Liberty is the opposite of tyranny!

Blogging for Liberty: Kabuki is a traditional Japanese form of theater.

“Kabuki theater” means roughly: a tale of smoke and mirrors, full of sound and fury, but signifying almost nothing. A big, showy production, utilizing stylized movement, while the real action goes on behind the scenes.

The word “Kabuki” symbolizes a traditional Japanese form of theater that is sometimes translated as “the art of singing and dancing.”

Kabuki was popular among the common townspeople but not to the people of the higher social classes.

Kabuki plays are generally about historical events, moral conflicts, or love relationships. The actors use archaic  language which is difficult to understand for modern Japanese people, and the actors speak in somewhat monotonous voices and wears elaborate make-up.

Kabuki takes place on a rotating stage (kabuki no butai) that is usually equipped with several  trapdoors through which the actors can appear and disappear. Another specialty of the kabuki stage is a footbridge (hanamichi) , literally “flower path” that leads through the audience.

When kabuki  first started only female actors were part of the cast, and the performers were often also available for prostitution,  but kabuki with female actors was banned in 1629 for being too erotic. Without women the next phase of kabuki involved young (adolescent) men who were preferred for women’s roles due to their less masculine appearance and the higher pitch of their voices compared to adult men. Unfortunately, they too were often involved in prostitution; so, Kabuki switched to adult male actors, called yaro-kabuki in the mid 1600’s, were male actors played both female and male characters.

Kabuki in the language of the stage is used to designate a curtain which hides the set and is rigged to fall off on cue to reveal the set.

The word kabuki may also refer to stagehands who are dressed in black and are regarded by audience as invisible.

So let’s see; prostitutes, arcane language, and invisible stagehands. Yes, that sounds like Washington D. C. to me!

Blogging for Liberty: What do you call a person in their 90s?

A person 90 years between 90 and 100 years old is called a nonagenarian. A person in their 80’s is called an octogenarian. A person in their 70’s is called a septuagenarian. A person in their 60’s is called a sexagenarian, and a person in their 50’s is called a pentagenarian, but  it will take more than 14 years at the current rate of job growth to reach the levels of employment seen before Obama took office.

What do you call a person who believes in Obama’s policies?

Answer: A fool.

Blogging for Liberty: Social Security is worse than a Ponzi scheme!

A Ponzi scheme is a way to cheat investors who VOLUNTARILY pay to be part of the operation that promises high return on the investment but actually pays investors with money that is taken from new investors.

Social Security is worse because it is an INVOLUNTARY system, i.e., you are forced by law to invest!

The scheme is named after Charles Ponzi who became notorious for using the technique in early 1920, and his operation took in so much money that it was known throughout the United States. Bernard Madoff (as in “Berny Made off with all the money”) created the biggest private Ponzi scheme in history.

Charles Ponzi                                               Bernard Madoff


However, FDR’s Social Securty is the biggest Ponzi scheme of any type in the history of the world!


The perpetuation of the returns that a Ponzi scheme advertises and pays requires an ever-increasing flow of money from new investors to keep the scheme going. Therefore, a Ponzi scheme requires a continual stream of investments from new investors to fund returns, and once the number of new investors slows, then  the scheme will begin to collapse under its own weight as the hucksters or (in the case of Social Security) the statists start having problems paying the promised returns to separate investors.

When it first started, Social Security was functioning at a ratio of 16 workers to every one recipient. Currently, there are only 3 Social Security tax payers to pay for the benefits of a single Social Security recipient!

Does this man look  familiar?




Texas, soon be called Taxes!

Texas, soon be called Taxes!

I live here in the land of the fruit and nut, so I am telling you what is going to happen to you in years to come (kind of like the ghost of Christmas future).

Economically speaking, your state is not as bad as Califunny, because here we have both State AND local AND county debt.

All you Texans know about our State debt, but only rarely, and only on shows like “Cavuto” is it ever pointed out that all the cities and counties in Cali are also in huge financial trouble.

Texas, on the other hand, doesn’t seem to have the same amount of State debt, but it does have a huge amount of local and county government debt that apparently no one in Texas pays any mind ( all despite having THE best private sector economy in the nation, and THE highest property tax rate in the nation).

If the cost of government services are paid for by the counties, then this is nothing more than cost shifting (like occurs in ER’s were the hospitals are forced to eat the cost of the non-paying, mostly illegal, patients without any government reimbursement). The result is huge increase in prices for the paying customers. Well, unless you want to change the name of your state to Taxes, you guys had better get real Conservatives and NOT Dream Actors.

For comparison look at the debt of the two states as of 2009 (8 years of Perry and 8 years of the Govenator).

California ranks 25th in the nation

Debt 2009: $134.6 billion
Projected 2012 Budget Shortfall*: $25.4 billion
GDP 2009: $1.9 trillion
Debt/GDP Ratio: 7.12%
Unfunded Pension Liabilities: $59.5 billion (13%)
Unfunded Health Care & Other Liabilities: $62.4 billion (100%)


Texas ranks 48th

Debt 2009: $30.4 billion
Projected 2012 Budget Shortfall: $13.4 billion
GDP 2009: $1.1 trillion
Debt/GDP Ratio: 2.66%
Unfunded Pension Liabilities: $13.8 billion (9%)
Unfunded Health Care & Other Liabilities: $28.6 billion (98%)

So, despite having THE best economy in the nation and the highest property taxes in the nation, the Texas State government has you guys in debt?

And you want the titular head of this anathema to run our nation?

Well, if we can’t do better than this, we are going to implode, and I am not ready for that!


ICE and other Federal authorities will no longer deport illegals they apprehend unless they have been involved in a crime in the U.S.

President Obama’s ICE

President Obama’s ICE announced today (8/20/11) that the ICE and other Federal authorities will no longer deport illegals they apprehend unless they have been involved in a crime in the U.S., but they will punish illegals that don’t commit other crimes by giving them a work permit! The rationale behind this new policy is suggested as an attempt to get alien criminals out of the country, and people who only violate immigration laws will be dealt with “at a latter date”. Really?


The picture above looks like our farm! There was a steady flow of illegals through our farm beginning in the 50’s but illegals were at all times leery of being caught by the border patrol and deported.

Illegals from Mexico would follow the trails through the brush early in the morning and late in the day, always staying far away from the roads and open spaces. Even in the relative safety of big cities like San Antonio, they remained skittish. That all changed under Carter, as enforcement efforts waned, and the once timid illegals became much bolder.

During Carter’s reign, there were noticeably more illegals too, and they began traveling along the back roads instead of sticking only to the trails (as they became much less afraid of being caught).

Next came Reagan.

Things were relatively stable, but soon after Reagan began to show agreement with the statists and their Amnesty program, what was a steady stream of human migration became a raging torrent. Illegals were everywhere, stomping through the fields, walking along the sides of the paved roads heading north for the big cities and relative safety from deportation.

It was status quo with the first Bush One.

Under Clinton and Bush Two it got worse, but with Obama it now looks like a tsunami.

Mexico, contrary to popular belief, is a resource-rich nation that is being held back by its socialism and crony capitalism.


Remove the socialism and Mexico will explode with economic opportunity for all its people (not just the connected few). Unfortunately, that transformation is unlikely to emerge, and even a brief trip into Mexico would make it abundantly obvious that immigration, legal or otherwise, is a wise option for anyone who is less than a crony. In fact, if I were an unconnected Mexican, then I am pretty sure that the photograph below would likely be a snapshot of my travels.

The United States before FDR was a nation of people struggling to make a living, and migration into this nation was a relatively advantageous process for all Americans including the ones who just walked in. But since FDR the U. S. has become progressively (pun intended) ever more a welfare state, and  the United States has now devolved into a socialist nation that no longer requires citizenship to partake in the government enforced redistribution of property.

Frighteningly, with the recent statist control of almost every aspect of the government, we are headed for a future that looks more like Mexico every day! The socialist redistribution of property is always promoted as a mechanism to eliminate poverty, and since LBJ, it has been titled by socialists as a war.

However, it takes very little observation to see that America’s war on poverty, despite promoting indolence, has been very successful. Nowadays, poverty, and relative poverty at that, can only be sustained by importing poverty from other nations. Rest assured, importation of poverty is exactly what the anti-poverty operatives (statists) promote to keep the wheel of redistribution in constant motion.

Obama famously claimed that his administration would lower the rising seas.

Well, he may not have decreased the levels of the waters, but the socialism he has brought to our nation has greatly lowered the tides of economic opportunity. His administration would be wise to remember the adage that a rising tide raises all boats.

Remove illegal immigration and poverty will be eliminated from the States. Remove socialism from Mexico and you will remove any need for the people of Mexico to immigrate. Remove socialism from the United States and there will be no need for a war on poverty and there will be no need to make immigration illegal in the first place.

Socialist Democrat Rick Perry or Conservative Republican Rick Perry?

Fellow Texans, I will shut up, but first read this and tell me why you agree with Rick Perry.

I read the entire article of “Why” Rick Perry is running for President, and right off the bat I could see that Perry “learned in (his) 20’s traveling the globe as an Air Force pilot that we (Americans) are the most exceptional nation on the face of the earth.”  But if he was so perceptive, then why was he a socialist Democrat until he was 38 years old? Do you really buy that sophistry? When you were 20 were you a socialist?

I’ll shut up as soon as you answer the question why Perry was a Democrat and then a Democrat politician, and then a state-wide Democrat politician, and then campaign manager for Al Gore (at 37 years old), and then became a Republican at age 38? Have you bumped your head? He changed parties at 38 to win elections (not because he suddenly became rational).

Okay, so you think he somehow changed, well then how do you explain that AFTER his epiphany he stumped for the Texas Dream Act? I will tell you why! He used your money in order to win Hispanic votes (and retain his power). So you say he did this to win the election. Yes, and exactly my point. He used your money to essentially buy votes for his election and retention of power.

“Perry signed a Texas version of the DREAM Act back in 2001, allowing foreign-born children of illegal immigrants to pay in-state tuition for college if they have lived in the state for three years prior to graduating high school. He explained, “We must say to every Texas child learning in a Texas classroom, ‘We don’t care where you come from, but where you are going, and we are going to do everything we can to help you get there.’ And that vision must include the children of undocumented workers.” Of course he is not paying for this largess, you are!

Is it fair to give the financial break to illegal immigrants, and then make U.S. citizens who are non-Texas residents pay more to attend college in Texas?

State legislators have filed at least four bills to repeal the measure, which grants lower, in-state tuition to the children of immigrants who have lived in Texas at least three years, have graduated from a Texas high school and plan to become citizens.

Okay, so everyone makes mistakes, but Rick didn’t make a mistake. “Rick Perry said he will oppose efforts to repeal a law, which he signed six years ago, giving tuition breaks to undocumented immigrants attending state universities.”  “I’m for leaving the law like it is because I think it serves a good purpose,’’ (yes, delivering him 39% of the Hispanic vote with your money).

Under the Texas Dream Act, Illegal alien students do not have to actually apply for citizenship, they only have to promise that they will some day! Yes, let’s just have all the children of the world come to Texas for college (but charge Americans from other states who want to do the same extra)! Let the Texans pay for it, they don’t mind. That way Perry will remain in power and all the people of the world will love Texas. Hey, sounds a lot like the President already!

His support of the Texas Dream Act was really a swift political move and Governor Brown signed the same law here in Cali! Hey!  I understand! You want your own Texas version of “moon-beam!”

Sorry fellows, but it gets worse: Perry wrote a letter to the editor of the Dallas Morning News, “I take strong issue with a news report in the Dallas Morning News mischaracterizing my position on amnesty for undocumented immigrants from Mexico. The truth is, I am intrigued and open to the Bush administration’s amnesty proposal. Most Texans would agree that it’s better to have legal, taxpaying immigrants from Mexico working in the United States than illegal immigrants living in fear of the law and afraid to access basic services.”

When Arizona enacted its controversial statute, he explicitly rejected that approach for Texas: “Recently, there has been much debate over immigration policy in Washington and what has been implemented in Arizona. I fully recognize and support a state’s right and obligation to protect its citizens, but I have concerns with portions of the law passed in Arizona and believe it would not be the right direction for Texas.

Seriously, are you kidding me? This is the politician you want to run our country?

I understand full well that he was the best man running for Texas governor at the time, and I would have voted for him too, but he is NOT the best man running for President (at least not right now). If he does win the nomination then he will again be the best man in the race and I will support him; however, he is NOT the best man for our country and that is what we need. We need a person with convictions not expediencies.

“Dude”, this guy is just a politician and he has no loyalty except to himself. When he goes to Washington he will become a Belt-way politician.

So, tell me again why he was a Democrat until age 38 and is now a Republican?

Blogging for Liberty: Just a SNAP of Hope and Change!

In January, 2005, Obama was elected to the Senate, and during that year 25.7 million people participated in the program called “The Food Stamp Program.” In February, 2011, around 44.1million people participated in the Food Stamp Program (an increase of over 171%).

As of October, 1, 2008, “The Food Stamp Program” became officially titled the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). The new name reflects changes made to the program, including a focus on nutrition and an increase in benefit amounts

During the last quarter of 2005, home prices started to fall, which led to a 40% decline in the U.S. Home Construction Index during 2006. Not only were new homes being affected, but many subprime borrowers now could not withstand the higher interest rates and they started defaulting on their loans.

In 2006, the year BEFORE the financial crisis, the Republicans had narrow majorities in the House and Senate, and 26.0 million people participated in the “Food Stamp Program”, and the participation rate fell by 1% that year (2006).

In 2007, the Democrats took control of the House and Senate, we got Pelosi and Reid, and by the end of the year 26.5 million people participated in the SNAP program (an increase of half a million people).

During February and March of 2007, more than 25 subprime lenders filed for bankruptcy, which was enough to start the tidal wave.

In August, 2007, (9 months AFTER the Democrats took control of both Houses of Congress) the big financial landslides started in earnest, and the problems spread beyond the United State’s borders. The interbank market froze completely, and central banks and governments around the world started coming together to prevent further financial catastrophe.

In 2008, the Democrats were now in filibuster-proof control of both Houses, Obama (who had been a Senator since 2005) was elected President in November, and 28.4 million people participated in the SNAP program.

In 2009, the Democrats were still in filibuster-proof control of both Houses, Obama was still President, and as of late November (a year after the Democrats assumed the Presidency), one in eight Americans and one in four children were using food stamps, and the program was growing at 20,000 people a day. The year-end statistics show over 35.8 million people participated in SNAP that year with a cost of $64 billion (an increase of 20% from 2009 to 2010).

In 2010, the Democrats were still in filibuster-poof control of both Houses, Obama was still President, and the SNAP program grew by 29%, giving money to 43 million people.

In February 2011, the Democrats had been out of power in the House for two months (but still had filibuster-proof control of the Senate and Obama was still president), and around 44.1 million people participated in the program, receiving an average benefit of $133.24.

How is that “Hope” and “Change” workin’ for you so far?


Do I need to be a U.S. citizen to receive SNAP benefits?

Certain non-citizens, such as those admitted for humanitarian reasons, those admitted for permanent residence, many children, elderly immigrants and individuals who have been working in the United States for certain periods of time, are eligible for SNAP. Eligible household members can get SNAP benefits even if there are other members of the household who are not eligible.

What is the average benefit from SNAP?

The average monthly benefit was about $101 per person and about $227 per household in FY 2008.



Blogging for Liberty: Obama is not a stupid idiot (well, he is not an idiot).

Obama is not an idiot (as the term idiot refers to a person who has an IQ of 25 or lower).

Here’s a trick to help tell if a person fits into the category of idiot: Ask a question, and if your subject answers, then they are a moron at worst. If they don’t answer,  then you might be talking to an idiot.  Obama answers all his scripted questions, and skirts most of the unscripted ones (at least since his famous answer to Joe-the-plummer’s query); so, that rules out the term “idiot.”

Any child with an IQ of above 70 is considered “normal,” while those with scores above 130 are considered “gifted.” On the other hand, scores below 70 are defined as retarded.

In the past, those with IQs between 51 and 70 were called morons. Morons had adequate learning skills to complete menial tasks and communicate.

Imbeciles, with IQs between 26 and 50, never progressed past a mental age of about six.

And the lowest of all were the idiots, with IQ between 0 and 25, who were characterized by poor motor skills, extremely limited communication, and little response to stimulus.

The moron/imbecile/idiot classifications remained popular until the early 1970s.

“Mongolian idiot,” which in the 19th and early 20th centuries was an actual, literal diagnosis, derives from people’s belief that individuals with Down syndrome – with their wide set eyes and round faces – resembled Mongolians. In fact, before the British physician J.H.L. Down (1828 – 1896) lent his name to the chromosomal syndrome, Down syndrome was known merely as “mongolism.”

Stupidity is defined as a mentality which is considered to be informed, deliberate and maladaptive. Mental schemas, which help us adapt to our environment and process new ideas, can also, simultaneously, be maladaptive. A schema may be maladaptive to the extent that built-in biases compromise data so that perceptions will conform to expectations and desires. In addition,  behavior that is determined by the schema (which presumably was adaptive when formed) might become maladaptive as conditions change (you know, like spending trillions and still having an unemployment rate of 9.1% even when (1) A person who loses a 40 hour per week job, but works for one hour mowing a lawn for pay is classified as employed.  (2)  “Discouraged workers” who have lost a job, but do not make an effort to find a new job in a given week are NOT classified as unemployed or even as in the labor force).  Of course both possibilities mean that the announced unemployment rate is not nearly as high as the real unemployment rate, and so, the Obama Administration’s continued behavior is, by definition, stupid.

The historian Carlo Cipolla wrote several essays about human stupidity and suggested five fundamental laws of stupidity:

1.  Always and inevitably each of us underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation.

2.  The probability that a given person is stupid is independent of any other characteristic possessed by that person.

3.  A person is stupid if they cause damage to another person or group of people without experiencing personal gain, or even worse causing damage to themselves in the process.

4.  Non-stupid people always underestimate the harmful potential of stupid people; they constantly forget that at any time anywhere, and in any circumstance, dealing with or associating themselves with stupid individuals invariably constitutes a costly error.

5.  A stupid person is the most dangerous type of person there is.

Today the classification system is one category broader – moron, imbecile, and idiot have been replaced with mild, moderate, severe,and profound retardation – and diagnostic factors other than IQ are considered in making a diagnosis.

Obama is not an idiot; however, Obama is a socialist and wants to rid this country of capitalism that is not directed by a central government. He thinks this will help the people of the United States, and that makes him ignorant of the truth with thoughts and behaviors that are just pure stupidity.



Bloggingforliberty: What Democrats Think of the American People? Not much. By William Kristol

What Democrats (and RINOs) Think of the American People

Not much.

This was an excellent article that I thought I would share. Although Mr. Kristol makes no mention of RINOs (Republicans In Name Only), they too are equally responsible for the predicaments in which we now find ourselves.

BY William Kristol

March 16, 2010 11:40 PM
Democratic leaders in the House are apparently moving towards the “Slaughter Solution” of avoiding a direct vote on the health care legislation and instead passing the Senate health care bill by voting to “deem” it passed. As they do so, they keep reassuring the media–and each other–that the American people don’t care. 

A memo from a top aide to Maryland Democrat Chris Van Hollen late last week counseled other Democratic staffers to tell their bosses not to worry, that “things like reconciliation and what the rules committee does is INSIDE BASEBALL.” Yesterday House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer told reporters, “I don’t think any American…is going to make the distinction” between the Slaughter procedure and a straightforward vote on the legislation. “Process is interesting, particularly to all of us around this room. But in the final analysis, what is interesting to the American public is what does this bill do for them and their families.”

In other words: the American public doesn’t care about how our representatives govern us–which is to say, about how we govern ourselves. Whether Congress follows its rules, whether there is democratic accountability, whether there is constitutional probity–none of this matters according to Hoyer. Rather, the self-centered and self-concerned American people only care about the (alleged) results of the legislation.

Here the Democrats betray their contempt for the supposed simple-mindedness and short-sightedness of the American public. They also convey their vision of the American people living under the big government liberalism: We are to be passive consumers of government action, who accept what is done for us and to us in light of our perceived narrow short-term self-interest. We are not to think of ourselves as self-governing citizens with a stake in the process of constitutional self-government and a concern for the good of the whole.

This may be the outcome–turning citizens into consumers, self-government into the nanny state–that the Democrats would like to achieve. I don’t think it’s one the American people wish to accept.


Blogging for Liberty: A letter to all our Senators and Congressmen about the heath care law.

A letter to all our Senators and Congressmen:

As a physician and as your constituent, I urge you to vote to repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

While I support the need for health care reform, I strongly oppose this particular bill because it shifts even more control over medical decisions to the federal government (the cause for the huge costs to begin with) and ultimately will further harm the quality of our nation’s health care and decrease timely access to all forms of modern care.

The cost of our health care has been driven up by government control, and as it now stands over 50 cents of every health care dollar is paid by the government.  More government control will add more to the cost and insure even more shortages (that means more rationing and decreased quality). If you don’t believe me, then look at the history of health care in the Soviet Union or the system currently used in Great Britain. This type of ponzi scheme has been tried before!

The following quote should be committed to memory: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it,”(Santayana’s Law of Repetitive Consequences).

Let me do my job of taking care of my patients and you do your job of following the Constitution.

This letter may be a little too abrasive perhaps, but we are talking about a fundamental change from freedom to slavery, and that is more than a little abrasive!


 Page 7 of 11  « First  ... « 5  6  7  8  9 » ...  Last »