Global Dissatisfaction with Free Market Capitalism, BBC Poll Shows

Interesting global survey from the BBC.

Free market flawed, says survey

By James Robbins
Diplomatic correspondent, BBC News

More than 29,000 people in 27 countries were questioned. In only two countries, the United States and Pakistan, did more than one in five people feel that capitalism works well as it stands.

Almost a quarter – 23% of those who responded – feel it is fatally flawed. That is the view of 43% in France, 38% in Mexico and 35% in Brazil.

And there is very strong support around the world for governments to distribute wealth more evenly. That is backed by majorities in 22 of the 27 countries.

Of course, I have to wonder why the survey was conducted and whether it was intended to isolate those in the U.S. who still believe in, and are strongly lobbying for, less involvement of government in the economy. At present the government of the U.S. is on course to regulate nearly every facet of daily life as well as the economic situation: health care including abortion rights, energy use including cap and trade, internet use including net neutrality, gun control, privacy including open-ended eavesdropping and reading of internet correspondence, and assuming control of financial institutions, automotive companies and dealerships, etc, etc.

The list is long. Many of my readers agree with this insertion of government into our private life and choices. Many do not. So I raise two questions: are we meant to be influenced by this poll?  And do we care what the rest of the world believes?

             
 

Puritans and their Scarlet Letter assist in the downfall of the U.S.

Last night the Conservatives in the U.S. proved that they still own this country; with the introduction of an amendment banning the use of federal funds to pay for abortions for any reason, they gave strength to the House of Representatives to pass their bloated, giveaway health plan.  It is morally outrageous that in the 21st century, the religious beliefs of some outweigh the rights and dignity of others.  Our tax dollars are to be used for the good of all, not to impose one’s views on another human being.

Banning the right of women to make choices about their own bodies, their own families, and their own health demonstrates how little we have progressed in the move for equal justice under the law.  I wish I could believe that each of you who support this prohibition will be lining up at hospital doors to adopt the unwanted children born as a result of your petty understanding of the Christ’s message, but we all know that you will turn your backs on them the moment they are born.   I hope that in the fullness of time He will open your eyes to your own sin of pride and that you will find forgiveness. For you have done great damage to your sisters and to the country you claim to love.

Perhaps when the government limits the number of children you may have, you will understand.

Or maybe this time, he will keep his word and not sign this bill if it gets to his desk!

That pesky birth certificate

I thought I would write a post to pick up on what cats said earlier about Leo Donofrio’s blog. Many people are highly misinformed about the entire eligibility issue but to at least set the record straight on that pesky birth certificate would probably clarify a lot of confusion.

The media outlets no matter if they are on TV, radio, or a newspaper consistently misrepresent and mislead people on the birth certificate issue. They all claim they have seen and touched Obama’s birth certificate and maintain that it is  fait accompli.

This is simply untrue. Obama never released a birth certificate what he released is a certification of live birth. This is not a birth certificate. It doesn’t name any hospital. It doesn’t have the name of any attending physician on it. The certification number is blacked out which invalidates the document (says so on the bottom of the document).

Philip Berg has excellent documentation on the forgery of Obama’s colb, however, since I am not a document analysis expert, I will focus on other areas of the issue.

Then we have statements like the ones of Dr. Chiyome Fukino, The Hawaii Dept. of Health Director who said that she had “personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Senator Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.”  And then in later sentiments says “Obama was born in Hawaii.” Oh really Chiyome? Well where is your proof? As Leo Donofrio has discovered, according to Hawaiian law, if Dr. Fukino makes a public statement, under 92F-12(a)(15), all “Information collected and maintained for the purpose of making” the statement available to the public must be disclosed.

§92F-12 Disclosure required. (a) Any other provision in this chapter to the contrary notwithstanding, each agency shall make available for public inspection and duplication during regular business hours:

(15) Information collected and maintained for the purpose of making information available to the general public;

Where is the information Chiyome used for the purpose of making her public statement? Is she citing the certification of live birth Obama released? Her statements really don’t hold any weight especially when you look into the state policies and procedures of Hawaii.

Up until June 2009, The Hawaiian Dept. of Health even stated that certifications of live birth are not acceptable under their verification standards.

In order to process your application, DHHL utilizes information that is found only on the original Certificate of Live Birth, which is either black or green,” the qualifications state. “This is a more complete record of your birth than the Certification of Live Birth (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Certificate of Live Birth will save you time and money since the computer-generated Certification requires additional verification by DHHL

What is even more suspicious and raises questions of complicity, is that the same Hawaiian Dept. of Health recently upgraded their policy on certifications of live birth sometime around July. Stating that they now accept certifications of live birth.

because they are official government records documenting an individual’s birth.

Hmmm… What changed within about 30 days from June to July of 2009 that they now suddenly accept certifications of live birth? Why would The Hawaiian Dept. of Health suddenly, out of nowhere change one of their long standing policies that directly correlates with the pressing matter of Obama’s eligibility? Because I thought a “certification requires additional verification”? What changed Hawaii? Were you tired of being pressured by patriotic Americans who are pressing you with questions that affect the constitution?  It could only make us wonder.

Back during the time Obama claims was born, there were four, yes FOUR different ways one could obtain a Hawaiian Birth Certificate. HI statutes 338-178 and 338-41 allows foreign born children to obtain Hawaiian Birth Certificates and allows one to obtain a birth certificate on a statement by a parent or grandparent. See Section 57- 9, 18, 19 & 20 and Section 57-40 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act.

Finally, even if he was at one point a natural born citizen and had a Hawaiian Birth Certificate he still wouldn’t be natural born. Obama’s mother divorced his father, she remarried Lolo Soetoro from Indonesia. In his book, Obama states he went to school in Indonesia for four years. Significantly at the time, Indonesia was at war, the only people who could go to school in Indonesia were people who were citizens of Indonesia. Therefore his stepfather had to do one of two things to get him into school – he either had to adopt him or he had to acknowledge him, that is how he went to school. His school records indicate his name as Barry Soetoro, nationality Indonesian. Indonesia at the time did not provide for dual citizenship, so he was now a citizen of Indonesia. Even if he went through Immigration back in the U.S. he would then become a naturalized citizen, not natural born therefore ineligible for presidency according to Section 1481 of the United States Constitution that provides loss of nationality by natural born citizens upon “taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state.”

There still is no definitive proof from Obama that proves he is a natural born citizen. Judge David Carter has recently said in a court order that plantiffs could have standing to raise the question of eligibility, but it should be filed in the District of Columbia. Perhaps one day this issue will have it’s day in court where it will be heard on the merits. But for now, the long and winding road of Obama’s eligibility continues on.

cross-posted at  http://shouldvevotedforhillary.wordpress.com

Civics, not Religion, is what is needed in our schools.

I took the Red Pill quoted Abraham Lincoln in a post a few days ago ( Obama, Corzine, and the Radical Left Agenda).

“The philosophy of the classroom in one generation will be the philosophy of the government in the next.”

- President Abraham Lincoln

And then added that what is wrong with our current current educational and political “situation” is that

We removed the Bible and allowed in people like Bill Ayers who infested the education system with Marxism.

I disagree completely with this statement, although I have enjoyed Red Pill’s blog and his comments at Leo Donofrio’s blog here. I have had some experience as a teacher (at State Universities, Junior Colleges, and elementary schools) and I totally agree that there is something wrong with our national education system. One problem is the one-size-fits-all philosophy that has allowed our government to dictate what should be taught and how it must be taught. During my short tenure as an elementary teacher, I taught second language students, many of whom spoke no English when they came into the classroom. By tailoring my methods and materials to suit the needs and interests of individual students and classrooms, I was able to successfully guide my students in English acquisition. One of my first/second grade classes excitedly learned the difference between transparent and translucent, learned about liquids and solids, the water cycle and so much more.

Like so many of my fellow teachers, I left the classroom when I was no longer allowed to determine how to teach my students. The idea that every student at each grade level should be on the same page at the same time of the day is ludicrous; combined with the necessity of national testing standards which really meant teaching to the test so the school would not be penalized, has proved quite unsuccessful, especially with second language students. Other teachers may disagree; many of them do not want the responsibility of assessing their students’ needs and designing instructional material. My daughter, currently in her second year of teaching special education students, voices the same complaint to me. Her students come to her with differences that can not be “ironed flat” by one-size-fits-all programs, but she is mandated to use the materials anyway. I suspect that she will not remain in the profession for long.

What is also missing in the classroom is civics, teaching from the earliest grade levels what it means to be a good “citizen.” I always began the school year by demonstrating to the class that they must act together, despite their many differences, in order to achieve their goal – learning how the world works. Such lessons teach respect, responsibility, and cooperation; things which our current social structure certainly seem to be lacking.

In all of this I have no disagreement with Red Pill. But Religion in the classroom is another matter. Western civilization may identify itself as Christian, but there are no end of varieties of Christian – from cult-like followers of strict interpretation to moderate constructionists and congregations of liberal thought and practice. Christianity means so many different things to so many Christians. They are entitled to those differences; but I do not think they are entitled to impose their beliefs on one another.

Let me be very clear here. Morality, virtue, justice, truth, ethics, virtue and many other attributes can be taught using a classical system of education without religion. This country is no longer a few colonies bound together by a common Protestant religion (if it ever really was); Catholics, Quakers, Adventists, Presbyterians, Buddhists, and dare I say it – even Atheists – have immigrated to these United States and contributed their beings to its welfare.

We must accept that from “sea to shining sea” what unites us is our belief in freedom, shared responsibility and respect for each one another’s inalienable rights.

Lean to the left, lean to the right, stand up, sit down…

Despite the many posts I have written in opposition to Barack Obama’s politics and in support of the Tea Party Movement and to the preservation of our constitutional rights, I am having a hard time figuring out the political cycles.  You would think I would be very happy that two Republican candidates just beat two Democrat candidates for governor of their respective states, but I’m not.  Nor am I sure that I am happy about the “revolution” that is about to take place.

The Republicans think their time has come.  They can replace a socialist tendency with a puritanical tendency.  I’m actually registered as an Independent.  I think  and act as an independent.  I don’t want the state or federal government meddling in schools, doctor’s offices, hospitals, etc.; but I don’t want religion in my schools, my doctor’s office, or personal values either.  Quite frankly, I haven’t noticed that either side of that coin holds much value for a lot of  human beings  on the “other” side.

It’s a real dilemma.  What is an independent thinker to do?   I can and have voted for third party candidates, but that rarely ever causes any great changes in Washington, so the folks there just keep meddling in my affairs.  I can also look for centrists from either party and swing left or right from election to election, but that is not really a satisfying choice either, because I’m always having to compromise something.  Obviously, there have been times when I could not vote for any candidate on the ballot because the compromises were too great.

So here I am on a Thursday morning thinking still about Tuesday’s elections and the resulting euphoria from the right.  Oh boy, now we can stop the Healthcare Bill because it might fund abortions, rather than because it might not improve health care.  And, there is still that pesky Maine vote against same-sex marriage.  Conservatives take great delight in that vote because their God has told them to interfere in everyone else’s business.  I spent some time this morning looking at the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights trying to find how that particular imperative was written into law.  It wasn’t.  As it turns out, Article VI of the Constitution states clearly that

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. (here)

Isn’t that odd? You would think that the founders would have insisted on a religious test if they intended for religion to be a guide for our laws; shouldn’t every Senator or Representative share the same religious values?   But wait, the Colonies belonged to England, only they were settled by people from all over Europe. Perhaps they did not all share the same interpretation of The Bible, and the Founders who believed that

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and  the pursuit of happiness.

did not feel a need to specify which Creator or how those rights were to be achieved.  I don’t see anything that mandates a nation-wide common value system.

The fifty-four men who composed the First Continental Congress represented different interests, religions, and regions; they held conflicting opinions as to how best restore their rights. Most did not know each other; some did not like each other. With no history of successful cooperation, they struggled to overcome their differences…here

I understand differences and I understand that people often fear what they are not. A bi-racial child, a mixed racial couple, a foreigner with a different accent or style of dress evokes some primitive need for self-protection.   Some people don’t want others to kill “babies” by abortion, but they will kill doctors or nurses who perform abortions.  Some people don’t want “non-traditional” couples to marry so they use their voting rights to deny others of their rights to make that choice.

But unless you are willing to go form your own colony somewhere, like the Separatist Pilgrims* did, you can no longer live in a homogeneous world. Isn’t going to happen. You can forestall change but you can not stop it (and I definitely do not mean “change you can believe in”). African slaves were not people once; neither were the indigenous peoples of the U.S., neither were women really (just an attachment to some male – father, husband, brother, it didn’t matter which).  Unless you are a Hobbit, the world around you is going to change. If you don’t do it, your children or their children will.  (My daughter told me this yesterday in a discussion about the need to be aware of others and twenty-four hours later, I get her point.)

Hold on to your own values and let me hold on to mine.  In the meantime, I’m still looking for a Centrist, tolerant candidate, who wants to defend the Constitution and keep this country from total financial bankruptcy and defend ALL its citizens, not just the ones who consider themselves “chosen.”

* more on this in the next post.

About that birth certificate, Mr. Obama?

Leo Donofrio says in today’s post at Natural Born Citizen,  ( here) that Hawaii’s Department of Health has confirmed that they do have a record of Obama’s birth dated August 1961.

So I ask again: Mr. Obama, why is it so difficult to produce the birth certificate that you claim proves your eligibility to be president? Unless the birth certificate in Hawaii provides information that disqualifies you for the presidency, there is no reason to keep it secret is there? Even if the bc shows that someone other than Obama Sr. is your father, so what? A little embarrassing maybe, but then you are still eligible to be president. If the birth certificate proves that your were born in Hawaii, that would at least give credence to your statements that you were born in Hawaii. Obviously, if the birth certificate states that you were, in fact, born in Kenya, that might be a bigger embarrassment.

On the other hand, if, as we assume, that Obama Sr. is your father, certainly then we might be entitled to an explanation of the dual citizenship you were granted at birth and whether that issue was ever resolved.  Are you still a British Subject, a Kenyan citizen, an Indonesian citizen?

See, no matter how I look at it, there are so many explanations for your secrecy that the issue can’t go away. Maybe for some unfathomable reason you like the distraction the issue provides , but a lot of citizens, naturalized and natural-born, are really disturbed by your lack of “transparency” on the issue.

I understand that you have difficulty making decisions about really tough issues, but, come on, how hard can this one be?

Tennessee Tenth Amendment Resolution update and an apology

Back in February of this year, I posted about the Tennessee resolution to affirm states rights.  here

That post is still getting readers and there are many searches for any information about the Amendment.  I apologize for not following up on it.   On the 27th of June, the Governor of Tennessee signed the Resolution after it had been passed by both the state senate and house.    here

While HJR0108 is strongly-word in support of the principles of limited, constitutional government that the 10th Amendment represents, it is a Joint Resolution and does not carry with it the force of law.  But supporters say that this is an important first step to get their message out not only to grassroots supporters, but to the media, and legislators in other states as well.

The Tenth Amendment Center also posts a map displaying action taken by individual states. here

As they say at the site “Follow-up, of course, is a must.” I apologize for not posting about this before.

The never-ending cycle

I suggest we all prepare ourselves for a GOP majority in the house and senate real soon.

Since late June, support for Republican candidates has ranged from 41% to 44%, while support for Democrats has run from 36% to 40%. Looking back one year ago, the two parties were in a much different place. Throughout the summer of 2008, support for Democratic congressional candidates ranged from 45% to 48%. Republican support ranged from 34% to 37%.

New polls find that the number of conservatives are the highest they have been in over 4 years. And you all thought the whole conservatives in power thing would end in 2008 right? Wrong. Well blame your fellow democratic leaders for installing an empty-promising liar.

I guess since a real democrat hasn’t been in office in over 8 years people have forgotten what true democratic progressive policies look like- thus mistaking Obama’s special interest favoring policies as democratic policies – thus moving people away from real democratic issues and winding up right where they started in 2004 – thus the never ending cycle.

The more time goes on the more Obama’s approval ratings slip. He has experienced the worst poll rating drop in more than 50 years! The support he has on key issues from healthcare to the deficit, from human rights to the war on Afghanistan continues to crumble. And his continuations of Bush’s unpopular policies on torture, terrorism, state secrets, bailouts among many others isn’t furthering democratic principles in the least.

And I don’t blame people shifting their stances on issues because with a Democrat like Barack Obama who needs Republicans? Why should citizens of this country be loyal to a party whose leader isn’t loyal to the issues it champions?

Truth is, we are all right back where we started. Conservatives are hip again (not), Presidents are on never ending trips again, and people who want real change have to wait until the democratic party gets their act together again.

cross-posted from http://shouldvevotedforhillary.wordpress.com/

October the deadliest month for U.S. troops in Afghanistan. Obama still can’t make a decision.

While the resident in the White House, hems and haws about what to do in Afghanistan, soldiers are dying and one official has quit.

Afghan bombs kill eight US troops

First U.S. Official Resigns Over Afghan War Senior diplomat in Afghanistan said he believes the war is simply fueling the insurgency

During the campaign, Obama asserted that we were fighting the wrong war, that U.S. troops ought to be pounding Al-Qaeda in whatever caves they were hiding in. He even asserted that far more troops were needed there.

Even after taking office, Obama made it clear that more “resources” might be needed as the situation developed.

Now when his generals call for more re-enforcements, the Commander-in-Chief needs to “think” some more before sending more soldiers into harm’s way.   Obama can’t make the call just yet.  My guess is that he has only now learned that it is so much easier to criticize the other guy making the calls than it is to make them yourself.

Obama says the Strategy” must come before the Resources;”  in other words the U.S. must have a plan for Afghanistan and Pakistan before more troops are sent in.  Wow!  That seems so logical to me, but why isn’t there a strategy already in place.  Men were fighting in Afghanistan when Obama took the office, his people were doing all kinds of planning – here we are in October with a Healthcare Plan in the works, but no clue what to do with our “resources” on the ground in Afghanistan.  And evidently, he doesn’t trust his general on the ground.

Meanwhile, I’m all for Obama taking his time to make right decisions, but if he can not commit troops to the war in Afghanistan and commit troops to secure Pakistan now, then let him order the troops already there to come home. They should not be left there without support.

Get in or Get out, Obama.   War is ugly no matter which way you call it, but you are the Commander-in-Chief.  It’s what you wanted so, make the damn decision!

Afghanistan may turn out to be Obama’s Viet Nam.

A taste of government run health care: Medicine by Panels, not Doctors.

Loathe as I am to talk about personal stuff, I am going to tell you about my experience with worker’s compensation and still try to maintain my privacy.  About 10 years ago, I suffered a career-ending injury while at work.  Although I initially tried to pretend nothing was wrong, I had filed a work injury report as required.  Eventually, I asked to see a doctor.  The doctor I had to see worked for the Insurer and despite telling me that I was clearly injured refused to let me take time off work.   Because I was relatively new at my job, I did not have enough sick time or leave time to do so without his permission.

After several months, I decided to see a lawyer, but it had to be a work comp lawyer “approved by the Union.”  I was required to see and be examined by several doctor’s, give a deposition, and sit around a small crowded work comp board room many, many times while my lawyer and the Insurance lawyers “talked” in another room, sometimes with a “judge” and sometimes alone.  I was rarely involved in the decision-making process.

At least, I was allowed to see doctors on a regular basis for treatment of my injury (complicated because there were/are multiple facets to my injury).  But everything the doctors did, every medicine the doctors prescribed had to be approved by some case worker and “analyst.”  Medicine got held up, temporary disability got held up, hearings got delayed, and my sanity began to deteriorate.

Work Comp benefits are barely life-sustaining.  I was lucky that I had a spouse to bring home a paycheck, but my family of four took a big hit in the wallet even while the economy was good.  None of this was my fault.

During my many visits to doctors and “court,”  I met people who had lost their homes and were living in a rented room because they had lived alone and could not live on the money work comp provided.  Some were able to move in with their children, although this often amounted to a loss of self-esteem and independence.  The “benefit” amount was based on the worker’s salary, so many of these people were pulling in minimal monthly allowances.   Like me, many of these people experienced disruption in their treatments and medicines as decisions were made by some clerk in an office across the country.  Many of these people were in a state of despair and depression; they had lost their jobs, their homes and, most important of all, their dignity.

I suspect we are the people Eric Holder,  Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel and others in the current Administration feel are no longer of value to this society; the people who ought to die so that the productive amongst us can have more space on this planet.

——–

I assure you that the lawyers, analysts, and doctors did not suffer wage losses as a result of  those injured worker’s or because of the system of compensation.  The abuses that were/are touted usually, but not always, come from people with good pensions, government jobs or,  sometimes, someone on the inside.  For them the scam is extra money, not living expenses.

When my case was settled, I was “Awarded” a pension, medical expenses, and medications.  My medicines and treatment during the last ten years have been stopped by a board of non-doctors, case workers, and “supervisors” who had no medical training.  I have seizures as a result of the injury, but my doctors were frequently questioned about the medicines they were prescribing and sometimes the prescriptions were denied outright.  I have not been able to get approval for a follow-up EEG in the last four years.

My doctors have had to file complaints to my lawyer who filed complaints to Insurance lawyers who then ignored the complaints until we went to court and the judge ordered a resumption of my benefits Meanwhile, unless I used my entire pension to buy the needed medication (expensive, of course), I risked and sometime had seizures.  Sometimes my pension was stopped and no one knew why.  Right!   Lawyers, Case Workers, and Judges again.

Some doctors refuse to take work comp cases because of constant hassle; my doctors set aside room in their practice to do so and I was one of the lucky ones. The medical care has been great as long as the doctor is in charge.  But the huge bureaucracy sucks away at the money and the soul of the system, as well as at the soul of its patients.  The insurance companies, the lawyers, the panels, and the doctors paid by the system to keep patients out of the system do just fine.

I have already experienced (state) government health care and I fear what it will mean when the Federal government steps into to the business of caring for my family’s other health needs.

Medicine by Panels, not Doctors.  Be Afraid!