Friday, October 23, 2009

2nd Amendment Wisdom

Below is an email I received earlier this morning. Most are stated in jest--but have a lot of truth behind the comical words. I understand the want to keep our citizen's safe. What I can't understand is the thought that TAKING AWAY guns from honest citizens will do the job. I'm not sure how many of you have had the privilege of being a part of an urban community, whether by being a neighbor, working there or attending a school. I'm not sure it really matters. If you have been a part of an urban community you KNOW that the "bad apples" don't care what the law says. They don't care if the 2nd Amendment is revoked. They will find guns and they will use them. So, you have your law abiding citizens that have done away with their guns, because they are illegal, suddenly faced with a law breaker who has a gun. Where is the protection in that?

Also, I once again feel that there is an ulterior motive behind making gun laws so strict or doing away with them altogether. Like I stated yesterday, this is a sneaky, sneaky administration that adores Chicago-style politics. Take away the guns from EVERYBODY except...those in power. Frightening. Frightening. Frightening.

Have a great weekend. Enjoy football and cool fall weather. These days we have to fight or dig our heads in the sand. On the weekends, I choose the latter of the two. Who Dat?!?

Clint Smith, Director of Thunder Ranch, is part Drill Instructor, And part standup comic. Here are a few of his observations on Tactics, firearms, self defense and life as we know it in the Civilized world.

"The handgun would not be my choice of weapon if I knew I was going to a fight....I'd choose a rifle, a shotgun, an RPG or an atomic Bomb instead."

"The two most important rules in a gunfight are: Always cheat and Always win."

"Every time I teach a class, I discover I don't know something."

"Don't forget, incoming fire has the right of way."

"Make your attacker advance through a wall of bullets. I may get killed with my own gun, but he's gonna have to beat me to death with it, cause it's going to be empty."

"If you're not shootin', you should be loadin'. If you're not loadin, you should be movin', if you're not movin', someone's gonna Cut your head off and put it on a stick."

"When you reload in low light encounters, don't put your flashlight in your back pocket... If you light yourself up, you'll look like an angel or the tooth fairy...Then you're gonna be one of 'em pretty soon."

"Do something. It may be wrong, but do something.."

"Nothing adds a little class to a sniper course like a babe in a Ghilliesuit."

"Shoot what's available, as long as it's available, until something else becomes available."

"If you carry a gun, people will call you paranoid. That's ridiculous... If I have a gun, what in the hell do I have to be paranoid for."

"Don't shoot fast, shoot good."

"You can say 'stop' or 'alto' or use any other word you think will work but I've found that a large bore muzzle pointed at someone's head is pretty much the universal language."

"You have the rest of your life to solve your problems. How long you live depends on how well you do it."

"You cannot save the planet. You may be able to save yourself and your family."

"Thunder Ranch will be here as long as you'll have us or until someone makes us go away and either way it will be exciting."

More Excellent Gun Wisdom.......The purpose of fighting is to Win!

There is no possible victory in defense.. The sword is more important than the shield, and skill is more important than either.

The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental.

1. Don't pick a fight with an old man. If he is too old to fight, He'll just kill you.

2. If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck.

3. I carry a gun cause a cop is too heavy.

4. When seconds count, the cops are just minutes away.

5. A reporter did a human-interest piece on the Texas Rangers. The reporter recognized the Colt Model 1911 the Ranger was carrying and asked him 'Why do you carry a 45?' The Ranger responded, 'Because they don't make a 46.'

6. An armed man will kill an unarmed man with monotonous regularity.

7. The old sheriff was attending an awards dinner when a lady commented on his wearing his sidearm. 'Sheriff, I see you have your pistol. Are you expecting trouble?' 'No ma'am. If I were expecting trouble, I would have brought my rifle.'

8. Beware the man who only has one gun. He probably knows how to use it!

'The true Soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because He loves what is behind him.'

A people that values its privileges above its principles will soon lose both.

'Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not..' ~ Thomas Jefferson

"A general dissolution of principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy." --Samuel Adams

If you believe in the 2nd Amendment, please forward. I just did.

Thursday, October 22, 2009

The Axis of Idiots

This is an email I received yesterday. I didn't write this--but in my disclaimer from yesterday, at least I'm VISITING my blog, right? I mean, it's really sad when you get your weekly reports and there are ZERO hits. I hope some of you come back to visit. Sorry for the absence. Anyway, I thought there were some pretty good points made here. Send to your friends, repost on your blog!!

"The Axis of Idiots" J.D. Pendry, Retired Sergeant Major, USMC

Jimmy Carter, you are the father of the Islamic Nazi movement. You threw the Shah under the bus, welcomed the Ayatollah home, and then lacked the spine to confront the terrorists when they took our embassy and our people hostage. You're the "runner-in-chief."

Bill Clinton, you played ring around the Lewinsky while the terrorists were at war with us. You got us into a fight with them in Somalia and then you ran from it. Your weak-willed responses to the USS Cole and the First Trade Center Bombing and Our Embassy Bombings emboldened the killers. Each time you failed to respond adequately, they grew bolder, until 9/11/2001.

John Kerry, dishonesty is your most prominent attribute. You lied about American Soldiers in Vietnam .. Your military service, like your life, is more fiction than fact. You've accused our military of terrorizing women and children in Iraq .. You called Iraq the wrong war, wrong place, wrong time, and the same words you used to describe Vietnam . You're a fake! You want to run from Iraq and abandon the Iraqis to murderers just as you did to the Vietnamese. Iraq , like Vietnam , is another war that you were for, before you were against it.

John Murtha, you said our military was broken. You said we can't win militarily in Iraq . You accused United States Marines of cold-blooded murder without proof and said we should redeploy to Okinawa . Okinawa, John? And the Democrats call you their military expert! Are you sure you didn't suffer a traumatic brain injury while you were off building your war hero resume? You're a sad, pitiable, corrupt, and washed up old fool. You're not a Marine, sir. You wouldn't amount to a good pimple on a real Marine's ass. You're a phony and a disgrace. Run away, John..

Dick Durbin, you accused our Soldiers at Guantanamo of being Nazis, tenders of Soviet style gulags and as bad as the regime of Pol Pot, who murdered two million of his own people after your party abandoned Southeast Asia to the Communists. Now you want to abandon the Iraqis to the same fate. History was not a good teacher for you, was it? Lord help us! See Dick run.

Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Carl Levine, Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein, Russ Feingold, Pat Leahy, Barack Obama, Chuck Schumer, the Hollywood Leftist morons, et al, ad nauseam: Every time you stand in front of television cameras and broadcast to the Islamic Nazis that we went to war because our President lied, that the war is wrong and our Soldiers are torturers, that we should leave Iraq, you give the Islamic butchers - the same ones that tortured and mutilated American Soldiers - cause to think that we'll run away again, and all they have to do is hang on a little longer. It is inevitable that we, the infidels, will have to defeat the Islamic jihadists. Better to do it now on their turf, than later on ours after they have gained both strength and momentum.

American news media, the New York Times particularly: Each time you publish stories about national defense secrets and our intelligence gathering methods, you become one united with the sub-human pieces of camel dung that torture and mutilate the bodies of American Soldiers. You can't strike up the courage to publish cartoons, but you can help Al Qaeda destroy my country. Actually, you are more dangerous to us than Al Qaeda is. Think about that each time you face Mecca to admire your Pulitzer.

You are America 's 'AXIS OF IDIOTS.' Your Collective Stupidity will destroy us.. Self-serving politics and terrorist-abetting news scoops are more important to you than our national security or the lives of innocent civilians and Soldiers It bothers you that defending ourselves gets in the way of your elitist sport of politics and your ignorant editorializing. There is as much blood on your hands as is on the hands of murdering terrorists. Don't ever doubt that. Your frolics will only serve to extend this war as they extended Vietnam . If you want our Soldiers home as you claim, knock off the crap and try supporting your country ahead of supporting your silly political aims and aiding our enemies.

Yes, I'm questioning your patriotism. Your loyalty ends with self. I'm also questioning why you're stealing air that decent Americans could be breathing. You don't deserve the protection of our men and women in uniform. You need to run away from this war, this country. Leave the war to the people who have the will to see it through and the country to people who are willing to defend it.

Our country has two enemies: Those who want to destroy us from the outside and those who attempt it from within.

Semper Fi, J. D. Pendry - Sergeant Major, USMC, Retired

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Justice Department Knows Best

In November 2008, the town of Kinston, North Carolina voted overwhelmingly to remove partisan elections for city officials, thus having non-partisan races (like 98.4% of other municipalities in North Carolina currently practice).

Apparently, according the DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE--this vote was (are you ready for it?) RACIST. Nevermind that the city has a black majority. (Those silly black folk just don't know what's good for themselves I suppose, and for you folks that read black and white, that statement was what we call SARCASM).

And just in case you want to accuse me of making this up... you can read all about it in the Washington Post, here.

"The Justice Department's ruling, which affects races for City Council and mayor, went so far as to say partisan elections are needed so that black voters can elect their "candidates of choice" - identified by the department as those who are Democrats and almost exclusively black...

...The department ruled that white voters in Kinston will vote for blacks only if they are Democrats and that therefore the city cannot get rid of party affiliations for local elections because that would violate black voters' right to elect the candidates they want."

I'm not sure what infuriates me more on this issue. The fact that the Justice Department (ummm...FEDERAL) is telling a local government (ummm...STATE) what it can and cannot do --or the fact that someone in our federal government actually BELIEVES that black voters NEED the "democrat" title next to a name in order to know who to vote for.

When is this going to stop? The Federal goverment are overstepping their boundaries in so many forms and fashions these days that it is becoming almost comical. I would think I was watching a bad movie if I wasn't witnessing each and every day.

On another note: I deeply apologize for my lack of posting here at Bless Our Hearts. I have A LOT on my plate at the moment and I had to make some decisions/cuts. One of the "cuts" had to be this blog for several reasons. First, I keep having panic attacks when I think and/or talk about today's current events. Second, some of the things going on in my life are a once in a lifetime deal and I have to give them priority (I know...so ellusive, huh?). Thirdly, I will simply repeat my first excuse. I seriously keep having panic attacks when I think too much about all this business. The General assures me he has some work to contribute so that we don't completely lose our readership during my hiatus. Let's see if he means business shall we?

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

A Short Rune on Dissent

A Short Rune on Dissent

Ah, the cool winds of spring bring a calm precision As the pieces, masterminded by the shameless, fall into place. But summer brings a dissonance As novice, eclectic dissidents descend, Bearing stakes bangled with fluttering hues, muttering apprehension Yet, screaming comprehension. Alas, it is but a dissent of harmless tea, petty reply to the pantheon of the left, Searching for a leveling of excesses, a return to principle.

Abused and Ignored, the beating keystones of our Great Thought Are reduced, demeaned, desocialized by the dissembling mob of nine. We lay in wait, but have awakened. Mark this, Foolish One – it bodes ill for thee. Liberty embraced shall break your hold! Sycophant plans exalted, amended, then dashed. Skulk to that great Pale Abode and wait, concupiscent of change. Your taking-time has passed, and We shall be abused no more!

© 2009, The General

Hollywood and Mainstream Media

Do you ever get SO frustrated with today's celebrities that you literally turn off the television--or bypass seeing a movie, just because someone plays a leading role? I do. Far too often. In fact, I sometimes battle with not going to see a blockbuster simply because I do not agree with the actors' personal beliefs.

Some (ok, most) of my friends tell me I'm ridiculous, but am I? These people tell us what we should do with our lives, how we should treat people, what we should give away, who we should vote for--though they don't follow their own advice (well except who to vote for). They lecture us from their million dollar homes. What makes them an expert in today's world? The fact that they made millions of dollars by pretending to be somebody else?!? I'm tired of listening to someone who has no idea what it is like to be an "average Joe" tell me what I should do in my home or how I should live my life.

I came across a speech that Pat Sajak gave in 2002. He took the thoughts and points I make on a daily basis and said them so eloquently that I felt I must share with blog land. Here's the full speech.

"...Former CBS News-man Bernard Goldberg has written a best- selling book called Bias, in which he maintains that the real problem with the media is not a bias based on liberal vs. conservative or Republican vs. Democrat. It is a bias based on the sameness of worldview caused by social, intellectual, educational and professional inbreeding. These are folks who travel in the same circles, go to the same parties, talk to the same people, compare their ideas to people with the same ideas, and develop a standard view on issues that makes any deviation from them seem somehow marginal, or even weird...

...At a dinner party in Los Angeles recently, our hostess was about to say some grudgingly kind words about President Bush and the way he was handling the War on Terror. She prefaced her remarks by saying, "Now I know everyone at this table voted for Al Gore, but ..." Well, she knew no such thing. She just presumed it. It's what "right-thinking" people did. This "false reality" is a phenomenon that permeates media circles.

It's the phenomenon that caused Pauline Kael, former film critic for The New Yorker, to remark after Richard Nixon's election sweep in 1972, "I can't believe it! I don't know a single person who voted for him." This was a man who won in 49 out of 50 states, and she didn't know one person who voted for him. And I don't think she was dealing in hyperbole. She simply had never met those people. She couldn't believe they really existed...

... It's the phenomenon that explains Hollywood's disdain for Big Business. You read about it in the newsmagazines and see it in the movies. Big Business is bad. The people who run these businesses are heartless, often criminal, brutes. There is no regard for the little guy. Thousands are laid off while the greedy business executives reap windfall profits. Never mind that some of the biggest and least-competitive businesses are in entertainment. They merge, they lay off thousands, while stock options accrue to the top executives. Top talent at networks and in movies get tens — even hundreds — of millions while so many of their co-workers, the little people they care so much about, lose their jobs. They simply don't see the contradiction. They are above it..."

I especially like the Big Business "evil" monster. I keep intending to do a piece on Michael Moore's new movie: "Capitalism: A Love Story." I think Jay Leno summed it up best last week when he said in more or less words--yes Michael. Capitalism is sooooo evil. It's so evil that all that profit you're making from the movie tickets and all the profits you are making off the items being sold along side the release of your movie is only ok, what, if it lines YOUR pockets???

I pledge allegiance

Aired in 1969. Lest we forget the true meaning of our Pledge. Isn't it amazing that something spoken back in 1969 by a comedian could be so true today?

video

Monday, September 21, 2009

more on that pesky subject: Healthcare

The following is a letter sent out to the New Orleans Tea Party participants. The author of the letter is an orthdontist in the Greater New Orleans area. His words hit several points I've tried to make time and again right on the head. The government makes things WORSE on a national level.:

Dear Tea Party Patriots, This one is a little long, so grab a cup of coffee or your favorite beverage as you read along.

As we approach the end of September, we know that, insofar as health care legislation is concerned, we are getting close to "put up or shut up" time for those we have elected to serve in Washington DC. I think we now all appreciate why it has been said that "laws are like sausages; it is better not to see either one of them being made."

What is it that people on all sides of the debate basically agree upon? Each of us would like to spend the least amount of our income on health care expenses. At the same time, we concede that having high quality care comes at an expense. That said, there are four things I hold with conviction:

(1) I believe health care and health insurance DOES NOT not have to be as expensive at it has become. (2) I belive that, with certain changes, health care expenses CAN be an affordable part of nearly every American's budget. (3) I believe that, when you break it all down, the biggest explanation for the rapidly escalating price of health insurance has been and continues to be.............government involvement. (4) I believe, with government out of the way, we can and will find a way to take care of everyone WITHOUT busting the bank. Allow me to elaborate. As far back as 1950, research shows that health care spending accounted for less than 5% of America's gross domestic product (GDP). By the early 1990's, it had reached approximately 13% of GDP and today it is close to 18% of the GDP. If left unchecked, it is projected to reach 20% of GDP by 2018 and will negatively impact the country's ability to fund other more pressing goals, not the least of which is national security and national defense. http://www.kff.org/insurance/upload/7692_02.pdf How did it get this way? Many people point to the great technological advances and improvements in prescription drugs over the last two decades. And while there is no doubt that newer technology and improved drugs contribute to escalating costs, they are just not enough to provide the entire explanation. The better explanation is how we now pay for medical care. In the "good old days," patients paid their doctors for services rendered. There was free competition amongst doctors, which helped control costs, and patients themselves behaved responsibly. They did not run to the doctor for every little sniffle or cough because (1) they figured they already knew what the doctor was going to recommend and (2) they knew there was a price to pay for an office visit. They used common sense to influence their decision of when to seek out a doctor and only went when they thought something might be serious.

Today, few people hesitate to run to the doctor because they know their own out-of-pocket expense is mostly (if not entirely) going to be covered by their insurance. Common sense plays no role in their decision. They figure "I've already paid for the insurance. I might as well use it." That kind of mentality, along with the way we pay for health care today, is at the very root of the problem.

I will get back to that issue in a moment, but there is another factor that compunds the problem. Several years ago in a faraway distant land, doctors used their diagnostic skills, training and experience to determine which limited tests he/she needed to establish a proper diagnosis. Again, this was paid for by the patient out of pocket, but NOT at an exorbitant cost. If it had been too expensive, doctors would have gone out of business because most people could not have afforded to pay their bills.

Today, that same doctor no longer relies on his/her training, but instead on a battery of unnecessary tests, scans, etc. to arrive at that same diagnosis. This, all at major expense not to the patient, but to the patient's insurance company. Why? On the off chance that the patient has a condition that is found in less than 1 - 5% of all patients, the doctors must literally rule out practically every known medical condition that might possibly be producing the patient's symptoms. And we all know why? The public used to understand and appreciate that (1) doctors are human and (2) treatment of the human body comes with no guarantees. A poor treatment outcome is NOT, in and of itself, a situation of medical malpractice. Yet today, patients with unfavorable outcomes often assume the doctor did something wrong. Or, even if they don't believe this to be true, they see it as a potential lottery ticket. They know that medical malpractice insurance companies will often settle out of court to avoid the time and expense associated with a trial. Yes, doctors make mistakes and doctors SHOULD be held accountable for poor treatment (as determined by their medical peers who set the standards for medical care). But malpractice lawsuits are OUT OF CONTROL and this most certainly drives up the total cost of medical care. In many instances, hospitals pay for their doctors' malpractice insurance and those costs are passed on to ALL of us via increased insurance premiums.

Now, back to the discussion of cost and how we got here. In 1965, the federal government stuck its inefficient and frequently corrupt nose into health care. It established Medicare for people aged 65 and older as a means of providing health insurance coverage to senior citizens. It simultaneously established Medicaid for low-income families and people with certain disabilities. I sincerely believe that the inflationary spiral in health care costs that we are experiencing today is directly correlated to these entitlement programs. Why?

The primary explanation is that Medicare and Medicaid essentially removed the doctor and the patient from cost-consciousness. If you and I win a gift card that allows us to spend as much as we want for a night out at Commander's Palace (for those of you NOT from New Orleans, it's one of our more fine --- and expensive -- dining establishments), we will probably order a great bottle of wine, appetizers, entree's, desserts, and perhaps an after-dinner liquor. If, however, the evening is on our own nickel, our wine selection might be a little less ambitious, we might skip the appetizers, and after-dinner drinks are probably out as well. In fact, we might not even go to Commander's Palace in the first place. Do you follow where I am going? Thanks to government's intrusion into health care WITH SEEMINGLY GOOD INTENTIONS, the unintended consequences have placed us in this untenable situation TODAY. The government, doctors and patients view it as "FREE MONEY" and the uninhibited spending habits learned from within the Medicare/Medicaid system gradually filtered into the private health insurance industry as consumers (patients) came to expect to have no additional out-of-pocket expenses for their health care.

And how ANYONE within earshot of this e-mail can place ANY confidence in government's ability to restrain spending and bend the cost curve downward over time is absolutely incomprehensible to me. You may twist the interpretation, but HISTORY DOESN'T LIE.

Medicare currently has just over $89 trillion in unfunded liabilities. An unfunded liability is the difference between the benefits that have been promised to current and future recipients versus what will be collected in dedicated taxes and Medicare premiums. If no other reform is enacted, this funding gap can only be closed in future years by substantial tax increases, large benefit cuts or both. In 1965, the government projected that Medicare expenses through 1990 would be $9 billion. Guess what?? Actual costs ended up being $67 billion !!! In 2003, the 10-year estimate for Medicare's drug benefit was $409 billion. Guess what?? Within just 3 years, it was re-calculcated at $1.2 trillion. The current estimate is that the President's health care reform plan will cost $800 billion to $1 trillion over 10 years. What do you think it will actually cost? And who do you think will end up paying for it?

Before Medicare was enacted, people understood that it was THEIR responsibility to plan and budget for basic health care and catastrophic health insurance, especially as they got older. But because government had not yet stuck its nose into the health care industry, basic health care costs and catastrophic insurance WERE ACTUALLY AFFORDABLE and would not break the budgets of people without active income.

Prior to government intrusion, the health care system worked fine. Patients had many choices amongst different types of doctors and they could find doctors they liked no matter what their budgets. Care was affordable. In the years following government intrusion, costs have gotten out of control, patients have less confidence in their doctors, lawsuits are out of control and medical costs are becoming unaffordable for the average person.

As a consequence, the government and, for that matter, the entire country is engaged in a bitter debate on how to "fix" the system the government screwed up in the first place. Our "leaders" believe that solutions include "cost-effective comparisons", government mandates, a government-run (public) option and various and sundry other GOVERNMENT solutions. Are we out of our minds?

And, for just a moment, let's ignore the cost aspect. When has ANY GOVERNMENT entity successfully run an entitlement program? Again, HISTORY DOESN'T LIE. In the United Kingdom, which has universal health care, there are an estimated 750,000 people on hospital waiting lists. And we've all heard about the horror stories of waiting to see a specialist in Canada.

Our government "leaders" try to use all the key words and phrases to make this all sound so reasonable, ethical and logical, i.e. "quality, affordable health care for all Americans." Who amongst you believes this will be the true end result? How can you possibly have such confidence when nothing in our country's history (or any country for that matter) demonstrates this will be the case in the future?

We MUST gradually phase government OUT of the health care industry and, yes, that means ending Medicare at some point in the future. The immediate gut-check response from some of you will be terror at the thought of losing your Medicare. But please remember that I said a gradual phase-out. Future generations must know, in advance, that the government will not be the primary provider of their health care funding.

But here's what you might be missing from my discussion. The reason surgeries and hospitalizations cost so much now is BECAUSE of government intrusion. With government out of the way, medical care would be as affordable as it was BEFORE. There wouldn't be many $20,000 surgeries because few people could afford them. Basic health services would be affordable and catastrophic private insurance would also be affordable. This notion that ONLY GOVERNMENT is able to take care of the elderly, the poor and the needy is PREPOSTEROUS. Get OUT of that mindset. That's what they want you to believe. Don't be a puppet.

And finally, this debate is about health care, but it is really more than just that. At its core is the debate of how much government is too much government. I, for one, have every bit of confidence in government's ability to bankrupt this system. If we do not put a stop to President Obama's plan, we are certain to face a future of increasing costs, an unparalleled appetite for "free" medical care due to the absence of cost-consciousness, an absolutely essential cost-controlling effort by government to ration care, government beauracrats telling our doctors how to practice medicine, an immense burn-out rate amongst those in the health care fields and a gradual deterioration in our overall satisfaction with the quality of medical care in America.

I believe the majority of Americans who are bothering to pay attention realize this. Hence, the current polls and the outpouring of emotion at town hall meeetings throughout the country over the summer. Now is NOT the time to get complacent. Continue to call your representatives until your fingers are exhausted and/or your voice is cracking. Tell your representatives to START OVER and make sensible decisions that REMOVE government intrusion and reward a free market system. And when the playing field is, once and for all, fair, America will figure a way (as it always does) to take care of those who are genuinely unable to take care of themselves. The outcome of this debate will shape the future of this country for generations to come. Make no mistake about it.

Best regards to all, Glenn Dubroc, Jr.

At http://www.ardocscare.com/ health care providers are asked to complete a survey that questions their thoughts on the current bills presented for healthcare reform. The results, I think say enough.