with. 

Rather than be the mule who starved between two bales of hay, here’s some quick hits …

Harry Reid

I can’t stand this insincere, lying, hypocritical pipsqueak.  He’s Obama’s Renfield (look it up) willing to do or say anything in the service of his master.  He revels in using the implied authority of his master to punish and humiliate his opponents.  Harry is what often happens when someone everybody always made fun of finally gets some power; he gleefully abuses it.  He’s vindictive, short-sighted and a downright nasty piece of work. 

His lasting legacy will be for going nuclear by recently overturning a centuries-old Senate tradition that protected the rights of the minority party from being run over by a majority party.  BTW, he had strongly defended that tradition when Democrats weren’t in control of the Senate.  This single move alone will increase polarization and result in even greater gridlock. 

Does Harry care?  Nope.  Just following orders …

Nancy Pelosi

The delusional Queen of the intellectually and ethically challenged, Nancy proved how completely nuts she really is in a recent interview with David Gregory.  When confronted with video of her own statements about ObamaCare, since unequivocally proven false, she continued to claim that what she said in those clips was true.  Gregory isn’t exactly a Republican shill by any means, so she was obviously caught off guard and seemed to get wackier and blinkier as the interview went on. 

Dennis Miller once said that she was so bat-shit crazy that he swore she must sleep upside down.   I agree.  Remember, she’s the one who said that the House had to pass the ObamaCare bill to learn what was in it.  Yep, that’s our Nancy …. 

Democrats in general

ObamaCare is a disaster.  When Obama said “If you like your plan you can keep it” and that if you liked your doctor you could keep them, too, he lied.  Plain and simple.  He lied.  Bald-faced and with not a single caveat.  He even punctuated those lies with “period.”  He knew he was lying at the time.  He knew that people wouldn’t be able to keep their plans, nor their doctors. 

In fact, the Democrats had to vote on a specific bill that very clearly stated that those existing plans must be cancelled by the insurance companies.  They also knew that people wouldn’t necessarily be able to keep their doctors either. 

So now they either claim they didn’t know – a convenient case of political amnesia – or that “technically” what they and Obama said was true.  They and Obama just weren’t as explicit or detailed as they probably should have been.  

More of them are sticking with the “technically” true argument these days.  They truly believe that if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it, and you will even come to believe it yourself. 

How delusional are they?  Well, after David Gregory eviscerated Pelosi recently on a Sunday talk show, the looney left blogs were full of praise for how Pelosi decisively debunked Gregory’s Republican talking points about ObamaCare.  And exactly what show were they watching? 

I’ve often said being a liberal Democrat is a form of mental illness.  This is more proof. 

Oprah

I admire how successful Oprah has become.  She’s so famous she only needs one name.  She’s made millions on her own merits, not because she’s black nor despite being black.  While she was skyrocketing to fame and fortune by attracting millions of loyal followers of all races, nobody ever cared about her race.  And they don’t care now. 

However, Oprah has now decided that she cares about race.  She thinks Obama gets a raw deal because of his race.  People don’t respect him as they should, simply because he’s black. 

Hello Oprah.  People don’t respect him because of what he’s done, not the color of his skin. 

He’s lied to the American people.  He’s abused the office of President.  He’s diminished the respect people have here and around the world for the Presidency by going back on his word and abandoning long-time allies.  He’s treated the Presidency as no more than a “cool job” with neat perks like rubbing elbows with celebrities and shopping trips to Europe for his family, rather than stepping up to what the job really entails.  As someone said, he likes being President; he just doesn’t like having to do the job. 

He’s an empty suit having the time of his life on what is the world’s most important stage.  The public doesn’t trust him.  World leaders don’t trust him.  Even politicians in his own party don’t trust him.

Note to Oprah:  It’s not because he’s black.  It’s because he’s deceitful and incompetent.    

Obama

I am both embarrassed and terrified by Obama.  

He is an insult to the high standards we should expect from someone who holds the most powerful office in the world.  With his waffling and “leading from behind” nonsense, he’s abdicated his role as leader of the free world.  He’s cutting deals with the enemies of our allies, and tossing those allies under the bus.  Nobody trusts his word.  Now Russia is more trusted; imagine that.

Truthfully, we can recover from all that.  We survived Carter, after all. 

What’s really scary is what Obama’s doing here at home.  The ObamaCare debacle and the food-stamp Presidency are small potatoes.  I suspect Obama – like many progressives since Woodrow Wilson – thinks our system of checks and balances is archaic and inefficient, and should be streamlined.  Everything he does is to diminish the power of the other two branches of government and increase the power of the Executive branch to near dictatorial status. 

This is unacceptable.  This is also unconstitutional. 

It’s now clear that he is trying to overthrow the structure of government outlined in the Constitution.  The result will be the culmination of the Progressive dream:  the creation of an enlightened ruling class unimpeded by the whims of a less enlightened populace.  This ruling class will make better, more informed choices for society because of its intellectual superiority.

If you don’t think that’s possible, consider the ever increasing power of Federal agencies these days.  Are they elected?  No.  The key people running these agencies are appointed to reflect the ideologies of the party in power.  So the rules they pass reflect the will of the Executive branch.  With the change in filibuster rules, the party in control of the White House and Senate can appoint whoever it wants to head these agencies. Now it can also close the loop by packing the courts who rule on the legality of the regulations they create.

Next, consider how Obama has already used Executive Orders to bypass Congress.  Consider how he’s decided that he has the power to determine what laws he will or won’t enforce, and what laws he can change any time he pleases.  Nobody is stopping him.  And every time he gets away with another of these power grabs, he’s setting precedent. 

Dangerous precedents are being set in stone.  The checks and balances are being knocked out, step by step.  It’s effectively a coup d’état if allowed to continue.   

If that doesn’t scare you, I don’t know what will. 

More to come …

Mob rule II

As I said in an earlier posting, politicians love mobs.  Especially irrational, unthinking mobs focused only on short term solutions. 

Mobs don’t care about any rights except their own.  They ignore rules or laws that stand in the way of what they want. Nor do they care about the consequences of their actions.   

All that makes mobs so attractive to politicians.  Well, as long as the mob is the majority, and remains on their side. 

And there, my friends, is the inherent danger of mobs and pure majority rule.  Sooner or later, all mobs dissipate, majorities switch, and you are left with the aftermath. 

The founders wanted a democracy – within limits

The founders tried desperately to stave off mob rule and potential abuse by a majority.  The balance of power incorporated into the design of our government was not an accident.  The Electoral College was not created on a whim.   The founders thought long and hard about how to preserve the rights of the minority in the face of challenges from the majority. 

They knew that absolute power almost inevitably led to abuse of power.  And that’s also why they created limits on what the Federal government was permitted – and precluded – from doing. 

They recognized that if everything was decided by popular vote, with no checks and balances in place, we’d end up with a populist dictator.  We’d get someone who would promise the masses everything to seize power, and then use the resources of the government to retain power.

It wasn’t as if they didn’t understand what could happen under autocratic rule. 

We’d fought against a king and defeated his armies to gain our independence.  We had seen that absolute power corrupted absolutely, firsthand.  We had rebelled against unjust rules and laws forced on us without our consent.  We rose up against restrictions on our freedoms.  And finally we went to war to reclaim our rights, our liberties, and to throw off the vestiges of a corrupt form of government that existed entirely for itself at the expense of the people it governed. 

Sound familiar? 

The nuclear option and autocratic rule

Well, with the Senate vote to eliminate filibusters on many Presidential appointments – engaging the so-called nuclear option – we’ve taken yet another step toward mob rule and the entrenchment of a pure autocratic state.

From now on, many appointments can be confirmed by the Senate with a simple 50 +1 majority vote.  This gives the party in control of the White House and Senate the ability to place almost anyone they want on a series of Federal courts, but not – at least for now – on the Supreme Court. 

The Democrats had been stymied in their attempts to get a number of new Obama-nominated judges appointed to a variety of courts, and to some executive branch positions.  Republicans threatened to filibuster many of the nominees, which would then require a vote for cloture in the Senate, which would take 60 votes to pass.  And the Democrats knew they couldn’t get 60 votes. 

So they invalidated a Senate tradition of more than 200 years that had enabled minority parties to hold up Presidential nominees to executive branch positions and to Federal courts.  Now all you need is a majority in the Senate.      

Why is this important? Its most dramatic impact will be on who gets Federal judgeships. 

Federal courts, including the Supreme Court, have always been political battlefields.  Both parties have tried to place judges on the benches they think will be favorable to their causes.  Sometimes this works and they get an ideological stalwart; sometimes they get surprised.  Over time a sure-fire conservative can become more liberal and a rock-solid liberal can become more conservative once they are on the Federal bench. 

There’s always that risk, and many Federal court appointments are for life. 

Most of the current battle is over the Federal D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, which is a unique entity in many ways.  It tends to get cases that involve Federal regulations.  It’s also seen as a stepping stone for many justices to get to the Supreme Court.

Problem is, that court is currently balanced with an equal number of Democrat and Republican appointed full-time judges.  The Democrats want to add several new judges to that court, obviously hoping to tip the balance and set up a pipeline of more liberal- and regulatory-friendly judges for the next Supreme Court vacancies.  Republicans, of course, want to stop them. 

Hence the impasse.  And the reason why Democrats invoked the nuclear option.       

With the Senate in control of the Democrats, and with Obama in the White House, it’s pretty much clear sailing to do whatever they want in terms of appointments.  They can stack Federal courts with far-left loons if they like and there’s nothing to stop them.  They can turn the D.C. Circuit Court into a rubber stamp for any regulations they feel like imposing.

Since Obama’s already shown a proclivity toward ruling by fiat – using Executive Orders in place of legislation, spawning regulations without Congressional input, much less approval and deciding which laws he will or won’t enforce – this was one of the last checks on his power grabs.

And now it’s gone.  He is officially the King of America.  He can pretty much do whatever he wants.  The only thing standing in his way is the House.  

His supporters are thrilled.  They think this will allow them to shape policy through the courts for years to come.  What they can’t get in legislation, they’ll finagle through regulations, acquiesced to by friendly judges appointed by like-minded progressives.  That’s the plan. 

There’s only one flaw.  When and if the Republicans ever retake the Senate and the White House, the tables will be turned.  Payback will be a bitch. 

The only time it’s good to have dictatorial powers is when you are the dictator. 

When you're not in power anymore, life sucks.   

Since when did charity become a birthright?

Growing up, nobody wanted to be dependent on charity.  Apparently a lot of Americans have no problem with accepting charity today.  Of course, it's not called "charity" anymore -- that would hurt someone's feelings.  But it's still charity, nonetheless.    

Food stamps are charity.  Payments through WIC are charity.  Welfare is charity.  Free cell phones and service are charity.  Subsidized insurance is charity. 

The list could go on and on, but in simplest terms when the government gives money or goods to anyone who hasn’t earned them it’s charity.  And by “earned” I mean actually doing something valuable in exchange for the money or goods.  Breathing and reproducing don't count.  

Sitting on your ass and popping out kids like Pez candies is not something valuable.  Training to be a “nail technician” at the community college isn’t either.  Nor is filling out job applications just to keep your benefits flowing.  Any money you get is charity; you haven’t earned a dime of it.    

On the other hand, Social Security benefits and UC are not charity.  That’s because we and our employers pay into these via payroll deductions from our paychecks for – wait for it – real jobs where we work to earn real money.  We contribute toward the benefits we ultimately receive.  

Now there’s nothing wrong with providing charity; it’s an entirely noble thing to do with your own money. There’s nothing wrong with accepting charity, either, if you really need the help. However, when the government takes money from you to provide charity, it’s different.  And when recipients of charity abandon any façade of striving for self-reliance and turn the charity they receive into a lifestyle, it’s just wrong.  Unfortunately, when government hands out charity that often happens. 

Honestly, we should always take care of the sick and disabled among us.  But we have no moral obligation to support those who aren’t.   Why government continues to do so is maddening. 

It does no good to feed people and give them money just because they aren’t willing to get off their butts to support themselves.  We’re not giving them “dignity” or ‘respect” by telling them it’s okay to be wholly dependent on government charity.  We’re not giving them a means to better themselves.  Government is just buying them off, postponing the inevitable realization that a lot of those people are just sponging off the system until they get caught and kicked off.  If ever. 

In short, we’re not improving anyone through handouts.  In national parks they have signs about feeding the animals.  The reason is that the animals can become conditioned to expect you to feed them.  If you don’t, they can become aggressive and hurt you. 

Here’s how that scenario plays out with humans.  Last weekend the EBT system was shut down for a day.  That’s the “debit card” those on the dole now use instead of the physical food stamps of yesteryear to buy things; the idea being that this allows the user to maintain their dignity. 

Now remember that the EBT program is about helping the working poor and the destitute get the food they need to survive.   So on Saturday the system went down and the cards either didn’t function or retailers couldn’t verify balances.  Walmart in one town decided to continue to allow EBT users to purchase stuff even though Walmart couldn’t verify the balances.

A near riot ensued as EBT card holders stripped the shelves of as much as they could carry to take advantage of the verification gap.  When Walmart announced that the EBT system was back online, people abandoned carts piled high with food in the aisles.  One woman tried to buy $700 worth of food before the system came back – she had 49 cents in her EBT account.  Others simply walked out the store with loaded carts full of stuff they never paid for.  

This wasn’t an isolated event.

Furious EBT card holders took to social media to flame Xerox for the hiccup in transactions.  Twitter was alive with hateful invectives and threats of riots and insurrections if service was not restored immediately. 

A couple of things …

First, if these people are so poor and destitute they need help to buy food, how can they afford devices and services to send Tweets, post on Facebook and the like?

Second, these people should be so damned glad they are getting something for nothing.  Instead of bitching about a minor inconvenience, they should be thanking everyone for their generosity.

But no.  These people acted like someone had arbitrarily decided to withhold their paycheck.  That’s because this is what all those benefits have become to them – a regular paycheck.  They’ve been conditioned to expect these benefits as their “rights.”  In their minds, they aren’t getting charity; they’re just getting what is owed them.

For what … I have no idea. I suspect they don’t either.   Except once they start getting these benefits, no one apparently has any right to limit or end them.  Certainly not the government.  

No one expects them to beg for benefits.  But for once it would be nice to know that we’re taking steps to assure that we’re spending our money on people who really need assistance on a temporary basis and – as sappy as this sounds – people who appreciate what they’re getting. 

Don’t expect that to happen anytime soon.  If anything, “the end of welfare as we know it” has morphed into a richer and more robust plethora of payments and subsidies designed to insure abject dependency for generations.  It's not “welfare as we know it” anymore, that’s true; it’s much better, more rewarding, and more inclusive than ever before. 

That may thrill the takers and the politicians dependent on them to maintain power, but a large part of the public is getting fed up with these leeches.  I don’t think I’m alone in this. 

If someone can work and they don’t, if they can feed their family but won’t, if they can afford things they want but won’t use their own money to buy the things they need, then that person is a worthless piece of crap.  He or she is a drain on society and contributes nothing of value.  They have no dignity, and are not deserving of respect.  They are a parasite. 

To all of you scamming the system:  I’m tired of hearing about you and your “needs.”  I, for one, couldn’t care less about you.  Piss off.  While you’re at it, STFU.  And stop reproducing – we don’t need any more of you; we’re all full up on generations of perpetual leeches and future criminals.

 

So let’s stop the bullshit about “human dignity” and “respect” for those laughing at the working stiffs supporting them.  Let’s help those who truly need help and cut off those who don’t.

Instead of constantly trying to find new ways to raise more money to squander on the same people, generation after generation, let’s stop the cycle of rewarding irresponsibility and bad behavior.  Certainly there will be blowback, as there was when welfare reform was enacted under Clinton.

But for a short time, it actually worked.  People moved off the dole and into jobs because they were forced to.  They had fewer "babies for benefits," too.  Then over time we got all warm and fuzzy again and made it more attractive to take money from the government than make money from a real job. 

That’s upside down and crazy.  We need to start paring back now.      

This isn’t selfish.  It’s just commonsense.  And it’s high time for us to start cutting our losses on a broad spectrum of the population that believe they are “owed” something simply by existing. 

Fruit of the poisoned tree

That’s what ObamaCare is in its present form.

Conceived in secrecy, nursed by special interests, and birthed prematurely, what did anyone expect?  When someone says that you have to pass a bill to learn what’s in it, shouldn’t that be a clear signal that something is desperately wrong?

I cringe when supporters say “it’s the law of the land” and held to be Constitutional by the Supreme Court.  Well, the Dred Scott decision – which essentially held that slaves were property with no rights – was also made by the Supreme Court.  And bad laws get made and repealed all the time. 

So just because a bad law gets jammed through by a majority party, and survives scrutiny by the Supreme Court on a technicality, doesn’t mean it’s up there with the Ten Commandments. 

Sooner or later, bad laws get overturned.  The Supreme Court usually gets another bite at the apple, too.  Common sense prevails and mischief is undone.  Unfortunately, this can take a lot of time and bad things can happen in the meantime. 

Right now, the media and the Obama Administration are trying to convince the public that there’s so much more good about ObamaCare than bad.  In short, they tend to highlight three things:

      People with pre-existing conditions can now get covered …

      There’s no cap on coverage …

      There are subsidies to help the poor pay for insurance. 

Well, that’s certainly looking on the bright side.  Kind of like saying that the bright side of WWII was that it pulled the country out of the Great Depression. 

So now there are lots of stories about Joe and Flo Blow somewhere who are just thrilled that they can now get coverage after being turned down by insurance companies for years.  There are tales about people who needed an organ transplant but didn’t get one because they couldn’t afford it.  And let’s not forget those who think they’ll be able to get good insurance essentially for free. 

You’d think that until ObamaCare people were dying in the streets for lack of medical care and only the rich had health insurance.     

Mind you, an overwhelming number of people already had insurance through their employers before ObamaCare.  Most of the people who had no insurance either didn’t think they needed it, couldn’t afford to pay for it, or perhaps were “undocumented.”  

If something happened to someone without insurance they just went to the local emergency room and were treated, because … wait for it … there’s a Federal law that requires emergency rooms to treat everyone, regardless of whether they have insurance or can afford to pay. 

Nobody in this country – here legally or illegally – has been denied medical care for lack of insurance or ability to pay for many years.  Long before ObamaCare. 

ObamaCare does nothing to change that.  People without insurance and with no money can still use emergency rooms as their family doctor as they do now.

But won’t everyone now have insurance?  Well that’s the plan but it’s not going to happen.    

Several things will rip it asunder. 

You see, the Affordable Care Act isn’t that affordable.  As with a lot of other big-government ideas many people aren’t going to do what government idealists think they will – or should – do. 

If you aren’t paying anything for something right now, what’s going to make you start paying for it?  The goodness of your heart?  Your innate altruism?  The request by your government that you do? 

Does anyone actually believe that the estimated 10-15 million uninsured who pay nothing for insurance now and get medical care free through their local emergency room are willingly going to start paying for care?  Seriously? 

And the young healthy people the plan is depending on to enroll – the people who won’t need any medical care for years – are they suddenly going to be thrilled to pay hundreds of dollars a year for something they don’t think they need?  Hell, they already bitch and moan about paying back their student loans – good luck with squeezing them for more bucks. 

Now, the counter argument is that people won’t have a choice – everyone is compelled by law to have insurance or pay a tax.  Also, generous subsidies will help people afford this insurance. 

Unless the subsidy brings the cost to zero, or pays people to take it, don’t hold your breath. 

Next, the Affordable Care Act does allow people with existing conditions to get insurance, and there are no caps on coverage.  Which is a good thing for those who couldn’t get insurance before because they had cancer, a heart condition, or some other serious ailment that could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars over their lifetime to treat.    

You may be wondering – or if you’re a Democrat, probably not – how can insurance companies afford to take on these open-ended risks now when they couldn’t before.

The answer is simple.  They can’t.  Not at the rates they’ve been charging. 

ObamaCare didn’t change reality.  It just distorts it to make it appear different. 

Insurance companies are still for-profit enterprises.  That means they have to take in more money than they pay out, unlike the government.  That also means they have to change the way coverage is written to account for their overall increased risks.  They also have to raise rates for everyone to account for stuff they’re ordered to provide “for free” like birth control, preventive care, etc. 

That’s why everyone’s premiums have gone up, despite what Obama promised.  You can order insurance companies to provide services and absorb more risk, and in turn those companies will do what they need to do to still turn a profit.  Otherwise, they won’t stay in business. 

So they raise rates and increase deductibles.  This is going to be a big shock for those who haven’t had insurance before, and especially for the deluded who think ObamaCare means great insurance coverage at an affordable cost.   

They are in for an unpleasant surprise. 

If your out-of-pocket deductibles before your insurance kicks in are thousands of dollars – as they will be on the over-hyped Exchange products – the deal is not so sweet.  Imagine paying several hundred dollars a month for insurance for the first time, going to the hospital, and discovering that you have to spend $5000 or more of your own money before your insurance starts paying.  Or finding that you have to spend thousands of dollars of your own money before your family’s prescriptions are covered. 

I’m not making this up.   This is how it’s going to work for a lot of people.  Yes, they’ll be able to get insurance, but aside from limited preventive care, it’s not going to be particularly useful once you factor in high deductibles. 

Even Obama cannot change the basic economics of health insurance.  It’s all about risk – insurance companies need to shave the odds and potential payouts wherever they can. They want to put some limits on what could turn into an “all-you-can-eat” buffet for some people. 

Unfortunately, the prevailing belief among some groups is that through ObamaCare they will have access to the vast buffet of services, docs, specialists and brand-name prescription drugs.  I’ve heard it from people who should know better – they think ObamaCare will prevent insurance companies from making decisions about what they’ll cover and how much they’ll pay.  In essence, there will be an all-you-can-eat buffet and there’s nothing insurance companies can do to stop it.   

Nothing could be further from the truth. 

By making you spend your own money before they start to pay, they’re betting you’ll be a bit more judicious in consuming services and prescription drugs.   And they’re probably right.  You’re less likely to run to your doc for the latest TV-advertised wonder drug if it’s coming out of your pocket.  You’re more likely to opt for lower cost generics when you do need a prescription, and treat a sprained ankle with hot and cold compresses at home before demanding an MRI.   

ObamaCare also reduces payouts to doctors and hospitals for treating Medicare and Medicaid patients.  Again, idealists in government are wrong: they believe docs and hospitals will work for less because they feel morally compelled to help Medicare and Medicaid patients.  As if docs and hospitals are powerless to resist.  Well docs are like a lot of us – they have to make a living too and if you cut their payments they’ll simply stop accepting Medicare and Medicaid patients.  If hospitals get jammed the same way, they’ll change their working model or close. 

Apply that to insurance reimbursements as well and you’ll see a lot of practices  and providers that won’t accept insurance any more, either. 

Now Obama’s spokespuppets say none of this can happen. With enough young people in the pool, the risks go down so insurance rates will go down.  And people won’t have a choice – everyone will be required by law to have health insurance.  Doctors and hospitals will learn to adjust. 

They are whistling past the proverbial graveyard.  This is a disaster that’s only getting worse.  The more the public learns about it, the less they like it.   It’s an ugly piece of legislation. 

If ObamaCare was so great, why aren’t all government employees on it?  Why isn’t Congress?  Hell, why isn’t Obama and his cabinet?

And why have so many vocal supporters at the beginning requested waivers later on? 

I don’t fault Republicans for trying to stop it. But they are going about it the wrong way. 

Don't repeal it; let it go through.  Just strip out all the waivers and exemptions. 

Let Obama and the Democrats own it 100%.  Then see what happens.  

Get over it

“If one person is offended, we have to listen.”

That, my friends, is a quote from NFL Commissioner Roger Goodall, being interviewed about the Redskins name – as in the Washington Redskins. 

To which I respond:  No, you don’t.  

You don’t have to respond to every hare-brained nitwit always on the lookout for something that offends them.  Or about something they think might offend someone else. 

It’s like the NCAA telling college teams they need to change their names and mascots, because someone, somewhere, might be offended. 

So you’ll now find few college teams named Warriors, Indians, or Braves or after specific tribes.  Central Michigan University teams were allowed to remain Chippewas after being approved by a Chippewa tribe; FSU teams are still the Seminoles after approval by the Seminole Tribe of Florida. 

Now as a UF graduate I am prejudiced against FSU.  But for the record there never really was an indigenous Florida “Seminole tribe.”  The “tribe” was originally comprised mostly of runaway slaves and banished outcasts from other tribes north of Florida.  The guy on the horse with the war paint and the flaming spear at FSU games is pure mythology. 

If FSU wanted to have someone truly representative of Florida’s Seminoles they’d have a casino dealer arrive on an airboat loaded with cheap cigarettes.  And instead of sticking a flaming spear in the ground, he’d wrestle an alligator. 

Politically incorrect, but more accurate.  And certain to offend someone, somewhere. 

Chances are, if you’re named Tiger or Osceola something and live off Tamiami Trail, that wasn’t funny.  But if you’ve ever traveled down to the Florida Keys on US 1, you get it.   Don’t feel guilty. 

So what’s the point in making some college team known as the Warriors for almost a century to suddenly become the Pioneers or some other innocuous name?  It wasn’t as if they demeaned warriors everywhere.  But on the very off chance they might – political correctness won out. 

The same political correctness has also struck high school teams.  Because someone thought someone might be offended. 

So say goodbye to the chiefs, warriors, braves and names that may have the word “red” in them – like Red Raiders – that generations of high schoolers cheered on. 

The ultimate in political correctness run amuck in sports team names may be from Utah.  There a team changed its name from Cougars because the local school board thought that might be offensive to a certain type of woman who prefers younger men. 

The team became the Chargers – which in an equally remote way might be disrespectful toward those with credit problems.  So far, no problems. 

Listen, if  you spend your entire life – or career – focused almost exclusively on not offending or upsetting anyone at all, you’re not going to get much accomplished and life is going to be very boring.  Very, very boring.  

Plus, there will be no jokes, no satire, no “dark sarcasm in the classroom” (Pink Floyd), no making fun of anything that’s patently stupid.   

In a nation of 300+ million people, somebody, somewhere, is always going to be offended by something. We simply can’t let the tyranny of the thin skinned or chronically offended to overrule common sense.  Sometimes a joke is just a joke. 

And sometimes a sports team’s name is just a name.

We need to lighten up and stop taking every little thing so seriously. 

The Red Robin hamburger chain caught Hell for a joke in a commercial that in addition to a big line of burgers they also offered a garden burger “just in case your daughter’s going through a phase.”  

Vegans were outraged that someone made fun of them; that someone would be dismissive of vegetarianism as a “phase.”   They demanded Red Robin pull the spot.  

Volkswagen got hammered for a spot with a white guy in Minnesota so happy with his new VW that he gets into a Jamaican “don’t worry, be happy” state of mind, complete with accent, and cheers up his coworkers.  VW was accused of being racist.    

Coke ran a Super Bowl commercial set in a desert with Las Vegas showgirls, cowboys, Mad Max types, and Bedouins on camels all racing toward an oasis.  It was derided as racist, because the Bedouins were on camels. Arabs here were offended; they thought the ad fed negative stereotypes of Arabs.    

(Apparently Las Vegas showgirls, cowboys, and Mad Max motorcyclists – all stereotypes themselves – had no issues with the commercial.)

Very recently, Hobby Lobby – a chain of avowedly Christian stores – was flamed in social media for offering Christmas decorations but not Hanukah decorations as a matter of policy. 

Look, somebody is always offended by something.  The question is, do you care? 

No, I mean that.  Forget being politically correct.  Drop the compassion you’re conditioned to think you should have.  Look into your heart and see if you honestly and truly care about a lot of stuff that seems to offend people. 

Like saying Merry Christmas.  Yes, there are people who are apparently offended by this.  But they are few and far between.  Contrary to Bill O’Reilly, I don’t think there’s a “War on Christmas.”  However, I will concede that there might very well be a war on common sense being waged by professional, perpetual complainers who contend they are offended by the most mundane stuff. 

“Christmas trees” are now renamed “holiday trees” so as not to offend anyone.  That's stupid.  

In Cherry Hill, they stopped celebrating Halloween in public schools because it was deemed a religious holiday.  Yeah, don’t know about you, but this Protestant kid never associated trick-or-treat with the eve of All Saints’ Day.  I don’t remember anyone dressing up as a saint, either.  Nobody on my block gave out candy crosses, nor carved pumpkins with a likeness of the Martyrdom of San Sebastian. 

So much for the Easter Bunny, too.  I’m a fairly well-read guy, yet I don’t seem to recall how Easter Egg Hunts, Easter Parades and baskets filled with candy directly relate to the celebration of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.  Here I just thought the Easter Bunny was about spring.

Now, some of these overreactions may tick you off.  But we’ve all gotten used to such nonsense. 

True story.  Some years ago a friend happened to attend a Baptist church service for the first time.  He said he was shocked when the minister kept mentioning “Jesus Christ” in his sermon.  My friend was so conditioned to be politically correct he said he almost flinched every time the minister said “Christ” aloud, like it was a forbidden word.  Jesus was one thing; Jesus Christ was quite another – you just didn’t say Christ in public for fear of offending someone.   

Another true story.  Some years ago I met a new client who casually asked if I was a Hebe.  I was stunned and frankly speechless just to hear the word, especially from a Jew.  It was a knee-jerk reaction on my part, from years of being trained not to use offensive words like Hebe.

We laugh about it now, but I actually panicked at that moment. 

I guess the point is that we can’t be so sensitive to every little thing that’s said.  We can’t live a full life walking on tiptoes for fear of offending someone.  Certainly we don’t want to consciously offend someone deliberately. But we can’t constantly overreact to every single person that finds something hurtful in the most innocuous things.

Somebody somewhere is going to be pissed off about something.

Get over it. They will, too. Eventually. 

And if they don’t … too bad. 

The demise of public service

There was a time when America’s best and brightest – and wealthiest – went into public service out of a sense of noblesse oblige. 

Roosevelts, Rockefellers, Kennedys, Lodges, and other members of America’s landed aristocracy entered government service because they thought it was their civic duty.  They didn’t do it for money. 

They simply wanted to serve their country.  It was the right thing for the well-heeled to do. 

That was before our Federal government morphed into the self-serving entity it is now.   

And make no mistake, that’s what it’s become. 

Forget about the high and noble calling of civic duty.  The siren song of government employment today is not about serving the public interest; it’s about serving yourself with virtual bulletproof job security regardless of job performance, as long as you don’t rock the boat. 

At one time, the role of our Federal government was to insure domestic tranquility and provide for the common defense.   Now it seems it spends much more time protecting and defending itself and its employees from the public they are supposed to serve. 

And as our government continues to grow and expand its employee base, and as it reaches deeper and deeper into our everyday lives, it’s also becoming further and further detached from the public it is tasked with serving.  Because of its insular nature, it doesn’t notice this contradiction. 

In essence, our government has become an entity of itself, by itself, and primarily for itself. It looks out for its own, at all costs, and is loathe to acknowledge – much less punish – any improprieties among its employees.  This often occurs with bureaucracies; ours happens to be on steroids

In effect, it’s taken on a life of its own, distinct and apart from the rest of the country.  It doesn’t have to follow the same rules as the rest of us.  Its employees don’t have to follow the laws and regulations they impose on the general population. 

It also operates within a completely separate economic system, unconstrained by supply and demand, budget concerns, or even generally accepted accounting principles.  It spends far more than it collects in taxes, prints money like the Weimar Republic, borrows billions more and thinks one solution is to raise the debt limit on its credit card so it can print and borrow even more.    

If our government were held to the same standards as it imposes on American businesses, it would be forced into bankruptcy, its remaining assets would be liquidated and distributed to its creditors, and a lot of people would probably be going to jail.

But that’s not going to happen.  Not because it shouldn’t, but because the Feds won’t let it. 

There’s a particularly dangerous group think that pervades our government that everyone in government is part of something bigger and somehow more important than anything else.  Because of that, they can’t be held to the same standards of behavior as ordinary citizens.  They believe they are the forces of righteousness who see more, know more, and therefore are entitled to more. 

While we plebeians putter along in our pedestrian lives, they are doing big things, things we can’t understand, things that are part of the “big picture” government employees alone see. 

The stuff the public finds disturbing they see as mere speed bumps.  Lois Lerner at the IRS is a perfect example.  Benghazi is another.  Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, anyone?  Solyndra?  

Federal government employees routinely escape serious punishment.  At worst, they get a paid leave of absence and get reassigned.  Try that outside of government and see what happens.

Now you may think I’m focusing mainly on the Obama Administration.  Certainly, they are part of the problem.  But so is Congress.  And so are the thousands upon thousands of Federal employees permanently ensconced in various departments and agencies throughout the government. 

There’s a pervasive attitude on the Federal level -- including among our elected officials – that the general public can’t be trusted to make intelligent decisions; intelligent defined as what they deem the right choices.   So they need to determine what foods we should eat, what fuel to put in our cars, who we should hire and how much we should pay them, where we should live, how we should get to work, what healthcare we should get, what health insurance we need and so on.

However, they’ll readily exempt themselves from all of this, because … well, they’re in the government.  So while some in Congress rail about student debt and tax cheats, it’s estimated that thousands of Federal employees – including those on Congressional staffs – have defaulted on their loans and/or owe back taxes.  And yes, that includes IRS employees.  

In the current debate over defunding or delaying ObamaCare, we learned that while the general public is being forced into it, Congress and their staffers won’t be.  They will continue to enjoy their subsidized healthcare plan.  The IRS – which will ensure that we all have “acceptable” healthcare or pay penalties – has managed to get its employees exempted as well. 

You would think conservative Republicans in Congress would see and seize on the bald-faced hypocrisy in this.  But when they were pushed on how they and their staffers got to keep their plan while the rest of us couldn’t, their response was that they were just maintaining “what all Federal employees get.”  

And there, folks, is the problem in a nutshell. 

Federal employees in general, and members of Congress and the Administration – regardless of political affiliation – believe they are entitled to special treatment.  It’s as if getting on the Federal payroll automatically enrolls you in a private club – or a street gang – which has its own rules of behavior outside the law and whose members always take care of each other, no matter what.

This is just wrong.  It’s also a major reason why there’s such a disconnect between the public and the government.  The American people don’t trust the Federal government.  There are too many instances of self-serving behavior at all levels to be ignored.    

They don’t trust Congress at all.  They don’t trust this administration to be honest with them, or to police itself.  Who can blame the public? 

They also believe government workers make too much and work too little compared to them. 

They wonder who the “non-essential personnel” are and why we have non-essential personnel on the government payroll at all. 

If fiscal hawks in Congress are really interested in cutting waste and fat – wouldn’t non-essential personnel seem to be first on the chopping block?  I mean, they are already defined as personnel that’s not really needed …  

Most of all, the tax-paying public doesn’t understand how government workers at all levels can have such a cavalier attitude toward the people paying their salaries and funding their benefits. 

That’s because many in the public still think government employees are public servants, when the reality is exactly the opposite.

More often than not, we now serve the government.  At least that seems to be the attitude of those in government – we exist as a funding mechanism and source of political currency.   

The Federal bureaucracy doesn’t really care what we think, ever.  Most Presidents appear to care when up for re-election, but actually don’t.  Congress only cares when House or Senate seats are up for grabs; even then, their interest in us is fleeting and passes as soon as the elections are over.  Then it’s back to self-serving business as usual. 

In the end, regardless of political party, what the government wants, it takes from us – our privacy, our personal liberties, the proceeds of our labors and enterprise.   

When it does this without the consent of the governed, we’re just supposed to go along.  Because it’s all for the greater good, right? 

Now I’m not preaching anarchy; I believe in the need for government.  Government can accomplish important, useful, and practical things far beyond the capabilities of individuals.  It can keep order and provide essential services to safeguard the health and well-being of its citizens.  Government can do an enormous amount of good and build things that benefit society as a whole.   

But good government needs to have high standards for integrity and honesty at all levels.  It needs to  remember that it exists only to serve the needs of  those it governs, and not just itself.   

I’m not so sure we have a government like that right now.