politicians...

Do you know what irritates me most about politicians? I mean ALL politicians- republicans, democrats, blah, blah, blah...

Their weird justifications whenever they lose an election. What might that be, you ask?

We lost because our base wasn't motivated to vote. We lost because people didn't get out and vote. We lost because we didn't explain ourselves well enough, and people weren't motivated to vote.

Maybe you lost because people disagree with you and your policies.

And before anyone fires back at me with Obama and the democrats, let me make myself clear- ALL POLITICIANS DO THIS.

In 2006, the republicans lost- and they did the same thing. It wasn't that their base did not turn out to vote, they were tired of how they were running things.

To the democrats that lost this year- it was not because your people did not turn out to vote, it was not because you didn't get your message out, and it was certainly not because us dumb citizens just don't understand what you are trying to do.
You lost because people do not like the way you are running things. Period.
End of rant.

Peace- I'm out.

My silence is broken...

After a hiatus of about 4 months, I have decided to break my silence. What will I talk about? I bet you cannot wait to get a glimpse into my soul, the deepest thoughts a redneck like me can conjure up...

Probably not. Because I am in school, and we are trying to expand the living area in the house that my posts will continue to be sparse. It is because I am on vicodin right now for an abscessed tooth that I am up at 1:30am and am writing this now.

Just some random thoughts-

Some may think because I am a black hearted conservative that I don't believe in social safety nets. Quite the contrary, actually. I am not opposed to welfare, medicare or medicaid, food stamp, WIC, etc, etc. I am opposed to the fraud and waste that poor MANAGEMENT of the programs produce. I am opposed to politicians using social programs as a bribery tool for votes. I think unemployment benefits are good. I like the idea that if I lose my job, I don't have to starve, or my family does not need to starve.

I recently had to read a book for one of my classes called American Dream by Jason DeParle. It is a book about welfare reform in the 90's. Although I didn't agree with many of the conclusions of the author, it was a very informative book I thought on the limits of government. After the welfare reform under the Clinton administration cleaned up most of the fraud and abuse, it shed new light on the legitimate cases of welfare. For some, being on welfare was needed because they were in-between jobs, or were single parents that felt they needed to raise their kids- in my mind perfectly legitimate and good reasons to be a welfare recipient. Others couldn't keep jobs because of mental illness and drug addictions.
What struck me most in the book (my class is on public policy) was how the policies implemented never quite got to the root of the problem. The policies in the welfare reform focused on job skill training, interview training, etc. All great things, except the majority of people still on welfare were there because of addictions and mental illness. How is interview training going to help someone on crack become a contributing member of society?
The issues that seem to cause people to be on welfare are not things the government can help with- they are issues of morality and values. This may surprise some of you, but I don't think the government is in a position to dictate and educate us about morals and values. Morals and values is what is going to help prevent teenage pregnancy. Morals and values is what is going to help prevent drug abuse. Not the government. I also think that Sex ed should not be taught in schools, even abstinence programs- that is something parents should be teaching.
We do need Separation of Church and State, but we don't need insulation from churches. That is the problem now days, religion has become something to be mocked. Moral relativism is what rules the day. Until we can change that, no amount of money spent in government programs is going to stop teen pregnancy, drug abuse, or any other moral or values based activity.
This is why I see the government as a lumbering impedance to society. They often have to stick their hands in places where they do not belong. They try too hard to be a paternalistic entity. In my opinion, it does more harm than good.
And just to show that this in not a right left issue, I will criticize the right for a moment. In the 90's, the prevailing thought was that the cycle of welfare could be broken by kids seeing their parents working, or that by working, adults would gain a sort of spiritual satisfaction out of it that they would magically become better parents. Now, conservatives also postulated that if a work requirement was introduced into welfare, the rolls would be reduced. They also postulated that if block grants were given to the states, and the states were allowed to administer it as they saw fit, the rolls would be reduced. Liberals said that both these ideas would increase the homeless population and kids would be sleeping in alleys.
The liberals were wrong, welfare reform did not produce more homeless families, it did reduce the number of people on the rolls, cause most figured they could just go out and get a job and make more money, since they had to work anyway. Also, states administered the programs more effectively and helped more people. So the conservatives were correct on that point, but they were wrong that it could break the cycle of welfare. They were wrong because they attempted to fix a moral and values problem with government policy- it doesn't work.

Anyway- after that long post that most people probably won't care to read, and may have fell asleep halfway through- I thank you for reading it and getting to this part, sadly there is no reward, only the knowledge that you know some of Danny's innermost special thoughts...

Peace- I'm Out.

Clarification on guns

I am ok with certain regulations on guns, just as I am on cars. Allow me to elaborate:
I am ok with age restrictions on owning firearms.
I am ok with background checks.
I am ok with outlawing straw purchases (although it really is just the honor system at play here.)
I am ok with one private citizen selling a gun to another private citizen.
I am ok with the tax stamp for owning an automatic weapon.
I am ok with having to take a training class before you carry a firearm.
Beyond that, there are not many more things I am ok with. A gun is dangerous. So is a car, an arc welder, a table saw, a nail gun. Cars kill far more people than guns do, so why have we not banned cars yet?
Just some facts that I found- in 2004 the number car crash fatalities was 42,636. The firearm fatalities (which includes all types of deaths from firearms- accidental, murder, etc.)was 29,569. http://money.cnn.com/2005/08/01/Autos/nhtsa_death_stats/index.htm http://washingtonceasefire.org/resource-center/national-firearm-injury-and-death-statistics

Also on more interesting fact- in 2008, according to the FBI Uniform Crime Report, the firearm of choice for murderers was a handgun, not a rifle by a 2 to 1 margin (an AK-47 is classified as a rifle). Leads me to believe the only gangstas who use AK's are in the movies. Besides, how many times do you here about 10 or more people getting shot at the same time? Has it happened, maybe, I can't find anywhere in the US where a gang member rolled up with an AK and took out a rival gang at the same time. If it does happen, it is rare. and AK's are legal to buy and own. Where is the mass killing from all the non-banned assault rifles?

more guns part 2...

To continue the theme of yesterday: arguments against guns and my responses to them.

 

I don’t have a problem with people owning guns, I just don’t see why you need to have a _____________.(fill in the blank with a scary gun, such as an M-16 or AK-47)  I’ll let everyone in on a little secret- how the gun looks or how many rounds it holds does not make it more dangerous then a pink, bolt action rifle.  ANY gun in the hands of an irresponsible person is capable of severely injuring or killing a person.  It’s like taking a stick of dynamite and painting one yellow with flowers on it, and another one black with flames and demons on it.  Is the yellow one with flowers any less dangerous than the other?  I think this argument comes from a lack of knowledge of guns.  People will say that these types of guns, especially the AK-47 have a more dangerous caliber of bullet than other guns.  This is simply not true.  The AK-47 fires the 7.62mm round, which is a relatively small round.  Most hunting rifles fire a far larger and more powerful round, such as the .30-.06, a far larger and much more common hunting round.  The M-16/AR-15 shoots an even smaller round, the 5.56/.223 (they are not the same, they are slightly different rounds).  In fact, this round is sometimes referred to as a “varmint” round, cause it’s mostly good at killin’ ground critters, like rats, prairie dogs and rabbits.  Others will say that what makes them dangerous is the magazine capacity- sometimes 30 rounds.  I honestly don’t understand too much of why this is a big deal, something about being able to fire more without reloading… I’ve got news for you- if it takes you more than 2 seconds to throw another magazine in the firearm you probably wear a helmet and ride the short bus to school.  So the amount of ammo it holds doesn’t really ring true to me as sufficient basis for a ban. 

 

Well, I had more written, but to be honest this subject is boring me for now…since this is my domain  I will cease writing about guns.  I have not really read any comments any have made, so perhaps I will.

 

On the other hand, Sharel and I might be getting a dog here in the next couple of weeks.  It is a big dog, one that will eat small children and skinny people.  (I am just kidding, the dog has no taste for adult, skinny humans).  Any way, she is a chocolate color and about 7 or 8 months old.  We are not real sure that we are going to get her, but we are going to check her out.  We are excited.  She was picked up by animal control from the owners who were moving and didn’t want to take her with.  The good news is she is young enough to still socialize and have it benefit her.  Like I said, it is up in the air right now, but we would sure like to get her if she fits with us.

Peace- I’m out.

More on guns...

Just in case any of you don’t know my stance on guns- I like them.  I like them a lot.  Sure, some may say it is an unhealthy obsession.  Mom thinks it is because I watched violent tv shows like CHiPs and Hunter as a very small child.  Perhaps it was the Christmas that I got a Red Ryder bb gun from Santa that set me on this path of firearm love.  Whatever the case may be, I do enjoy shooting guns.  Please don’t mistake this for some sort of apocalyptic  end of the world stance on life, where I stockpile guns and wait for zombies to rise so I can shoot them and live in a world with no electricity and no government and no…well, you get the picture.  I would call myself a gun enthusiast (not really, ‘cause then I would have to kick my own rear end) in the same vein as people are enthusiasts about cars, or golf, or musical instruments, or model planes, or chess.  Get the picture?  It’s a hobby that I find no weirder or strange than the aforementioned hobbies.

That being said, as far as gun control, I have heard all the arguments for it, and it has yet to change my mind.   There are some common arguments that I hear, and just so we do not repeat ourselves here, here are my responses to them.

Guns kill people.  So do knives, cars, baseball bats, tire irons, fists, feet, piano wire, rope, electricity, water, heat, cold, bungee jumping, mountain biking, horses, tigers, bears, dogs, viruses, hammers, nail guns, lakes, boats, airplanes, bricks, rocks, cliffs, trees, skydiving, scuba diving, sharks, repelling,, etc.  If you don’t get my point- lots of things kill people, but we do not outright ban them.

Guns kill people part 2.  No, they don’t.  I can set a loaded gun on a table and at no point will it kill someone.  It can’t.  it is not alive, it is not capable of manipulating itself, it is not capable of aiming itself.  It cannot kill.  A person could pick up the gun and use it to kill another human.  A person can pick up a baseball bat and use it to kill someone.  A person can pick up a knife and use it to kill another person, but there is no crusade bellowing “Knives kill people!”  In my scant 30 years of life, not once has a knife from the kitchen ever killed me or someone I know on its own.  It is the same with guns.  It is a tool, one that people use for a variety of purposes from sport to hunting to fighting wars.  Someone has to use it to kill.  Blame the person, not the tool.

Crazy, evil people use a myriad of things to kill or hurt other people.  I don’t think it is going to make much difference what they use, the point is if they want to kill or hurt someone, they will find a way.  Banning guns ain’t gonna stop them.

But, you say, guns are more dangerous and deadly than a lot of things you just listed.  I would agree.  But any of the things listed above, especially automobiles can be deadly in the hands of an irresponsible person.  We do not ban cars, and I know more people personally that have been killed or severely injured in a car accident than killed or injured with a gun. 

That is probably a long enough post for now.  I will post more arguments I have heard and my responses to them.

Peace- I’m out.

 

 

My silence is broken...

SCOTUS rejected Chicago’s handgun ban.  I know most of you will say “boy, Danny is probably ecstatic right now, that loveable, cuddly lump of right wing angst!”  But, you would be wrong.  Well, not too wrong, just a little.  Lemme ‘splain, before some think I have lost my mind.

First, I am very happy with this ruling.  I think bans like this are bred out of an illogical fear knee-jerk reactionism.  These types of bans do not address the root cause of crime, but rather symptoms of crime.  It is like going to a doctor with an infection, and instead of treating the infection, he prescribes Tylenol just to keep the fever, the symptom of an infection, away.  I could go on and on about what the underlying causes of crime are, but that is another post.  Anyway, I think this ruling does give back some of the freedom that we should have.

I am hesitant with this ruling for another reason.  My states rights/libertarianism is showing on this one.  I think states should largely be left alone from Federal intrusion.  If a state wants to ban guns, give out socialized medicine, have exorbitant taxes, dictate what kind of car you can drive, when you can run your A/C, then you can move to California and see how well you do.  Hey, maybe spend, spend, spend, tax, tax, tax will create a successful economy and a wonderful place to live, just like California.

If you want to live in a state with the opposite philosophy, then you can move to a place like Texas.  If you want to live someplace in between, then you can choose from  48 other states. 

My point is, I think if you let states run themselves with whatever philosophy they choose, it will be apparent what works and what doesn’t.  I know some will say that it can’t happen that way since states and their economies are tied in to each other, and it wouldn’t be practical, but hey, I can dream can’t I?

I know some, like Spencer will argue that states cannot trample on fundamental rights laid out in the constitution.  I would agree as well.  That is why I am very, very happy about this ruling, and only slightly, very slightly unhappy about it.

Now, everyone feel free to comment and express their own views, but let me say I may or may not respond, as my time is very limited on looking and updating the blog, and also because with gun control I am very stubborn and already have made my mind up.  There is little that anyone could say that will make me think any differently about my views.  So nah nanana booboo.

Peace- I’m out.

response to Spencer

I do not disagree with you. You are addressing the clean up phase of the spill. In that area Obama is failing horribly. I am referring to the actual leak and the many people who wonder why Obama hasn't stopped the leak yet. I am referring to the people who are screaming for Obama to kick BP out and take over the efforts to stop the leak.

I think what we have here is a large segment of the population that when disaster strikes, they are waiting for Uncle Sam to kiss the booboos and make everything better immediately. they did it with Bush and Katrina. They wondered why Bush didn't evacuate New Orleans. Now they are wondering why Obama didn't plug the leak. I am quite confident that the government would take 8 times as long to fix the leak than BP will take.
This is the point of my post. the cleanup efforts are a whole other discussion.
So there.

On a somewhat related note, the EPA brought together the best minds they could find to figure out how to stop the leak. One of the "experts" they called in was one James Cameron, the mega intellectual director extraordinaire. Given who this administration is running to for ideas, I think it is a good thing for humanity that they are letting BP fix the leak.

a brief foray back into the seedy world of politics...

Just a potpourri of thoughts…

 

I just have to ask all those that loathe George Bush- 20 years from now am I still gonna have to listen to everything being blamed on Bush?  How long is the Obama Administration going to keep blaming Bush for things?  At some point enough policies will be in place that the current administration will have to own it.  For now it sounds like a lot of people have loser’s elbow.  (to demonstrate what ‘loser’s elbow’ is, first point your index finger out, like you are pointing at somebody.  Take your other hand and cup it under your elbow.  Now jab your pointing finger hand towards something [may I suggest a picture of George W.] whilst repeating “it’s your fault, it’s your fault!”.  Do that enough and eventually you will have to see a doctor as you will have a condition similar to tennis elbow, but its called ‘Loser’s Elbow’)

 

The Oil Spill…

First I would just like to say that this is not Obama’s fault.  I would also mention that BP is not some evil, sinister corporation that is not fixing this because it hates the inbred shrimp fisherman of the Gulf and  the environment.

I think a little logical thought would help- first, this spill is going to cost BP an enormous amount of money and reputation.  This could likely put BP into a serious financial problem.  What evil, profit worshipping corporation is going to purposely endanger their profits like this?  In that same vein of thinking, with BP knowing what a huge disaster this is for their bottom-line, does it not stand to reason then that they are doing everything they can to stop the leak?  It was an accident.  Lets get the leak stopped first, then we can evaluate what went wrong and see if there is any culpability on anyone’s part.

 Further I would like to go on record as defending Obama a little (shocking, I know).  Really what can he do?  Don a scuba tank and a teleprompter and go down there and inspire the pipe to stop gushing oil?  Perhaps we could hook his enormous brain up to a computer and use it to come up with a solution to the leak?  Better yet, why don’t we just follow the solution he has already given to “Plug the damn hole!”.  He can do no more to stop the leak than Bush could to stop a hurricane.

I do however think the people who blamed Bush for Katrina should go ahead and blame Obama for this spill.  You guys wouldn’t want to be hypocrites, would you?  You see, I didn’t think there was a whole lot Bush could have done to get people out of New Orleans (state and local sovereignty issues), and I don’t think there is a whole lot Obama can do in the current situation.  So I am consistent.

Now just so you don’t think that I have suffered brain trauma, here are my criticisms of the administrations handling of this disaster- as I said before, lets concentrate on fixing the problem, rather than wasting time and effort trying to find someone to blame for this.  After all, did Obama not run on the promise to change the status quo of politics?  What is the status quo of politics when it comes to disasters?  Assigning blame early and often.  Instead of sending Holder down there to investigate criminal activities, focus on the problem.  As Sharel pointed out, it is a little like an ER doc trying to figure out who hit who before working on the car accident victim.  Beyond that, I think it helps little to start threatening everyone associated with this effort with criminal charges.  It is counterproductive. 

Peace- I’m Out.

Enjoy...

Conclusions

I grow tired of the healthcare discussion…it displeases me.  So this will be the last post on healthcare for a while.  We have had a rousing discussion, and points were made on both sides, but in all seriousness, I think we are all intelligent people that have already made our minds up.  We could spend months going back and forth on this issue, and since this is my totalitarian blog, I choose to move on after this post.            

But first, a few last thoughts on the bill.  Sharel’s post sums up nicely what the philosophical opposition to this bill is.  By mandating that we have to do something, we are being deprived of a choice to make.  Like it or not, this diminishes our agency.  I feel, and Sharel does too, that we have an obligation as a disciple of Christ to help the poor and the needy and the sick.  The key word is WE, not the government.  When the government takes over, it too diminishes our ability to take care of the poor and the needy.  Agency in this life means suffering and unfairness abound.  Opposing this healthcare bill does not mean we don’t care about the poor or the needy.  It doesn’t mean that we like the way the system is run right now.  It doesn’t mean we are ok with people going through bankruptcy because from no fault of their own, they became ill.  These are things that need to be addressed, but I don’t think this bill addresses any of this.              

In fact, I think this bill is going to really hurt me and my family.  We are the people stuck in the middle that make too much for help, but not enough to cover all the proposed costs.  Sharel and I have worked hard to manage our finances, and we have less going out in money than we have coming in not because we make a lot, but because we have gone without a lot of things such as cell phones, or flat screen TV’s, new clothes, etc.  I would bet that I make less than most people reading this blog, and if you want to know how much I make, just ask, and I will shoot you an email.  All that hard work is being threatened by rising health care premiums to meet the government mandates.  And that is not me speculating what is going to happen, that is an acknowledged fact.  I don’t want to break the law, but if it is the difference of having to go on welfare because I can’t afford to pay my bills, or Sharel having to go to work or pay the $695 penalty, I will pay the $695 penalty.  I will take my chances with not being obedient to the laws of the land.  And if we get sick, we will sign up for insurance.  It sucks, and I won’t be proud of it, but I will not make Sharel work outside the home, it is too important that she raise our kids, not a daycare.

 

So that being said, I will move on.  And what will amuse me in the future?  Shall we talk about current political events?  Perhaps.  But probably not.  I think I will turn back to a rousing discussion of guns.  A few upcoming debates- .223 vs 7.62.  Glock vs. FNp.  AK vs AR.  Perhaps other debates, such as Courtesy flushes, who do they really help?  ’68 Camaro vs. ’76 Camaro.  K5 Blazer or Bronco?  Maybe I will have some more venting posts, such as what frustrates me about Boy Scouts, or working in an office full of women with only two toilets, one of which is a ladies room, the other a unisex restroom.  Or why Newsradio was the funniest sitcom ever on television.  Whatever I desire…

Peace- I’m out!

Thoughts from Sharel on the current discussion of healthcare...

From Sharel in answer to comments from the previous post:

Yes, WE the Lord's disciples are supposed to take care of the poor and needy, not the government. There is a difference as well between being compelled to give and giving of our own free will.

“It is the responsibility of every Latter-day Saint to work and so impart of his substance, regardless of the shifting standards of this world. We must uphold these principles and oppose every derogation of them. We must be careful not to adopt the commonly accepted practice of expecting the government or anyone other than ourselves to supply us with the necessities of life.”

– Marion G. Romney

All things to be done in the Lord's way and as we can see the government never does things in the Lords way.

We are supposed to take care of the needy and poor, but we should be able to do that without punishing others. Our whole purpose in helping the poor is to teach themselves how to help themselves as well. As history has shown us well that once you are in a welfare state, there is no incentive to go back. We should not just give stuff away and the church never just gives stuff away. Whenever help is given the gospel teaches the person who has been given something, to help out in return, to give back.

I guess it all comes down to a basic belief in what the governments role is. When we look beyond the health care bill there are fundamental beliefs about freedom and government.

I want to really reiterate how I DO NOT LIKE THE SYSTEM THE WAY IT IS, I keep getting from you how I must love how things are and that is not the case! We just don’t like this particular bill the way it is.

President Henry D. Moyle talked on this subject in these words:

“All we have to do is … examine any movement that may be brought into our midst … and if it … attempt[s] to deprive us in the slightest respect of our free agency, we should avoid it as we would avoid immorality or anything else that is vicious. … Free agency is as necessary for our eternal salvation as is our virtue. And … as we guard our virtue with our lives, so should we guard our free agency.” (Conference Report, Oct. 1947, p. 46.)

President Marion G. Romney, when he was a member of the Council of the Twelve, gave this advice:

“One of the fundamental doctrines of revealed truth is that … God endowed men with free agency (see Moses 7:32). The preservation of this free agency is more important than the preservation of life itself. … Everything which militates against man’s enjoyment of this endowment persuades not to believe in Christ, for he is the author of free agency.

“Now the world today is in the throes of a great social and political revolution. In almost every department of society laws and practices are being daily proposed and adopted which greatly alter the course of our lives. Indeed, some of them are literally shaking the foundations of our political and social institutions. If you would know truth from error in this bitterly contested arena, apply Mormon’s test to these innovations [as recorded in Moro. 7:16–18]. Do they facilitate or restrict the exercise of man’s divine endowment of free agency? Tested by this standard, most of them will fall quickly into their proper category as between good and evil.” (Speeches of the Year, Brigham Young University Press, 1957, pp. 10–11.)

“In this modern world plagued with counterfeits for the Lord’s plan, we must not be misled into supposing that we can discharge our obligations to the poor and the needy by shifting the responsibility to some governmental or other public agency. Only by voluntarily giving out of an abundant love for our neighbors can we develop that charity characterized by Mormon as ‘the pure love of Christ.’ (Moro. 7:47.) This we must develop if we would obtain eternal life.” (Conference Report, Oct. 1972, p. 115.)

The difference between having the means with which to administer welfare assistance taken from us and voluntarily contributing it out of our love of God and fellowman is the difference between freedom and slavery.- Marion G. Romney, “Church Welfare Services’ Basic Principles,” Ensign, May 1976, 120

P.S.- I still want the crepe and fruit sauce recipe.
Sharel

Help me understand...

We heard over and over again that the insurance companies had largely created the current healthcare “mess”.  I have heard from many people how much they hate their insurance companies.  I would agree as well.  I think the insurance companies have created a middle man that has inflated costs of healthcare.  It may have been unintentional, I don’t believe in a grand conspiracy to inflate costs, but it has happened.  Why just a few weeks ago, a doctor had prescribed dad a powerful antibiotic to combat an infection he had.  The insurance company decided it was unnecessary, and would not pay for it, so dad had to settle for a less powerful drug.  Thankfully, it seems to have done the job, and he can continue on in his cancer treatments.  So I have no love for insurance companies.  They can be very frustrating, as sometimes it seems they do anything and everything they can to keep from paying.

We heard from members of congress, and even President Obama himself that the insurance companies were at fault.  So their solution- make everyone buy insurance from the health insurance companies.

Can someone please explain this to me?  And I am serious, I have racked my brain trying to figure this out.  Seriously, please someone tell me how this makes sense at all?

Serious thoughts on Healthcare...

So, I was thinking what my objections are to this new healthcare plan. I think there are 3 things that have bothered me so much about it, and most of it, at least two of the things have very little to do with what was actually in the bill.

1. The way it was done. This is my biggest gripe, and if anything "scares" me about this thing, it is how it was done. Or, perhaps to clarify, it was congress seeming to completely ignore us, there constituents. It was deal making to buy votes, rather than representing the people. I feel like I was totally ignored, that any hesitations or reservations about the bill were ignored as well. It was almost like a "we know what is best, so stop bothering us with your opinions." I firmly believe, and I think most polling will back this up, that people did not want this bill to pass, whether you thought it went too far, or not far enough, most people tried to tell their "representatives" (and I use that term very, very loosely) to reconsider and vote against this bill. But, a few promises of money to states, and some heavy peer pressure helped congress to forget who they answer to, and it is not Nancy Pelosi.
2. The cost of the bill. Does healthcare need to be reformed? YES. I said it, it does, despite what people think, I oppose this bill, but also think reforms need to be made in healthcare. But to be this drastic about it at a time where the national debt has tripled in one year, more than Bush ever thought of spending, is disconcerting. I have heard arguments that if not now, when? When we have money. Basic budgeting guidelines for businesses and regular people dictate that if you cannot afford it, you do not buy it, no matter how much you want it. You make do. I am just asking that we be able to pay for it now, not print money to do so. We just can't spend money we don't have, and the government shouldn't either, because ultimately they are spending our money. One day the debt will have to be paid, and that will come through our kids and grandkids having to pay over 50% of their money in taxes to clean this up.
3. I think this bill just made things worse. I am already paying a lot in premiums, and my premiums are going to get higher. If I had a million bucks, fine, so be it. But I don't, and am scraping by as it is. Higher premiums is going to take more money that I don't have out of my pocket. Also, I don't want that much government intrusion in my life. Mandates? Forget it, I don't like the government telling me I have to buy something. Merely telling everyone they have to buy insurance does not solve the problem of unaffordable healthcare any more than telling homeless people to buy a house solves the homeless problem. All this was was a big shoutout to the insurance companies, so they wouldn't fight against the bill.
I think ultimately the problem we have with healthcare is not the doctors and nurses, it is not the hospitals or clinics. It is the insurance companies. They have become a middle man, inflating costs and burdening health workers with extra paper work. I think that if we were to get rid of insurance for routine and basic things, such as checkups, colds, small infections, a lot of money could be saved, and more people would have access to care. If you absolutely can't afford a $20 dr.s visit, then perhaps there could be some help there. But I personally think entirely waay too many people go to the doctors every time they get a sniffle, and that costs the insurance company a lot. Now, let's have insurance for serious illnesses, and expensive surgeries and procedures. I am ok with that, but I think the first step would be to stop covering routine checkups. Let's get some tort reform in there to lower the doctor's costs of having malpractice insurance and the habit of ordering every test known to man to avoid potential lawsuits. That would help lower a doctors overhead, while also cutting down on frivolous procedures. Deregulate some prescription drugs. There are plenty of harmless medications out there that are unnecessarily regulated. Remember claritin? used to be prescription only, but now OTC. Why was it prescription only? if you can self diagnose and buy it yourself now, why couldn't you then? Amoxicillian? can you die taking amoxicillin? Sure. But you could also with OTC Claritin. Some of us are big boys and know our limitations. Why do I need to waste a doctors time, and my money so I can have them prescribe antibiotic eye drops for pinkeye? I know what pinkeye looks like. Is the .4ML in the eye drop bottle really enough for someone to ingest and die? Perhaps it is habit forming? I think making a lot of these prescriptions OTC could help lower costs as well.
Well, lookee here, I just lowered the costs of healthcare without adding to the national debt or degrading the quality of care anyone receives
Peace- I'm Out!

How to respond to treasonous rhetoric challenging the Great Healthcare Bill

Many of us taking part in the glorious revolution for the implementation of a truly fair and equal system of communism have been confronted with facts and logical arguments against healthcare.  They are correct in their theories of massive government debt, massive takeover of private industry and a mandates that are wholly unconstitutional.  Although they are correct, they fail to see that we just don’t care.  This does not matter in a communist form of government.  They will not persuade us.

In order to counteract these arguments, and prevent them from swaying the naïve and the independents in this country, I have compiled a list of Central Party approved comebacks.  These are to be used on forums, comment sections, and in conversations around the soon  to be obsolete water cooler.

“Why don’t you want people to be able to go see a doctor when they are sick?”

“Why do you want people’s health insurance dropped when they get sick?”

“Why should only the rich get to see a doctor?”

“Why do you want the child with cancer to be denied the best healthcare because the insurance companies decided he has a preexisting condition?”

“Why do you hate poor people?”

“Why are you racist?”

“What is wrong with having a black president?”

These comebacks are just a few of what you can use.  Be creative, and feel free to use these whenever a logical argument comes up.

Now, we need to realize that the opponents of healthcare know that the insurance system in this country needs a serious overhaul.  And many of them want everyone to be able to get affordable healthcare.  But we cannot let others know that this is what they think.  We must paint them as uncaring people who hate poor people and minorities, and like the healthcare system the way it is because it makes them rich.  If they counteract your comebacks with more fact-based logical arguments, then it is time to pull out the race card.  Feel free to use the race card liberally. 

Latah!

Unfounded Facist Claims Addressed!

I have heard a number of claims that this new Healthcare Bill is unconstitutional. Really!? Why, it is not unconstitutional, it falls right into the bounds of the Venezuelan Constitution. And really, I think people do not give it enough credit, it is not a nationalization of healthcare. It is more conservative than that. The democrats had to make a lot of concessions to the bigwig fatcat rich republicans and that is why it does not reflect the values of the Cuban constitution. We after all are a melting pot of nationalities each with it's own special values and culture. Why not add a little Cuban here, and a little Venezuelan there. Perhaps if you do not think so, you are racist.
Another issue that concerns me is when the rich fatcat racist that oppose this bill talk of mandates. Of course state governments have forced people to buy car insurance! What is the difference?! And before you say- well, if you don't own a car, or if you do not drive, you are not required to buy car insurance- I say "Don't confuse me with facts!"
Das Vedanya!

Welcome to the new Workers Paradise!

Change has happened! A glorious revolution has taken place! Let us all rejoice and bask in the light of a new workers paradise! Sunday night the people spoke! All 219 of them! We are now fighting back against the facist businesses that oppress the worker! We can now take money from the fatcat rich and give it to the rightful heirs- the 219 people of the United States. From now on the masses of facist drones will no longer be able to tell the 219 citizens of the United States what to do. We have won! Embrace the change!

2 questions for our congresspeople

I just want to ask all of the elected officials in Washington 2 questions-

1.        Is the current Healthcare bill before you an issue of “moral principle”?

2.       If yes, then is the moral aspect of the legislation important enough to bypass democratic principles for the greater good?

The answers to these questions would be very telling.  I have a suspicion that democrats have convinced themselves that this is an issue of morality, and therefore should not be subject to Constitutional guidelines and principles, not to mention basic representation of elected leaders in this Republic of ours.  Which brings up another important point, one that is greater than the healthcare bill, it would confirm at least to me, the disdain liberals have for the Constitution, not to mention fundamental human liberties.

 

I have to admit that I have been fairly optimistic the last few months, that common sense will prevail.  That democrats, especially those in the House, would push back against Pelosi for their own political future.  It is clear that a majority of Americans do not want this bill passed.  It is also extremely clear that less than 1/5 of Americans think what congress is doing is good.  Less than 1 out of every 5 people do not like congress.  That means even that one person still has a right arm that disagrees with congress.  Now I am convinced that the democrats just plain don’t care.  More importantly, Obama and Pelosi DO NOT CARE what we think.  All of you that voted for Obama- do you realize that he has treated you like a cheap prostitute?  You have been used, and promptly tossed aside.  What’s worse is he didn’t even pay.  He has shown that he does not even want to waste his time listening to you.  Now think back to the past year.  Over the summer recess with all the town halls, I was convinced that healthcare was DOA.  Wrong.  Even after getting yelled at, they still passed it.  Scott Brown was elected, and they lost their filibuster proof majority- once again, thought the issue was over.  Obama in his State of the Union told us he was focused too much on healthcare and 2010 would be the year of Jobs, Jobs, and Jobs.  I thought, ok, this is his way of trying to bow out without egg on his face, and perhaps he will wait until after the midterm elections to start it up again.  Wrong.  This whole thing is spiraling out of control, and quickly.  I believe they are prepared to do what is ever necessary to get this bill passed.  Mark my words, and I hope I am wrong, but if this thing does not pass Sunday, it is not the end of it.  This is going to go on and on, until finally I fully believe the Constitution and all legislative precedent will be thrown out the window, and this will become the law of the land.  I don’t know how they could do it, but I have no doubt it will at least be attempted.  And when that happens, I think we are going to see the so called “populist rage” come to a boiling point.  For the first time I am really quite concerned about what the future will be.  I am not scared, just concerned.  Things will get ugly.  Things will get hard.

We read in the Book of Mormon that at one point the people would “contend warmly” with each other, and eventually that turned into blows.  Physical fighting over things.  We are not there yet, but I think we are close.

Now that I have sounded very alarmist- let me tell you that although I am concerned, I really have no fear.  We are prepared, not physically, but spiritually.  We are not perfect, far, far from it.  But we are doing the seminary things, and  I can attest to the comfort that having the gospel be the center focus in your life reaps some amazing benefits.  I hope and pray that some cooler, calmer heads will prevail in all of this.  That those around us, those we elect will recognize what this is doing to this country, and put a stop to this fever pitch.  But, if not, we will make it through.  I have always told Sharel that all we really need in life is to be able to make and keep covenants.  The world can fall apart around us, but as long as we can make and keep our covenants, we will be ok.

 

Anyway- PEACE, I’M OUT!

a confession...

Joe Biden.  I have to admit I like him.  Now, I know he is part of the Obama administration, but I just can’t help but to like him.  I wholeheartedly disagree with his politics, but he seems like the kind of guy I could sit down to dinner with and have a good time.  All of these gaffes he makes- they are funny, and mostly harmless.  And he knows what kind of idiotic things he says.  I don’t hold it against him, heaven knows Bush wasn’t the “great communicator” either.

Personally, I don’t think Biden is part of Obama’s inner circle.  He seems to be much more of a Harry Truman to FDR, than a Cheney to Bush.  For those unfamiliar, FDR appointed Truman for pure political points, and the two never spoke much and Truman was largely left out of the loop on matters.  I almost get the feeling that Obama was advised to get Biden, precisely because Biden is such a likeable, friendly guy to counterbalance Obama’s robot heart.  But, it’s all speculation.  If I find out that Biden has the same designs as Obama, I will be terribly upset.

An open letter...

Dear Nancy Pelosi,

I understand where you are coming from.  I understand that you live in and represent the people of the San Francisco area.  I understand that most people living to the east of the great intellectual bastion of San Francisco resemble at best the Beverly Hillbillies, and at worst the deviant mountain folk portrayed in “Deliverance”.  And perhaps, somewhere in the middle, we mostly resemble the people in Patrick Swayze’s epic “Next of Kin”.

I know that we are not as smart as you, that our inferior thinking and logic make it difficult to understand what is best for us.  I know such outdated ideas such as religion, the Constitution and free will really stand in the way of you doing what is best for us.  So I understand why you would want to circumvent voting on something as important as the Healthcare bill.  If I thought the way that you do, I wouldn’t want to let something as insignificant as allowing representatives of the people to vote on this legislation either.  And, I certainly don’t blame you for wanting to remove accountability from the process.  Us dumb rubes out here in flyover country are sure to not re-elect anyone voting for this bill.  So why not try and shield them from it?  It seems perfectly reasonable to me.  After all, we are too dumb to really know  what is good for us.  And to hell with the idea of a representative republic.  As your esteemed colleague Thomas Friedman pointed out- a two party system, and a system of representatives really hampers the government from doing what is important and best for their citizens.  So, I say why stop here.  Who cares about rules, who cares about voting?  Why not just pronounce the legislation passed, even without enacting the ‘deem and pass’ rule.  That way everyone in the House can say with a certain amount of technical honesty that they did not vote for it.  Imagine 435 representatives each announcing that they did not vote for what has become the law of the land.  Wouldn’t that be great?  Talk about change, LOL!  That way us dumb hillbillies would still re-elect them.  Furthermore, I think that whoever is there now, (not republicans of course) should just announce that they have been appointed to represent their district for life by you, the Speaker of the House of Representatives.  That way they wouldn’t even have to run for office ever again!  I really think you should get together with Harry Reid and Mr. Obama on this.  Feel free to run with it.  Eventually the dumb-dumb’s  of middle America will forget about it, and think that is the way it has always been.  Perhaps you could get some of your friends in Hollywood, like Matt Damon and Tom Hanks, to do a movie about the constitutional convention of 1787.  In it you can tell the real story of what is in the Constitution.  Why you could do this in one of two ways- first it could be a film about a bunch of angry white men who wanted to preserve their dominance and power of women and other people who “didn’t look like them”.  The second way you could do this would be to tell what “really” happened at the convention (wink wink).  How the founding fathers and the constitution do not talk about a representative republic at all, but a government that had the power and ability to do what is best for people, even if they don’t know themselves, like the government of Cuba!  But, I am sure you already know all this.  I guess I am writing you show my support for a fundamental transformation of our country from a republic to a totalitarian form.  I am with you.  Good luck in you endeavors.

Yours truly,

Danny

P.S.- when you have a movie made about your greatness, might I suggest Cheri Oteri to play you.  She does the wide eyed, creepy hyper thing well.

"One’s life, therefore, cannot be both faith-filled and stress-free. Therefore, how can you and I really expect to glide naively through life, as if to say, “Lord, give me experience, but not grief, not sorrow, not pain, not opposition, not betrayal, and certainly not to be forsaken. Keep from me, Lord, all those experiences which made Thee what Thou art! Then let me come and dwell with Thee and fully share Thy joy!” - Elder Neal A. Maxwell

http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp

more gun talk

Spencer- I agree with your assessment.  I was reading the arguments made, and I know, who wants to do that, but I find reading opinions and what not interesting.  Anyway, the arguments being made are not being made under the 14^th amendment- the due process clause.  The argument is about “ordered liberty”, or rather is this a fundamental human right that does not derive it’s authority from the constitution?  Not all amendments in the bill of rights are applicable to the 14^th amendment.  For example, States do not have to adhere to the trial by jury clause.  There are many states that have different standards as far as trials go. Most states do have trial by jury, but they are not required to under the constitution.  Up until the early 1900’s, searches and seizures were only applicable to the Federal Government and Federal law enforcement.  I am a firm believer that the framers of the constitution set it up to limit Federal power, not necessarily state power.

The idea of “ordered liberty” is that there are some rights that are more fundamental than others, and because they are more fundamental than others, they apply to the states without the need for justification under the 14^th amendment.  Reading the arguments, it seems the Court is not too happy with the argument, they would have rather had it argued under due process.

I think they will eventually shoot down the ban, however.  I am looking forward to reading the majority opinion.

 

An interesting observation- each judge seems to be prodding the counsel to argue the way they want it argued.  It’s almost like they are trying to lead the lawyers with stuff lie- “but aren’t you really trying to say…, wouldn’t you agree…”  Just interesting.

 

Some Obamamama news-

I can’t decide whether his administration is suffering from amateur hour at the White House, or rather the arrogance of the Supreme Leader is on display.  My emotional gut feeling is that it is arrogance, but my logical synapses’ are telling me it is Amateur Hour at the White House.

-          The administration telling us not to pay attention to the job numbers coming out, because the snow storm is likely to skew them.

-          State of the Union- “2010 the focus is on jobs!”  January to April 2010- “focus on Health Care!”

-          Robert Gibbs.  Nuff said.

-          Health Care Summit-Obama to Republican congressman who had the 2400 page health care bill “stop with the props.” Yesterday white lab coats behind Obamamama as he discussed healthcare (props, anyone?)

-          Contracts from the “stimulus bill” on green jobs is going to create 3000 new green jobs- in China.

-          2007- reconciliation on major policy allows one party to be totalitarian in nature, it is not what the framers of the constitution had in mind.  2010- use reconciliation to have this large piece of policy legislation passed. (that was Obama, BTW)

You tell me- arrogance that he can say or do anything and no one will either a. notice or b. care? Or is it a complete lack of professionalism and an overwhelming dose of amateur hour- and I mean not only Obama but his staff.

Peace-I’m out

The right to bear arms...

So…the Supreme Court heard arguments yesterday in  McDonald v. City of Chicago.  For those of you who haven’t the faintest idea of what I am talking about, this is a very prominent 2^nd amendment case.  The previous famous case of a year or two ago, Heller v. DC was landmark in nature, as the Court found that the 2^nd amendment articulated a fundamental right to self defense.  But, the decision only applied to the Federal gov’t.  This new case asks the Court to apply the Heller ruling to the states, something in legal mumbo jumbo called incorporation.  Chicago has a total ban on all handguns, and Mr. Otis McDonald challenged the ban under the Heller ruling.  So, now you know what I am talking about.

 

Believe it or not, I am not sure how I feel about this case.  I further submit that this case has given all parties involved a severe identity crisis.

Lemme’ ‘splain- fundamental brass tacks- this case has nothing to do with the 2^nd amendment, but rather states rights.  Conservative peoples who favor a fundamental right to have guns and shoot stuff also tend to favor a Federal govmint that stays out of states bizness.  Liberal peoples who quake at the very sight of a firearm tend to favor a large central Federal govmint that has its hands in all sorts of nuances of everyday life.  Here is where the identity crisis is rearing it’s confused head- the liberal I-just-peed-my-pants-I-saw-a-gun are arguing for the Federal gov’t to stay out of state and local gov’t business, while the lets-watch-NASCAR-and-then-shoot-stuff crowd wants Federal intervention into State issues. 

While I completely agree that the right to self defense is a God given right, and so in that light it should be applied to the states just as the Due Process rights are, I do pause however at the notion that a state cannot enact it’s own laws.  I would be a hypocrite if I said it was ok for the Feds to force the states to allow handguns under the 2^nd amendment, but on the other hand say the Feds should stay out of the whole marriage thing and let the states decide for themselves.  If you don’t like California’s restrictions on guns, then don’t live there (and for a myriad of other reasons, you should move out anyway), same thing with Chicago.  Let these liberal bastions of…liberalness, uh…reap what they have sown.  It seems plain to me that these areas are falling apart rapidly- Detroit, Chicago, DC, etc.  These are cities that are run by people just to the right of Karl Marx, and they have extremely high crime, high taxes, and are on the verge of bankruptcy.  Let them fail.  Let their crime rates increase to the point of no return.  Please, please let them fail.  If you value your life, and want to be able to keep a firearm in the home for self defense- don’t live in these cities.  Let them implode like the Soviet Union.

Even with the same sex marriage issue, I don’t like the idea of a constitutional amendment.  I think every state should decide for themselves.  And in almost every state where it has been put to a vote, the voters have rejected the idea of same-sex marriage.  In most of the states that allow it, it was the decision of a handful of people on the courts- which is very wrong for a plethora of reasons.

I too am torn, I suppose after thinking about it, I would rather have the Heller decision incorporated into the states, than allow places like Chicago to be a little authoritarian society.  Especially if I believe the right to bear arms to be a fundamental right.  But I am still very confused…

What do you think?  I am actually curious to hear what the 3 people who read this blog think…

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

According to climate scientists, January was the hottest January ever…. http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/160556

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAHHAAHHAAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

So, they say they know this because of satellite data… hahahahahahhahahahaha hahahahahahhahahahaha hahahahahahhahahahaha hahahahahahhahahahaha hahahahahahhahahahaha hahahahahahhahahahaha hahahahahahhahahahaha hahahahahahhahahahaha hahahahahahhahahahaha hahahahahahhahahahaha hahahahahahhahahahaha hahahahahahhahahahaha hahahahahahhahahahaha hahahahahahhahahahaha hahahahahahhahahahaha hahahahahahhahahahaha hahahahahahhahahahaha

 

Are we so reliant on computers, that all common sense has gone out the window.  This is like looking at one of those bank signs- you know, the ones with the time and temp, and seeing that it says 80 degrees, yet there is snow on the ground.  Well, apparently climate scientists would believe the sign over their own need to wear coats and mittens.

 

Good times, good times…

just a thought...

How come heat waves, hurricanes, and thunderstorms are evidence of global warming, but massive snow storms and extreme cold snaps are just “weather”?

 

I am sure there is some intellectual Poindexter out there who can educate me…but I think I already know the answer.  Because heat waves are hot, this is a great excuse to point out global warming, because it is really hot outside.  Hurricanes and tornadoes are evidence because they are destructive and scary.  If they are linked to global warming, then more people will want to do away with global warming, because it doesn’t play nice with the rest of the group.  But cold spells, such as the one we had in January, this is just an isolated weather event, that neither proves not disproves global warming- it is just weather, and weather can fluctuate.  The massive snow storms is just an isolated weather event as well.

 

Now, I am not here saying that because it has been really, really cold and there has been lots of snow that global warming does not exist.  My point is, to have a legitimate point of view, then you have to be consistent in your arguments.  You cannot brand a type of “weather event” such as a heat wave as evidence of global warming, but then dismiss another “weather event” – cold snaps, as having nothing to do with climate and global warming.

 

I for one am consistent in my arguments- I don’t believe in global warming because it is dumb and Al Gore is a poopoo face.

 

Peace- I’m out!

Car Kit of Doom...

Now, on to the car kit.  Most people think of the car kit as a kit kept in the car- with things such as jumper cables, tools, blankets, food, and water.  That should be in your car at all times, and what I am talking about is different from that.

Our Car Kit will first include you BoB.  The Car Kit is put together to enable you to take more things with you if you a) have more time to get out, say 20 minutes, and b)are able to drive your vehicle out.

So, with those two requirements in mind, let’s discuss the car kit. 

The car kit should be portable, that means plastic tubs, or foot lockers, suitcases, even cardboard boxes- just as long as you can grab it.  When putting one together, think of how much space you will have in your vehicle to put this stuff.  In our minivan, we could probably fit 4-6 tubs in the back, with an extra 2 up front.  If we have time, we could even fit more on the roof of the van, as we have a luggage rack.  Evaluate what you can fit.  Also what scenarios would you most likely need the car kit for-

Zombies are coming into you city, you have 20 minutes to leave.  You decide to leave and drive to family in Utah.  That means at least a 16 hour drive and who knows how long until you can come back.  What would you need?

Well the first is food, and you could probably pack a good 3 or 4 days worth of food in your car.  Water- you probably would not be able to fit gallons and gallons of water, but a couple of 7 gallon containers of water would not be unreasonable.

A couple of days worth of clothes

Tent, sleeping bags, tarps, propane stove with propane, rope, more rope.

Tools- folding shovel, saw, hatchet, car tools

More ammo, perhaps even a .22 survival rifle, or a Mossberg 12ga that can easily be broken down to fit in a storage tub.

A Comprehensive first aid kit- a large one, one with everything- if you have the scrilla, get a First Responder Bag, can get them off of Galls.  (Ask Korynn and Bryan what to get for a first responder bag, that would be a good FHE).

Any number of things can and should be included in the car kit above and beyond what is needed for basic survival.  It just really depends on your family, what you are comfortable with and without.  The Car Kit could actually be your 72 (ahem, I mean 96) hour kit that everyone talks about.  It just needs to be portable enough to grab and throw in the vehicle. 

 

 

Bug Out Bag

So, I talked about the Year’s Supply, and was going to move down the list, but it occurred to me that I should start with the bug out bag first, and then move up the list, as things added to the bug out bag will constitute the car kit, and things added to that will constitute the 72 hour kit and so on.

Bug out Bag- In order to explain the bug out bag, I will have to talk for a moment about the 72 hour kit.  Many people confuse the 72 hour kit, with the bug out bag, but they are not the same thing.  The bug out bag is not designed to sustain you with food and water for 3 days, nor is it used to haul around some sort of mini cabin and the comforts of camping.  Of course, if you google Bug out Bag, you will find many variations that are intended for the wearer to run into the woods and wait out the zombies for a few days.  Realistically though, how many of you are planning on running straight into the woods in the event of anything?  Probably very few of us.  Most likely we will be moving to another shelter, a place to get food and water.  Most disasters in this area that will necessitate an evacuation of your house will not leave you without someplace to go.  We have no hurricanes, no earthquakes that will wipe out huge swaths of city such as Katrina or Haiti.  It is very likely that small areas will be affected, but there will be places to go if you are not able to stay in your own home.

The Bug out Bag is used when you have to get out of your house, and get out QUICKLY.  I am talking 2 minutes quickly.  This is especially true for those that live close to train tracks (chemical spills) or cemeteries (zombies).  What is needed in a BoB?  It needs to be tailored to your specific needs, and this will involve a little bit of talking with your spouse about what needs to go in there.  The BoB assumes that you can get somewhere where you can have water, shelter and food, such as a Red Cross shelter or family.  So if you tailor the bag around this scenario, it will be a lot easier to figure out what you want to put into it.  For example- My BoB is tailored around having to a) go to a public shelter on foot  or b)go to family on foot.  Both of these scenarios is going to assume that whatever shelter I will get to will have food and water and perhaps even medical care.  So really the BoB is full of important items and a change of clothes, not so much on survival items.  Of course, you may want to tailor your bag to fit other scenarios such as the nearest family member is 2 days walk away- so we will need food and water and shelter to get us there. 

Remember that it is impossible to plan for every variable.  All we can do is plan for the most likely variables, and move on from there.  This is why a good knowledge of skill sets  could be invaluable to us. Do we know how to get food without packing it along- such as edible plants, or hunting?  Do we know how to purify water without purification tablets or filters?  Do we know how to build a shelter if all we had was a tarp, 4 feet of rope, a tire and a pallet?  How do you stay warm without a sleeping bag?  These are skills that can make up the deficit in unplanned variables.

Generally though, here are some absolutes:

Important documents (THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING TO HAVE!!!): either hard copies such as Social Security cards and birth certificates, other important pictures and documents such as bank account info, insurance info, etc. stored electronically on a thumb drive. (this is probably the most important thing you want to take with you- here is a more in-depth website for more info on this http://www.theplacewithnoname.com/blogs/klessons/p/0006.html there is a  small amount of cursing, nothing real bad, no f-bombs- but he has a great list of things to have on in a BoB)

Money- probably at least $100 in small denominations, including change.

Medications- I would include daily things like Tylenol, Tums, maybe some anti-diarrheal stuff.

Small first aid kit- nothin’ fancy, just enough to treat some small injuries

Scriptures

Consecrated Oil

Phone numbers for family

Hygiene kit (small bath towel, soap, sanitizer)

Toilet Paper (or disposable towelettes would be better)

As for other things- I would have

Change or two of underwear and socks, perhaps even a change of clothes

Some snack food such as granola bars, candy

A few bottles of water- remember on the food and water- this is not meant to keep you in food and water for 72 hours- although if you want to pack some MRE’s- they are gross, but will provide food in a small package and you could probably fit 2 or 3 days worth.  Mostly the food and water would be if you had to walk a few miles to get where you need to go- like to Mom and Dad’s house, to the church, or other shelter set up.

Flashlights- the LED kind as the battery lasts forever

Water filter- the LDS distribution center sells them for $22

Good Leatherman type tool

100’ rope

Trash bags- can be used for all sorts of things from purifying water to shelter

Poncho

Matches, candles, flint and steel, or other firestarting items.

Good pair of work gloves

Spare batteries

The crank power radio and cell phone charger  mom and dad gave us

A large tarp

Space blanket

Knit hat

Hand warmers

Compass

Maps of the area

Water purification tablets

Metal canteen cup (one that you can boil water in)

A good knife

100 rounds of ammo for a firearm (not only to mow through waves of zombies, but also for hunting)

Duct tape (a million and one uses for this)

Special Forces Survival Guide-  a small booklet with tons of info from shelter to first aid for trauma and sicknesses.

We have small kids, so we have two BoB, and mine is much heavier than Sharel’s, as I can carry more.  Having kids means a little less space to pack things you may want, as you are packing stuff for the kids, such as clothes, some entertainment for them, baby food, diapers, etc.

Your BoB should not weigh anymore than 50 pounds- if it does, then you need to get rid of some stuff.   It should also be in a place that is very easy to grab on your way out, such as next to the door, or in a coat closet.  In order to be effective, you should also practice getting out of your house in under 60 seconds, to see if you need to adjust anything- an evacuation plan.

 

Year's Supply

The Brethren have always advised us to have a Year’s Supply on hand.  This means much more than just food, but also necessities such as soap, toilet paper, etc on hand.    A good way to try and figure out what you would need is to imagine that you couldn’t go to the store for a month.  What things would you run out of?  Could you prepare and eat what is in your food storage?  Many of us store wheat, but have no way of preparing it; or if we do, have we actually prepared it into something edible? 

Sharel’s parents had a great example of stuff to store.  They had soap, deodorant, toothpaste, shampoo, cleaning supplies, toilet paper, and all sorts of other things.  The main idea behind the Year’s Supply is to be as self-reliant for a year as possible. 

Most people may imagine the scenarios of needing a Year’s Supply as being out of work, or a local disaster where the Bishop asks for donations of food to care for the needy, or some other collapse such as an economic depression.  Another reason, one that threatens every year is a major Flu pandemic.  We have not had a bad outbreak of the flu since the 1960’s, and the worst one on record was in 1918.  Public Health officials fear a 1918 like flu outbreak more than anything.  Why? The 1918 flu killed more people between the ages of 30 and 60 than it did the old, or the young.  More than 675,000 died in the US alone within 18 months.  To this day, scientist and medical professionals are still at a loss as to what exactly in the virus killed so many relatively healthy adults.    When we see the panic over the swine flu, or other flu outbreaks, it is mostly concern that we will see another strain that is going to kill relatively healthy, young and middle aged adults.

With all of our great advances in medicine and a far deeper understanding of viruses than ever before, still the only effective mitigation (stopping the spread) strategy for viruses is quarantines and isolation.  Because of the speed at which we can travel, the virus could become pandemic before anyone even shows any symptoms.

A study done by the Dept. of the Navy shows that  a viral pandemic of great enough proportions could halt transportation of goods and services on a monumental scale.  Most large stores such as WalMart, or even local grocery stores get all their stock from just a few distribution hubs scattered throughout the United States.  For instance, HyVee gets all of its goods from a distribution center in Iowa.  Most stores only have about 4 days worth of goods actually in the store.  That 4 days worth in an emergency panic mode would probably take less than 48 hours to clear out the store.

It would probably take at least a week to open up necessary transportation lines, depending on the speed and effectiveness of any anti-virals that could be delivered to the workers in the transportation industry.  And this is only if the quarantine is government mandated.  What if the majority of drivers get sick, or self quarantine out of fear?  Estimates show that it could be at least a month to have transportation and delivery up to where it was previously.

Would you have a month worth of supplies in the event you couldn’t leave the house?  We are assuming with this scenario of course that you still have running water, gas and electricity.  Most communities will have a plan to keep essential services running, beginning with health care workers, emergency responders, and utilities.

I hope that has given a little perspective on the importance of a Year’s Supply, and the need to make sure we are constantly working to build it up. 

I am not saying to get into debt over it, or to be impatient with thinking you need a Year’s Supply now, but as President Hinckley advised us- every time we go shopping, just get something extra to add, it needn’t cost a lot, just an extra can of fruit, or perhaps an extra tube of toothpaste.  I have full faith that as we are working on it, in the event anything happens before we have completed it, that the Lord will make up the rest.

 

Zombie Preparation

Everyone knows that the only thing you really need to be prepared for the impending Zombie Doom is a good, reliable 12 gauge pump action shotgun, with plenty of 00 buck shot and perhaps an axe.  If you have that, you’re set.  But, let’s suppose you want to prepare for just more than the Zombie Apocalypse?  What might you need?  Your needs and preparation will depend on a few different factors.

1.  Where do you plan on surviving?
2. How long do you plan on surviving?

In answer to question 1, there are a really 3 options.  The first is staying at your home.   This is probably the best scenario that you can hope for.  If you house is not unsafe to remain in, and there is no evacuation order, then this is probably you best bet for survival.  What situations might require you to remain home?  In Missouri, an ice storm, flooding that has not affected your neighborhood, tornado damage that has not affected your home, a flu or other virus outbreak, riots, or zombies that don’t know how to open doors.

A second option involves needing to leave your home, due to damage, or a general evacuation order and go to a shelter for a few days.  This can happen for a number of reasons, including all the ones mentioned above, but has most consistently been a factor in chemical spills.  Often a neighborhood will be evacuated for a time to allow cleanup.  In this case, if you don’t have family you can stay with, or you are put in a quarantine situation, a red cross shelter is the most likely place.

The third option is evacuation, but having to leave the state, or to travel a fairly long distance to reach a safe area, or family.

Each one of these scenarios will necessitate a different amount of time needed for survival.  Unfortunately it would be almost impossible to plan for each eventuality and have a different stockpile prepared for each.  Instead, there are some general preparation strategies that will meet most of the elements needed for survival.

 There are 4 different stockpiles needed to minimally survive most scenarios. 

1.  Year’s Supply
2. 72 hour kit (really more like 96 hour kit, but I will explain later)
3. Car Kit
4. Bug-Out Bag.

Each one of these kits can be a part of the kit above it, for example a car kit can be part of your 72 hour kit, and the 72 hour kit part of your year’s supply.  So really it is a matter of organizing things into groups depending on how much time you have to either survive or leave your home.

 

Preparing for the Zombie Apocalypse...A Series by Danny's Deep Thoughts...

As most of you may know, my brain is growing bigger day by day with the invaluable knowledge of a Graduate School education in Disaster and Emergency Management.  One course that is glaringly missing from the catalog is “The Zombie Apocalypse:  Mitigation, Preparation, and Response Strategies for Dealing with the Undead.”  It’s quite disappointing really, to not have that course offered.  But, I will be writing up a proposal and presenting it to the Dean, and perhaps even the Board of Directors for the school, in an attempt to have this course added to the curriculum.  So, in preparation for the proposal, I will attempt to educate the three readers of this blog on the Zombie Apocalypse.

First- what is the Zombie Apocalypse?  May I suggest watching “I am Legend” with Will Smith, or perhaps “The Omega Man” with Charlton Heston?  Other films that will educate you on the Zombie Apocalypse are (disclaimer:  I have not seen these, so I cannot verify that the content is suitable for an active, faithful Latter Day Saint to watch.) 28 Days Later, Zombie Land, Night of the Living Dead.

My purpose is to discuss the three strategies mentioned previously, Preparation, Mitigation and Response.  I will tackle each one of these topics in the upcoming weeks.

In all seriousness, I will be writing about Emergency Preparedness, because a lot of the info I have seen coming from numerous sources, including what has been presented to us on a ward level are out of date.  Recent disasters such as Katrina, and more recently Haiti, have presented us with invaluable information that has not been used to update the current thinking, your ward may be different, so perhaps you already know some of these things. 

 

State of the Union Cliff notes...

For those of you that didn’t sit through the 1 hour and 10 minute long State of the Union Address, here is a brief synopsis of what was said:

 

“Blah blah blah blah, I, my, I, Bush’s fault, Bush’s fault, blah, blah blah blah, I, my, mine, Bush’s fault, Bush’s fault, blah blah blah, Republicans fault, blah blah blah blah, listen and obey me, I’m great, welcome your ideas, as long as they are mine, blah, blah, blah, blah, Bush’s fault, don’t blame me, evil Bankers and Wall Street, blah blah blah blah blah, Bush’s fault, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah, I’m great, my ideas are infallible, have the courage to agree with me without question, blah blah blah blah, blah.  Once again, my fellow Americans- everything bad happening is Bush’s fault, some of it is Wall Streets fault.  Don’t be mad at me.  I have the best ideas ever, and you are welcome to share your ideas, but just as long as they are really my ideas- it’s the only way I will consider them.  To you democrats that are listening to your constituents- stop, stop right now, have the courage to stand by me, even if you don’t get re-elected.  Stop listening to your constituents.  Republicans- if none of you will vote for my ideas, rest assured, if my ideas fail, we will still blame you for the failure anyway.  I am great, I am relating to the common man out there, because I have a low level staff intern read your letters, and then creatively tell me what I want to hear.  One time, I also stopped at a McD’s to take a kingly deuce.  Now after that experience, who can tell me I don’t relate to the common man.  And because I relate to you- the common man, or woman- I know what’s best for you, because I am smart, I went to Harvard, smoked dope and even cocaine once.  But don’t worry about that, I could explain, but your feeble, common minds wouldn’t understand.  Allright, I suppose we are finished here- oh, one last thing- congress- stop perpetually campaigning, no one likes it.  There you have it folks, vote for me in 2012…I mean that is the State of our Union!!!  PEACE!! I’M OUT!!!”

just for fun

A classic:

a few thoughts

So Obama had a closed door meeting with his top security people the other day.  News sources tell us that Obama was quite blunt about the failure of security on Christmas Day – here is what is purported to have been said- http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dc/2010/01/obama-dresses-down-his-intel-a.html

 

I have it on good authority that the meeting went something more like this (the unreported comments are in italics):

 

“This was a screw up that could have been disastrous to my image and presidency” Obama told his war council and national security advisers in the Situation Room meeting. “You dodged a bullet but just barely. If that plane would have been blown up, my political future would be in serious jeopardy. As it stands, this little failure on your part disrupted my vacation, disrupted my golfing, and has made me very cranky.  This is not acceptable.  Now I have to get up and give a speech on my vacation.  Now look, I agree with the next person that the plane did not get blown up, so what is the big deal? Right?  Wrong- it’s a big deal because it is making me look bad.  Now we were successful in convincing people the Ft. Hood shooting was the work of a deranged, lone gunman, instead of a terrorist attack.  I tried in my speech I gave a few days after the attempted bombing to blame this on the work of a lone, isolated individual, but that has not worked.  I am trying to get large portions of the private sector under government control before I lose the majorities in the House and Senate, and this little episode is distracting me, and it is distracting the proletariat.  On top of all this, some of my most ardent supporters are criticizing me for my detached, unemotional speech about this attempted attack 3 days after it happened.  You would look unemotional too, if you had to get out of your golf shorts, and into a suit, and go and talk to the media instead of relaxing.  This attempted attack has really hurt my image, and that is not acceptable.

 “While there will be a tendency for fingerpointing at me, I will not tolerate it, I will throw all of you, and your families under the bus if I need to.  Mark my words, if something like this happens again, I will ruin each and every one of you.  I cannot stress enough how important I am, and what people think of me.  This type of stuff is the stuff that makes me look bad.  Now, just to clarify- I know that I promised an end to terrorism when I was elected.  I know we blamed terrorism on Bush, and it worked.  This is what the people that voted for me thought.  The truth is that terrorism began long before Bush, and will probably continue long after.  I know this, and you should know it.  The American people, however, should not know this.  It is your job to quietly prevent things like this from happening so I can be the great savior that stopped terrorism because I am not Bush” Obama also said.

The leaders of each administration agency and department took responsibility for failures to make Obama look good at their respective organizations.

 

Now- a few predictions for the Red Dawn remake-

America will be to blame for getting attacked- probably in the form of our greed causing the economic recession, or some other such nonsense.

The Wolverines will secure firearms from criminals, as only criminals have guns.

None of the wolverines will know the first thing about handling a firearm, they will all need to be trained by Jed, who in this version is a Marine Veteran from Iraq.

Somewhere in the film, the terrorists who plant roadside bombs in Iraq and Afghanistan will be painted as simple freedom fighters, trying to drive foreign occupiers out of their land like the Wolverines, rather than foreign jihadists who entered Iraq for the sole purpose of killing American Troops.

Somewhere in the film, the Middle Easterner will be portrayed as intellectually and culturally far more advanced that the brutish Americans, despite the treatment of women and only wiping their rear end with their left hand.

Towards the end of the film, we will be introduced to the sympathetic invader, who only had our best interests at heart, and could really help us.

Mark my words, most, if not all of these will be elements in the upcoming Red Dawn remake.

Peace- I’m out!