By The Numbers

One of the statements on the White House website that I’m going to take out of context for the topic on the site (preventing gun violence) is the following:

“If even one child’s life can be saved, then we need to act. Now is the time to do the right thing for our children, our communities, and the country we love.”

The implication here is that a child’s life is precious, and must be protected.  I couldn’t agree more.  But the greatest loss of life in this country isn’t from the barrel of a gun as the politicians would let us believe – it’s from abortion.

It is estimated that abortion has ended the lives of somewhere between 50 and 55 million children in the womb from 1973 to 2011.  By contrast, the total number of homicides by gun  in the same time period (by my fuzzy math of a high average of 12,000 per year) is 456,000, and this number includes adults.

Thus, it is no source of confusion on my part about the following statement concerning the Progressive Liberals:

If children are so precious that they must be protected against all harm, real and imagined, then why, why, do (Progressive) Liberals support, in any and all of its grotesque & horrific forms, the abortion of innocent unborn children?

The justification or defense that I most often hear or read about is that the fertilized egg or group of cells is not life much less a human being.  I must respectfully reject that legal definition that a group of cells of human origin, created by the human reproductive process, and has the potential of developing into a human being is not life.  And there is a reason why I state that a fertilized egg or a group of cells is indeed life.

NASA has spent millions if not billions of dollars on interplanetary exploration in the quest for information.  One of those investigations is evidence for life in our solar system.  NASA scientists are looking for organic material such as DNA or even evidence of a single-cell organism, and has multiple robots and probes scouring our little island of a solar system for said evidence.  If science defines a single cell as being alive, then what is a fertilized egg?

I ran across this quote from Faye Wattleton from Planned Parenthood given during an interview with Ms. magazine (from Abort73.com)

“I think we have deluded ourselves into believing that people don’t know that abortion is killing. So any pretense that abortion is not killing is a signal of our ambivalence, a signal that we cannot say yes, it kills a fetus.” – Faye Wattleton, “Speaking Frankly,” Ms., May / June 1997, Volume VII, Number 6, 67

I fully understand that Roe vs. Wade legalized abortion in the United States.  To hide behind the statement that it’s “the law of the land” will not absolve anyone from the moral & ethical implications of performing or having an abortion. If you recall, “the law of the land” banned abortions in the not so distant past, and was changed only on the basis of falsified testimony. If you don’t believe this last statement, do your own research and learn along the way exactly what an abortion is.  It is perhaps the greatest and most sickening crime against humanity that I can think of.  And yet abortion seemingly continues without question.

So I challenge our politicians who state that they want to protect the children – Draft and pass laws restricting or outlawing abortions.  In other words, do what you say you believe.

A Break…

Hello all,

Due to the job and catching up on certifications, I won’t be posting very much over the next couple of weeks.  Instead, I thought it would be a change of pace to repost some old, sometimes relevant posts from years and blogs gone past.

This week, The Tale of the Trids.


On an island in the South Pacific, there lived a tribe of natives called the Trids.  They are a peaceful people, although, well, vertically challenged.  But their island had everything that they could want or need.  It was Paradise….except for the giant.

The giant lived on a mountain on one end of the island.  Every now & then, usually once every couple of months, the giant would come down from the mountain into the village of the Trids and kick them around.  No deaths, no broken bones, just lots of bruises.  Only the very young and the very old were spared the wrath of the giant.

One day, a cargo ship was passing by the island, and stopped for supplies.  On the ship was a Rabbi looking for a place to live for a while.  He saw the island as a sanctuary, a place to relax while he sorted out the problems of life in general.  The Trids welcomed the Rabbi as their guest, but they did warn him about the giant.  He promised that he would do his best to help save them from the giant.

The cargo ship sailed away with the captain promising to return for the Rabbi in four months.  And for about six weeks, everything was as if the Rabbi was in the Garden of Eden.  Then the giant came down off his mountain.

The Trids heard the giant coming, and ran screaming through the village for everyone to run and hide.  The Rabbi heard this commotion, and went to the front of the village to confront the giant.

And he saw the giant coming down the path from the mountain.  And he was huge!!  The Rabbi’s confidence was fading with every step the giant took toward the village.  Finally, the giant reached the village and stopped in front of the Rabbi. 

The giant looked down on the Rabbi and started to chuckle a low, rumbling, bemused type of chuckle.  With every passing second, the Rabbi’s knees began to shake.  The giant saw this, and chuckled louder.

Finally, the Rabbi couldn’t take it anymore.  He looked up at the giant and shouted, “You’re not going to kick the Trids around unless you start with me first!!  Well, get on with it!!  Start kicking!!”

The giant let out the loudest chuckling laugh ever heard, shaking the very ground and echoing through the land.  The giant leaned down and looked the Rabbi in the eye.  The Rabbi thought he was a goner as the giant fixed him with a penetrating gaze with his yellow eyes.

Still chuckling, the giant said, “Silly Rabbi.  Kicks are for Trids…”

A Patriotic Rant

Before we start, let’s recall probably the only truly patriotic quote from the Hildebeast:

“We need to stand up and say we’re Americans, and we have the right to debate and disagree with any administration.” – Hillary Clinton

Since my last post on New Year’s Day, I’ve sat back and watched the news with disgust and concern.  The sheet incompetence of this Administration & Congress is as overwhelming as the arrogance displayed by our non-representative Representatives.  For instance:

This is especially galling considering that from a news report this morning that 92 MILLION people have dropped out of the job market because they cannot find a job.  These same people have the unmitigated gall to vilify people that create jobs & products that boost the economy, and then turn a blind eye to those celebrities or “special people” whose contributions to society are short-lived.  To whit:

Our jobs market growth is abysmal – period.  There is uncertainty concerning what government is going to do next – face it, the Affordable Care Act has thrown a damper on the economy due to the increased scope of power it gives the Government over not only the People, but to business as well.

And our President, supposedly a professor of Constitutional law, violates the Founding Document on an almost weekly basis.

And our non-representational Representatives are not much better.

Indeed, our non-representational Representatives jobs is not to create more and more legislation and regulations that restrict, choke, and otherwise hinder the freedoms of the American People, but to defend the Rights of the People from Government abuses.

Instead, the “Progressive” politicians are doing this to divide us:

We The People should realize the following:

Because it’s not about Government taking care of us, it’s about us taking care of ourselves because we all know government cannot take care of itself much less us.

We’ve lost that independence when we allowed our government to grow out of control.  Our government is so big with so many departments with initials that there is no way that anyone can keep track of which department is doing what.  That is why people who care about this country (like the TEA Party) are labeled threats by the government – government wants to keep that unaccountability to the American People intact.

Part of the accountability is the fiscal responsibility of our government – something that is not on the horizon anytime soon.  Raising the debt limits while continuing to spend & borrow money uncontrollably will bankrupt this nation in approximately 20 years.  The can keeps getting kicked down the road by Congress every year, no matter which political party has the majority.

debt as the greatest of the dangers  Debt as the Greatest of the Dangers

I certainly wouldn’t think that this President is going to show any leadership given his past performance, and what he continues to do with any crisis.

We need to understand that this country is capable of great things…and what can be lost.

Therefore, we must let our non-representational Representatives know that we are watching them, and their potential opponents, so that we can elect those people who will represent The People & not their party.

Are You Being Served? *

The main topic of 2014 is going to be ObamaCare – what’s it going to do to the American People in terms of cost, employment, and the effect upon the economy.  We’ve seen the effects of a bungled website and broken promises upon the people who had individual healthcare insurance plans.  With 2014, it will be the people who have insurance through their employers.  And that, my friends, will be a bigger disaster than what we have seen so far.

The Liberal / Progressives have all reassured us that all the problems with the website will be fixed soon (even though deadline after deadline has come & gone without resolution of said problems), and that everyone will be OK.  However, the website is only the beginning of the problems – the rules and regulations of the of the poorly written Affordable Healthcare Act (i.e. ACA or ObamaCare) as implemented by the Dept. of Human and Health Services (HHS)are not only voluminous but onerous (and that is being generous).

While I do admit to having a bit of Schadenfreude watching the Liberal / Progressive masterpiece self-destruct, I have to temper that with the 5-6 million people who have lost their insurance and cannot get it back either through the Exchanges or through their insurance companies.  Even if the few do get coverage, the numerous reports of increased premiums, larger deductibles, and unwanted services covered in the policies are legion, far outweighing the “success stories” put out by the lame-stream media.

And this year, the next folks in the ACA barrel will be people like me – those people who get their insurance through their work.  I’ve already had my monthly premiums raised slightly to cover what Human Resources calls “to comply with the Affordable Healthcare Act,” and that is before the so-called “Employer Mandate” kicks in later this year.  And folks, if you have been paying attention, the Liberal / Progressives want to delay the implementation of this mandate until after the 2014 Election.  I wonder why…not!

Our Congresscritters do not represent us, The People, for whom they were elected.  If they did, they would not have passed this legislation over multiple objections at multiple townhalls held throughout the country prior to passing this legislation.  Indeed, this POS legislation was passed without one Republican vote in the House or Senate.  So as far as I’m concerned, the Liberal / Progressive Democrats own this legislation, and must be held accountable for all of the legislation’s effects upon the American public.

While writing the above, I recalled some discussions and other posts of why our elected Representatives do not represent the people that elect them.  Part of the reason is a lack of individual accountability of the Representative to the population in their respective districts.

From Walter Williams in 2008:

The Federalist Papers, written by James Madison, John Jay and Alexander Hamilton, is the document most frequently referred to when trying to get a feel for the original intent of the framers of the Constitution. One such intention is found in Federalist 56 where Madison says, “…it seems to give the fullest assurance, that a representative for every thirty thousand inhabitants will render the (House of Representatives) both a safe and competent guardian of the interests which will be confided to it.”

Excellent research, found at http://www.thirty-thousand.org/index.htm, shows that in 1804 each representative represented about 40,000 people. Today, each representative represents close to 700,000. If we lived up to the vision of our founders, given today’s population, we would have about 7,500 congressmen in the House of Representatives.

James Madison, the acknowledged father of the Constitution, argued that the smaller the House of Representatives relative to the nation’s population, the greater is the risk of unethical collusion. He said, “Numerous bodies … are less subject to venality and corruption. ” In a word, he saw competition in the political arena as the best means for protecting our liberties.

Another problem of a small number of congressmen, with large districts, has to do with representing their constituents. How in the world is one congressman to represent the diverse interests and values of 700,000 people? The practical answer is they don’t and attempt to be all things to all people. Thus, a congressman who takes a principled stand against the federal government exceeding its constitutional authority — whether it be government involvement in education, business welfare and bailouts and $2 trillion dollars worth of other handouts — is not likely to win office.

The Constitution states in Article I Section 2 that

“The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative…”

Please note that Congress passed legislation in 1910 limiting the House to 435 members, but it is not a Constitutional Amendment!

From Margo Anderson:

The framers of the Constitution expected the House to grow with the population. Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, in Federalist no. 58, noted that the purpose of the census was to “readjust, from time to time, the apportionment of representatives to the number of inhabitants . . . [and] to augment the number of representatives . . . under the sole limitation that the whole number shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand inhabitants . . . “

Let’s stop and think for a little bit.  While I’m certainly not comfortable with 7,000+ more politicians running around nor with one Representative for 700,000 people, there is a certain appeal to having the politicians being more accountable to their constituents.  Each politician would need to be more in tune to his voter base, and would theoretically be less influenced by special interest groups.

Opponents to this would include increased expenses for the politicians, no room in the Capitol for the increase in representatives, and an inefficiency in passing laws in their arguments against this line of thought.  Let’s address each of these:

Our representatives were not paid when this country was first founded.  Representing the People was considered to be a public service to the country, an honor, and was considered by many to be a duty.  (I personally would like to see the career politicians get a life outside of politics instead of dipping into the public trough for their livelihood.)  But that isn’t practical, so there should be a pay scale set up for the politicians based on the average income of the citizens of the United States.  If the People do better as a whole, then so will the Representatives.  If not, then they get to share the pain of their decisions as well as the rest of the People.

No room in the Capitol shouldn’t be a problem.  With technology being what it is, virtual meetings can be set up at almost any time at any location.  Voting on legislation can be set up in much the same way (as long as the same systems as Healthcare.gov are not used).  This way, the Representatives can stay home in their district to understand what the real issues of their constituents are concerned with instead of being insulated in the Washington DC Beltway.

Our Founders did not set up a system of government to be efficient.  No, it was deliberately set up to be inefficient and accountable to the People it represented.  I understand that as of January 1, 2014, over 40,000 laws went into effect nationwide.  Taxes, restrictions, grants, and other laws were created by our Local, State, and Federal Representatives over this past year.  This disturbs me on several levels, and can be summed up with the following statement:

Every law or regulation that is passed must be funded by the taxpayer in one way or another, and will most likely take away either a freedom of choice or infringe upon a right. – Tom Roland

There is no way that anyone, no matter how steeped in the law, can know every single law and regulation.  And I know that there are laws that are contradictory and useless, but they remain on the books.  But I digress only slightly.

The Representatives that we have now are woefully ignorant (or deliberately ignoring) the Constitution that they all took an oath of office to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same”.  As such, they should, as a requirement, to read and reread the Constitution and the Amendments to understand their limitations as well as their authority and responsibility to the People of the United States.  As an added requirement, they should also be required to read the Federalist Papers, which would put them into the mindset of the Framers as to why the Constitution was written the way it was, and to fully understand the role of the Federal Government.  Walter Williams wrote in his January 1, 2014 Townhall.com column:

… Just as in a marriage where vows are broken, our rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution have been grossly violated by a government instituted to protect them. These constitutional violations have increased independent of whether there’s been a Democrat-controlled Washington or a Republican-controlled Washington.

There is no evidence that Americans who are responsible for and support constitutional abrogation have any intention of mending their ways. You say, “Williams, what do you mean by constitutional abrogation?” Let’s look at the magnitude of the violations.

Article I, Section 8 of our Constitution lists the activities for which Congress is authorized to tax and spend. Nowhere on that list is there authority for Congress to tax and spend for: Medicare, Social Security, public education, farm subsidies, bank and business bailouts, food stamps and thousands of other activities that account for roughly two-thirds of the federal budget. Neither is there authority for congressional mandates to citizens about what type of health insurance they must purchase, how states and people may use their land, the speed at which they can drive, whether a library has wheelchair ramps, and the gallons of water used per toilet flush. The list of congressional violations of both the letter and spirit of the Constitution is virtually without end. Our derelict Supreme Court has given Congress sanction to do just about anything for which they can muster a majority vote.

James Madison, the acknowledged father of the Constitution, explained in Federalist Paper No. 45: “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce. … The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives and liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State.” Our founder’s constitutional vision of limited federal government has been consigned to the dustbin of history.

And now, dear friends, we have come full circle to the start of this post.  The Representatives that we elected to govern us are not following the Constitution and are not representing the People that elected them.  This is why we have such legislation as the ACA / Obamacare.  But then again…

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

We The People are not being served, but we are on the darker side of “To Serve Man.” ** This is what happens when We The People make poor, uninformed choices when electing our Representatives to government. 

I can only hope that the People see what has been happening and make better choices in elections from 2014 onward.


* – “Are You Being Served” was a British sitcom that followed the misadventures of the staff of the fictional “Grace Brothers Department Store” that parodied the British class system.  I hope you get the irony here…

** – “To Serve Man” was a Twilight Zone episode based on a short story by Damon Knight.  Read the synopsis at Wikipedia to understand which definition of the word “serve” is being used above.