40 Years Ago This Week The USA Landed on the Moon

40 years ago we landed on the moon, 50 years ago it wasn't possible. In 14 months we won't even be able to put a man in orbit. In 14 months the space shuttle will be retired, and unless the US develops a new manned spacecraft soon, we will have to hitchhike into space with Russa, China, or France. That's just sad.

NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, or LRO, has returned its first imagery of the Apollo moon landing sites. The pictures show the Apollo missions' lunar module descent stages sitting on the moon's surface, as long shadows from a low sun angle make the modules' locations evident. click here to read more and see more NASA photos


Appollo 14 landing site, foot path, etc.

Political cartoonist Scott Stantis at www.townhall.com has similar fellings as I do about the USA being on l4 months away from not being able to put a man in space.

Ode to Maintenance and American Production

Read this article about a 45 year old Mercury with 559,000 miles on it. Well maintained this one owner car is still on the road and looks good.



Talk about green, even at 15 mpg, the energy and resources saved in not scrapping and replacing it every 10 years or so by far makes up for the relatively low mpg. Gotta love old cars and little old ladies, especially when they get tickets for driving 92.

Keep on Truckin Gradma!

Read Story Here

Health Care Bill Outlaws Private Insurance

H.R. 3200, the 1,018-page Health Care bill, contains the following segment listed under "Protecting the Choice to Keep Current Coverage," in the "Limitation on Enrollment" section on Page 16:

Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of the year the legislation becomes law.

That means once law; nobody may purchase new private health care. You will only be allowed your employer's insurance or the government's insurance. This is the nail in the coffin that clearly demonstrates that the Obama regime is pushing the USA to and a fascist state. The Italian Charter of Labour, introduced by the fascists, contained the following statement:

The corporate State considers that private enterprise in the sphere of production is the most effective and useful instrument in the interest of the nation. In view of the fact that private organisation of production is a function of national concern, the organiser of the enterprise is responsible to the State for the direction given to production.

Mussolini stated in The Doctrine of Fascism:
The Fascist State lays claim to rule in the economic field no less than in others; it makes its action felt throughout the length and breadth of the country by means of its corporate, social, and educational institutions, and all the political, economic, and spiritual forces of the nation, organized in their respective associations, circulate within the State.

We the people of the United States of America have elected a Fascist president. We have elected an extreme left liberal/socialist congress. Socialist healthcare is what we will have if congress passes this healthcare bill. It will bankrupt and destroy the nation. Socialism economically destroyed the “democratic republics” of East Germany, the USSR, and Cuba. Let's not even talk about the cars the eastern block produced which are the type of junk we will be forced to buy from GM and Chrysler.

My question is by what constitutional authority can the how can the government not allow insurance companies to sell insurance to private individuals?

"Not One Dime"

Obama said that the taxes of people making less than $200K wouldn't be raised. On the campain trail he was often hear to say "Not One Dime" of new taxes or more taxes on working Americans.

Receintly the White House said that taxes for people making less than $200K might have to go up to help pay for healt care.

Sounds like "Read My Lips".

Will this be enough to make him a one term president?

Insurance is No Answer

In todays TownHall Column by John Stossel, Insurance is No Answer, Mr. Stossel put the thoughts of yesterdays blog entry What Reform Could Look Like into much clearer and better words.

"Imagine if you had grocery insurance. You wouldn't care how much food cost. Why shop around? If someone else were paying 80 percent, you'd buy the most expensive cuts of meat. Prices would skyrocket."

"That's what health insurance does to medical care. Patients rarely even ask what anything costs. Doctors often don't know. Often nobody even gives a damn. Patients rarely ask, "Is that MRI really necessary? Is there a cheaper place?" We consume without thinking. "

Please read his article, and then in your own words tell your representatives to end the fascist (govt./big-business conglomerate)control of healtcare and let the people fix it.

What Reform Could Look Like

Question: What country's health care system has the highest percentage of users who are happy with it, and consistently produces the greatest number of innovations and improvements?

Answer: The USA, 85% of us are happy with our Health care, and no other nation on earth produces as many new drugs, procedures, advances in medicine as the USA.


Question: What type of insurance has the largest choices in policies, providers, and benefits; Is required by virtually everybody, and offers the lowest price per dollar covered?

Answer: Automotive insurance; everybody who owns an automobile must have minimum auto insurance, but the type of coverage, what's covered, deductibles, and prices are all governed by the free market.


Question: What organization when it runs something traditionally add layers of bureaucracy, inefficiency, and ends up providing less service for more money?

Answer: The US Government. Education is a great example as it can be clearly shown that the more the federal government has gotten into education the higher the cost and lower the quality. Can anybody argue that students are better educated in public schools today than 50 years ago?


Question: What model has been shown to decrease health care costs, increase availability, and offer more choice?

Answer: Free Enterprise, In the USA if we look at elective procedures which are not normally covered under typical insurance we find that prices keep coming down. Facelifts, Breast Enhancements, hair grafts, Lasik, and the like have all gotten easier to get, less expensive, and more choice in who, when, where, and how the procedures are performed.

We have two proven models in the US that lower costs and improve service. Auto insurance and elective medical procedures. If we applied these to all of health care we'd probably see the same kind of results.

Terry Paulson discussed it in his TownHall article Health Care Reform that Puts You In Control

Imagine a system where doctors and hospitals have to compete on price, reputation, and quality for your business, and insurance companies have to compete based on price, reputation and quality for your business. Rather than them telling you what you can/can't have you will be able to establish what you need and can afford. Imagine a system where the government doesn't control your choices, benefits, costs.

Sounds like real reform to me.

The Emperor Has No Clothes

The Emperor Has No Clothes is the famous fable by Hans Christian Andersen about an emperor who unwittingly hires two swindlers to create a new suit of clothes for him.

The basic plot is that an emperor of a prosperous city-state who cares more about clothes and looks than running his city-state. He hires two swindlers who promise him the finest suit of clothes from the most beautiful cloth. This cloth, they tell him, is invisible to anyone who was either stupid or unfit for his position. The Emperor cannot see the (non-existent) cloth, but pretends that he can for fear of appearing stupid; his ministers do the same. When the swindlers report that the suit is finished, they dress him in mime. The Emperor then goes on a procession through the capital showing off his new "clothes". During the course of the procession, a small child cries out, "But he has nothing on!" The crowd realizes the child is telling the truth. The Emperor, however, holds his head high and continues the procession.

The difference between this Danish fable and today's reality is, that today when someone points out that the emperor has no clothes, the emperor his ministers and the press attack him as a "denier" trying to keep the people from seeing the obvious.

Alan Carlin a senior analyst in the EPA's National Center for Environmental Economics and a 35-year veteran of the agency, submitted a 98-page analysis arguing the agency should take another look at the science behind man-made climate change because the evidence was "inconclusive at best." The "Transparent" Obama administration has tried to bury this, and have been caught.

Unable to defend the EPA's actions, anonymous EPA officials are doing what they does best: ad hominid attacks on Mr. Carlin, decrying him as a "denier." The EPA tells us he is, "only" an economist, but the fact is that Carlin holds a degree in physics from CalTech.The EPA says that his study was full of sham science, but the fact is tThe majority of the science is from peer-reviewed studies. The EPA says it isn’t his responsibility to look at this issue, but the fact is that he works in an office tasked with "informing important policy decisions with sound economics and other sciences."

Because the Obama EPA's endangerment finding is a policy act, the EPA is required to make public those agency documents that pertain to the decision, to allow for public comment. Court rulings say rulemaking records must include both "the evidence relied upon and the evidence discarded." By not allowing Alan Carlin’s study to be circulated the Obama EPA has hidden the evidence from the people and decision makers. He, through the EPA, lied by omission. How does this sit with his April 2009 statement saying "the days of science taking a backseat to ideology are over." Hardly the “transparency in Government” he has promised.

It’s not one child that is calling the townspeople to notice that the emperor has no clothes, it is the brightest and best scientists of the world. Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe now counts more than 700 scientists who disagree with the U.N. -- 13 times the number who authored the U.N.'s 2007 climate summary for policymakers. Princeton's Will Happer is leading a group of 54 noted physicists who are demanding the American Physical Society revise its position that the science is settled. Both Nature and Science magazines have refused to run the physicists' open letter. The world's first woman to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology, Joanne Simpson, expressed relief upon her retirement last year that she was finally free to speak "frankly" of her non-belief. Japanese environmental physical chemist, Dr. Kiminori Itoh, a contributor to a U.N. climate report, declared that man-made warming is "the worst scientific scandal in history." Man Made Global Warming is the "new religion" according to Norway's Ivar Giaever, Nobel Prize winner for physics.

To quote Kim Strassel‘s recent WSJ article. "The collapse of the "consensus" has been driven by reality. The inconvenient truth is that the earth's temperatures have flat-lined since 2001, despite growing concentrations of C02. Peer-reviewed research has debunked doomsday scenarios about the polar ice caps, hurricanes, malaria, extinctions, rising oceans. A global financial crisis has politicians taking a harder look at the science that would require them to hamstring their economies to rein in carbon. " It’s about Power not science. Obama and the Press want to ram Cap-and-Trade down our throats before we notice that the science doesn’t support their position.

The child is pointing out "Man Made Global Warming is a Lie". When will the crowd recognize the truth?

Similarities between 1930's Germany and the USA today

Similarities between 1930's Germany and the USA today

Let's start with H.R. 675. This House resolution Provide police officers, criminal investigators, and game law enforcement officers of the Department of Defense with the authority to execute warrants, make arrests, and carry firearms.
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h675/show

The authorities granted by the bill:

To execute and serve warrants;

To make arrests without warrants;

To carry firearms;

To enforce federal laws enacted to protect persons or property;

To prevent breaches of the peace and suppress affrays or unlawful assemblies

Why does the DOD or some new Federal police force need the authority to execute warrants, make arrests and carry firearms? The FBI can already do that, and the Justice Department can prosecute federal crimes. I believe that the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act explicitly prohibits the Department of Defense from involvement in state and local law enforcement activities. So the whole reasoning behind HR675 just doesn't' make legal sense, and no where in any of the 28 powers authorized to congress is there a power to create a federal law enforcement agency. By the specific restrictions on the Federal Government in the 9th and 10th amendments tot he constitution the power to police is specifically restricted to the states or the people.

This sounds like Obama is trying to do exactly what he told us he'd do when running for office. Form a national police force that is not accountable to the people but accountable to Him, didn't Germany do that in the 1930's? If I remember my pre-PC history, I believe that Hitler did the same thing, it was called the Gestapo.

The first amendment to the US Constitution says that congress shall pass no laws infringing on the right of the people to peaceably assemble. So what is an unlawful assembly? Any assembly the government doesn't approve? This HR wants to prevent "unlawful assemblies", didn't Germany do that in the 1930's. Those laws were used to arrest those how tried to protest against the Nazi party.

Earlier in this blog I wrote about Democratic congress persons claiming that those who would actually hold elected officials accountable and publicly tell them they would vote them out of office if they vote raise taxes are Terrorists.. They are trying to use a revamped version of the Fairness Doctrine to shut down Talk Radio, and proposing other laws to shut down blogs, etc. to restrict what the press can and can't say or who can and can't say what. Didn't Germany do that in the 1930's.

There are several bills before congress that would require the registration of all firearms, didn't Germany do that in the 1930's.

Obviously because current police and military have taken an oath to protect the constitution and the people, and are held accountable if they execute unconstitutional orders, the Democrats in Washington want to create this federal police force.

Obviously the virtues independence and individual freedom are not those of the Democrats and power mongers in Washington. Government control seems to be the virtue they most want cherish.

Oath Keepers

Oath-Keepers

This organization gives us all hope. Probably not the hope Obama wants you to have.

Our respected military service members all took an Oath to Protect and Defend the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic.

While many political offices require a similar Oath, among public servants only military and Police Officers have the training and means to truly fulfill the Oath…. But more importantly, they are the only ones not beholden to a political party or candidate. They are only beholden to the Constitution and to the People they serve. They are the true Guardians of the Republic!

Oath Keepers exists to remind current and veteran Police Officers and military service members of their Oath to the U.S. Constitution, and the restrictions the Constitution places on the power and scope of governmental interference into the lives of its citizens.

Members of the service or law enforcement who are "Oath Keepers" have sworn to the following.

They will NOT obey orders to disarm the American people.

They will NOT obey orders to conduct warrantless searches of the American people.

They will NOT obey orders to detain American citizens as "unlawful enemy combatants" or to subject them to military tribunal.

They will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a "state of emergency" on a state.

They will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty.

They will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.

They will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext.

They will NOT obey orders to assist or support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against the American people to "keep the peace" or to "maintain control."

They will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies.

They will NOT obey any orders which infringe on the right of the people to free speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances.



Thank God for our service men and women, and for the Police who actually serve us. Ask them if they know of this organization and if they would take this oath, to uphold the oath they have already taken.

Gun Control = More Crime

Gun Control = More Crime

Over a decade ago Great Britain confiscated the guns of private citizens in the name of public safety. They even made it a crime to use a weapon in self defense. Official crime figures show the UK also has a worse rate for all types of violence than the U.S. and even South Africa - widely considered one of the world's most dangerous countries.

Here are the violent crime rates for top ten most violent industrialized nations (violent crime rate is measured as crimes per 100,000 residents).

Country	Crime Rate
UK	2034
Austria	1677
South Africa	1609
Sweden	1123
Belgium	1006
Canada	935
Finland	738
Netherlands	676
Luxemburg	565
France	504

The U.S. has a violence rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents. Do some research yourself and you will find that in general the stricter a country is on its citizens guns generally equates to those same citizens being subjected to higher rates of violent crime.

When you read some article that tells you that for public safety we need more gun control, and they show you a murder statistic, ask them about rapes, robberies, assaults, and other violent crime. They either won't know or say those numbers don't matter. They do. Virtually every place that has allowed citizens the right to carry weapons (concealed or open) has seen a reduction in violent crime. Virtually all mass shootings occur in "gun free zones" like schools. I see a correlation do you?

Let your congressmen and senators know that if they vote to further restrict your right to keep and bear arms that you will vote to replace them.