text:
tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-85182318135807488862018-04-16T04:39:32.743-07:00Doubtin' ThomasMusings on life in General, with a particularly jaundiced eye on politics and logic (or the lack thereof) in America today.Doubtin Thomashttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-52864442706392363882017-11-16T11:13:00.000-08:002017-11-16T11:13:25.562-08:00America is on the brink of becoming a "3rd world country"My definition (and my suggested reason for the existence) of a "3rd world country" is the absence of the rule of law. The status has nothing to do with the form of government. Even a dictatorship can be responsive to the needs of a majority of its people. Chaos, violence, denial of respect of "others," and a desire to eliminate or render powerless and inconsequential all those who would disagree or challenge a "different" point of view are the characteristics most prevalent.

With the election of Donald Trump to the Presidency of the United States, the above characteristics have become predominant...even in those elected to public office. Prior to his election, once an election was concluded and votes counted, those who considered themselves on the losing side would grouse, whine and moan...often loudly for a bit, promising the collapse of civilization as they knew it...but then retreat to wait for the next election; there was a respect for the election process and the rule of law.

One can argue that the election of President Trump was a legal revolt by the voters. Clearly a majority felt that those elected to public office were no longer honoring their oath of office to represent the citizenry, but were actively pursuing self-aggrandizement, accumulation of personal wealth and of power. Those possessing the perquisites of elected office find the presence of Mr. Trump in the White House to be a threat to their "elite" status and power, so they...in some cases quietly, in other openly and loudly...do all they can to render him powerless.

Unfortunately, these efforts have not been confined to sanctioned legal political maneuvering. Elected holders of office and even the press have openly challenged the right of President Trump to hold office, regardless of the fact that the election has been legally certified. For the first time, elected office holders are urging the portion of the public that disagreed with Mr. Trump's electioneering promises to disregard and disrespect the election and the rule of law, with the intent of disrupting and eliminating any discussion on policy and action in favor of emotional mob rule. Some have even spoken of their desire that Mr. Trump be "eliminated" only to later disingenuously argue that they only meant removal from office...even as their acolytes and supporters violently demonstrate, injuring persons and destroying property as they go.

These people behave as if laws are "optional"...only to be obeyed if they happen to agree with them. Civility and respect for others is now almost universally absent in America, except for small, almost secretive enclaves where people still value disagreeing with others without acting disagreeably. Friendships and marriages are failing and disappearing because of this encouragement of mob rule as a replacement for the rule of law.

It could be argued that this path started decades ago when the secularists in America began convincing a majority the the rules of behavior handed down in the Bible should be considered the Ten "Suggestions", open to both interpretation and human approval. Predictably, that now is extending to our secular laws of behavior, as those who chose to ignore and act contrary to law insist that they should not be required to suffer "consequences" for their transgressions.

With the ongoing combination of polarization, disrespect for those who do not agree with us, and the encouragement to disrespect not only the law but also those who enforce the law, it is certain that increased violence will result, as those so inclined will feel encouraged to kill and otherwise eliminate all who do not agree with them. And that, my friends, is exactly what happens in 3rd world countries. Take the time to breath deeply, set emotions aside, quietly calm yourself and consider if this is what you want for your country, much less the world around you.

Mob rule in this country was violent. And the day after, most of the members were quietly embarrassed and ashamed of their actions. Unfortunately, today's Media encourages and excuses the excesses, even labeling them as justified and proper, not particularly surprising as it if financially and ideologically rewarding for the media to do so. One wonders if the framers of the Constitution had that in mind when they gave the Press the freedom to libel and slander as they wish under the guise of "freedom" of the press. The result is that one Mob rule moves on and pops up somewhere else, sometimes under a different name or "cause." It makes me consider seeing them as the mob equivalent to the renown "Oldest Established Permanent Floating Crap Game in New York" first described in "Guys & Dolls."

It would be reassuring to think that America will wake up at some point in the cold, harsh light of reason and reverse course.

That isn't going to happen.Doubtin Thomashttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-7559688224646873912017-10-16T12:43:00.000-07:002017-10-16T12:43:44.882-07:00The "Establishment" Politicians on both sides still don't "get" it!Perhaps it is because they see any success by President Trump as "Armageddon" to their elite political existence. I find it hard to imagine that with the myriad professional politicians with elite educational credentials are unable to see the true reason for the election of a businessman with considerable baggage, personally and in business, to the highest office in the land in preference to a life-long political operative who had so much in common (with, of course, ideological differences) with those on both sides of the aisle.Can they all hold the conviction that Secretary Clinton lost because she was a bad candidate and had at least as much baggage as Mr. Trump?

While it is clear that all professional politicians motives, even as they each deny them, include self-aggrandizement, accumulation of power, money and a sense of an elite status, not one of them seems to have the ability to sense, much less analyze and conclude, that the American voter is fed up with the lying and failure to actually care about the things that the voters who put them in office truly care about.

Some of them seem to think that because they were re-elected even as Mr. Trump won in last November's election they were not seen by the voter the same way that hindsight seemed to indicate those same voters saw Mrs. Clinton. One wonders if they have any inkling that if in their own races there had been 3 or more choices (including a brash, non-politician) that they might have suffered the same fate as Mrs. Clinton. Because with very few exceptions, it is clear that such would have been not only possible but likely.

Those of the political establishment have for years...decades, actually...gotten away with making promises that were clearly abandoned as soon as the election results were tabulated. In some cases it is clear that those promises at the time they were made were clearly lies.

Now that President Trump has held office for almost a year, it has been clear to every citizen capable of voting that every other person elected to the Congress of the United States of America acts to prevent any significant accomplishment by the new President...every one, even those who ran on a Republican ticket.

For eight years, Republicans claimed they had a better way of providing Healthcare in America and were prevented from providing relief for the American people because of the veto threat from a Democrat President...FOR EIGHT WHOLE YEARS! But once President Trump took office, having promised that when the Republican controlled Congress presented the bill to him, he would sign it...that Republican-controlled Congress failed to pass the promised legislation. That is too egregious to be an oversight, a mistake, or something slipping through the cracks! They lied.

Meanwhile, the Democrats for the previous eight years had proven over and over again that they also were lying to the American people. They also were moving further and further to the Left, as they took the side of demonstrators who took to the streets hurting people and destroying property and even attacking, hurting and murdering police. They claimed such violence was only "sporadic" and that it was all part of "free speech." Somehow they missed the concept of the guarantee being for the right to avoid prior censorship, but not consequences for what was said.

It is unfathomable that professional politicians do not recognize that the majority of the country see them as the equivalent of an invading, occupying force that holds office through subterfuge and fraud while exercising their power to obliterate individual freedom(s) and control both speech and action.

Clearly, the citizens of this country do see that as the truth, hence the election of President Trump.

Instead of colluding with each other to try to take Mr. Trump down...instead of investigating the election, obstructing real partnership to get reasonable legislation passed...and colluding with a clearly "Leftist" media for the same purpose, they should recognize, admit, and act to prove they are prepared to abandon their lust for money, power, and status by actually listening to and acting on the wishes of their constituents.

If they do not, the next election cycle will see a lot of members of Congress on both sides of the aisle facing challenges from candidates that will make President Trump look like an agreeable teddy bear. And those candidates will win.Doubtin Thomashttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-76917874045261316482017-09-09T11:49:00.000-07:002017-09-09T11:49:01.110-07:00Our Educational System is failing...but THIS is ridiculous!We continue to allow our Educational System in America to deteriorate. Objective evaluations show performance to continue to fall when compared to what students in other countries are achieving. We literally do nothing about it...except to point fingers at people and factors other than ourselves.

The reality is constantly growing more apparent. High School Diplomas no longer guarantee that holding one means that you can do basic math, spell most words correctly and recognize when you have to check a dictionary (do any young people even have one anymore, much less know what one is?), have the ability to write a coherent sentence or note with decent handwriting so that it can be read a half hour later? High School Graduates no longer even seem to have had instilled a sense of discipline or the ability to concentrate on any task (other than "texting" others) for more than 45 seconds at a time; they interact face to face badly, seemingly unable to communicate without using an electronic device. They have not been taught the rudiments of "problem solving" or civilly discussing different sides of any given subject.

This results in Colleges and Universities being inundated by applicants that several decades ago would have been deemed insufficiently prepared to benefit from exposure to "higher" education and been denied admittance. And parents would have recognized how inappropriately prepared such young people were and realized that to fund such would be a waste of money. Yet...Colleges and Universities are well attended. Why?

Our (Your) government has made loans easily available. To the immature person, this seems like "free" money, since repayment is not until after graduation which fells like eons away to the new applicant. These loans don't require a well defined "purpose" or "motivation" for so-called advance studies. A young adult can "park" themselves in a University or College for 4 years or more...and the institution they attend welcomes the government money that enables them to fund all sorts of courses in what is a largely non-competitive environment for the faculty. The presence of young people so ill prepared for what used to be the rigors of acquiring a University education required (and apparently continues to require) a down-grading of subject matter and grading standards. Such a waste of time and money is deplorable. But it is worse than that. No longer is debate, challenge, or problem solving allowed, much less valued, in many Colleges and Universities. News Flash: the real world doesn't have "safe spaces."

Why, you ask, this diatribe now?

When President Trump announced that he was going to discontinue DACA as a Presidential Executive Order, young people around the country walked out of classes, out of work and congregated to declare such action as being "cruel" and "hurtful" and even un-Constitutional. AND they were joined by many of our elected Public Officials. Apparently, our diminished educational system's deficiencies has already percolated to those holding public office!

How can I suggest such a thing?

The DACA program is only by means of a Presidential Executive Order. It is NOT a law. It is subject to the personal whims of whatever individual holds the office of President of the United States. This makes it a political football with no real benefit to those it alleges to help...a very uncertain thing that leaves some level of fear in the minds and hearts of those who are subject to it.

By demanding that Congress act to codify DACA so that it becomes the law of the land, President Trump is working to make the benefits certain and sure, which would depoliticize the program, removing it from use to fear-monger those who are subject to the current vagaries of politics.

The President has given Congress 6 months to get a law drawn up and to present it to him for his signature...a signature that he has stated he would provide. And he has further indicated that if there is some proven need for additional time to get this done, he is prepared to re-visit the matter.

Anyone with a REAL education, prepared to read, ask questions, research would have almost instantly realized that for those affected, this was a cause to demonstrate THANKS...not fear. The fact that not one group realized the truth just emphasized how our refusal to redesign and rededicate our Educational System to serious education has resulted in what can only be described as a nation of indoctrinated idiots, with apparently no ability to think and evaluate correctly.

It is impossible to not think that this is the ultimate proof that our educational system is no longer remotely involved with educating. It has failed miserably.Doubtin Thomashttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-60464502611393921612017-08-18T08:28:00.000-07:002017-08-18T08:28:30.750-07:00"Mob" Rule apparently now acceptable in AmericaLife in America today suddenly seems like a combination of a seriously illogical dream and being on the trip that Alice took to "Wonderland." It appears as if someone set off a device that has deprived almost everyone of any common sense or logic.

Dealing with the relatively new phenomenon of "Terrorism" is bad enough; the senseless killing of innocent individuals by Muslim Extremists, Mentally Ill individuals and a couple of Far-Right Fanatics is an unfortunate fact of life today. All violence or any sort, whether against persons or property, is to be condemned and punished no matter who the perpetrator.

But by what logic does this sudden desire to sanitize and/or revise History become a populist movement, seemingly endorsed by the Media, the Democrat Party (and its members) and the Republican Party (and its members)? Has the entire country become so narcissistically enthralled by a desire to "attack" something that such action a denial of historical truth will erase anything or improve life in America in 2017 for anyone? If this was the 1850's in our West, tomorrow the mob would wake up feeling guilty and avoiding looking each other in the eye out of embarrassment and guilt.

Our President condemns the violence in Virginia by all who took part in that violence, and goes on to condemn the attitudes of Racism as being "wrong" and "unacceptable" but the Media, the Democrat and Republican elected officials and anyone on the ideological Left insists on misinterpreting his comments as equating the beliefs of the Racists with the beliefs of those who declare that Racism is wrong. Instead of seeing the statement(s) as the plea and demand for non-violence by both sides, promising punishment for those who act violently, as the call for sanity that it clearly is, they incorrectly label his comments in an attempt to profit politically.

Seems as if there is a strong logical basis for suggesting that all of America...or, at least the media and the political establishment (all sides)...should properly be undergoing treatment in a mental hospital.

The only speech allowed these days seems to be Leftist, Socialist, Progressive, Marxist, Liberal and Fascist. All others are shouted down or prevented from speaking without being denigrated and insulted with the aid of the media. What is going on today is the over-turning of the Constitutional guarantee of "Free Speech."

For those who respond that the "speech" being quashed is "bad" speech, they might consider that if a group that disagrees with that definition gains power, the reversal will make it impossible for them to speak at all. The court held that the church that demonstrated at military funerals with a message that clearly was hurtful to the families involved had a Constitutional right to so demonstrate. There was emotional hurt but no violence.

How much more effective would it have been if the legal march in Virginia (they had a permit, after all) had simply been allowed to take place...BUT NO ONE ATTENDED OR REPORTED ON IT? After all, they were after publicity. Any intelligent person or group would have won the day by simply ignoring the matter...it is a fringe group with no significant support and that would have been clear is all had simply stayed away. But unfortunately today's attitude is that anyone with whom you disagree must be shouted down and "prevented" from saying anything. Why?

Politicians say a lot of things that I don't like. But they get to say them anyway. News reports are very often wrong on facts or incomplete and slanted...but I don't get to shut them down. But I don't want to shut them down. If I feel strongly enough about a matter, I can write letters, make calls, ask questions and made suggestions. But the actions of the last week suggest that my right to do so will not exist for long, because this feels like an attack on our very rights under the Constitution.

When History is being sanitized revised, and re-written...and mob rule replaces our Constitutional guarantees, we are in very big trouble.Doubtin Thomashttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-74612239808271834472017-08-14T11:29:00.001-07:002017-08-14T11:33:33.920-07:00Declining Education in America should not be a surpriseNo one disagrees that America's educational system is losing ground to the rest of the world at an increasing rate. But there seems to be little agreement on why...or what to do to reverse this.

Like everyone else, I have some ideas that might bear consideration and discussion.

Let's start with some presumptions:
-the purpose of education is a function of a societies view, which is not a constant;
-the importance of education is determined by both the home and society;
-how effective education reaches defined goals is NOT defined by students.

Today, our society had become so sensitive and delicate that our history is being "sanitized" and revised so as to not "offend" anyone's sensibilities. Discussion of the cause as well as the proofs of climate change is seen as no longer legitimate, despite many instances that cast doubt on both data and reasoning. Can a country where facts can be distorted, history be re-written and challenge disallowed ever successfully "educate?" Do we WANT to educate? Define that term...

Our K-12 educational system was based on the Prussian model which had two goals: 1. indoctrinating youth to act in concert as commanded, and 2., providing reading, writing and mathematical skills sufficient to make the graduate employable and to be a worthwhile citizen of the country. For many years, it accomplished this, but with reduced indoctrination results due to American family values and demands that insisted on independent problems solving skills, and questioning of authority due to the lessons carried over from the War for Independence and needs for survival.

As the Industrial Age developed, increased skills were needed, yet problem solving became an even more important skill. With time, and increased security, family interest in History lessened but continuing knowledge of History continued in schools as a "habit." Also increased security allowed the luxury of also lessening the need to be productive in order to survive, as government began to promote a need to "support" those who could not support themselves.

Today, advancement through the grades does NOT require successfully acquiring proficiency in reading or math, and many schools are now eliminating the need to know how to write (I have no idea how these individuals will be able to record anything or communicate over any distance should our power distribution system be disabled for an extended period). Now "social" promotion is the norm and a High School Diploma is virtually useless as a qualification for a reasonably well-paying job.

K-12 Schools no longer are places where discipline is instilled, education to facts, or the art of problem solving is the norm. The inmates are running the institution. Immature children are not being trained, they are being coddled. Learning is no longer being demanded. Those interfering with the learning process are no longer being removed from classrooms or the schools, resulting in students who wish to learn being deprived of the right to accomplish that goal.

Money is not the answer; legislation is needed to provide the authority to control our youth in schools so that they can be taught the basics needed to survive in a real world. The "individual rights" concepts focuses on single trees as all around our forests are dying by our own hand.

Universities and Colleges are no better. They used to be places where an aspiring individual went to develop their ability to compete, argue, convince even as they learned more about the world around them, both present and past. They acquired advanced ability to communicate, question, and solve problems...often in intense disagreement with both classmates and Professors. Such disagreements were valued as "teaching" exercises...to be able to argue and defend a position or point even as you learned some often very valuable things from your opposition...and you respected your opponent and the opposition, knowing that it broadened your understanding of your own point of view even as it was amended in light of newly learned strengths and weaknesses. There used to be competition to be admitted to such place. And, of course, you needed to pay for it. Some graduated from High School and worked for years to put away enough money so they could take college courses and ultimately gain greater security for their family...it was a privilege to be able to achieve this, demanding dedication purpose, and hard work.

Today, attendance at a University and/or college is touted as a "right" instead of a "privilege." But today's University is not the one that I enjoyed more than a half century ago. Why? While there are probably many answers, one can be sure that with the failure of High Schools to graduate youth with the skills needed to hold ordinary jobs, the Universities and Colleges now serve to do that. However careful examination proves that such is not the case; math, writing and problem solving are no longer of any obvious interest today. Today Universities are also, like K-12, run by the inmates; "safe spaces", "nonaggression" and "being offended" are the focus of today. Administrators are dedicated to making their students "comfortable" and Professors are (apparently willingly) advised to not offend their students or require them to do anything with which those students disagree. How disgustingly plebeian are the majority of today's College and University graduates. One strongly suspects that the reason that the government makes student loans so easy to acquire is that these institutions of "learning" are great for parking a lot of our youth so they don't appear on unemployment rolls for at least 4 years... The government apparently cares little for the low probability that a majority of recipients of these loans will get an "education" that qualifies them for a job that will enable them to live and pay off those loans...

Do we want Universities that train, rather than coddle and indoctrinate? If so, restore competition in admittance, in grading, in performance, including a guarantee of open and challenging dialog between both students and faculty, and require students to come with a life plan, knowing why they are in a college setting (other than to please their parents). The least desirable element should be comfort. Learning, advancement, challenge are uncomfortable. They require ongoing effort of a lifetime, and University should be where one learns the habits that make success possible...not an artificial comfort zone that increases the likelihood of failure in a real world.

Maybe...just maybe...if we consider honoring what used to work, once again our educational "systems" can revert to successfully preparing our putative students to not only survive but achieve success in the real world.

Doubtin Thomashttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-38791384948848084402017-08-10T11:19:00.000-07:002017-08-10T11:59:28.428-07:00Will Mueller turn out to be our modern day Torquemada?The voters of the United States of America, under the impression that they had the right, elected Donald Trump to be President of the country. He did not come from a long line of politicians. He was not a politician. He was not active in any political activities, other than as they affected his businesses, until disgust with politics motivated him to run for President, which led to his subsequent election. Evidently a lot of people agreed with him.

The political establishment was neither amused or content; they were horrified.. For politicians, the "game" of politics takes on the aura of religion; it is a way of life and they believe that being "called" to be a politician establishes a common bond that transcends ideological differences. They become "family." So, while they can fight between themselves, when an outsider appears and disagrees with their family "habits" of behavior and activity, they stop fighting and combine to defeat the newcomer.

Ah...but how to accomplish this?

The "people" have spoken. Clearly a multiple pronged attack is clearly in order. First, mount a campaign of both falsehoods and half-truths that, if pursued constantly and loudly, will cause a diminution of President Trump's support. Secondly, do all that is possible to prevent any accomplishments reach the eyes and ears of the public, hoping that the public will conclude that no Presidential promises are being kept or being effective. Third, work across ideological boundaries (but cautiously, so the public does not become aware) to defeat bills that would enable actions desired by President Trump.

However, there is a chance that these efforts will not be enough to defeat President Trump's support or prevent his accomplishing some of his declared goals. What more can be done?

It is unclear who actually triggered the concept (one suspects that all would take credit if asked "off the record"), but the appointment of a "Special Prosecutor" took place. Usually, this is in response to evidence that a crime has been committed and the goal is document it and determine the responsible party(ies) to be sent to prison...as in "Watergate."

Curiously, after more than 9 months there is no evidence of a crime. With the porous nature our nation's capitol, if there were such evidence it is inconceivable that it would not by now have been leaked to press corp proven ravenously anxious to publicize any illegal act by President Trump or his supporters. Yet...we have a Special Prosecutor. Not only do we have one, but he is one ideologically oriented to the Democrat party which is the lead ideological group seeking President Trump's removal from office. Certainly a good number of Republican Congressmen and women would cheer the event also...but oh so quietly, while giving lip service to President Trump.

The power granted to a Special Prosecutor is immense. It is reminiscent of the power granted to the Grand Inquisitor of the Spanish Inquisition in the late 15th century, Tomas de Torquemada. And there are more similarities: two prominent leaders, King Ferdinand II of Aragon, and Queen Isabella I of Castile (you may substitute "Sen. Schumer: and "Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi" if you wish) appointed Torquemada to "cleanse" Spain of "non-believers" ( you may substitute "non-politicians" if you wish) in 1483 and he remained in office for the next 15 years. There is no "expiration date" for the office of Special Prosecutor.

Both the Special Prosecutor and Torquemada enjoyed virtually unlimited power authorized by the government with no over-ruling element (while the Special Prosecutor may in theory have some of his actions subject to challenge, the political price is so enormous that it rarely happens).

The various forms of Inquisition lasted in the Hispanic Americas until 1825, in Portugal until 1820, and in Spain until 1846. In Italy, it ceased in 1870. But the office, renamed twice, remains to this day: Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.This particular enumeration of "Special Prosecutor" is the first that was clearly established as a "fishing expedition" and lacks a specific law-breaking event to investigate. Much as was the Spanish Inquisition, the Special Prosecutor may do and investigate whatever he chooses with little if any legal, political or Sense of Justice; Justice will be what Mr. Mueller declares.

Not sure that any of us should be comfortable with that.

Doubtin Thomashttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-81757047390705350992017-03-09T15:58:00.000-08:002017-03-09T15:59:32.917-08:00Is it about Health Insurance...or Health Care?Even as "Obamacare" is imploding from costs that are not covered, young people who are not signing up, and premiums that are sky-rocketing, the Media, Ideological Right and Ideological Left point fingers at each other, and talk past each other. And it is so obvious that one cannot escape the strong suspicion, if not certainty, that they are doing it on purpose to mislead the vast majority of the public.

First, a review of the facts shows that Obamacare has apparently increased the number that is covered by healthcare of some kind.

The difficulty with this claim arises when we ask ourselves if it is insurance, regardless of scope, that we want to extend to people...or is it increased paid-for actual medical coverage that all of us see as the goal.

Healthcare Insurance comes in various forms...at least it used come in many forms. You could chose to select catastrophic insurance plans, where the costs were low because you had no benefit until medical costs exceeded a selected limit...often more than $5,000 for an illness...because you budgeted for normal and ordinary Doctor's visits and accidents.

Then there were the normal, what I used to think of as the Blue Cross/Blue Shield, plans. These covered normal costs of doctors and hospitals in a variety of ways. You could chose a network of doctors and hospitals, out of network providers and select any number of co-pay limits and/or drug coverage.

The point of these offerings was to enable any person or family unit to balance cost of premiums against their medical coverage preferences. Those who had the choice of insurance provided by their employers usually benefited from the employer's negotiating good premium terms, and often had portions of those premiums actually paid by the employer. But if you left that job, every person had the option of continuing that coverage, albeit at a higher rate. But you wanted to continue coverage so that you didn't trigger a non-covered period (usually a year or 18 months) for any discovered pre-existing condition.

The motivation for getting, paying for, and continuing Medical Insurance coverage was to protect against preexisting conditions which might or might not develop. It wasn't enough to have just any policy; you needed to have coverage that was useful.

Obamacare was and remains the equivalent of a con, because it claims to offer a benefit that turns out to be non-existent; the premiums are increasingly exorbitant while the deductibles are so high as to turn the policies into catastrophic only coverage that isn't what most purchasers had before and expected to continue under the promises made by President Obama regarding Obamacare.

And now the Congress is repeating the same mistake. The only motivation that will cause younger people (and families) to chose to purchase Medical-care Insurance is the fear of discovery of preexisting conditions. Obamacare proved that a financial penalty wasn't enough if there were no prohibition of coverage due to preexisting conditions. Besides, without that exception of coverage, what you are trying to provide is NOT insurance at all, but socialized medical coverage. Without making citizens responsible for the consequences of their planning and their actions, you are socializing the medical costs of everyone. And that is exorbitantly expensive.

If the government wants to provide ability and incentive for all citizens to have USEFUL medical coverage, provide a limited period (perhaps 18 months) for everyone to select, sign up for, and begin to pay for medical coverage of their choice with coverage for preexisting conditions. But upon expiration of that period, reinstate the preexisting condition exclusion.

Additionally, for the poor (and there needs to be a certain definition of what that is) set up a means for catastrophic coverage costs to be reimbursed to the purchaser by the government, with the government also picking up any intervening hospital and practitioners' costs upon their supplying factual and audited data.

The key, though, is to mandate that the people themselves have to be responsible for selecting, and processing the necessary applications for coverage and, where appropriate, reimbursement. If that is done, truly everyone will have the opportunity to access meaningful medical insurance coverage. But it is opportunity that needs to be provided...not a guarantee.

Doubtin Thomashttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-49615484423137713532017-02-24T13:30:00.000-08:002017-02-24T13:30:52.269-08:00Are the "Hate Crime" statutes attempts to by-pass the Constitutional guarantee of free Speech?For three quarters of a century I have been angered by many events that centered around the exercise of free speech as guaranteed by the American Constitution. Most were personal events that occurred after I had gotten to voting age and had to endure what I considered bad language that not only was often physically impossible but also un-civil. These offended my perception of what communication should be in any civilized society.

Then there were general public exercises of offensive behavior and speech that seemed to violate existing social norms. Included in this list, was the burning of the American Flag and the behavior of the Westboro Baptist Church, of Topeka, Kansas, at the funerals of fallen servicemen.

I admit to a visceral anger at such behavior, and the wish for the power to put such activities to an end.

On reflection, while there was great danger in any preemptive prohibition on speech and/or action that did not encourage actual physical harm to others, it seemed that in cases where a case could clearly be made for damage being inflicted on innocents or others those who were injured should have the right to restitution.

Logic suggests that the courts, SCOTUS included, have wrongly and carelessly expanded the definition of "free" in free speech to include freedom from consequences of that exercise. A careful consideration of the concept of free speech seems to clearly mean that the founding fathers wished to prevent the preemptive prohibition of any person from stating a case on any subject that they found compelling.

There is no action in this world that does not have consequences for those committing actions...or speaking words. ONLY in America are people allowed to insult others, call them vile names and, in the case of politics, actually lie about accusations and behavior.

In any moral sense, this is wrong. Certainly any person can comment or accuse, but isn't it just common sense that there needs to be truthfulness in the comment or accusation? Absent truthfulness, shouldn't any person...rich, famous, poor, unknown...be able to call any such commenter or accuser to make the victim whole? What social, moral or governmental purpose is served by allowing reprehensible language.

Note that I see such action as being in civil courts, and never as being based on statutory laws. This should never be in the criminal realm. Why? Because then the government is given control of determining what is acceptable or not.

I abhor the passing of "Hate Crime" and "Hate Speech" legislation. The activities specified are already against the law and the courts have jurisdiction and those engaging in such actions can be punished for their actions. Frankly, the motivation for abhorrent behavior is not of importance and certainly should not the subject of governmental definition and intuition. As far as speech is concerned, the Constitution is clear on it being allowed. I certainly would allow action to recover provable injury from such speech...as long as it was in civil court and the judgment made by a jury.

Hate Speech statutes seem only to be a means for the Federal Government to "pile on" for largely political purposes when some crimes are committed. That is not reason to create more power and put it in the hands of the level of government most removed from the people.

Doubtin Thomashttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-51771199702432892512017-02-02T11:02:00.000-08:002017-02-02T11:02:22.900-08:00Possible Solution to our Education deficitThe degradation of the educational system in America is the result of many factors: the erosion of the family unit, the unionization of teachers that focuses on protecting the welfare of teachers instead of the education of children, and the Prussian Model used as a basis of our educational system through twelfth grade which is better designed for indoctrination than for learning and independent problem solving, among others. The focus on the family cannot be recreated by any government. It must come from the people. Likewise, a desire to change our educational system from one of standardization to one of maximizing individual learning must also develop from the people and the teaching community working together.

But perhaps if the educational professionals themselves considered a radical change in their way of organizing, they might lead the way to improvements in the other two areas. Here is one possible approach for consideration.

This involves a great deal of spending up front and that will turn many people off. But if we look at how much money has already been appropriated only to fail to improve education in this country, perhaps we could at least try something a bit different.

How much more respectful and empowering would it be if all educators ruled themselves through a Professional Association matrix instead of a union matrix? If administrators and teachers ruled their own membership in a manor designed to mandate good teaching methods as well as results, with awards and raises given by their own judgment and standards based on the achievements of their students, they would achieve three things:
 1, They would insure that all of them were dedicated to educational achievement, with the ability to set and demand high standards of each of their members based on their own self-interest;
 2. they would have professional respect from parents as well as the general public; and
 3. they would have the self-satisfaction of knowing that their students would be productive citizens.

But...how to implement this? One idea would be to approach the teachers and their unions with the concept that ALL salaries for three years would be tripled. Yes, tripled! In return, the teachers would create their own Professional Organization empowered to rule itself, set minimum requirements and methods for self-evaluation based on student achievement as well as the teachers' Organization evaluations, and give up all tenure.

During those three years the teachers would themselves select those who's performance on behalf of the students qualified them for terms of tenure...which would be for a set number of years (perhaps 8 years), upon the expiration of which the Teachers Professional Association would do a review evaluation, the satisfactory finding of which would provide for an additional 8 year tenure. At the same time, the Teachers Professional Association would be tasked with reviewing the educational program for learning efficacy, seeking improvement in the learning matrix and experimenting to improve the educational system with the goal of enabling and insuring that all students reach a certain minimum standard of reading, math and general knowledge while those with exceptional or advanced abilities are nurtured to maximize their educational growth. But the key would be to put the responsibility AND the rewards for achieving that goal in the hands of the teachers themselves.

When Teachers and the general public come to see that Teachers are dedicated professionals exercising professional ability to regulate themselves to excel every bit as much as Doctors and other professionals and demonstrably requiring that all their members perform at the same high standards, they will:
 a. receive the admiration of the public and parents;
 b. which will give them greater authority to enable changes in education that will provide better results for all students;
 c. which in turn will demonstrate value that will provide for remuneration that all excellent teachers deserve; and
 d. the increased status will draw highly motivated and able new recruits into the profession.

At the end of the three year period of adjustment, re-selection of teachers deserving tenure and the creation of the basis for self-regulation and self-evaluation, the salary level would initially go to double the original (or, decrease one-third from the then effective level). As time passes, the Teachers Professional Association can develop payment rates. Perhaps they will decide to create a hierarchy of teaching ability (level 1, 2,3, Masters) either generally or by subject that would stay with the teacher and set the level of pay regardless of where or at what school he or she worked. And/or there might be set adjustments based on cost of living when a teacher moved from one area of the country to another. And, if a teacher moved during a tenure period, that tenure would continue until the expiration of the current term, with the usual re-evaluation to be conducted by representatives of the Teachers' Professional Association.

Just one idea to consider. It seems wrong to criticize without attempting to come up with a way of improving or changing what seems currently not to be working.

Doubtin Thomashttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-6922275315803042652017-01-15T09:15:00.000-08:002017-01-16T07:55:46.517-08:00Were the Russians Really helping Trump win?I have not seen one argument or suggestion that Russia or those directed by Russia were not trying to help Trump win the election. But I would suggest that in fact they had no idea that Trump might win, regardless of any Russian-backed activities.

Consider that there were no countries, residents, governments or leaders throughout the world that expected Mr. Trump to be elected. You can safely bet that that was the view throughout Russia too...including Mr. Putin and the leadership of Russia.

So...what was really going on? I suggest that it not only possible but probable that, with the success they had in hacking into various American sources a year or more earlier, that they decided to test the American Public's reaction to some of the politically indefensible and embarrassing information they had acquired. It is likely that they discovered far more than was leaked during the campaign season. To reveal what they did release was arguably a signal of proof that they had "stuff" that the DNC AND Ms. Hillary would find not only embarrassing, but possibly grounds for impeachment; that not-so-subtle message would have made influencing a President Hillary Clinton easier and perhaps even more effective.Governments usually go to great lengths to hide their hacking operations...and do so quite effectively. The DNC hacks were not particularly well hidden, as known cut-outs were employed. Arguably, they wanted the government, expected to be headed by a President Clinton, to know.

Whether all of this is true or only true in part is not something I can prove. But when you consider that the entire world, in addition to the Democrat party and its adherents, expected the election of Ms. Hillary Clinton to the American Presidency, what other use did the leaks serve? Most of America knew about the leaked data and that didn't move the polls...and neither did Trump's other promises and claims.

Think about it.Doubtin Thomashttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-88216930512923613222016-12-28T08:13:00.001-08:002016-12-28T08:13:57.631-08:00Tracking "differences" prevents operation of America's "Melting Pot" heritageOur Government, at every level, has stopped America from continuing to operate as what we used to refer to as "the great melting pot." When our country was "discovered" by the Italians, the Scandinavians and the Irish, among many others, as holding out the opportunity for attaining success, they ran into opposition. Much of it was oriented around Race and discrimination. But over time, that passed and today they and their offspring are seen as "American" as anyone else.

Today, we have arguments about "racism" all to often, regarding Color of Skin, and Religion...and there seems little hope that it will be resolved anytime soon.

Why did the first groups go beyond it in relatively short order while others cannot seem to get beyond the perceived challenge?

I hear comments that America has a problem with "white" privilege, that a significant portion of our residents are racist and act punitively against anyone who is not considered "white." Others posit that skin color never fades and is always a sign that is interpreted as being "different." And the argument regarding religious practices and beliefs adds fuel to the flame of perceived negativity. All of these positions are offered as reasons (or excuses) for the failure of groups being assimilated into American Life.

These reasons (or "excuses") don't hold up to close scrutiny.

Those who came to this country voluntarily wanted to become Americans. They had not found opportunity in the country of their birth and wanted the chance to attain more. They knew there was no guarantee of success, or even of survival, but they appreciated that America provided opportunity to try to achieve something more than was afforded them in their birth country. Many failed. Significant numbers died. But those who survived became full-fledged Americans thankful for the opportunity to succeed or fail on the basis of their own abilities, rather than a caste or other system in the country of their birth that denied them the chance to prove themselves. They saw the obstacles, including the racial opinions of those already here and established, as challenges to be overcome. There were no guarantees or gifts of success, but they accepted that as only fair.

African-Americans did not come by choice. And until freed by the Emancipation Proclamation few had the chance to succeed on their own abilities and merits. But freed they were, and declared to be citizens of the United States of America. Did they have challenges due to lack of education? Yes...but so did those who came from the Mediterranean and Asian countries. Did they face organized resistance and fear from those already established? Of course they did, just as did the other groups that had chosen to come here. The big difference was not the color of their skin; those of Mediterranean and Asian Heritage had the same obstacles. Their big difference was choice! What was the solution to that challenge? They could have actively petitioned for funds to travel back to their home country. Of course, history tends to ignore the fact that African-Americans were sold into slavery by their own countrymen for profit and to eliminate competition for power. Going back to those countries would allow them to look the same as others of their race, but they were unlikely to survive for long...and they had become used to living in America. So the clear choice for the vast majority was to stay here and strive for a successful free life.

And that struggle was severe in the Southern States of America due to the ingrained attitude of non-African-Americans to see African-Americans as less than equal. And the North, despite their self-serving claims, wasn't much better; they simply hid their opinions a bit more effectively. The Civil Rights Laws passed in the mid-twentieth century as well as the Supreme Court decisions of that ere were needed to provide legal protection for some semblance of equal treatment. But equal treatment in America as well as throughout the world has always been an illusion rather than a reality. It hasn't, doesn't and never will exist. America tries harder than most, but it is an impossible goal because the human race is not equal at all. We all have different abilities and traits and no one and no government can or should promise equality of anything. All that can be promised is to allow each person the right to take a chance. No guarantees of success or any level of result. People don't grow up equally. Someone born to well-educated and financially secure parents has a better shot at success than someone born in poverty to parents with no appreciable education. That is the way of life. But even a casual study of achievements reveal that a fair number of children born in poverty achieve greater success than those born into wealth and privilege.

The reason that a perception of racism remains so strong today is that our governments' decisions to trace and classify Americans today by Race, Gender, Sexual Orientation and Religion tells us that such differences are important. It says that even if you are a third generation American, the background of your great grandparents matters...officially.

It shouldn't. Yes, the laws of this country can provide a legal remedy if one is discriminated against...and they do. But that should be a private action by one citizen against another...not a basis for tracking by and the interest of the entire Federal Government. Leaving the government out of tracking such differences would send the clear signal to all of us that such differences do not matter, that we are all Americans and we have that common identity.

Every immigrant group that has come to America has had to comply with the requirements of our immigration laws, has had to adjust to American Society. In most cases, those coming here would gravitate to hold to themselves for emotional and financial security, even as they encouraged their children to learn English and become "American." Later generations increasingly became assimilated with the enthusiastic encouragement of the first arrivals...the "melting pot" worked.

Currently there are only two groups where this hasn't taken place; African-Americans, and those of the Islamic faith.

African-Americans that have failed to escape poverty can look to the Federal Government as the real cause. By taking the attitude that there needs to be virtually eternal financial support in a variety of forms, the Federal Government has essentially declared that African-Americans cannot succeed on their own efforts and merit. By so doing they invite and encourage all but the most dedicated and inspired member of that community to just take the offerings of the Federal Government and remain dependent thereon. They take it...but they are not stupid and do recognize that they are being disrespected and ultimately resent it mightily...and quite correctly start to "cop and attitude." Any human being would. Want to see a happy community? Provide limits to government support, but provide plenty of job training and guidance.

The other group that has not assimilated is that of the Islamic Faith. They show no sign of wanting to assimilate. Apparently, they want to re-create their country of origin here in America. That includes Sharia Law and a way of living that is contrary to the inherent freedoms of American culture. Such "separateness" should not be permitted...certainly not the legal attitude. In America, American Law applies and no area of the United States should be allowed to apply any other standards. If immigrants fail to follow our laws, they should be deported back to their country of origin. If already a citizen, they need to be prosecuted and jailed.

But our Federal Government would go a long way to recognizing the equality of every American by applying the policy of benign neglect to any and all attempts to track any racial, gender, ethnic or religious elements of its citizens. As the populace realizes that it isn't important to the government, they will cease to see it as important to them.

Doubtin Thomashttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-45210113491849409822016-12-17T12:16:00.000-08:002016-12-17T12:16:38.169-08:00A Government may be legal...and still be illegitimateThe United States has just gone through an intense election and the European Union is seeing its member nations involved in an almost universal crisis of confidence in membership in that union.

Most of us have been angry, disturbed or perhaps just uncomfortable with actions that have been judged by our respective national justice systems to be legal even as we "knew" that they were wrong. Sometimes this has been because of badly worded laws, sometimes because of very good defenses coupled with inadequate or inept prosecutions (or the reverse), and sometimes because it seemed as everyone was so very worried about the individual tree as the forest was left to burn or wither.

In America Free Speech, originally defined to mean that there could, with rare exceptions, not be prevention of the right to say something, has become defined as meaning that whatever and however something is said, there shall be no consequences for it. That is just a perversion of the original intent. No longer is it necessary to be certain that your speech is a truthful statement lest you be brought into court for libeling someone...say whatever you want. This may be legal...but any sane person would suggest that such action should be judged as illegitimate.

The legal system in America has become a tool to enable people to avoid consequences for doing and saying illegitimate things. Just one example is the treatment of those entering and remaining in our country illegally. Our Constitution is a contract between its government and its citizens; it basically establishes that the government will protect its citizens and the country's borders and the citizens will obey the laws that govern the land. How on earth does any person or group who has NOT obeyed the laws of the United States get the right to claim that the government provide them the protections promised to its citizens? Those here illegally come to the table as non-parties to the contract and, moreover, they come with unclean hands, having already broken the laws that a citizen, as part of the contract, agrees to obey and abide by.

In France, the people voted NOT to join the European Union...but somehow (who know by what technical legal maneuvers) they are a member. The fact that France's politicians have done something that they argue was legal, does not make it legitimate. All over the world, the increased ability to communicate without prior constraint by governments is revealing to the people that their governments are run for the self-defined elites of each country, that the citizens are being made to support the lives of elites who care not one wit for the citizenry.

Strange that the elites seem unable to understand why the people are upset, angry and growing closer and closer to violence each day. How quickly the elites around the world forget the lessons of the Russian and French revolutions, among many others. When the government(s) show contempt for the law or use it for their own privileged purposes, why should they not understand that the citizens will see that they need to act in their own interests regardless of the laws, in the same way that the politicians have done to mistreat the citizens, to regain control of their own lives.

Those in power can only avoid "consequences" for so long before they must account. And the longer they delay that accounting, the more extreme the consequences.Doubtin Thomashttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-31465970245808585432016-12-06T15:08:00.000-08:002016-12-06T15:08:00.010-08:00"Open Border" advocates are not "American"I repeat..."open border" advocates are not "Americans." Oh, they can be citizens. They can also be citizens of other countries. But they are absolutely not Americans.

Why?

Because the concept of a country...every country... is that it has borders. Those borders are definite. They are defended. They are enforced. It is effective borders that make, for instance, Germany different than France, and Italy different from Austria. If it weren't for borders, eventually the languages would merge, individual traditions would fade and the individual country identifications would fade into oblivion.

Those who advocate open borders for the United States of America ... and for the rest of the world if asked ... are those who believe in a World Order or World Government,

They see no value in the United States Constitution, or any other country's founding documents or beliefs, because it is their intention to create a world-wide unit that will be run by an entity populated by those they consider gifted, educated (by their definition) elites that will direct how the rest of the world's population will behave and live.

Should you doubt this, "google" Agenda 21, read all the basic documents and position papers, then check to see the progress that it has made in various countries of the world and get back to me.

Whether our President was Clinton (Bill or Hillary) or Trump matters little to them except as to the degree either of them would present road blocks to the New One World Order. Think of it as the German Reich on steroids.

Consider that the United States of America is almost an ungovernable entity as it now exists, thanks to President Lincoln and the Civil War. And that has nothing to do with slavery. That is based on the fact that the founding fathers realized that a Republic was an effective and responsive form of government only for a limited area or limited population. They full expected that as the colonists expanded into the continent and the population grew that new Republics would be formed to retain the responsive self-rule that they so valued. They full expected those new Republics to create treaties and alliances with the original for the purpose of self-defense, but that each would have a government that would serve the citizens of each respective Republic. Consider this: at the time of the formation of the Republic, each member of the House of Representatives represented 30.000 people.  Today, each member of the House represents 720,000 people. To get the same level of responsiveness today, the House would have to consist of over 10,500 people. Does any sane individual really think that your Elected Representative is influenced by what you...or even you and one thousand of your friends...thinks? Does any sane person think that this ratio is even in the ball park of ensuring representative government?

But as bad as this is, consider what would happen with a World Government. Jefferson accurately indicated that eventually government becomes the enemy of individual freedom.

That being so, the question now is whether a sufficient number of our citizens are Americans, and if they are prepared to fight to preserve at least the diluted representative government that we still have.

I don't know the answer...but I suspect that the next decade will reveal the answer.

Doubtin Thomashttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-58280125776280986192016-11-08T22:17:00.000-08:002016-11-08T22:17:27.580-08:00The "People" are both angry and privateProgressive Liberal Democrats are depressed. I can understand that; they have been spoiled by having things pretty much their own way for almost a decade now. Their President has used Executive Orders to create a country that he devoutly wishes he could have brought into being with laws, but made do with his pen. The good news for the PLD folks was that they got the country they wanted. The bad news is that is wasn't and isn't permanent.

But that is just the ideological view. What is much more important is that this election revealed the depth of the voters' anger at the entire political establishment...all sides...is tremendous. It showed in the Republican primaries. It showed in the Democrat primaries.

The fact is that the political establishment deluded itself, talking itself into a presumption of control and power based in part on a disrespect for the independence of the American voter. That presumption was ill conceived, presumptuous and just wrong. And our politicians have earned the anger. You can be sure it will not be easily assuaged.

The other factor that makes this election a surprise to so many is that the American public can be really private about what they think, especially if revealing their true feelings might cause their friends and business associates to disrespect them. Clearly, this flumixed the pollsters. I personally know two individuals who were polled and told the pollster they were voting for the Democrat candidate, yet told me that they were voting for Mr. Trump because of Mrs. Clinton's lying, inabilities, and what they see as her treating Classified information as unimportant when it collided with her desire for secrecy and control of her private affairs. The view her as inherently corrupt.

Politicians, Washington (D.C) and the power structure in this country had better adjust quickly and treat the citizenry with the respect that they have not granted for several decades.Doubtin Thomashttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-68819886014608229932016-10-27T08:06:00.000-07:002016-10-27T08:06:42.658-07:00Has the United States become "Balcanized?"After much effort and planning, my father emigrated from Norway to the United States in the early 1920s. He first had to arrange a sponsor, then get a written guarantee of a job, save money so that he would not be a burden on the government, show that he had a place to live when he arrived and finally, upon entry, go through a physical exam to show that he was not bringing with him any communicative disease(s). He told me he never thought that these requirements were burdensome, wrong or illegal; they were good, common sense requirements to protect both the United States and him.

He spoke little English, but those he lived with and worked with immediately began teaching him English and he enrolled in Citizenship Classes to prepare him for the Citizenship Exam. He...and all who attended those classes with him...came to America to become "Americans." He honored his birth country, Norway, and taught me to do the same...but he emphasized that he hadn't come to America to make America into a "little Norway,"...he had come to become a true "American." He wanted to, and believed in, assimilation. He and all the other immigrants that he came to know were anxious to become a part of the the miracle that was the United States of America...a country where one found the freedom to try to succeed in ways not available to him in Europe...and understood that that freedom came with the possibility of consequences of failure, too. That was the trade-off: freedom to strive came with no guarantees other than the right to "try." And he found that if you failed, you had the opportunity to try again. And he did.

Dad loved visiting Norway in later years, and being with old friends and acquaintances...but he never failed to exhibit a sigh of relief when he came home again to America and say, "it's so good to be home again"...he was an "American." Not a "Norwegian-American." And he was both proud and thankful for that.

As I was going through school I was surrounded by kids also born to immigrants...from many different countries. We got to know and appreciate each other and each other's national backgrounds...but always there was the attitude that those backgrounds were nice, they were part of "us"...but they were incidental; we were Americans. We appreciated and we abided by the rules and the laws of America...and expected everyone to do the same. Those who broke the laws and the rules were outcasts...not by any command or written edict, but automatically by their disregard and disrespect for the essence of "America."

Sadly, my observations reveal that this "America" has largely disappeared and is well on its way to extinction. First, I see multitudes (particularly in the Southwest) who have not come here "by the rules" or legally. Second, I see many groups refusing to assimilate, keeping to groups from their country of origin continuing to speak the language of their country of origin and refusing to even make believe they are trying to learn English. Third, a majority of today's immigrants still hold allegiance to their country of origin and not to the United States of America...and attempt to make America into a "mini" version of their country of origin, even to the point of disrespecting the American Flag and flying the flag of their birth country.

 Most importantly, I see the Federal Government of the United States of America actually supporting these activities, aiding and abetting this lack of assimilation. And the result is that the United States of America has become increasingly "Balcanized." As Europe originally did in areas of the Caribbean and South America, areas of the United States now seem less like America and more like small versions of other foreign countries...America has disappeared.

The Federal Government no longer truly protects our borders or control who comes to America...and then takes action against border states that attempt to fill the need for that protection and control, leaving the citizens of those states unprotected and at risk. Add to that the actions of some major cities that put the welfare of those who surreptitiously and illegally cross into this country above that of lawful citizens. Arguably, those elected officials in those cities are in abdication of their oaths of Office...but neither the citizens of those cities or the Federal Government seems to care...at least not enough to demand that that be stopped.

America is losing its identity...and amazingly a great number of our citizens do not seem to mind or care. Thankfully, my father has passed away...otherwise these actions would insure his dying of embarrassment for the country he adopted as his own and loved more than where he was born. And I am embarrassed for my country's abdication of its character.Doubtin Thomashttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-74897103811518451542016-10-26T09:08:00.000-07:002016-10-26T09:08:34.183-07:00Why do we have Racial Unrest today? (#3 of 3)There is a valid assertion that by providing government assistance that assures survivability and is available for virtually an unlimited period we cause the receiving group to not only become dependent on such support, but to train them to ignore all other potential efforts to be self-sufficient.

But given that such dependence now exists, to discuss whether or not it should have been done is a useless exercise.

To be "given" support over an extended period of time with no requirement or expectation of moving from that support to self-support creates a sense of shame (usually deeply buried) and compensatory attitudes to bolster a sense of self-worth. For kids without fathers present in their daily lives, they substitute gangs and gang membership. To support their self-worth, they develop their own sense of right and wrong that supports their own actions, regardless of what those actions are, as "right." And they totally ignore efforts from "others" to change that view, because to change would necessitate that they acknowledge that their previous actions were not "good" or "right." Oh, there are some that see the bigger picture, but not many.

It is this unwillingness to change, and the underlying anger that supports it, that creates the real problem for those kids, their neighborhoods, and ultimately for America as a nation. What can or should be done?

I freely admit that I don't know.

But there are some ideas that might be worthy of at least talking about.

Supposing an organized effort was made to take every single child that did not have a father present and employed out of the neighborhood and put them in a proven, approved foster home that had access to a good school district with support to encourage achievement?

What if the rules on schooling provided not only for school choice, but for schools to be able to bar disruptive kids from the campus, thus allowing students who wanted to learn the teacher time to enable that desire?

What if disruptive kids were required to be put in a military type, government organization where they were supervised and required to work each day for a menial wage until they came to recognize the advantages of learning?

How about city officials discussing with gangs the possibility of them becoming screening groups for calling in regular Police forces, making them officially responsible for the safety of their community? That would give them status but also make them responsible...a good pairing for learning to live a useful life.

Are these answers? Probably not...but it is time we all recognized the very real and difficult problems that our citizens who live in the inner cities have and work to provide good and beneficial options for those there who want improvement.

Unfortunately I don't see our government, at any level, having any real interest in solving the situation. They just want it to be quiet: quiet summers, quiet desperation, quiet unhappiness. And that is just an abdication of their respective oath's of office. Until we demand and see that that attitude changes, we will have to look to private organizations to move forward. And I hope that all of them, both civic and religious groups, step up...and soon. Each of us, as citizens of a great nation, should have available to us a path to success. That path isn't free, and it isn't easy, but it should exist so that every citizen with purpose and motivation can travel forward...and upward.Doubtin Thomashttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-56524522944122091132016-10-03T09:15:00.003-07:002016-10-03T09:15:19.530-07:00Why do we have Racial Unrest today? (#2 of 3)It is essential to understand three things, before looking at the root cause of today's challenges:

First, having a reason...even a valid reason...for doing something does NOT eliminate the consequences for what is done. When civil disobedience was first used, the actions taken were against the law. Those who broke the law fully expected to be arrested and jailed; they understood (unlike so many today) that in order to bring attention to their position that the laws were unjust, they would be put into jail. They accepted that that would happen but were convinced that by so doing they would bring more publicity and more support to change laws they were convinced were unjust, unfair and just wrong. They understood and accepted the concept of "consequences."

The riots, looting, injuring and killing people in response to perceived injustice are wrong. While in varying degrees the response is understood, it is NOT excusable and those who so act should be arrested, prosecuted and jailed for their crimes...and they ARE crimes.

Second, those in the minority community who talk about hating whites are NOT racists. They have had experiences that have taught them that most whites with whom they have interacted are not nice people, that they disrespect and mistreat...and cheat...them. Their attitudes are the result of experience, not of un-supported assumptions.

Third, the majority community (usually white) that interact with the minority (usually black) community are NOT racists either. Their experience has been that they are disrespected, called names and have things thrown at them and are lied to by the minority community. Their attitude is experience-based, not the result of un-supported assumptions.

So...could we all stop with the accusations of Racism or being Racist? It is wrong and it is not productive.

With all that in mind, what is at the root of today's challenges?

I would suggest that there are two main causes: Failure of Education, and Failure of Government.

Education in this country is based on the Prussian model, designed to create good citizens. "Good" citizens was defined as those with sufficient educational skills (writing, math, spelling, ability to read, and an appreciation for a nation's "rightness" in history) and the training to obey basic laws and orders from the "powers that be." It was, as best I can estimate, about 50% education and 50% indoctrination. When established in America, initially the indoctrination part of the equation did not work; students went home to a family life that required hard work, independent thinking to survive, and parents that had no problem at all in dismissing anything they deemed "faulty" in the teaching...and in dismissing any teacher that didn't teach as the "families" (making up the school) wanted. So that period of education worked for as long as the family unit remained the prime trainer of children.

This all changed after the Great Depression and World War II. "Modern" parenting became permissive (and parents wanted to avoid their children suffering from the depredations that they suffered during the depression) and absent as the march to acquire "stuff" and the movement toward "women's equality" saw many mothers now working outside the family home. Children no longer experienced their parents checking not only their homework, but what they were being taught each day. Teachers' Unions came into existence and parents no longer controlled what their children were taught...of even if the were being taught. Today's parents who care about such things often find themselves banned from even entering their children's' schools, much less determining what they are taught.Today's schools seem to be 90% indoctrination, with failure to pass in the remaining teaching elements no obstacle to being given a High School Diploma.

This failure is clear throughout the United States, but is particularly disabling to young, poor, minority youth in our inner cities. Even those with a H.S.Diploma find it hard to find a job. And most are the product of broken homes where there is often only one parent, and that parent has to work multiple jobs to survive, even as they get some benefit from so-called "safety-net" social programs.

The first generation to suffer this kind of existence is embarrassed by it and want desperately to get out of the dependency. The second generation is less embarrassed and less motivated. By the advent of the third generation, the dependent life-style has become the norm and they know nothing else. However...all people who are "given" stuff, eventually come to hate and despise the givers because the very dependency on "unearned" anything is disrespectful. So they grow angry and simmer...until some action becomes the "hair that brakes the camel's back" and all of that resentment explodes in violence...violence that hurts themselves, their neighbors and friends more than it moves toward a correction or solution to the underlying causes.

Government, of course, serves those who contribute the money. That means that government want the peace kept. Instead of identifying the educational needs of the poor and the minority citizenry, the government simply works to wall-up the poor. Then, they give enough money to keep the poor from starving in an effort to keep them quiet. Even those who claim to want to improve the plight of the poor only do enough to secure the votes of the poor so those elected officials can stay in office, often speaking disrespectfully of those of their own race in the privacy of their offices.

So...what, if any, are the solutions? We'll look at that in my next (and last) entry.Doubtin Thomashttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-20613945227165704492016-09-23T21:43:00.001-07:002016-09-23T21:43:21.654-07:00Why do we have racial unrest today? (#1 of 3)I watch sports to get away from the concerns I have with the world, country and my life. For me, sports has always been about performance, not personalities or beliefs. Yes, that is an artificial and protected view of life, but it provides a certain solace for a period, after which I have to go back to living life.

Suddenly, that solace has been taken from me. And my reaction has been anger. All my life I have dealt with people of all races, colors, and creeds on the basis of their performance and character; do they do what they promised, and are they truthful...these are the rules in business. In my personal life I gravitated to people with the same moral outlook and conversational interests. In listing business associates and acquaintances, I would have to think twice or three times to even try to identify the race, color or creed of those I know...those considerations are unimportant and unworthy of notice.

But all of a sudden I have strangers accusing me of being a racist and being responsible for someone else's happiness, well-being and/or "feelings." Hogwash! No one cares about my feelings either, but that doesn't mean that anyone is doing or intending me ill. That is not their responsibility.

So,...fine, I can dismiss the whole thing as being the creation of a group of narcissists who want "someone else" to be responsible.

Except, maybe that is not the intelligent thing to do.

The people demonstrating and rioting, clamoring for "something" while damaging property and hurting people, are clearly motivated. Yes, some of them are criminals and others are just looking for "free" stuff. But others clearly perceive themselves to have valid grievances and want something done. And that kind of emotional response doesn't come overnight or from just one or two incidents.

Certainly I don't know about the quality of life about which they are complaining. I have been stopped by police over the years for traffic incidents; I have always been conscious of their concerns about my being a potential danger, and have been extremely careful about obeying their instructions exactly, and asking permission for any movement I would like to make. I have had some interaction with officers who "had an attitude" but simply put it down to their having a bad cay and dealt with the situation by being formally polite. But some of the more logical lucid observations by some demonstrators indicate that their experiences have been different...even to the point of disrespect (an often overused term, these days). They want that stopped...particularly in light of their seeing such an attitude leading to unnecessary deaths from civilian/police interactions.

I know that, if all this is true, I am not to blame. But...then, who IS to blame?

Clearly, the things that the demonstrators complain about didn't just start in the immediate past; it takes time for frustration with a situation to develop to the point that any group will be large enough and angry enough to destroy property of their neighbors and friends, loot stores, attack and kill police. So...how and why did this situation come about?

Perhaps if we investigate (to solve, not avoid or postpone) we can get insight sufficient to point us toward solutions rather than cover-up.

 (To be continued)Doubtin Thomashttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-17626674270781456782016-08-10T01:54:00.000-07:002016-08-10T01:54:46.714-07:00This Fall's election doesn't really matter...It can be argued that this Fall's election is either the last chance to save America or that it is already too late. These two possibilities have absolutely nothing to do with ideology. They are based on simple financial considerations.

Consider that neither candidate likely to be elected in the Fall has spoken much, if at all, about the need to get our budget under control and to reduce the national deficit. Consider that no party, no campaign group and no significant organized group of citizens have spoken of spending as a problem. Note that no media outlet of any sort has mentioned anything about a need to get our finances under control.

All that one reads, hears or watches has to do with control and contributing more in the way of funds or benefits to those in our country...legally or otherwise.

One hears nothing about the constant flow of lies coming out of Washington, the clear failure of Justice to apply to those in power, and the lack of accountability of those in the Federal Government. You can even hear a reporter suggesting, in the form of a question to an elected official, if honesty is overrated in government.

One argument suggests that the last clear chance to save our nation in the form that it holds today was in the 2012 election. It was clear by then that our finances were out of control, that our government's elected officials were lying to its citizens, that the economy was not recovering at a pace that would provide needed jobs and that the upper echelons of government were failing to fulfill their administrative and oath of office duties.

In 2012 the citizens of the United States chose more "free" stuff over taking for themselves and demanding of their elected officials the taking of responsibility to balance the budget and start down a path of fiscal responsibility. At that time they saw an out-of-control spending that was most of the way to the present almost 20 Trillion Dollars. All but several trillion was created in those first 4 years from 2008 to 2012...and much of that first one and a half trillion had been voted for by the person holding the office of President. Nonetheless, the voters approved another 4 years of more of the same fiscal insanity and lying and inept administration.

Certainly should Ms. Clinton be elected in November, it is unlikely that the nation will survive past 2020. Why? Well, interest rates cannot stay close to zero forever. As the National Debt rises toward 25 Trillion Dollars and interest rates also rise, the cost of the debt will meet or exceed the amount of tax revenue. leaving no money to actually run the government. Seniors will find their checks either not being honored or just not arriving. As payments to police, firemen and soldiers are first delayed and then not issued at all, public safety will cease to exist. If SCOTUS has approved laws allowing the confiscation of firearms in private ownership, there will be few, if any, to attempt to enforce those laws...and with the proof of the government's failure becoming so obvious, there will be actual revolt throughout the country...and those who will be positioned to be in power will be those who possess firearms, have planned for such a disaster and who have little respect for those who for decades have been belittling and insulting them. It will not be pretty.

But one thing will be for certain: who is President and who controls Congress or SCOTUS will no longer matter.Doubtin Thomashttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-70752656949866260482016-08-02T19:22:00.000-07:002016-08-02T19:22:52.820-07:00"Words"...or "actions"Children aren't taught this anymore, but I grew up to the mantra, "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me." And it was a factual comment. As I grew up, I learned to listen to words for understanding, learning and as an indicator of the the nature of the person speaking the words. For anyone who wants to learn, words and the manner of speaking reveals a lot. Words contain promise as well as threat. Words provide nuance that is available for the listener who wants to hear it.

Actions, however, provide no choice. They simply "are" and the results cannot be changed. Actions can hurt as well as provide pleasure. Of the two, actions are the most immediately dangerous. Words, if used to deceive or misdirect, are just as dangerous...sometimes more so...as actions because they, unlike actions, can seem to promise even as they deceive.

A person who lies lacks both honor and character and is to be avoided. Above all, such a person should never be allowed to have power or authority over you. But such a person, provided that they are aware of their lying, is not the most dangerous.

The most dangerous of people is that individual who not only lies successfully to others, but who also lies so successfully to themselves that they no longer are aware of their own dishonesty. Why is such a person so dangerous? Because they actually exude a sense of belief in their lies that can be very effective in convincing or conning the listener...they come across as believing what they say and there is little defense against such a presentation other than research and verification.

Today children and young adults, particularly those who attend College or University, seem to be indoctrinated with the concept that they should never be challenged by words or ideas which they have been taught or either wrong or hurtful. They have absolutely no emotional callouses; they are ill prepared to evaluate or research ideas, much less challenge them.

But even more concerning is that these young people seem now to consider the "nicety" of words and ideas to be more important that honesty and actions; they are less insulted by those who lie to them and fail to fulfill promises (provided that the lies are phrased nicely and in a complimentary way) than those who speak bluntly and are not "politically correct" (which is clearly an oxymoron). For those who know the "Music Man" play and movie, they would honor the smooth talking liar for his ability to talk and accept the lack of honesty...and then consider themselves superior for so doing.

How can we, as a nation, accept such perverting of our values? How can we allow our children to grow to an age when they must become self-reliant while we allow a government that we elect to spend our children and grandchildren into financial ruin? By what reasoning do we allow our children to be indoctrinated to value "group think" and "avoidance of (or even absence of) consequences" while we fail to teach them that any person or government that is strong or big enough to give them anything is also big and strong enough to take everything away?

One of my own grandchildren has become a victim of this American failure. I am embarrassed that I was not aware and did nothing to attempt to provide some counter instruction. I am embarrassed for all of us who assumed a dedication by our educational and political systems on the part of those who educated and who have and continue to rule us. Our cost of our negligence will be visited upon our descendants and, if justice is served, we will be reviled by those who come after as narcissistic cowards who failed our offspring. I would apologize, but those would just be words...I have already allowed others to throw the sticks and stones.Doubtin Thomashttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-31986979941248289932016-07-25T08:47:00.000-07:002016-07-25T08:47:00.125-07:00What should be the criteria for being "President of the United States?"It is the election season. Actually, it feels as if it has been the elections season forever already! But we still have over 3 months during which we will be bombarded with reasons to favor one candidate over another and why one of the candidates is just the worst example of humanity ever.

Already we hear and read arguments that center on race, gender and ideology...and, strangely enough, honesty. That last one often confuses me because I have always expected that those elected to high office would be, for the most part, honest and truthful. But the other day I watched in amazement as an interviewer asked our current President of the United States if "honesty was overrated!"

Can you believe that such a question would even be asked? I was astounded. Has our country, that once presumed honesty on the part of each of us and, when it was found wanting would exile the liar from any contact with our children or ourselves, sunk so low that we now accept dishonesty and lack of trustworthiness and truthfulness in our politicians and elect them knowing that they possess those traits?

As to the other elements being raised, I find them superfluous. Competence should always be the criteria for holding the office of the Presidency: competence and trustworthiness also. In the upcoming election, my examination of the performance record of Ms. Clinton in public office reveals a lack of both. She has lied. She has failed to protect her people from danger as Sec./State. She has failed to protect secret information properly, knowing that she was putting information at risk.

The performance record of Ms. Clinton disqualifies her as a trustworthy, competent candidate for the office of the Presidency for anyone who examines her record with an objective mind.

Her gender and race are immaterial. Currently there are 106 women holding elective office with a record that invites consideration for holding the office of the President of the United States (6 Governors, 20 Senators, and 81 members of the U.S. House of Representatives), plus others holding positions as CEOs in private industry. While it is foolish to place gender as the top tier requisite for holding any office, elected or not, no one can convince me that one or more of these women would not be the equal of any man currently showing interest in holding office of President.

I have worked for women who were not only the equal of, but superior to, most of the men for whom I have labored...so I know there are qualified women who should be considered and ultimately elected. But not one the basis that "I have waited and now its my turn," but rather, "I have a proven track record that reveals the competency, the honesty and the trustworthiness needed to perform the duties of President of the United States, and I invite an examination of my record.

It is competence, honesty and trustworthiness that should be foremost. Placing any other criteria above these simply invites the presumption of corruption of purpose.

Doubtin Thomashttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-55075149811259717892016-07-17T08:52:00.000-07:002016-07-17T08:52:59.214-07:00Blame the "Protectors" but not the "Doers?"It often appears as if the so-called civilized world has lost its mind. One of the recent news articles said that those who erroneously allowed the truck driver in Nice onto the road where he killed so many people were being blamed...at least in part...for the deaths. The anger in France...or in any country where terrorists act out...should be focused on the terrorist(s), not those who do their level best to protect others. The French are not alone in their apparent desire to ignore the actual "doer" of the atrocity in favor of attacking those who were trying to prevent such occurrences.

In America, I have seen minorities "cop and attitude" with police when approached for almost anything. In an era where minorities have ambushed and assassinated police, those who serve as police are logically on alert. When they approach someone and issue an order (such as "don't move your hands" or "keep you hands where I can see them") and that order is not obeyed, I know of no logical person who wouldn't react as if there were a developing threat and react accordingly. But in the aftermath of these events, even our President accuses police of "overreacting" ...or even of discrimination.

Today, in America it is not hard to get a cop fired. This administration will virtually require local police departments to punish and/or fire any officer who is complained of by any minority. The logical action, then, would be to behave very quietly when approached by any member of the law enforcement community and then bring it to the attention of the police department and the Justice Department. Instead, some just insist on not obeying commands and/or mouthing off as they move their hands in ways that could constitute a threat.

Who is blamed? Why, the law enforcement officer(s) of course.

Over the years, I have been approached by police nine or ten times. Each time, I responded as I would have to any person with authority: directly and politely. Was I uneasy? Sure...in some cases I wasn't sure what I had done wrong, in others I had been speeding and was chagrined that I had been "caught." Another time there had been a "hit and run" and I was questioned if I had seen a particular color and make vehicle. And one time, coming home from school, I had a brake light that wasn't working. Big Deal? Not really. Life goes on around us and sometimes we're the hammer and other times we are the nail.

What I don't understand is why the human race seems bent on allowing those who initiate behavior that results in consequences feel that it is appropriate to deflect consequences on the responder instead of the "doer" who's actions began the whole thing. I can understand how the people involved would like to accomplish that...but not society as a whole, each member of which should know better.Doubtin Thomashttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-37903105022715782082016-07-04T21:44:00.000-07:002016-07-04T21:44:23.716-07:00Why the protest against Patriotism?Our schools and many of our politicians today want to do away with patriotism. Even the courts seem to agree. Schools no longer start the day with the Pledge of Allegiance or singing the National Anthom, something that use to be the norm. Why?

I know of no other country on earth that provides the combination of opportunity and the lack of a "class" attitude that prevents individuals from working to accomplish great things. Many of our largest, most profitable, most generous, and most innovative companies were started by people who came from low or middle class backgrounds and who accomplished much without even completing a college degree. It was their effort and accomplishment that was rewarded.

And it was rewarded by the United States of America and its economy. No other nation state provides the opportunities for individual success that does America.

Yet there are apparently a sizable, if not a majority, of those who control education in America that deem America a "bad" entity; who take every opportunity to focus on her faults and ignore her strengths. Not satisfied with that, they work to cease teaching our children to value the good that exists in America; they often extol the belief and economic systems in other countries, arguing that America is bad because it doesn't proved equality of accomplishment and pay to every person who resides (note that citizenship is not a factor) in the country...or even visits.

These individuals and groups ignore that no other country provides the opportunities that are available to every citizen of America.

More important, they ignore that many countries and ideologies in the world seek to destroy the entity that we know as America.

Why?

If they know of another governing entity that is better, why not extol it factually, providing the basis for all citizens to evaluate their point of view. Why do they use subterfuge and flawed emotional arguments to eliminate competition in schools, rewards for excellence and diminution of accomplishment as a basis for grades...and even arguing that grades or performance is "hurtful."

These people seek only to destroy the United States as a shining example of individual achievement when given individual freedom.

Why do we allow them to hold office, positions of power, and honor them with acceptance?

Doubtin Thomashttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-22889655197186105872016-06-30T01:02:00.003-07:002016-06-30T01:04:21.571-07:00We are a "stricken" country!I suspect that most of the citizens of Greece and of Rome were surprised when their civilizations collapsed. After all, just living life and taking care of one's responsibilities to provide for one's family and to attend to each of our obligations takes time and attention. We all tend...and I thing the citizens of Rome and Greece also..to trust those with governmental power to preserve our safety.

We assume!

Of course we are aware of just how wrong that is...but we do it anyhow. In part, we do it because those who got our vote promised us that they would look out for us...and, after all, they grew up in our town or county and knew what our attitudes were. How could we expect that they would ignore us in favor of "strangers?" Yet...they did. And do.

Once our politicians leave our (their) town...they don't want to come back. Even running for re-election is a chore and make them uncomfortable. Just watch them at local "Town Halls." Notice how controlled it is! Notice how it "feels" like "us" versus "him (or her)". Didn't feel that way the first time he or she ran for office, did it?

They went to Washington and became part of a new community. The Washington establishment doesn't truly care about your town, your county, or your state. They no longer are a part of it. They have become a part of the elite establishment who, as a group, reassure each other that they "know best" and that your interests are just "wrong."

Are any of you who read this post for even one instant think this isn't so? Are you that naive? Or that wrapped up in your individual life pressures that you haven't noticed? You have been...and continue to be...scammed. Conned. Lied to. And...IGNORED.

But...you are too busy to do anything about it, so our country is stricken and on the way to oblivion.Doubtin Thomashttp://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-8518231813580748886.post-71301659245097010542016-06-13T09:30:00.000-07:002016-06-13T09:30:08.960-07:00Have we become a nation of "victims?"Once upon a time (and, no...this is not a fairy tale) America was a country full of people who "did" things. Our forefathers never ever expected to be given anything; they expected to live or die on the basis of whether they succeeded or not. And many did die. The actual number of people that died as America was settled and then expanded west is unknown...at least I have never seen any estimate supported by good research. Those who survived accomplished amazing things.

These people were of all kinds: kind, cruel, gifted, lucky and all sorts of other mixes of character traits. The common trait, however, was that they had only themselves to rely on and that meant they had to take responsibility for the path that their lives took. They were doers...NOT watchers. They acted. They acted to accomplish goals: to eat, live, support their family, to defend their family. None of them...that survived...expected this to be done for them. They didn't sit around waiting for someone else to support or protect them.

Very few people of that frame of mind exist in America today. Those that do are vilified as cruel, unkind, uncaring and/or racist...in addition to many other terms of disrespect. Why? For two main reasons: 1. that sort of attitude is embarrassing to those who are supported by government handouts and if acknowledged as a good thing would leave the recipients feeling "less than";2. the politicians who use the "giving" of other peoples' money to those who don't achieve in order to "buy" their votes and thereby remain in office do not want that fact...or the fact that they usually never keep their promises...highlighted, lest they lose their position of power. I can remember the days of the Community Chest and local Churches and Charities taking care of the "deserving" poor. Yes...I said "deserving." Because in those days every town and county had hard working folk who had disaster visited upon them unexpectedly and were as hard-working as any other member of the community...they deserved help. Likewise, every town had some who were poor out of lack of effort or impulse, making a career out of looking for a hand out. Those folk were never indulged...except for the "elitists" and Progressives in town who were rich and make themselves feel worthy by ostensibly giving funds to any poor person providing it could be done ostentatiously...in public.

Today's America is populated by an increasing number of passive and active "victims." Almost half now receive money from the government that has no basis on their contributions to government programs, like Social Security. That is money that was paid by the recipients over past years, and that is repaid by the government now on the basis of how much you contributed during your working and productive years. No...I am talking about reverse taxation, unemployment, welfare and the like.

There was a time when a majority of people who found themselves in a position to have to take such support were embarrassed to do so; they knew that they hadn't earned it, and looked forward to getting back on their feet so that they could take pride in living off of what they earned. No such embarrassment today; in fact, there is a certain pride and braggadocio exhibited by those who are "stealing" tax dollars from those who do work and pay the taxes that are so blithely redistributed by politicians. And the majority allow this sort of attitude...even applaud it. I find it disgusting.

The same goes for defending ourselves. We allow the government to abandon guarding or enforcing our borders. We make excuses to not hold those that attack us accountable, thereby keeping from having to react in any forceful way to eliminate such attacks. A majority sit around as if there is nothing to be done...except to chant mantras and call for peace and love. I remember a saying common when I was growing up: "God helps those that help themselves." One didn't sit around moaning about something...you did something about it. Maybe you failed, but you tried. You didn't whine about it or mis-characterize it for some unrelated agenda item. It wasn't about words. It was about doing! Victims whine.  Independent free human beings act, and take pride in that fact.

Too bad that America has forgotten how to do that.Doubtin Thomashttp://firstname.lastname@example.com