The election results were interesting. My optimism was realistic for my state, which went for McCain, but incorrect for the nation which went for Obama by about 7.2 million votes. Some interesting bits of trivia about these results. I doubt this will be in the paper, but Obama is the first Democratic president to win a majority of the vote since Carter (Clinton never received a majority, he won with a plurality both times, with thanks to Ross Perot sucking votes away from the Republicans).

I hope the election of a black man will help heal those for whom race is a major issue. I look forward to the day when virtually everyone looks at the character, ideas, and experience of a candidate instead of their race and believe we will see this in my lifetime.

California shocked the liberals by narrowly passing a defense of marriage act. This is the second time the voters have done so, but four unelected tyrants - members of California’s Supreme Court - had previously overturned the earlier referendum and arbitrarily told Californians that same sex marriage was not an oxymoron and was legal. So this time the residents of California passed a constitutional amendment correcting this situation. We will see how well liberals respect the will of the majority this time.

I hope my liberal friends are correct that an Obama presidency, complete with Democratic control of the House and Senate, will lead to better times ahead. However, in my consulting practice, I am taking steps to ensure as much 2009 income as possible is billed in 2008. This is the opposite of my normal practice as usually it is smart business to defer taxes. However, it would not surprise me if the Democrats eliminate the Bush tax cuts in 2009, two years ahead of schedule.

Today is Election Day and I still have hope that Obama will not be our next president. Even though I am certainly not excited about a possible McCain presidency, the prospect of an Obama presidency fills me with great concern for my country.

However, last night put things in perspective for me. I was unexpectedly in Wal-Mart to humor my other half and walked down the book aisle. My eye was attracted to 23 Minutes in Hell by Bill Wiese [Click on the link to buy the book for $3.58 at the time of posting]. It was written by a man who claimed to have experienced Hell for 23 minutes on November 23, 1998. He further claimed that after the experience, he had a vision of Jesus who told him that he was given this experience to warn others about Hell and that Jesus was coming back very soon. Finally Jesus told him that Bill had been sheltered from much of the actual pain of Hell during his experience.

I had heard about this man’s claims on the radio a few years ago. I bought his book and read it last night. I do not know if I believe him or not, but his vision was horrifying. He also has ample discussion on what the Bible says about Hell, including an Appendix with all the Bible verses on the subject. I do believe in the Bible and in the existence of Hell and the book was sobering. I regularly pray for my country and have tried to persuade people to vote for the party that thinks human life is worth protecting, but I have spent very little time trying to help people make much more important decisions about Jesus and where they will spend eternity.

Today I will go vote for McCain (and against my Republican representative in Congress who voted for the $850 billion bailout bill - fortunately the Democratic option is pro-life) and pray for my country. However, more importantly, I will also pray that my countrymen find Jesus before their eternal fate it sealed. I will also pray that I will start making a positive difference in people’s eternal destiny by pointing them to Jesus.

US Pharm D posted a fairly objective overview of the candidates’ positions on healthcare. It is worth reading for those who want to know some details.

This is also a good time to print an email I received when Hillary Clinton was discussing similar programs to what Obama is now advocating.

This was sent out by a career Marine who just happens to be a Canadian. I believe his thoughts on the recent health care proposal might be of interest to some. Subject: Health Care

Hey Guys; I saw on the news up here in Canada where Hillary Clinton introduced her new health care plan. Something similar to what we have in Canada. I also heard that Michael Moore was raving about the health care up here in Canada in his latest movie. As your friend and someone who lives with the Canada health care plan I thought I would give you some facts about this great medical plan that we have in Canada.

First of all:

1) The health care plan in Canada is not free. We pay a premium every month of $96. for Shirley and I to be covered. Sounds great eh. What they don't tell you is how much we pay in taxes to keep the health care system afloat. I am personally in the 55% tax bracket. Yes 55% of my earnings go to taxes. A large portion of that and I am not sure of the exact amount goes directly to health care our #1 expense.

2) I would not classify what we have as health care plan, it is more like a health diagnosis system. You can get into to see a doctor quick enough so he can te ll you "yes indeed you are sick or you need an operation" but now the challenge becomes getting treated or operated on. We have waiting lists out the ying yang some as much as 2 years down the road.

3) Rather than fix what is wrong with you the usual tactic in Canada is to prescribe drugs. Have a pain here is a drug to take- not what is causing the pain and why. No time for checking you out because it is more important to move as many patients thru as possible each hour for Government reimbursement

4) Many Canadians do not have a family Doctor.

5) Don't require emergency treatment as you may wait for hours in the emergency room waiting for treatment.

6) Shirley's dad cut his hand on a power saw a few weeks back and it required that his hand be put in a splint - to our surprise we had to pay $125. for a splint because it is not covered under health care plus we have to pay $60 for each visit for him to check it out each week.

7) Shirley's cousin was diagnosed with a heart blockage. Put on a waiting list. Died before he could get treatment.

8) Government allots so many operations per year. When that is done no more operations, unless you go to your local newspaper and plead your case and embarrass the government then money suddenly appears.

9) The Government takes great pride in telling us how much more they are increasing the funding for health care but waiting lists never get shorter. Government just keeps throwing money at the problem but it never goes away. But they are good at finding new ways to tax us, but they don't call it a tax anymore it is now a user fee.

10) My mother needs an operation for a blockage in her leg but because she is a smoker they will not do it. Despite her and my father paying in to the health care system all these years. My Mom is 80 years of age. Now there is talk that maybe we should not treat fat and obese people either because they are a drain on the health care system. Let me see now, what we want in Canada is a health care system for healthy people only. That should reduce our health care costs.

11) Forget getting a second opinion, what you see is what you get.

12) I can spend what money I have left after taxes on booze, cigarettes, junk food and anything else that could kill me but I am not allowed by law to spend my money on getting an operation I need because that would be jumping the queue. I must wait my turn except if I am a hockey player or athlete then I can get looked at right away. Go figure Where else in the world can you spend money to kill yourself but not allowed to spend money to get healthy.

13) Oh did I mention that immigrants are covered automatically at tax payer expense having never contributed a dollar to the system and pay no premiums.

14) Oh yeah we now give free needles to drug users to try and keep them healthy. Wouldn't want a sickly druggie breaking into your house and stealing your things. But people with diabetes who pay into the health care system have to pay for their needles because it is not covered but the health care system.

I send this out not looking for sympathy but as the election looms in the states you will be hearing more and more about universal health care down there and the advocates will be pointing to Canada. I just want to make sure that you hear the truth about health care up here and have some food for thought and informed questions to ask when broached with this subject.

Something to keep in mind before we vote.

When I make the time to play games (and I would like to make the time to get involved in gaming again now that my children are getting old enough to play too), I play for entertainment and escapism. I rationalize it by mostly picking games that require some thought (strategy games), but I also enjoy mindless twitch games (I have spent more than a few hours playing Fusion Frenzy on the X-box with the kids) for pure entertainment and escapism.

Now, some video games are ruining the escapism aspect. Massive, an advertising agency owned by Microsoft, approached both Obama and McCain about the opportunity to advertise in gaming. Obama's campaign said yes and will be advertising in the following games:

Burnout Paradise
Madden 09
Nascar 09
NBA Live 08
Need for Speed Carbon
Need for Speed Prostreet
NFL on Tour
NHL 09
Skate

McCain said no. Glad to see at least one candidate (or campaign) draws the line somewhere. I can understand advertising on free games, but this is unacceptable on paid games. I will not buy nor play any game that ruins the escapism with advertising. Nor am I likely to buy any product nor vote for any candidate that ruins the experience by advertising in a game.

Click here for more details.

Moral hazard is a concept that shows that people who are sheltered from the consequences of foolhardy actions may be more likely to repeat them than people who feel the pain of their actions. In other words, if you spend too much of your money on beer, but your parents pay your other bills anyway, you are not as likely to change your behavior if your parents let you learn on your own.

This is another reason why the bailout bill was and is such a bad idea. Read this story. I really sympathize with this banker. ...in offices around the country, [good, trustworthy] bankers simmered. Peter Fitzgerald, chairman of Chain Bridge Bank in McLean, said he was "much chagrined that we will be punished for behaving prudently by now having to face reckless competitors who all of a sudden are subsidized by the federal government."

This bank did what they were supposed to do, properly managed their bank. In a capitalistic society, they would be rewarded by having opportunities to grow as their foolhardy peers went bankrupt. Instead, taxpayer money (that is even more money that we will have to pay in taxes) is being used to prop up the poorly managed banks so that they can complete with the well run banks. We are rewarding the wrong type of behavior and penalizing those who acted wisely.

A friend of mine emailed me this perspective:

1) The current world credit problem is almost entirely due to the US government putting a socialist program in its banking/mortgage industry (redistributing goods and services as loans to those who can't pay them back). You get some feel for the relative size of the US and all other economies by seeing how our problem is everyone else's problem.

2) We are about to elect a determined socialist president who will likely get a majority in both houses of our legislature large enough to put his programs in place.

To quote Al Jolson "You ain't seen nothin' yet!"

I am still predicting that McCain will win, even though this is becoming more and more a minority opinion. But if my friend is right, I agree with his conclusion.

We are witnessing one of biggest governmental power grabs in history. Congress and two presidents caused this mortgage crisis and now Congress and a third president are trying to saddle the taxpayer with more debt to give the government more power.

Call your leaders today. I agree with Mike Pence. The $700 billion bill remains the largest corporate bailout in American history, forever changes the relationship between government and the financial sector, and passes the cost along to the American people.

The economy will do just fine without this so-called help, but the taxpayer will suffer if it passes. Please call your legislators today. If your legislators approve this bill, vote against them when they are up for reelection.

As a college professor, I have the opportunity to get to know many students in the 18-24 age range as well as some non-traditional students. In general, it seems that a greater percentage of students are pro-life than they were when I was a student. This is anecdotal evidence, yet it is shared by my colleagues at other universities. I have heard the statistical evidence bears this out as well; someday I will make the time to look this up myself. This does not mean that today’s students are more conservative than previous years (for example, a slight majority of today’s students favor homosexual marriage while every other age group believes that marriage should strictly be between a man and a woman), just that more and more youngsters are pro-life.

While there are probably several factors involved, such as the Roe Effect, I believe technology is playing a major role in these attitudes. When I was growing up, teachers and the media would talk about how the fetus was just a lump of tissue or a generic being that was indistinguishable from animals in the womb. Doonesbury was a typical example of the disinformation spread by the left, making fun of pro-lifers by showing a speck that the pro-lifers wanted to defend.

What changed? Ultrasounds made a difference; abortion "counselors" try to dissuade potential clients from having ultrasounds because once a woman sees her baby, she has no doubt that the unborn child is human. General Electric’s 4D sonogram technology is having an even more dramatic impact. GE even has a site where you can see pictures showing the week-by-week growth of the unborn. It is difficult to kill a child when you can no longer pretend that the unborn is not human.

I stand by my prediction that Roe v. Wade will be overturned in my lifetime. While this event may have to wait until enough Baby Boomers die off, the pro-life beliefs of more and more young adults are at least reducing the numbers of unborn babies killed in the States each year.

Capitalism has its advantages and disadvantages. Government has its place and there are some things it can do better than the free market. There are also many things where it is much worse than the free market. However, the worse possible combination is when you combine the free market’s tendency of taking risks with the government’s guarantee that it will back you up no matter what. This is a recipe for disaster.

Despite the predictions of most mainstream pundits, I now forecast that John McCain will be our next president barring some completely unforeseen event. In early 2008, when the Rev. Wright scandal broke, it was clear that Obama lacked the judgment needed to be president. However it was not clear if McCain had the judgment either.

For those not familiar with the Wright Scandal, Wright is a hate-mongering preacher who gives Christianity a bad name. He spewed his vile interpretation of religion in Chicago from 1972 until early 2008 when the media (lead by Rolling Stone magazine) started publicizing some of Wright’s comments. These comments were quite racist (anti white) and anti-American. Wright was a close family friend of Barrack Obama. Wright married the Obamas in 1992 and Obama had been a member of Wright’s church from 1992 onward. I do not blame Obama for the hatred his "spiritual advisor" spewed forth for decades. However, the fact that Obama exposed his family to this type of mental illness from 1992 to 2008 shows Obama does not have the judgment and/or character to lead our great nation (or even a banana republic). When someone has this severe of a judgment problem, I was very confident that the American people would notice it and vote against him if they had a viable alternative.

However, my fear was the McCain would show a similar lapse in judgment. Many of my liberal friends are thrilled with McCain – in their words, they cannot lose, they just can vote between a big liberal and a little liberal. Likewise, my conservative friends were very unhappy with McCain’s nomination and many had decided to stay home or vote for a third-party if McCain nominated a liberal running mate. With the nomination of the conservative Sarah Palin, McCain has ensured that conservatives will get out and vote. I will discuss Governor Palin in another post, but the great judgment that McCain showed with this selection shows he is still a canny senator and I am confident that he will be our next president.

There are many things about the United States of which I am proud, but I recently learned something that made me want to stand up and cheer. With all of the partisan bickering going on in Washington, one sometimes wonders how many people are keeping their eyes on the really important issues.

Partisan bickering is not limited to our country of course. While I have not kept up with my blogging, I still communicate with a network of international friends, many of whom I only know through the internet. Recently, Middle East politics arose in a thread between an American libertarian, an American conservative (myself), and two Englishmen whose belief systems I would hesitate to classify other than well left of most Americans. One of the Englishmen stated that President Bush is thoroughly discredited here and may yet stand trial at the Hague one day. In other words, he was stating his hope that President Bush would be put in trial for war crimes at the International Criminal Court; a court of which has no jurisdiction over the United States or about 40% of the world’s countries. The ICC’s jurisdiction is much smaller if you count by population as the three most populous countries in the world (China, India, and the USA) think the ICC is fatally flawed and refuse to join it.

Honestly, I am not positive if the Englishman was serious or just trying to get a rise out of me. By now, he fully understands how I feel about national sovereignty even if he has trouble truly understanding how important this is to most Americans. Most Europeans see national pride as a problem since they, wrongly in my opinion, attribute nationalism as a contributing factor to World Wars I and II. One could more logically argue that Europeans were a contributing factor to these wars, but I digress. Given this anti-nationalism background, many Europeans support the International Criminal Court and many seriously support bringing Americans before it because they think they have the right to veto our nation’s actions.

So what would happen if some arrogant European tried to arrest one of our soldiers, or even our Commander-in-Chief, and charge them under the ICC? This is not just the dream of my European leftist. This is a dream of many people like him. Google “ICC Bush” and you’ll find links to news stories with this wish, not just leftist bloggers. It is not just Anti-Bush or Anti-Americanism; many of these same people want to bring former Prime Minister Blair up before the court as well.

Fortunately, the Unites States has already made their position abundantly clear with more than just speeches. About the time the ICC was becoming a reality, our legislature passed the American Service-members' Protection Act of 2002. I knew that it was put in place to protect our troops and citizens. However, I recently heard an expert discuss it and he stated that this legislation is effectively an open declaration of war on any person or organization who attempts to place a single US armed forces personnel, from the lowest private to the commander-in-chief, under the power of the ICC. This got my attention, so I looked it up myself.

SEC. 2008. AUTHORITY TO FREE MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES AND CERTAIN OTHER PERSONS DETAINED OR IMPRISONED BY OR ON BEHALF OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT.

a. AUTHORITY- The President is authorized to use all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any person described in subsection (b) who is being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court.

This legislation gives the President of the United States the legal authorization to use any and all force he deems necessary and appropriate if the ICC ever attempts to put our armed forces on trial because the ICC disagreed with the United States. This means the President could send in the Marines to rescue any hostages or otherwise use the full power of the United States to stop the latest fascist threat from Europe.

Legislators from both parties helped pass this bill. It is nice that some people in Washington understand that sovereignty is still worth protecting. This bill is about perfect. It only has one weakness; it depends upon a strong US president to use it.

Thanks to the King of Fools, this blog along with others, is now online. My consulting business website was hacked and malicious code was placed on it. Security precautions were put in place to hopefully prevent a recurrence, but these precautions messed up my blogging software installation which affected this blog and one I host for a friend. I kept fooling myself that I would make the time to fix this, but between my two jobs, family, and fixing up our new house, I should have known better. I finally admitted the truth and hired the King of Fools to fix things.

I believe Paul Burgess deserves the title of Solport's biggest supporter. He made a comment on the King’s test post before I even had time to start blogging again. Many thanks for the interest! And yes, I will start blogging again, at least through the political season.

We are now back online.

I wanted to capture this gem so I could find it again when needed.

Hate speech is verbal communication that induces anger due to the listener’s inability to offer an intelligent response.

Mike Adams

Anyone interested in the global warming debate should avail themselves of the following resources. For a brief overview of the science of global warming and/or simply to see how much you really know about global warming, take the Global Warming Test. I consider myself fairly well educated on the subject and I still missed two of the answers. The test is also useful in that it has references on each page.

For those interested in the history of media and self-serving cries that the sky is falling, read Fire and Ice (provided under the Fair Use Act for educational purposes). I remember the media trying to scare me as a kid with stories of the upcoming Global Ice Age, which is one of the many reasons why I laugh at the Gorekins who tell me that mankind is causing the Earth to overheat. When discussing this with a senior friend years ago, he told me that he remembered the media trying to sell news about the Earth getting too hot sometime between the World Wars. The Fire and Ice report not only documents these cases, but points out one to which I was unfamiliar.

It was five years before the turn of the century and major media were warning of disastrous climate change. Page six of The New York Times was headlined with the serious concerns of "geologists." Only the president at the time wasn’t Bill Clinton; it was Grover Cleveland. And the Times wasn’t warning about global warming –it was telling readers the looming dangers of a new ice age.

The year was 1895, and it was just one of four different time periods in the last 100 years when major print media predicted an impending climate crisis. Each prediction carried its own elements of doom, saying Canada could be “wiped out” or lower crop yields would mean “billions will die.”

I encourage you to save the Fire and Ice report in your own documents and forward it (and/or a link to this post) to your friends. People need to be educated about real science so they can make informed decisions instead of blinding following the latest media doomsday prediction. I will close this post with a prediction of my own. In the 2030s, the New York Times and other mainstream media types will run stories about the coming Global Ice Age.