Let's Compromise on Your Life, Okay?

..................................

Imagine if you will, you make $50k a year. Let us suppose further that your wife spends about $80k a year. You are of course $30k in debt for the year. Now, suppose that your wife has been doing that for a while now and that your total debt is around $400k. Let that sink in, 400,000 dollars in debt, adding 30,000 in new debt this year and it rises every year, and you make 50,000. Okay, so you go to the bank and ask for a loan because you need to spend the 80,000 this year but you don’t have it all. The banker says, okay I’ll float you one more time, but listen you have to cut your spending so I believe that your serious about getting this spending binge under control. Your answer as a staunch democrat is; Yes sir. I’ll cut $300 from my wife’s budget this year! Aren’t you proud of me! Now write the check you mean, extreme banker who wants to kill my wife!

Is there a sane person in the world who believes that this is a realistic approach to finances? In the world? Anyone who went to a banker with that situation and proposition would be laughed out of the bank or dragged out by security if not the white coats. And yet this is the ‘great deal’ that our fearless leader Speaker John Boehner just secured from The President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama. Mmmm, Mmmm, Mmmm! Ostensibly the most important man in the world. Hopefully at least marginally smart. Sanguinely loyal to our nation. Expectantly having our children’s interest first and foremost. And this is what our president gives us? This is what our great Revolutionary leader, John Boehner gives us? This is the great compromise of the 2011 budget. And therein lies the lesson. Compromise, widely seen as a good thing amongst the population, is completely misunderstood as relates to politics in America in the 21st century.

If you are engaging in a business deal with someone and they want 10% of the profits and you want them to receive 8% of said profits. You can negotiate and reach an agreement at 9% of the profits for your business partner. That is compromise. That is a good thing. Why? Because it all involves profit. Because both entities are reaching towards a similar goal that is beneficial to all. Imagine for a minute that instead of wanting 10% of the profits, your business partner wanted to gain all of the profits and additionally have you lose 10% on your investment?!? Are you going to accept a 5% loss on your investment and call that compromise? Is that negotiation? Is that a good deal for all parties? Of course not! Indeed it is in fact a crime! This is the state of political discourse in this country today.

We have an entire party whose philosophy of governing this nation is antithetical to the Constitution of the United States of America; whose world view is polar opposite of that of our Founding Fathers. The democrat party is led by communists who hate capitalism, hate freedom, believe that they are smarter than everyone else, believe that the elite must lead the masses, believe there are no limits to power in Washington D.C. and are willing to sacrifice citizens’ dignity, freedom and future for their own personal assumption of power and money. It is the most disgusting display of hateful, shameful, corrupt and cynical elitism seen on this scale in the history of the world. How do you compromise with that? The president has been all around the world genuflecting in front of tyrants and apologizing for America. How do you compromise with that? Okay, Mr. President, only bow a quarter way down, not a full bow. And only apologize for half of America. There, don’t you feel better? Aren’t you such a good person since you ‘compromised’? It is comparable to someone wanting to kill you and you compromise and let them just wound you instead! “Okay, just shoot me in the leg and I’ll agree.” Compromising with enemies of the state is not compromise at all. It is in fact, capitulation to tyranny!

When one is being attacked by a mortal enemy who wants to destroy you and your children’s future you do not compromise, you do not give in, you do not falter and you must not fail! YOU FIGHT! YOU FIGHT! Then you fight harder; you scratch and claw and bite and pound and beat and kick and do everything within your power to defeat wholly and completely your enemy. You destroy them before they destroy you. This is politics in America today. The unions and the communists understand this. That’s what they’ve been doing for a century. It is high time the Patriots who love this nation understand that we must do the same. We must destroy the communists on the battlefield of ideas. We must constantly reinforce our troops with the truth of our founding, with Liberty, with capitalism, with prosperity and with virtue. We must sound the horn of Freedom at dawn, at noon, at dusk and through the night. We must call our neighbors; “To Arms, To Arms! The enemy is at the gate!” If we fail to do so, this nation will be lost. This government ‘Of the People, For the People and By the People’ will fall. This ‘Great Experiment’, that posits the notion that Men do not have to be led by elitists or oppressed by tyrants will end. The dream that we can indeed take responsibility for our own lives, our own future and our own prosperity; that we deserve the fruits of our own labor; that we own our thoughts and our deeds will be forever banished from the face of the earth. All that has been gained with the death, blood and treasure of generations of Americans before us will be subverted by the political musings of a worthless theorist (Karl Marx) who watched his own children starve while he pontificated. Are you willing to compromise on the Declaration of Independence? Are you willing to compromise on the Constitution of the United States of America? Are you willing to compromise on your children’s Liberty? If so, you are not my countryman; go quietly from us now and kiss your chains in the darkness of subjugation.

by: Keith D. Rodebush

Speech to U.N. 1-21-2013

Who Gives This Speech?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In my previous post, I posited the opinion that America must announce a new doctrine; The Peace Through Power Doctrine. This is the speech that would be required by the President of the United States to the United Nations the day after inauguration.

"Throughout the history of human events there has remained one constant, one known, one unequivocal truth, one disturbing norm, one unfortunate reality. I speak of course of war. The technical causes of these wars vary as much as the participants to same. Some are fought for righteous defense of human rights. Some are fought for imperial fiat. All are fought because Mankind finds it impossible to peacefully negotiate with evil men. Our faith tells us to love our enemies. Our religious texts are rife with instances in which we slew them instead. It is doubtful that we will resolve this dichotomy in the history of this nation. Therefore, we are forced to accept an odious truth. True peace in this world is only achieved through the aggressive use of force to make one’s enemies submit. That peace may manifest itself in total oppression in which the entire population must submit to an evil or benevolent dictator who rules with an iron fist. That peace may manifest itself in freedom loving nations allowing religious and economic liberty to thrive under the protection of a powerful military willing to crush all who oppose it. The choice is ours alone. We throw our lot in for freedom.

Oh to live in a world where no evil existed. May our God hurry the day when evil is banished from this earth. Alas, His Divineness has not yet chosen to do so. It is not for us to question why. This leaves us with the two alternatives. Either we allow evil to foment until it poses great risks to nations of the world; in which case many lives and much treasure must be spent to defeat it; or, we smash evil everywhere we see it. We methodically and resolutely crush the spirit of any man with designs on subjugating peoples to tyranny and oppression. Make no mistake; these are our only two choices. Proponents of a third way, a peaceful way of negotiations only delay the moment of truth requiring ever more sacrifice to defeat evil. This is the lesson of history. This has been the folly of the United Nations. In earnest desire to heal our wound they infect the entire body.

Therefore, it is with grave resolve and Providential consultation that a new doctrine of the United States of America is revealed. The Peace Through Power Doctrine. America will use all power and force necessary to defend the right of peaceful nations to exist without interference from foreign powers. America will punish with blunt brutality any nation that threatens these nations either overtly or covertly. The world will live in peace with one another and embrace religious and economic freedom; trade and prosper with each other, or it will burn down around the tyrants’ feet. America will no longer tolerate Western nations who refuse to accept the complete legitimacy of this doctrine of peace through force. We will cut all diplomatic and economic ties with any nation that refuses to completely embrace this doctrine. The world must know that we are the one and only true superpower, that this power was achieved through bestowing Liberty upon our peoples and allowing their participation in free market capitalism, that we intend to use that power to achieve religious and economic freedom, and that we are resolute in that mission from this day forward. If we, a nation of Freemen having achieved this power through our own Liberty and peaceful pursuit of prosperity, are not willing to use that power to allow the peoples of the world, all God’s children, to enjoy that same Liberty and prosperity; for what have toiled? To whom do we justify? May God bless the Peacemakers. May God continue to bless the United States of America."

Saving Private Elton

So Congress has passed a bill which ends the so-called "Don't ask; Don't tell" policy on gays in the military which was one of the most brilliant things ever done by the Clinton administration. What is so typical about this legislation as is true with most liberal/socialist legislation is that it attempts to end discrimination against one group by discriminating against another larger group. Liberals simply cannot look past our differences and find ways for us all to get along. Instead they must demonize one group for the edification of another. And of course, this is not really done for the good of either group, rather for the good of the politicians who can once again claim the holier than thou personna they so dearly love to use to mask their evil nature. Ask yourself a question; 'What was really wrong with this policy?'. If a gay person wanted to serve their country, they could. If they wanted to fight terrorism, they could. All they had to agree to was not to be 'openly gay' while in uniform or on base. Granted, this may cramp their style a little but the same is true if we do away with the policy. Many straight individuals could claim that openly gay members on base would 'cramp their style'. So what we had with the "Don't ask; Don't tell" policy was a pretty good compromise on a basically insolvable problem. What are the possible drawbacks to ending this policy? Let's look at a few facts.



1. Many religions view homosexuality as an abomination. They are commanded by their religion to disassociate themselves from this lifestyle. Regardless of whether you agree or not, this is their faith and their teachings. The numbers of people who fall into this category are far greater than the number of gays who want to serve.



2. Many individuals in combat units are type 'A', aggressive and intense personalities. Say what you will, but when the stuff goes down on the front lines, these are the guys you want watching your six. Many of these individuals see homosexuality as a weakness, a sin and they worry about unwanted advances. You would probably call them homophobic. Fine, I don't think they care what you call them (just don't say it to their face!). Again, however, in the case of front line combat units especially, they are much more prevalent than the number of gays who wish to be there.



3. Members of the opposite sex are not allowed to sleep together or shower together for obvious reasons. If this policy is lifted and now we will have openly gay members of the military, will they be getting separate sleeping and bathing facilities? If not, are heterosexuals now going to be able to sleep and bath with the opposite sex for whom they hold an attraction? Well? It's hardly fair to let one group sleep and bath with the ones to whom they hold an attraction and not let another now is it? You see this being fair thing is not always as easy at is seems.



4. A very good argument can be made to anyone who cares to hear the truth, that the members of the first two groups mentioned above make up a large portion of the individuals that make the U. S. military a formidable fighting force. In many cases throughout military history our soldiers have prevailed in situations where the odds were overwhelmingly against them. It is the unknown factor; some call it the 'fighting spirit'. Using the military for some kind of social experiment or simply to push an agenda that may in and of itself be intended to weaken our military is to risk diminishing this fighting spirit. This will most certainly cost American lives in some cases such as mentioned above.



So what do we see here? We have a situation where the religious beliefs and feelings of the many are being subjected to the feelings and beliefs of a few. We have a situation where potentially, individuals in the majority are going to be forced to sleep and bath with the minority who openly find them sexually attractive. This same 'privelege' will not however be extended to the majority. We have a situation in which on line fighting units may question the tenacity and focus of all of their members causing unneccessary stress in an already life and death situation. We have a situation in which American soldiers may be put to a greater risk because of a possible loss of fighting spirit. And what is all of this for? Ostensibly to soothe the feelings of one small group of people who rightly or wrongly believe they are being discriminated against in the military, in which there is no obligation for them to serve. We have a situation where liberals once again are going to punish the many for the sake of the few. Many can't understand why. Fundamentally it is because liberals don't think straight. They believe there exists a Utopian society that is there for the taking if we will only listen to their politically correct solutions to every problem that can possibly arise in the life of a human being. They believe that they alone understand this and if we all just let them run our lives we will all be one step closer to that Nirvana. Sadly, the truth is that not only do they typically not really help the few since they always further marginalize them, but indeed they hurt the many in the process. This of course takes us exponentially further away from the supposed Utopia; which of course does not exist on Earth.

Finally, all of this can be thought out and expressed by an old curmudgeon living in the middle of Texas, biding his time till the good Lord sees fit to bring him home. And yet, the smartest minds in politics can't figure this out? Or, can they? And...if they can, and yet they do it anyway, then why? Is it possible that their real intent is to harm the cohesiveness of American fighting forces? I know that you find this hard to believe, but ask yourself why would one do this if they knew it was a bad idea? Surely some are just going along to get votes, but the ones behind the scenes, the ones who really push the issue to the forefront; do you believe that they have the U. S. military's best interest at heart? Really?

by: Keith D. Rodebush

It's Bizzaro World!

Do you ever just stare at the television or the radio and think, "What planet is this?!?" It is just amazing at how insane our world is becoming. And what is more frustrating than ever is the fact that so large a percentage of the population seem to take it in stride and simply lament, 'That's just the way it is these days.' No, that's not just the way it is. That's the way you make it. Either with your actions or inaction, our world is what you have made it.
This week in CA teens were told that wearing an American flag was unacceptable and reason for suspension. This was during Cinco de Mayo, an obscure Mexican holiday that has been turned into a rallying cry for illegal immigration in this country. The boys were told that the flags would be insensitive to their Mexican brethren. Of course being insensitive to American citizens was perfectly okay with these school officials.
In my home state this week a 3rd grader was suspended for having a jolly rancher. Yes, a jolly rancher candy. 5 days suspension. I can't even comment on this stupidity.
A terrorist parks his truck in Times Square and tries to set off the bomb he's made and fortunately it fails to explode. Government officials trip all over themselves to get on the air waves and tell us that this was a huge law enforcement success! Success? You have got to be kidding me. Only the cruel prankster happenstance avoided a terrible disaster with possible loss of life. And yet, straight faced they stand there and praise themselves for a job well done. Who can do this? The answer may surprise you.
The temperature is rising, well it was and now it's going down, but it WAS! And it's not because of the sun, no, no. It's because of cow flatulation! And you breathing that evil gas CO2 which of course plants use to grow and produce oxygen, but we digress. Stick to the point. We're all gonna die if we don't let an elite few tell us how to live while they live high on the hog.
These are just a few examples. I could list them all day actually. You know them, you see them come across your screen every night or your radio every day. How can this continue without these people being laughed off of the stage and banished to handing out conspiracy fliers on the street corner? It is all they are qualified for. And yet, they hold positions of great authority and power all over this once great nation.
As with all human interaction the answers are complicated. However, there seems to be the capacity in the human psyche to completely ignore empirical evidence and common sense not to mention cold hard facts, when confronted with someone who...cares. This phenomenon can take on many faces. Adolph Hitler wreaked havoc worldwide while telling the German people that he only wanted to help them to take their rightful place in history. His initial forays into the public sphere was merely to help the economy, help everyday Germans to get a job, because he cared for his people. They ignored what he was doing, and listened to what he said. Numerous cult leaders have led a group of people to their ultimate demise all the while telling them that they only wanted to protect them, because they loved them.
The entire American political system has become an emotional food fight vying for the title of who cares the most for you the voter. All the while every single reasonable person knows deep inside that there is not a single one of them that cares for you more than they care for their own career and paycheck. And yet, we vote them back in again and again. As of this writing only one incumbent has been defeated in a primary and the talking heads are already calling it 'toxic' politics. You see how they work. You exercise your right to vote for who you see fit and they use emotion to tear you down and make you feel bad, because facts cannot get in the way of power and control.
Wake up my friends. Recognize plays on emotion when you see them. Reject defenders of the status quo. Consistently take away power from those who seek it. Never, Ever believe what they say, only believe what they do. Chastise, ridicule and banish all who abandon common sense. The founders of this country told us many years ago that human nature is flawed and no one is to be trusted. History tells us daily that we ignore this fact to our own peril and the peril of millions of innocent bystanders. The stakes are high. Charismatic charlatans have long taken advantage of this flaw in our character. Recognize; or kiss the boot on your throat.

Update: The Islamic Republic of Iran, where stoning of 'immodest' women is codified, has been named to the Commission on the Status of Women by the United Nations. Insanity or stupidity?! You decide.

by: Keith D. Rodebush

Health Care Solutions for America

Are we not all Americans? We the people are united, not in political discourse, but by a much stronger and enduring bond. We are united by an innate belief in the undeniable rights of Man as articulated so brilliantly by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence. No cynic or cunning strategist should be allowed to divide us on these basic truths. The rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness were singled out as those most worthy of defending by Mr. Jefferson. While other rights may be considered such as the right to worship freely one may argue that they would be included in the pursuit of happiness. What is not included, and should not be included are necessities, i.e. food, shelter, health or companionship. Rights in this context are endowed by our Creator. Our Creator did not endow us with the right to food. He provided a planet populated with plants and animals for our use. He did not endow us with a right to shelter, He provided materials and a curiosity and intellect that allows us to provide our shelter as we see fit. And - he did not endow us with a right to health care. He gave us multitudes of medicinal plants; He gave us a superior brain that allows for innovation and invention; and He gave us the capacity of sympathy for our fellow Man.

For the sake of discussion let us consider the following as goals agreed upon by all Americans:

- All Americans should have access to quality health care
- Americans with unavoidable chronic illness should not be denied health care
- Truly needy Americans, incapable of self-reliance, should receive assistance from their fellow Americans

My previous post, A Case Against Government Health Care, is an intensive study of the folly of government programs designed to address the above goals. It is critical that you peruse that article before continuing. Any reasonable study of government run programs cannot conclude other than; they are inefficient, costly, encourage unwanted behavior in the citizenry, and through mandates, regulation and bureaucratic control infringe on the liberty of the people and deny the rights guaranteed in the X Amendment.

Therefore let us, within the framework of the U.S. Constitution and the principles of the free market, determine viable methods to reach the above stated goals, as Americans, as neighbors, as children of God. The following solutions are put forth with an understanding that current federal programs cannot and should not be capriciously ended and would necessarily need to be phased out with strict guarantees to all current participants.

Constitutional Free Market Solutions to Health Care:

1. The federal government shall embrace it's constitutional role in regulating interstate commerce and remove all barriers, including federal regulations, to the purchasing of health insurance.
2. All federal regulations regarding the access, provision, delivery, payment or cost of health care services shall be repealed.
3. A state Attorney General, I suggest Texas but I'm prejudicial, shall sue the federal government under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States for usurping the rights of states and the people, thereby creating a SCOTUS opinion that will permanently bar the federal government from interjecting itself into a private industry.
4. Pursuant to Article I section 8 of the Constitution the federal government will pass a law regulating all commerce related to the provision of health care amongst the states in regards to the peoples right to access to services without discrimination. This is the only constitutional power of the federal government in this issue.
5. Congress shall pass a law putting reasonable limits on the amount of damages that can be levied against a health care professional or institution who/which acts in good faith on behalf of their patients without regard to injury by tragic accident. Gross negligence being proven against an individual health care provider shall have no such restriction. Gross negligence being proven against an institution will result in limited damages in addition to penalties and censorship, with multiple offenses resulting in loss of privelege to provide medical services. Additionally, the right of the people to sue for discrimination will be protected. (I am not a lawyer, but this should include discrimination for age in the case of someone who carrys insurance for some period of time. In other words, insurance companies should not be allowed to drop someone's insurance because of an illness or an arbitrary age has been reached. While this will necessarily raise rates across the board, other provisions herein should result in a net decrease in insurance costs.)
6. The states, with discretion to their individual constitutions and in cooperation with county governments will pass laws establishing community health centers for the dispensing of basic health care services. These centers are to be not for profit entities subject to local inspection and control. Pricing for services will be based on known business & accounting standards on a cost + 2% basis. The 2% shall be kept in reserve under state control for emergency assistance during unforeseen circumstances such as an epidemic. (states would also be free to use some portion of this percentage for the indigent care proviso)
7. State government shall levy a tax to be used for indigent health care and care for persons with unavoidable chronic ailments. It would be preferrable for these taxes to expire every 6 years at which time the state legislature should review the program and reinstate the tax.
8. State and federal government should do everything possible within the constitution to encourage competition among the insurance and health care industries. Insurance companies or any other industry should not be allowed to collude in regards to pricing of goods and services. Personally, I am for banning national unions or associations. This falls under the federal governments constitutional mandate to regulate commerce among the states. Collusion for the purpose of setting rates and stifling competition is in direct opposition to the free market and should not be allowed.
9. State boards should be set up to review the cases of citizens with pre-existing conditions in regards to eligibility for indigent or chronic assistance. Criteria should be drafted with attention paid to the circumstances surrounding the loss of coverage. In other words, the case of an able bodied person who voluntarily quits working and subsequently cannot pay premiums and loses insurance should not be equal to the case of a person laid off during times of recession who subsequently cannot afford to keep insurance. Pre-existing conditions are the most difficult for insurance coverage. It is akin to wrecking your car and then asking the insurance company for a policy that will grandfather in the recent crash. No business practice could sustain itself with that policy. However, states should look to fold these citizens back into the insurance customer base after they can afford coverage, perhaps with tax breaks, grants or cooperatives.

I have purposely shied away from specifics such as the type of insurance that should be available. The free market should determine this with the federal government insuring free access enjoyed by all. Personally, I believe that educating the public to the reasonable approach to purchasing catastrophic coverage while maintaining a Health Savings Account, or simply using cash for day to day health care such as colds, cuts, broken bones etc. is the most prudent path for most families in America today. These choices need to be promoted and encouraged, but the final choice remains the individuals. If one prefers maximum coverage for a maximum rate then so be it. If one prefers no coverage at all, then so be it; just don't complain when illness assaults you. Regardless of our choices, good or bad, no person should be denied basic life saving care such as what is being provided in our emergency rooms today. This is NOT the same as treating sniffles and minor cuts and bruises in emergency rooms at your neighbors expense. This does not include long term world class care for fatal diseases such as cancer. If an individual freely decides to expose his/herself to risk, then they do not deserve extensive care. This is wasteful and unreasonable. They should, however, receive basic care and pain relief out of compassion, paying what they can afford, and relief of liability for the remainder.

One of the most important aspects of this plan is that the states are not mandated by federal law regarding their citizens health care. They are required to have equal access to care. The citizens of the country will vote with their feet. States with reasonable coverage and freedom will keep people and business. States with too much involvement will discourage business and have higher taxes. Their economy will suffer, prompting changes. States with too little coverage will lose taxpayers, again prompting changes. This is how the forefathers intended our country to work. They were very smart and intuitive and I challenge all of my fellow citizens to read their writings again and again until it soaks in just how deep their understanding of government and freedom was. They were voracious readers and they studied every government past and present before designing this wonderful republican government we have so far enjoyed. Let us be dutiful in passing these liberties to future generations. Libertas! God Bless America!