Monthly Archives: February 2010

AMERICAN GENEROSITY

2009 – Recession – Unemployment 10% – Charitable giving 300 Billion dollars. Some claim America is the most generous nation in the world. It probably is true.

Reasons – Capitalism, Conservatism, Freedom.

Capitalism has created more prosperity for more people than any other system, thus enabling greater giving at all levels of society. Capitalism is a system that fosters the desire in many of those who have created great wealth to want to give something back to the system. Socialism does not.

Conservatism is a philosophy of small government and self reliance. Where there is a need, the conservative mindset is how can I help, rather than waiting for the government to help. And we are a nation of conservatives. A 2009 Gallop poll found conservatism to be the most widely held political ideology by a 50% margin of self declared conservatives over self declared liberals

Freedom, freedom to help when, where and what you choose without government interference encourages the wealthy to establish charitable foundations to further a favorite cause. Andrew Carnegie wanted to see a library in every town in America and he made it happen. Bill Gates wants to see malaria eradicated from the face of the earth and is giving millions toward that pet goal.

Capitalist America has given extensive aid to Haiti in their need. Socialist Venezuela has given nothing. The free market system is the greatest generator of the means and inclination for private giving.

Bob B

WHOSE SOCIALISM?

Obama is a socialist. Obama is not a socialist. So the sides argue.

Each side is debating on a different premise and neither seems to realize it. The Left sees socialism as that form of government represented by Sweden or Germany and argues for it. The Right sees socialism as it is exemplified by Venezuela, Cuba or the USSR and argues against it. Resolution cannot occur as long as the two sides continue to argue past each other.

A recent Rasmussen poll reported that 47% of Americans either think socialism is better than capitalism or are unsure which is better. Liberals heaved a ho-hum, conservatives expressed alarm. Rasmussen asked one question. The respondents each interpreted the question differently and answered accordingly. Conservatives would do well to realize 47% of Americans are not leaning in Hugo Chavez’s direction, Sean Penn notwithstanding. Liberals would do well to realize the Right fears socialism because it is aware of how many times socialism has brought totalitarianism and tyranny to the people.

The Right and the Left have been with us since Aristotle and Plato. We will never agree. But we might learn to understand each other if we only had the book of life open to the same page.

Bob B

Bookmark and Share

AL JOLSON

As Monty Python might say, now for something different.

Some may fault Al Jolson because he was the master of Minstrel. Jolson meant no disrespect. It is only later that white society’s eyes were rightly opened. occasionally political correctness is simply correct. But we should not damn this great talent for succumbing to that which was generally accepted in its time. The time was WW I and almost before radio.

Al Jolson was a southerner and much of his music reflected that heritage. Here are a couple exceptions.

First, one from Hawaii, long before statehood. The song is called Yaaka Hula Hickey Dula, recorded in 1926. With that title you know you just hafta (sic) hear it.

And then there is When the Red Red Robin Comes Bob-Bob-Bobbin Along

Jolson’s classic is Mammy. I don’t have that readily at hand. perhaps another time.

For the technocrati, the protocol is MP3. If the files do not play on your computer get your techy person to add the ability to your computer. MP3 is the wav(e) of the future.

Bob B

Bookmark and Share

Don’t hover, click

YOUR SHARE

Federal spending was $24,000 per household when G. W. Bush left office. The Heritage Foundation calculates it would increase 50% to $36,000 if Obama’s programs become law. I trust you have enough set aside to cover this liability. Please keep in mind it is not a one time payment, it is every year.

Ok, so you don’t have that kind of money. But the government’s bills must be paid. Now aren’t you glad there are rich people and corporations who are paying more than their pro rata share?

Imagine yourself as director of something or other at Goldman Sachs. The boss comes into your cubicle and hands you a check. It is your million dollar bonus. You thank him, then, crass Wall Streeter that you are, you look at the check. It is for 530K. The boss explains the rest is already on it’s way to the federal, state and local tax collector.

So just a little more than half of your bonus is yours to spend on groceries, yachts, investments and charitable giving. You do all three. Obama thanks you for spending. It helps the economy. He is silent about your investments. He reduces your tax break on the charitable giving, explaining that the government is there to help. Private charities only diminish the role of government. Not good, says the President.

Bob B

Bookmark and Share

IT’S LINCOLNS BIRTHDAY

From Lincoln’s “House Divided” speech.

“A house divided against itself cannot stand.”

I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free.

I do not expect the Union to be dissolved — I do not expect the house to fall — but I do expect it will cease to be divided.

It will become all one thing or all the other.

Either the opponents of slavery, will arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate extinction; or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become alike lawful in all the States, old as well as new — North as well as South.”

You can read the entire speech here.

Those who would re-write history like to cite the House Divided speech as foundation for their assertion that Lincoln was ambivalent about slavery, that his concern was saving the union not ending slavery. However, Lincoln’s response to Douglas’ speech puts the lie to any such notion.

Those arguments that are made, [by Lincoln’s opposing Democrats] that the inferior race are to be treated with as much allowance as they are capable of enjoying; that as much is to be done for them as their condition will allow. What are these arguments? They are the arguments that kings have made for enslaving the people in all ages of the world. You will find that all the arguments in favor of king-craft were of this class; they always bestrode the necks of the people, not that they wanted to do it, but because the people were better off for being ridden. That is their argument, and this argument of the Judge [Douglas] is the same old serpent that says you work and I eat, you toil and I will enjoy the fruits of it.

Turn in whatever way you will—whether it come from the mouth of a King, an excuse for enslaving the people of his country, or from the mouth of men of one race as a reason for enslaving the men of another race, it is all the same old serpent, and I hold if that course of argumentation that is made for the purpose of convincing the public mind that we should not care about this, should be granted, it does not stop with the negro. I should like to know if taking this old Declaration of Independence, which declares that all men are equal upon principle and making exceptions to it where will it stop. If one man says it does not mean a negro, why not another say it does not mean some other man?

If that declaration is not the truth, let us get the Statute book, in which we find it and tear it out! Who is so bold as to do it! [Voices—“me” “no one,” &c.] If it is not true let us tear it out! [cries of “no, no,”] Let us stick to it then. [cheers], Let us stand firmly by it then. [Applause.]

The text of the Lincoln/Douglas debates can be found here.

Bob B
Bookmark and Share

THE HOAX GOES ON

Apparently the moose population has declined in Minnesota. The Minneapolis Star Tribune explains moose are heat sensitive and “researchers continue to believe”… Let’s stop right there for a moment. Whenever you read “studies show” or “researcher say” the best thing to do is immediately skip to the next paragraph or beyond. If the writer knew of any studies or research he would have named them.

Back to the story, hat tip to Power Line,,.the Trib goes on to tie the moose decline to global warming. Over the last 50 years mean temps in Minnesota have increased one half of one degree fahrenheit. That is 0.01% every year. Wow! I had no idea moose were that sensitive. I no longer dare say how awkward they look if there is a bull moose around.
Personally, I don’t think global warming is the reason. If it were, the moose population in other states that are also part of the globe and must be warming would not be increasing, but it is. If  it’s not global warming the only other thing it could be is something Bush did. Must be.

Time magazine has an explanation for the great blizzards of 2010. Guess what. It’s global warming. Read it here. Prediction – look for articles about how older Americans are freezing to death in unheated apartments due to global warming.

Here comes the New York Times, verily as I type, with their 50 cents worth. Drudge points to the article with this – “NYT- Blizzard due to warming”. That’s a little harsh. It is not a bad article. I liked the part about Senator Inhofe building a 6 foot high igloo on capitol hill with a sign on it “Al Gore’s New Home”.

Bob B

By the bye, a little increase in traffic on my blog would encourage me to continue. I will pay two donuts for every certified reader you introduce to Random Thots. Three donuts for liberals.

SEE DECLINE GROW

Here is an animation showing how unemployment has grown by county throughout the US.

Impressive, isn’t it.

TIMES PREDICTS END OF AMERICA

“We’ve always known that America’s reign as the world’s greatest nation would eventually end.” On that dour note the New York Times begins to tell us why that end may come sooner rather than later. Typically Times.

As they see it, we are at risk of  “re-enacting the dissolution of 18th-century Poland” when “By 1795 Poland had disappeared”…”not to re-emerge for more than a century.” According to the article it took only one objector to block any piece of new legislation at the time and that led to the nations demise.

How is America being put at risk of vanishing like Poland?  It’s the Republicans. Their party is now out of power. So they are doing what Democrats do when Democrats are out of power, namely, use procedural rules to their advantage.  In our republican form of government we not only want our representatives in office to do good, we also expect them to prevent bad. When totally out of power you can’t do much good but you can prevent some bad. That’s what’s happening and the newspaper doesn’t like it.

By the way, New York Times, I trust the “We”  in your opening sentence means – we, the New York Times. It certainly does not include me.

Bob B

PROPAGANDIC, THE NOUN

If you have read Orwell’s “1984” you will remember NewSpeak and see propagandic as a variation of it.  If you haven’t read the book, you should.  In “1984 ” any history that reflected badly on The Party was torn from books and records and thrown down the Memory Hole by the Ministry of Truth.  Everything adverse to The Party was changed so that all truth would reflect favorably on the government.  Propagandic is the Newspeak of the real world.

While NewSpeak is a whole language, propagandic is simply a word or phrase employed to deflect a truth or cover up an adverse image, often changing  the image to one directly opposite from the real truth.    Totalitarian regimes tend to apply propagandic in the naming of their lands.  Nations where the people have the least voice in government often name their countries People’s Republics.  In this context “People’s” is propagandic.  The Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea is not a democracy, not of the people and not a republic.  It is a dictatorship presuming to hide its true nature under a blanket of propagandic.  The country we call “South” Korea is The Republic of Korea, no propagandic there.

Propagandic is spoken everywhere but it is most prolific in the political world.  Lawmakers apply it to hide the real purpose of a proposed law.  You can guess the true objective of some legislation simply by reversing their titles. For example, The Employee Free Choice Act is a bill that would limit free choice by ending secret balloting and open the door to intimidation.  If the name were changed to The End of Employee Free Choice Act it would be de-propagandized,  revealing the true purpose of the bill. Here is another example.  To help jump start a slow economy, former President Bush announced tax “rebates”.  The payments went to everyone including those who had not paid any taxes.  It wasn’t a rebate at all; it was a cash distribution.  But the idea of a rebate was more palatable to voters than “cash distribution”.  “Rebate” was propagandic.

Some propagandic becomes so standard in the language that its influence on thought is completely subliminal.  From its beginning, America has operated on an economic system whose philosophic core is the right of its citizens to exchange goods and services freely and to own private property including the means of production.

However, in his famous book, Das Kapital, Karl Marx labeled this system Kapitalism, which one dictionary translates into English as “assets in the form of money”.  Thus a system whose foundation is freedom, ownership rights and equal opportunity for everyone is known by a word that means a system based solely on wealth.  It puts the cart before the horse.  Capitalism creates wealth; wealth does not create capitalism.  “Capitalism” is propagandic because it creates the false impression that capitalism is of, by and for only the wealthy.

Propagandic is a subtle and devious tool used to manipulate your mind.  Be very aware of it lest you fall prey to it.

UPDATE
The very beginning of this video is a brief tribute to Andrew Breitbart.  The rest of the video is about words.  It’s about how the Left’s application of words is often dead opposite to their original meaning to make their agenda sound more palatable.  It is a good companion to this post.

WHEN YOU NEED A FIX

Every once in a while we get so fed up we just need some release. Single folks have no spouse to beat up. Mormons and AA members can’t tip themselves a drink. Most of the rest of us want to stay married and sober so what’s a poor angry soul to do?

Find release in Ann Coulter?  I mean by reading her stuff, and yelling “Right on Ann ! Give it to ‘em”. That might help but the trouble is some of us don’t care too much for Ann. The next time you need a quick fix try Burt, Burt Prelutsky. If Krauthammer is Mozart, Prelutsky is Rachmaninoff. Some of your liberal friends might say he is more like acid rock.

Here is a free sample:

Speaking of paying for political favors, inquiring minds want to know if Ben Nelson and Mary Landrieu have to return their bribes now that ObamaCare has been given the big thumbs down by one of Obama’s very own death panels. (laughter and applause)

The other day, while thinking about the fact that things such as the Copenhagen global-warming fiasco; the East Anglia Climategate scandal; Obama’s absolute lack of transparency; his packing his administration with lobbyists and tax cheats; the lock-outs of Republicans by Pelosi and Reid from the legislative process; the trashing of the Tea Party participants by the Democrats; and the insistence by Obama that conservatives sit down and shut up; are either ignored or sanctioned by the mass media, I found myself wondering what actually takes place at an editorial board meeting at the New York Times and the Washington Post. Do these left-wing elitists really, as I suspect, just sit around and ask one another which major news stories they won’t cover in tomorrow’s edition?

Now that you got that off your chest, even if just by proxy, don’t you feel a bit better?