If you take the time to read the comments on the stltoday.com article, you’ll see the usual critics and apologists fighting over truth. It always amazes me how truth seems to have turned into this elusive place that no one can ever completely reach. People are constantly spinning this or misspeaking that. No one ever has to take responsibility for what they say.
Is it possible that the Illinois Policy Institute wrote this piece with an agenda in mind? Sure, I suppose so. That doesn’t make it false. Facts are facts. If our state government is paying significantly higher than private-sector equivalent jobs, someone needs to tell us why?
We’ve got a bunch of ninnies in the Illinois legislature that are so afraid of losing an election that they dumped the budget decisions on Governor Quinn. Talk about making a bad situation worse. He’s not going to cut anything – he wants to be re-elected as well. So they’re going to avoid the problem and run the state into eventual ruin.
Here’s an idea. Fire the state-employed barbers. Have the prisoners do it. It’s the least they can do to pay us back a little for feeding and clothing them during their stay. Next, fire all the state-employed auto mechanics. Bid out the work to the lowest bidder. Keep going down the list. If it can be bid out to the private sector, do it.
Along with that, cut this “prevailing wage” crap. Sure, it’s great for the unions, but it’s not going to be good for anyone when the state goes bankrupt and the checks stop coming.
Our leaders have got to stop making decisions based on their next election hopes. They need to stand up and BE leaders, making the tough decisions. True leaders don’t do things to be liked or to be popular – they do them because they know they are the right things to do.
I’ve always wondered something, and some people who read this will remember me talking about it before. It turns out philosophy has assigned a name to my particular question: Qualia. I happened across it in a Wikipedia list of unsolved problems in philosophy. Here’s the excerpt:
The question hinges on whether color is a product of the mind or an inherent property of objects. While most philosophers will agree that color assignment corresponds to light frequency, it is not at all clear whether the particular psychological phenomena of color are imposed on these visual signals by the mind, or whether such qualia are somehow naturally associated with their noumena. Another way to look at this question is to assume two people (“Fred” and “George” for the sake of convenience) see colors differently. That is, when Fred sees the sky, his mind interprets this light signal as blue. He calls the sky “blue.” However, when George sees the sky, his mind assigns green to that light frequency. If Fred were able to step into George’s mind, he would be amazed that George saw green skies. However, George has learned to associate the word “blue” with what his mind sees as green, and so he calls the sky “blue”, because for him the color green has the name “blue.” The question is whether blue must be blue for all people, or whether the perception of that particular color is assigned by the mind.
I’m not sure if I should be happy that I wonder the same things that other philosophers do, or if I should be upset that I don’t have the answer to the question.
We need this guy in Illinois – bad. This state is hemorrhaging money and our current Governor and all his Democrat and RINO lackeys won’t do anything about it. This guy is going to save New Jersey by making the hard choices.
Here’s a perfect example of laziness, stupidity, corruption and greed in our bloated government. Head Start has recently been exposed. Apparently they were caught helping people falsify applications, understating their income so they could qualify for assistance. Somehow I’m not surprised.
According to the Washington Post article, Head Start is an anti-poverty program established in the 1960′s. The quick summary: It’s a program to provide surrogate parenting for poor kids. If you want to know more about the program and it’s history, read the Wikipedia article. I don’t want to offend, but sometimes it’s necessary for emphasis – all the liberal hippie nonsense in the entry made we want to puke.
The corruption and greed are plain here. The Head Start workers knew that their individual programs would receive more funding if they had more kids in the program. They figured out that either no one was paying attention or no one cared, and they gamed the system. It probably started out small, but greed is a slippery slope indeed. The same tendencies can be seen in pretty much any social program that is government funded. They almost always receive funding based on need, so they learn to inflate the need. After all, the people running the program wouldn’t feel very fulfilled if they didn’t have anyone to help!
Now we get to the laziness and stupidity. Head Start’s budget is over $7 billion annually. That’s $7 billion of YOUR tax money each year. How stupid does our government have to be to hand that kind of money out and not assume that it would corrupt?
Where is the oversight? Who is keeping an eye on the checkbook? Apparently no one. According to the Wikipedia and Washington Post articles, The Department of Health and Human Services oversees Head Start. From the Washington Post article:
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, whose department oversees the program, wrote in a response to the report that President Obama has been briefed on the issue and that the administration will take swift action to tighten enforcement. Among possible steps, she wrote, are terminating federal funding to organizations that run the Head Start centers and referring cases for criminal prosecution.
Sure, they’ll tighten enforcement. Right. Now that they’ve been made public, they’ll make token changes to pacify the public, and then they’ll go right back to the status quo. Remember, 8 out of the 15 Head Start centers investigated were caught falsifying applications. There were over 1600 programs and over 210,000 paid staff members in 2005. The few scapegoat staff workers that will be sacrificed because of this scandal won’t even scratch the surface of the problem.
This is where your hard-earned money is going. You’re working your butts off to try and make a better life for yourself, and social programs like Head Start are just getting bigger. It’s time to vote these liberal progressive social justice loons out of office and vote in some real conservatives who believe in limited government, lower taxes and personal liberty. It’s time to stand up, speak out and get involved.
I found this article over at the Prometheus Institute. It’s a few years old, but it gives a nice breakdown of 5 different types of Democrat, grouped by WHY they are Democrats, or how the developed that political bent. It reminded me of something that I’ve discussed with other like-minded people, which is MY breakdown of Liberals and Progressive. Unlike the Prometheus article, which groups people based on the reasons why they have their particular ideas, I thought I’d create groups based on their motivation. Here goes:
The Communist. This is someone who really truly believes the Liberal-Progressive agenda. They really think Socialism will somehow work to make everything wonderful, because it will all be “fair”. They picture the end goal as a Utopian society where everyone puts in equal effort and everyone gets equal stuff. These people are Communists in the true form of the word. Everyone equal, no personal ownership, no ruling class.
The Totalitarian. This is someone who doesn’t believe that the agenda will make everything wonderful. What they DO understand is that they have a very effective way to control the masses. They want to be in the elite class that gets to have that control. The more control they have, the farther down they can push the people and the higher up they can rise. These people want the government to control every aspect of life. Examples are North Korea and Cuba.
The Socialist. This is someone who believes the agenda will work, but only if someone as smart as them is in charge. In their mind the general public is too stupid to make their own decisions and too much personal freedom would cause society to fall into ruin. They and their other smart friends (again, the elite class) need to get control over the people so they can make all those right decisions for us. These people are true Socialists in the Marxism-Leninist sense of the word. A ruling class must retain control of the means of production or the system will fall apart.
The Un-Aware. These are the people that follow the Liberal-Progressive agenda for reasons that they generally can’t explain. Their family has always voted Democrat or maybe they belong to a union that encourages them to vote in a certain way. They don’t have time or don’t want to take the time to understand the issues. They’re relatively satisfied with their position in life and assume that things are going to continue to be more or less the same regardless of who is in power.
Sadly, I think many people fall into #4. They just don’t want to be bothered with details. They don’t want someone to give them a history lesson. They just want to do what they’ve always done or what they’re told to do and then go back to watching television. If things get bad enough, some of these people might get uncomfortable enough that they’ll start to take notice.
The people in #1 are just confused. They can be swayed from their ideals, but in many cases their ideals are akin to a religion. It’s difficult to convince someone that their ideals are misguided. I don’t think there are many people who think this way, although they do exist.
The people in #2 and #3 are dangerous. They want power, and they won’t be satisfied without it. Fidel Castro and Kim Jung Il fit nicely into these categories. I think it’s safe to say that some of our current politicians here in the USA fit here as well. Nancy Pelosi, for example, definitely isn’t Un-Aware. I’m guessing she’s not a Communist, as she seems to like being in charge. I can’t read her mind, so I can’t tell if she fits in #2 or #3.
So how do we pull people out of these groups and convince them of the error of their ways? First, get used to the idea that not everyone wants to be convinced that they’re wrong. In fact, most people don’t like being wrong, and having to admit it will cause some to go on the defensive and stick to their ideals out of pure pride and stubbornness. Don’t spend all your energy trying to force them to change. Learn to identify these people and move on.
For those who CAN be convinced, the answer is education. Educate them with history and current-events. Share the information with them that they’re not getting from the mainstream media. Loan them your books. Invite them to come along to rallies. Point them in the right direction and let them come to their own conclusions.
We CAN turn the tide against the onrush of the Progressives.
This speech by Rep. Tom McClintock is the kind of clarity and patriotism that we should be hearing from ALL of our elected officials. Unfortunately he’s currently in the minority. Hopefully that will change in November.
Rep. McClintock, if you’re ever in Western Illinois, swing by so I can shake your hand and buy you a beer.
Transcript:
M. Speaker:
I rise to take strong exception to the speech of the President of Mexico while in this chamber today.
The Mexican government has made it very clear for many years that it holds American sovereignty in contempt and President Calderons behavior as a guest of the Congress confirms and underscores this attitude.
It is highly inappropriate for the President of Mexico to lecture Americans on American immigration policy, just as it would be for Americans to lecture Mexico on its laws.
It is obvious that President Calderon does not understand the nature of America or the purpose of our immigration law.
Unlike Mexicos immigration law — which is brutally exclusionary — the purpose of Americas law is not to keep people out. It is to assure that as people come to the United States, they do so with the intention of becoming Americans and of raising their children as Americans.
Unlike Mexico, our nation embraces immigration and what makes that possible is assimilation.
A century ago President Teddy Roosevelt put it this way. He said:
“In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American…There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language … and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”
That is how we have built one great nation from the people of all the nations of the world.
The largest group of immigrants now comes from Mexico. A recent RAND discovered that during most of the 20th Century, while our immigration laws were actually enforced, assimilation worked and made possible the swift attainment of the American dream for millions of immigrants seeking to escape conditions in Mexico.
That is the broader meaning of our nations motto, e pluribus unum from many people, one people, the American people.
But there is now an element in our political structure that seeks to undermine that concept of E Pluribus Unum. It seeks to hyphenate Americans, to develop linguistic divisions, to assign rights and preferences based on race and ethnicity, and to elevate devotion to foreign ideologies and traditions, while at the same time denigrating American culture, American values and American founding principles.
In order to do so, they know that they have to stop the process of assimilation. In order to do that, they must undermine our immigration laws.
It is an outrage that a foreign head of state would appear in this chamber and actively seek to do so. And it is a disgrace that he would be cheered on from the left wing of the White House and by many Democrats in this Congress.
Arizona has not adopted a new immigration law. All it has done is to enforce existing law that President Obama refuses to enforce. It is hardly a radical policy to suggest that if an officer on a routine traffic stop encounters a driver with no drivers license, no passport, and who doesnt speak English, that maybe that individual might be here illegally.
And to those who say we must reform our immigration laws I reply that we dont need to reform them we need to enforce them. Just as every other government does. Just as Mexico does.
Above all, this is a debate of, by and for the American people. If President Calderon wishes to participate in that debate, I invite him to obey our immigration laws, apply for citizenship, do what 600,000 LEGAL immigrants to our nation are doing right now, learn our history and our customs, and become an American. And then he will have every right to participate in that debate.
Until then, I would politely invite him to have the courtesy while a guest of this Congress to abide by the fundamental rules of diplomacy between civilized nations not to meddle in each others domestic debates.
H/T to Aaron for pointing me to this article. It’s a great analysis of the life of nerds in school. He puts into words the things that many of us “nerds” experienced in school. I didn’t understand at the time, but I think he’s absolutely right: I cared more about being smart, with my eyes set on life AFTER school, than I did about popularity. The people who cared more about being popular worked hard at that instead.
He also does a good job of describing and explaining the often shocking cruelty seen amongst kids in school. It’s a long read, but well worth it.
In this article over at Illinois Review, we see just how poorly the government administers just one state program. The Illinois All Kids program, a government-subsidized program created to help families afford health insurance for their kids, is just the latest mess in this state.
Some high-points (actually low-points) for the 2005 year:
70% of the medical claims for for undocumented illegal immigrants.
The program brought in $8.9 million in premiums but paid out $79.1 million in claims, costing Illinois taxpayers $70.2 million.
43% did not provide proof of birth and 6% didn’t even provide proof of identity.
For full details of the program, read the original article. It’s enough to make my blood boil when our Governor is pushing for more taxes. Why should we give them more money to spend when they can’t keep track of the money they already have?
It’s time to take action, get involved, get educated, and vote these corrupt and inept people out of office. It’s time to restore dignity to this state that’s become a laughingstock for corrupt government.
Attorney General Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut has apparently been claiming to be a Vietnam Veteran. Turns out he’s a big fat liar. See the NYT article for details.
People like this turn my stomach. Many Americans served in Vietnam (including my dad). Yes, Mr. Blumenthal – SERVED. They performed a service to this country by putting their lives in danger in a foreign land. They came back, often to a less-than-grateful public.
Blumenthal and people like him (see Stolen Valor by BG Burkett) are apparently so hollow that they’ve done nothing of value with their lives and have to steal the honor that true Veterans deserve.
We need honesty and integrity in our leaders. Blumenthal doesn’t qualify.
Let me start by saying that I by no means have perfect grammar, and undoubtedly there are phrases or words that I use incorrectly. Even though, I notice when other people say things that don’t make sense to me. Lately it’s been the word “literally”.
It seems like everyone around me is throwing “literally” into their sentences. The odd thing is, the sentences are already literal. The only time it makes sense to say “literally” is if otherwise the meaning would be interpreted figuratively. It turns out that I’m not the only one who noticed this. A quick Google search found multiple references to the mis-use of this word.
Another phrase I’ve heard mis-used many times is, “I could care less”. That would mean that it were possible to care less, which means that I care somewhat. The proper term is, “I couldn’t care less”, which means that no matter what, I care so little that it is impossible for me to care any less.
It may seem like a small thing, and I’m sure people will think I’m just being picky. To me it’s important to be correct and to be understood.
Recent Comments