Just Asking

The people who closed off public roads leading to public parks and memorials; the people who shut down privately owned and operated businesses because they were leasing space from the government; and the people who closed off over a thousand square miles of the Atlantic Ocean did so because they wanted to throw a temper tantrum.

The same people who refuse to talk to anyone with a different opinion unless the other party gives in to them before the conversation.

Believe it's a good idea to be involved in your health care

So tell me...why is this a good idea?

Not in my day

A student in Bryant School District in Arkansas brought home a worksheet that presented her with a scenario that referred to the Bill of Rights as “outdated” and that as part of a special committee she would need to throw out two of the Amendments.

The worksheet was handed out to Sixth grade students in a History class. According to the girl’s mother the young lady had not received any government or civics classes and this was the first assignment dealing with the Constitution or Bill of Rights.

 The reference to this education atrocity noted that the school district used the controversial Common Core curriculum. Common Core is an educational philosophy that pushes political liberalism, centralized government, minimizes family importance and denies any place for religion in an individuals life. 

Families need to be aware of what the younger generation is being taught in school and respond if those values conflict with their family beliefs. In Pennsylvania a few weeks a go a father was arrested for asking, at a public meeting, questions about the Common Core studies program in his kids school. All he did was ask a question, apparently without causing a scene, and was detained and charged with disorderly conduct and assaulting a police officer.

A peaceful question about a public policy was encouraged in my day, but apparently "those in authority" in today's world cannot abide anyone questioning their decisions.

Keeping up with the children

I was talking with a friend when he mentioned a conversation he with his granddaughter a few months ago. During his conversation he asked what was important about the date of February 20th.

The little girl told him it was "President's Day"

Thinking he would get an answer concerning Washington or Lincoln he asked "What does President's Day mean?"

The answer she gave him was " That's the day President Obama steps out of the White House and if he sees his shadow we have one more year of unemployment"

If the story is true I can only say that's a wise (and cynical) child.

Where reason is not understood

Yesterday in the "progressive" country of Dubai a court entered a guilty sentence against a Norwegian national that serves as nothing more than an illustration of how badly the religion of Mohammad can distort reality.

It all started when a 24 year old lady from Norway went to Dubai on business. Since Dubai is, by Muslim standards a very liberal country with a record for allowing its citizens great latitude she didn't anticipate any problems during her business trip. Unfortunately she went out one evening and  ended her day by being raped by a local. When she reported the crime to the police they not only arrested the rapist they also arrested her. He was charged with having a carnal relationship outside marriage and for the consumption of alcohol and was sentence to 13 months in jail. She was charge with the same crimes and has been sentenced to 16 months in jail.

Under Sharia law the lady is guilty of being female and was treated more harshly than the low life that made her a victim. And yet our political bosses say we need to treat the followers of the "religion of peace" with dignity when those very "peaceful" people are unwilling to act as responsible adults and to show respect for people.

It is an extreme statement...but I think I learned all I need to know about Islam on 9/11

Words Matter

One way political opponents denigrate those they dislike is to point out issues with those they consider the enemy and then pontificate about the subject.

Since actively social politicians do not like the military they are having a field day with sexual issues that have come to light within the military. I don’t think that any rational adult is accepting of sexual assault, but it does happen and society has a responsibility towards the victim, the perpetrator and society in general and to the adult mind the perpetrator should be caught and punished severely.

The President was certainly not using an adult mind when he recently spoke out on the subject and is quoted as saying at a press conference:

“The bottom line is: I have no tolerance for this,” Obama said, according to an NBC News story, he expanded on his comment by saying ‘I expect consequences,” Obama added. “So I don’t just want more speeches or awareness programs or training, but ultimately folks look the other way. If we find out somebody’s engaging in this, they’ve got to be held accountable -- prosecuted, stripped of their positions, court martialed, fired, dishonorably discharged. Period.”

These words came back to haunt the President when a Navy judge at  the court martial of two accused military members was asked by defense lawyers if his comments were prejudicial to the defendants. The judge agreed and ruled that the statement constituted ‘Unlawful Command Influence’. Even if the defendants are found guilty they can not be separated from the service because that Mr. Obama had in effect ordered the military to do something that only a court-martial can decide. Under the rule of law that is unacceptable!

There went the trial and it also opened the door for future defendants in military sexual assault trials to raise the same defense. One thing politicians are not good at is foresight and the impact words can have. It does point out that words can matter, a concept that seems to have evaded the thinking of many present day political creatures.

Citizen or Subject

With the exception of the major media outlets that seem to want to downplay the event there is lots of commentary concerning a homicide that occurred yesterday in England. A member of the British military was run down by a car on the sidewalk near an Army installation in Woolwich and then literally butchered by the perpetrators.

The killers remained on scene and were recorded by multiple phone cameras as they taunted bystanders and offered their “reason” for committing such a public killing. The film clips clearly show the killers and their victim and more importantly the large number of people who were observing the incident or who walked through the crime scene without breaking step. Despite the many witnesses no one appeared to want to intervene, either to stop the attack or detain the killers.

A few years ago an equally reprehensible group of perpetrators hijacked and crashed airplanes in an American day of tragedy. One man on one of the planes responded during the attack and tried to take back the plane. Despite the passengers efforts the plane crashed in an open field and all were killed.

What needs to be celebrated is that as citizens of this country the passengers recognized that they had both a right and an obligation to fight terrorism. The contrast with the actions of people who were present at yesterday’s incident is clear…we are citizens and a responsible few of us know that direct action is preferable to standing around and doing nothing.

Worms

A couple of weeks ago I had some stents put in after several cardiac veins started to fill up with unwanted plaque. Post procedure one of my goals is to try walking every day in order to exercise my body. The walking also gives me time to think, plot and plan my day and mentally to write such things as this blog. Walking through our neighborhood gives me lots of opportunity to observe and this morning I noted that at some time in the past the weather had called out lots of earth worms that then got caught on the sidewalk by the summer sun. The walk was littered with the desiccated remains of venturesome worms that had paid the penalty for extending themselves. For some reason I felt sorry for the each of those worm and with lots of walking and thinking time I contemplated the great mystery of life: Do worms have a soul?

Those thoughts conflated into the bigger question concerning what is it that drives some people to deny the existence in any other species other than themselves. It is characteristic of humans to realize that they have a soul and that it is the presence of that soul that sets us apart from all others. It’s that belief that because we can think, and reason, that we are special.

But other species have demonstrated the ability to think, and even to reason and there are uncountable examples of animals living and responding in ways that are similar to our ability to think, live and reason. So perhaps it is human kind’s ability to occasionally suspend reason that sets us apart?

Nearing the end of my walk I finally concluded that what we call soul is really awareness that we are aware of our awareness and of our existence. All creatures’ great and small have to be aware that they exist just to able to survive and reproduce so my stream of thought concluded that all who are aware of self must also (by our definition) have a soul.

I suspect that many who read these words will strongly object to my conclusion but that’s what makes us the multifaceted species we are. It also allowed me to escort the small insect I found while I enjoyed a morning cup of tea to the great outdoors so he/she/it could enjoy its existence.

People of the Book

The actions of the media reporting the resistance the people of Massachusetts to the burial of Tamarian Tsarnaev in their fair state demonstrates the ability of societies to demonize individuals and social groups.  It’s a human characteristic to view others as “different” and to be viewed with suspicion. And oddly enough Islamic religion spends a lot of its writings in the Koran demonizing others. A short walk through the books of the Koran can easily find comments calling others “animals”, “demons”, “living in filth” are just a few of the nicer things this religious tome says.

But there is one thought in the Koran that is repeated several time and is based on the simple fact that Islam acknowledges that much of its teachings are based of the philosophy of both Judaism and Christianity and in fact links all three religions as “people of the book”.

In my work as a mediator I have had the opportunity to mediate disputes between Sunni and Shia. Two branches of the religions that dislikes each other intensely and are often at odds with each other over minor issues. Each time I try to mediate these cases I have to listen to each party try to influence me while at the same time insisting that as a non Muslim I couldn’t possibly understand their predicament.

When I use the Arabic phrase Ahl el-Kitab in response to their diatribe they are startled, start wondering how a Westerner knows the Koran and Arabic they usually calm down, listen to me and start to discuss their issues. In truth I know almost no Arabic and couldn’t care less about the contents of the Koran, but I do know that people who believe the writings of their religion always respond positively to the thoughts found in their book.

In response to the actions of those who would deny a man, no matter how reprehensible, the respect afforded by a simple burial I can only repeat what I tell Muslims in dispute: We are all people of the book and are required to respect the values of others.  You might not like the individual but you must respect his right to fair treatment both  under the law and as a statement of our social commitment.

Autonomous Cars

I read a recent article that talked about the virtues of “autonomous cars” and what a brave new world the future would be if only all cars were self controlled.

I started reading the article because the title was intriguing and I was curious why the author choose to use a somewhat obscure word to describe efforts and goals for making cars more self sufficient and ultimately capable of going from point A to point B without any human input.

The planners envision a future with drivers doing office work, reading the news and perhaps even taking a nap while the vehicle does all the work. They tell us that cars will not get into accidents, travel will be more efficient, gas mileage will be better and efficiency will improve.

I see their future dream as one more step towards removing control from the human loop. The futurists who are selling this concept belong to a culture that wants to centralize authority to “those who are more capable than the common man”  and taking the right of each one of us to decide how and in what manner we choose to lead our lives…and knowingly responsible for the results of those decisions.

I know that driving from one place to another is a minor task but I would much rather depend on the awareness of a human being rather than the known fact that electronics fail at the worst possible time, with the worst possible consequences.

As for autonomous cars we already have that capability. If you don’t want to drive you can usually take the bus or hire a taxi.

Just a Thought

We have been on vacation and have little opportunity to update the blog, but the events in Boston have made me think about what constitutes terrorism and who the players are.

I find it most striking that the President can't seem to get energized when he talks about the bombs and the action the government is (should) be taking to find the perpertrators responsible. When he talks I get the feeling that he is bored and uninterested in the subject and is just talking about the problem because it's an expected thing for him to do. I wish I were wrong, but it goes along with his style of government by fiat and demonizing of any one who questions his tactics.

Perhaps he isn't interesting in pursuing the subject of terrorist bombings because his close friend and Chicago mentor, Bill Ayers made his reputation by being a domestic terrorist and is still proud of the actions he took as a younger man. To this day Ayers has refused to do anything other than brag about his history and still considers a bomb to be a political statement.

Since the Presidential thinking is much influenced by the Chicago political code it appears that deep down he doesn't see any problem with terrorism as a political tool.

A Change of Pace

My brother spent several years as a senior manager at Yosemite and I'm sure he saw these scenes every day.

The park is a beautiful place...enjoy the link

                 http://vimeo.com/40802206

The Peter Principle

Two events demonstrate the hubris of the political class in this country. Nancy Pelosi has come out as opposed to the congressional pay cut that is mandated by the administration proposed sequestration as "undermining the dignity of the job". I wonder what the reaction would be if I used that same statement if someone offered me a reduction in salary! Of course her comment comes on the heels of a statement she made last week that the economy was not in trouble because of "overspending", it needed just needed adjusting because of a "budget deficit".

The best illustration of political hubris came while watching the State of the Union dog and pony show. One Australian writer compared the attitude and actions of Mr. Obama to the actions of Captain Queeg in the novel.  "The Caine Mutiny". For those of you who have not read the book it is a beautiful description of a naval officer who has been promoted beyond his level of competence and freezes up when presented with events he has no understanding of or ability to react to. Queeg almost allows his ship to founder when he refuses to take any action other than to repeat previous orders that have proved ineffective during a typhoon.

Faced with what looks like an epic fiscal typhoon Mr. Obama has done nothing at all other than repeating pseudo-Keynesian fiscal mantra that are nothing more than repetition of failed ideas. His inability to recognize the issues his policies have created suggest that he is seriously deficient in mental agility and certainly unwilling to listen to other opinions and suggestions.

Watching him I'm struck by his visible lack of concern and his smug, self evident sense of his own greatness
His programmatic response to the coming debacle is to blame others and to ask for increased taxes on those he calls "the rich". A cursory look at economics reveals, to me, that there are not enough "rich" people to  lower the debt to any measurable extent.

The Laffer Curve, as applied in President Reagan's administration demonstrated quite well that the way to improve the economy and lower the deficit is to lower taxes. But the political class in this country is committed to the idea that only by doing the same failed thing over and over will the economy improve.

That's not economics....that's insanity.

Damn Their Eyes

The past few weeks I've been dealing with insurance problems and I'm becoming expert on the things insurance people can do to keep from paying a claim. Granted the greater proportion of claims are paid in a timely manner but in every industry there are people who seem to delight in making life hard for those they deal with.

The National Flood Insurance Program is a federally mandated and underwritten program that is administered by FEMA who ultimately pay out on all flood damage claims. Commercial insurance companies and local agents write and service flood policies but their risk is minimal and their economic exposure is infinitesimal. Nevertheless I have had scores of people telling me about their issues with the insurance company.

Could you produce a sales receipt for the coach you bought 20 years ago? And if you could find where you had filed that ancient receipt what do you do when all your records were washed away in the flood. But it seeems to be a requirement by some companies that if you can't produce a receipt for every item they will deny the entire claim...until you can prove when you bought and how much you paid for the item.

Then there are the companies that claim that their adjuster, the person who looked at your loss and wrote it up has never sent them the paperwork. Three months later and they never bother to tell you that their agent failed to do his job! And of course there are the companies who just never perform. The client keeps calling and they always tell them "next month" until someone (usually the client) gives up in dispair after using his own funds to pay for repairs the insurance is supposed to cover.

None of this is FEMA's fault, they are depending on the insurance companies to do their job. But when the client is at the end of their tether they usually end up talking to me since I'm usually the first human contact they can reach. I can help, I can refer to higher authority, but I cannot give the people back the time they have lost while waitng for the insurer to do the job in a timely manner.

That's not the worst of the crimes some companies commit. All mortgage companies require that purchesers of property within a defined flood zone have both property and flood insurance in force. It's logical that they want to protect their invesment. On more than one occasion I've been approached by a homeowner who was sold "flood insurance" by their mortgage ccomapany, with the particiption of an insurance company that was nothing more than a declining balance mortgage insurance. After the flood has totaled their home the couple who had been sold "flood insurance", and it said so in bolded letters on the insurance policy get a letter saying that the mortgage on their house had been paid off and that they were responsible for any and all repairs to the house.

Words fail me.

Rights

The great social debate of the day is focused on the right of the people to keep and bear firearms. Some of the people believe that the Second Amendment gives them unfettered right to own rifles, shotguns, pistols and just about any other weapon they desire and to enjoy any and all of the shooting sports. There are also other members of our society that think any kind of "weapon" including a pointed finger should be banned and the user punished.

Obviously the truth of the debate lies somewhere between those two extreme positions. I tend to believe that with few exceptions all qualified citizens have a right to posses and enjoy firearms and I cannot understand the thinking of those who would take away what I believe to be a right. I also believe that if we want to debate the issue all parties need to have a clear understanding of what the word "rights" mean.

To my mind rights can be identified as have either positive or negative positions. If you ask the average person to define the American Bill of Rights they will always identify them as negative rights that are reserved for the people to enjoy and the government is forbidden (and incapable) of taking away from the people.

The people who presently oppose the Second Amendment to the Constitution will loudly identify what they see rights to be. To them a right is a positive obligation of society to all its citizens. The right to an education, food, a job and an income are some of the rights they hold dear. I can't fault their desires, I just find it counter-productive to believe that things that can be achieved by personal effort should be given us by the state. It is society's job to present opportunity to the individual, not give him a handout.

If those rights are so important I believe the reason the writers of the Constitution did not enumerate them is that they saw those rights as a positive value, and one that could only lead to a centralized and controlling government. They had just fought a war and created a new nation over that issue and certainly did not want to create our own monster.

I believe the society and members of those who created our country were far wiser than many of today's society give them credit for. So if you don't mind, I'll stick with the negative values of the Bill of Rights and refuse to "improve" them as some of our politicians want us to do.

Lessons Learned

I've been on deployment with FEMA to the New York area helping people impacted by Super Storm Sandy. The last time I spent more than a day or two in New York was when I was growing up here...and I left the city behind me back in the 50's when I graduated from high school.

Old New York is not the same as when I was growing up and to my jaded eyes all the changes that have occurred are not all for the good. What was once a crowded and congested city is now a grossly crowded and congested assembly of people who seem to have lost all social skills. Manhattan used to be a walkers paradise and people on the street had a an almost ballerina skill in walking crowded streets without colliding. Today when I try to walk the streets it's almost impossible to avoid being run down by pedestrians who bull down the street, focused on their latest electronic toy and seeing neither people, cars or walk lights in their hurry to get elsewhere. The shear number of people concentrated in a small area has destroyed the concept of  "personal space" and the traditional in your face attitude is reflected by personal space becoming a contact sport.

Once out of the city and in my car I get a daily lesson in attitude from my fellow drivers. Speed limits and traffic control devices are there for tourists and I'm sure the horn industry sells lots of replacement horns every day. There are signs on all the highways that tell drivers it's a state law that turn signals must be used when changing lanes. HAH! they only use of turn signal I see is when traffic is jammed up (a common occurrence) and the guy next to you wants to get in the space your car is occupying...and he will do that come what may. About 20 percent of the drivers I see insist on driving with their high beams on and there is nothing that can persuade them to do otherwise. I guess they feel that if they don't blind you, you won't see them trying to occupy your space.

I made a decision many years ago that "elsewhere" was better than New York City and I'm glad I did. I got a wonderful lady, great family and an interesting career after I moved away. I've never looked back, but I also have to say that the xenophobic people who inhabit the region are also up front, outspoken and assertively some of the nicest people you can meet. Once they say hello to your good morning welcome they prove to be social and (almost) polite.

In my dealings with those who were impacted by the storm I've seen a resiliency and a willingness to work towards regaining their fractured lives that I find impressive. I'm still glad I live where I do, but I am impressed by the applicants I work with.

I have to disagree

I occasionally publish my thoughts and could be considered a blogger. That's a term with about as much credence as "assault rifle" and "dumb blond" but I enjoy speaking my mind and letting the few readers I have know what I'm thinking. As most bloggers do I also read the product of other bloggers both to get ideas and to tune my own writing skills in comparison with people whose writing ability I admire and hope to emulate.

I ran across a post from a blogger who believes that governmental disaster response is both too expensive and muddleheaded. Writing about "Sandy" the recent east coast disaster he made it clear that if you build on a barrier island you deserve having your house washed away. If you decided not to have flood insurance he sees no benefit in the government helping you recover from the result of your stupid decision. In short he thinks that money spent on disaster recovery is a bad social investment, with no good return on investment in his eyes. Interestingly enough I can see the merit (but not the logic) of his commentary.

I am a reservist with FEMA (as are the majority of FEMA people, which means we have a life outside the periodic call to help others) and at the moment I'm stationed on one of those east coast barrier islands that was devastated by the storm. I'm seeing first hand the impact poor decisions made years ago can have on people. And often those decisions were made by other people who didn't have a clue that what they decided would hurt future generations.

I see people who have lived in their seaside cottage for over half a century. A cottage that was built long before there was an understanding of the dynamics of barrier beaches and long before the concept of building codes. Logically society should not have built infrastructure on barrier islands but reality is that society established itself on the island and we have to live with the consequences of decisions made by those long dead people so many years ago.

The older couple I mentioned just a moment ago probably bought their seaside cottage in the 1950's or 60's and after decades of occupancy they finally paid the mortgage off. What they failed to realize is that the mortgage company, when they finalized the mortgage also terminated the National Flood Insurance coverage the couple had paid for over the years. And as often happens the elderly pair didn't realize they had no insurance or made the (bad) decision that the premiums were higher than they could afford.

What do I, as a representative of a government that prides itself on caring tell these octogenarians when they approach me for help. Their cottage has been knocked off its foundations and the contents of their home (and the visible memories of their lives) have been washed into the ocean or are ruined by mold. I have to tell them that when their insurance lapsed they forfeited their best opportunity to recover their declining years and that the most their government can do for them is fund them to a ceiling of $31,900 which barely gives them opportunity to turn their back on their lives and their history and find a safer place to live.

So while I agree with my fellow blogger that we should not reward bad decisions I have to ask if individuals should today bear the burden of past generations making those poor decisions. There is a need for society to make some serious changes and we need to discuss what they should be and what the implications of those decisions will be.

I look forward to that conversation.

The Blame Game

Every morning I try to watch at least a few minutes of news while I'm getting dressed for work, it puts me in a cynical mood but I try to ignore that to I can deal with clients in a more positive frame of mind. The past weeks the talking heads that read the news de jour have been over extending themselves in spreading the word that the evil and/or sick people who have cause undue pain and suffering are the result of other peoples actions. So if out of the thousands of people who have seen a violent movie there is one sick individual who acts out his emotional fantasy and rage it's all the fault of the entertainment industry.

I grew up in the 40's and watched my kids growing up in the 60's and 70's and there was always some depiction of violence and bad behavior on the silver screen or the TV. While we have always had asocial people who are willing to do bad things there was no casting of blame when those people did wrong. Society dealt with the problem and the perpetrator and depended on the parents of the millions of kids growing up to teach them social morality and proper behavior. It was not then, and it should not be now a reason to blame others for the failure of an infinitesimal few to abide to the social norms that define us as a society.

While we are right to blame the individual and right to determine suitable punishment for their transgressions we should look to the parents who failed in their job of guiding the growing child down the proper path rather than blaming the media and the entertainment industry. I don't like the extravagant violence that is glorified today but it still remains the jo of the parent to see that their child knows right from wrong, understands the social contract and is willing to take responsibility for their actions.