Different Floors of the House

Saturday, March 27, 2010

Janus For Three Guitars

Haven't had a song in a while, so I did this one up yesterday.  Hope you like it.  If you don't...it was free :D  Try it with your headphones on to get the full effect of all those strings attacking each other.

Thanks to Timsdd for the awesome time-lapse skills.
Thanks to God for the inspiration

I ONLY use Parkwood Guitars!  (You should too!)

Friday, March 26, 2010

He just don't get it.

Here is a little snippet of president Obama's little speech about that little bill that just became a BIG LAW:

Why does he keep doing this? Blaming the insurance companies for the federal government's failures?  Quite simply, it is the dynamic, singular regulation of this industry which has stifled and spoiled it.  I won't toy with the idea that he's ignorant, I think he knows what's going on--has been going on for quite some time now.

Only private insurance is restricted from doing business across state lines.  Only private insurance has to contend with an entity which constantly passes laws in favor of itself and against its competitors.  Only private insurance is answerable to the very people who want it destroyed.  Only private insurance companies have to battle with a competitor with unlimited resources who can print money, bribe people with that money, and use their coerced henchmen as agents of usurpation in any way they see fit.  Only them.  And here you thought the democrats were all about "fairness".

Let's be clear, this problem of over-regulation and restriction is not the Obama administration's fault.  This has been going on for a hundred years.  I for one find it funny that the government believes it can replenish the fields IT IRRADIATED by irrigating them with the same poisonous waters it killed them with in the first place.  Funny.  Funny. Funny.

Not so funny:

It was the government that institutionalized the poorly conceptualized 'cost plus' system with Medicaire. 

It was the government that encouraged provider-based health care systems of delivery and pre-enrollment.

It was the IRS itself that allowed the institutionalization of employer-paid insurances-a practice bereft of quality and ripe for the picking and abuse by labor organizations--which the government allowed encouraged mandated through legislation and interventionism.

It is the government's own tax code that encourages 'first-dollar' insurance options as tax avoidance measures--that is to say: if we can save money and get weaker insurance, we will do so almost every time.

It was the government that enacted the so-called "experience rating" which drastically skewed any equatable coverage system across the board.

It was the government that instituted Medicaire A and B, third party payer systems that have proven our humanness: if someone else is paying for it (with imaginary money) LET'S GO SHOPPING!

It was the government who bribed the medical industry into accepting these fruitless, enslaving plans.

It was the government that created the ill-conceived Health Maintenance Organization (in order to fix all the aforementioned problems the government itself created). The HMO failed as a cost-saving measure, as a quality-of-care measure and as a linchpin of fiscal security.

It is the government's own state-mandated insurance policies which have effectively costed people out of the health insurance market, historically (small businesses)and it is the oncoming mandates that will force them beyond that, into bankruptcy and liquidation.

We could go on and on and on. The governmental restrictions and regulations on the health insurance industry are a blight on the economic prowess of this nation and it will continue to be exactly that...and worse.

So yes, Mr. president, we will fight you tooth and nail, while we still have a doctor willing to fix our broken teeth and a manicurist able to stay in business long enough to weather this torrent of idiocy you have just signed into law.


Wednesday, March 24, 2010

I'm Just a Bill: Obama Stizzzyle (yo)

The hand stays and you're gonna pay for it.

That's it.

Theft, Lies and Coercion: A leftist gameplan

A Facebook response to another Facebooker posting a highly Digged story about the stupidity of tea-partiers:

...I applaud your effort to limit government, but think it's a bit hyperbole. (yes, sometimes that's how you get someone to listen, but it turns my ears off.) I like this quote from a doctor "I am a doctor. Here is my plight: I will have to pay more in Medicare taxes and take a pay cut at the same time. Having said this, I see patients daily ... that have no money for the medicine they need to live. They return to the E.R. numerous times for their "health care." And guess who pays the E.R. bill? You and I. Either we let these people die at the door of the hospital because they cannot pay. Or, we pay for their health care. There is no other option ... I have a conscience. I won't let my fellow American die at the door. I'll pay for her health care. God forgive me, and the rest of you who complain about it. "

Hmm.  "...turns my ears off."  No wonder these lefties can't learn anything.

I always wondered how people like the person who posted this define "conscience" and how do they justify thievery and coercion?

Now I know.   They simply make up a story about a "doctor" who doesn't know enough about the law to practice medicine...in any state.

A doctor?  Really?  Then he would know that no one is going to "die at the door of the hospital" because they don't have insurance.  He would know that federal law has required doctors to care for people-even if they cannot afford the care-for a long time.  And before the law enforced it, the hippocratic oath enforced it (too bad doctors did themselves in by doing away with the oath in the 70's, eh?)  That quote is a blathering lie and is not from a doctor (unless he's a complete moron).

And it's not just nitwits on FB and Twitter who are saying this.  Remember Chuckie Schumer's infamous:  They're DYING!  AAAAAAHHHHHH!!!! PEOPLE ARE DYING!!!!

In my state (Oregon) there has been a minimum of charitable care (uncompensated care) hospitals have been required to provide for some time now.  Yes, An actual law that says they pretty much have to work for free!

Makes you wonder what the term "conscience" means to people like this, doesn't it?  But hey, if they can make up quotes from "doctors" and cherry pick among Tea Party members, I can do the same thing...it's only "fair", right?

Tea: Define "Conscience"

Lefty: Uh, like, to like steal from people is ok if you've really convinced yourself that you deserve or need their stuff more than they do.

Tea: Did you know that hospitals have been required for a long time to service people in need of medical attention whether they have insurance or not.

Lefty:  Yeah, but we all have to pay for that care and that's like, not fair or something.

Tea:  Did you know that many states have had laws requiring hospitals to meet a minimum of charitable care each year?

Lefty: So!  That, like, doesn't count...or something!

Tea:  Did you know that the U.S. Postal Service loses 14.4 million pieces of mail each year?

Lefty:  What does that have to do with, like, healthcare?

Tea:  Hmm...maybe nothing.  Maybe everything.  I for one don't really want to find out if they have anything to do with each other.

Lefty:  You're an idiot, uneducated loser.  And you have no conscience!

Tea:  Fine.  Let's talk about fairness.  That's what lefties are really talking about when they say "conscience" isn't it?

Tea:  Name one other industry that is so regulated that it is not allowed to do business across state lines?

Lefty:  Uh...

Tea: O.K. Maybe an "unfair" question.

Lefty:  Yeah!

Tea:  Can you name one commercial entity that is restricted against doing business across state lines but has a competitor who is allowed to do so without impunity?

Lefty:  ...

Tea:  Does that scenario sound fair to you?

Lefty:  People are DYING!  They are DYING!

Tea:  Right.  It is so vital and imperative that we do something now. That is why this law will have no effect on the health system in this country for four years.

Lefty:  What?

Tea:  Yawn.  This is getting too easy.  You ask me a question now.

Left:  Yeah!  Ok.  Why do you hate people so much?

Tea:  Because they steal from me and justify the theft with lies and enforce the lies with coercion.  That's why.

That's it.

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

When in Canada, do as the Bolsheviks do

I first learned about the Ann Coulter v. Canada issue at Legal Insurrection.  That was a while ago (in blog-time), so I was really surprised when I logged in this evening and 4 out of the top 10 sites on my link list were talking about it.

Here's one with some crazy people...FYI:  Crazy people precede Ann Coulter...wherever she goes.  The hope, I suppose, is these people are a little less crazy having been graced with her presence.  Never happens. 

The ever shrugging Atlas decided to take this one up. Atlas is a site dedicated more to eradicating islamofascism than anything else these days, so of course this piqued interest o'er there.

And there were others as well.  

Lets not mince words:  Ann Coulter is sexy.  She's the type of 'sexy' liberal men just can't handle.  She's the true feminist out there, doing what the women of the left sit around wishing they could do.

I'm not a huge Coulter fan, to be honest.  But you pit her against any of the scum sucking-bottom-feeder-hairy-chested-420-filthy-faced-hoes I went to college with...I'm with Ann.  Every time.

Gone, not Gone

It only seems the blogosphere is suffering from post health-care anxiety syndrome...no matter how we feel. They are out there.  Still writing. Still fighting. 
Monday was a day of mourning across the conservative blog community it seemed.  Many people didn't even show up to write one lousy article.  The amount of feeds went down.  But the amount of hits went up.  That's where it's all at.  That's why these guys write.  Because you never know who's coming to read your thoughts, laid out here in electronic ink. And on Tuesday, the info streaming in is hard to keep up with...Everyone's back.

No matter how drowned in disappointment I am--no matter how heavy my fingertips feel as all the tension and turmoil and vein-bursting blood rushes to their tips--I'll be here, pressing that quill.

Monday, March 22, 2010

Bearing False Witness

Barrack Hussein Obama.

Is he a far left of center leader?  Yep.  Is he a socialist?  Probably.  Does he deserve to be shot?  Uh...no.

This isn't the only vitriol being spewed forth. Here are some of the things I've read about the president of the United States over the course of the last few hours, and it's all pretty disgusting:

There's this website:  http://obamaisliterallyhitler.tumblr.com/  --Really?  C'mon.  The site offers this beacon of unbefuddled wisdom as it's call to arms: "PATRIOT INQUIRIES AND ALERTS CAN BE SENT HERE. AS A TRUE PATRIOT I ONLY SPEAK GOD'S LANGUAGE--AMERICAN."  I'm pretty sure this HAS to be a gag site run by some lefty...but go find out for yourself...

This status quo rant:  "Just like what Nazi Germany did to the Jews, so liberal America is now doing to the evangelical Christians. It’s no different. It is the same thing. It is happening all over again. It is the Democratic Congress, the liberal-based media and the homosexuals who want to destroy the Christians. Wholesale abuse and discrimination and the worst bigotry directed toward any group in America today. More terrible than anything suffered by any minority in history."  --Pat Robertson, same old/same old from this guy.  Hey Pat, turn the other cheek, will ya?  Please?

And here is a lengthy diatribe that I personally could not finish...so it could have a more reasonable ending then it had a beginning, but I doubt it.

On Facebook:  "Hitler and Stalin both had their "meanness". And these wre real "jack-booted" thugs. I think that is what Obama has on his mind." --This poster, ironically, has a picture of Moses holding the Ten Commandments as his profile pic.

I wonder, isn't there a commandment that says something like:  Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor?

There's this video which compares Hitler to Obama.  Ok, stop right there.

Obama has not murdered 8 million Jews.  Has not intentionally starved millions of his people to death.  Has not suspended habeas corpus.  Has not interned his own citizenry.  Has not led millions of his people to starvation in the swampy countryside.

Even this site referred to Nancy Pelosi as "Adolf Pelosi".  And that too is no good.  (Although, one could argue there is a striking physiological resemblence.)

Has the president done things I disagree with philosophically, ideology etc?  Yep.  Tons.  The list is endless.  And, surely, some gray similarities are easily drawn between most of the aforementioned tyrants and our president--just like the left was able to connect the dots between former president Bush and Hitler or Stalin or Mao or whomever.  I get that.  Obama is a statist elitist and a complete pompous ass, in my opinion.  But he does NOT deserve death and he is not Hitler.  Not even remotely.  He simply needs to lose in 2012 and his policies need to be reexamined by the next congressional body.  That's all.  By amplifying this torrid, incendiary blather about Hitler and whathaveyou, we are simply assuring sympathy for Obama from those otherwise inclined to think twice about him as a president.  That, and it's just wrong.

I think, when people are comparing Obama or Bush to Hitler or Stalin, they are talking about the policies which led up to the destruction of so many lives.  I get that, if it is truly the intention.  But that's not the image that I or anyone else visualizes when they think the word "Hitler", or the word "Mao".  It just isn't. When we think of Adolf Hitler we think of dead corpses piled up in concentration camps and the bloodthirsty screams of indoctrinated youth.  We think of gulags when we think of Stalin and pits full of bodies when we think of Pol Pot.  Truly gruesome, horrifying stuff.  So when Americans evoke the names of these murderous bastards they are themselves attempting to invoke fear--the very tactic they ascribe to the early political campaigns of the Maos and Hitlers and Lennins of the world.

I cannot condone the references to Hitler or Stalin or any other genocide perpetrating megalomaniac.  These references demean and degrade the legacy of all those lost souls throughout time.  And I won't have it.  Any site on my link list that uses such a reference will be banned and not re-linked.  And, as this site has practically no influence on any of the sites I link to, it won't matter one bit..  But it would be nice if people would have the decency to honor the memory of those countless millions who have fallen prey to the REAL Hitlers in the bloody annals of world history.

When "abortion on demand" becomes "abortion by command"

Yep. That silly little executive order won't mean anything. Neither will the Hyde amendment, by the time this Congress gets done with it.

I feel a Lee Greenwood song coming on...

Here is Mr. Stupid Stupak admitting the toothless nature of Obama's over-zealous tendency to sign executive orders on a whim:

Yes, I allowed Obama to lie to me and knew he was lying when he did it...

/snarky cynicism

Sunday, March 21, 2010

Consummatum est

It's over.

Adolf Pelosi wins.

You can watch the demise of the Republic HERE.
I certainly hope everyone will remain calm.  Have some cookies and milk.  Hell, I dunno, go to the batting cage and whack a few dents into some balls or something.

Whatever you do, don't sit and stew.

Ok, wait.  Here.  I got it:  READ THIS.

That might help...

A e-group hug?

Not quite a haiku...but maybe poetry helps:

You're going to live.  You're going to die.  Between, there will be you and I.


That's all I got.

That's it.  That's all.

Sunday Morning Smackback

Along the lines of my last series of posts regarding Peter (the Rat) DeFazio, and the willingness of democrats to sell out their constituency,  this morning on Prof.  Jacobson's site he asks the following question:

"What if Barack Obama were not President, and Democrats did not control Congress. Would liberals be so willing to give the federal government this sweeping power?"

My answer to this would be:  Well, yeah, duh.

Here is the proof, in part.  The voting record for the 2001 NCLB act: 

No Child Left Behind.

Clearly the vote was bilateral.  Clearly the bill was socialistic.  Clearly the Democrat Party is mostly full of progressive spenders...and, CLEARLY SO IS THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.  Please keep trying to sell us on the idea that the Democrats are the only anti-American party.  Please!

For sure, Prof. Jacobson sees the health care reform bill as more of a "sweeping" power grab, and in terms of dollars, he is right, but in terms of importance, he's a million miles off.  Why is it that the democrats hid behind children in their fight to justify this health care reform?  Because, we all know the power the child wields in political discourse, as political tools.  And we all know why they can constantly get away with it.

Next, we could talk about the "sweeping" superfascistic powers granted to the executive via The Patriot Act.  But it's Sunday, and I'll not use the Lord's name in vain today, which inevitably happens when I talk about that Godda--


All that said, I'll also take note of Prof. Jacobson's points made via Randy Barnett and simply say that, yes, I agree: the health care bill is unconstitutional.  And that is the real issue here.  HOW a thing is unconstitutional is less important to me than the fact that it IS unconstitutional, in the end.  And in the end, a vast array of legislation that has come out of Washington--from BOTH sides of the isle--goes against the grain of the Constitution.  That, is the problem.

And that is it.  That is all.