Here’s a thought: If you don’t like your insurance company today, you can change it. If you don’t like Government controlled health insurance, you will not have any alternative. Remember how you were unsatisfied with how Bush handled Katrina or the war? Or how Obama is handling unemployment? Or how the post office handles your mail? Why would you trust them with your health care? Write to Congress now! It will be nearly impossible to repeal such an all-encompassing law once it’s passed. It opens the door to more and more spending and bureaucracy. It violates your right to choose, and your doctor’s right to decide.Contact Congress! Kill the Bill!
or call 202-224-3121 and ask for the congressman or senator by name.
Government created high health care costs to begin with. Government is not the solution.
Many doctors will quit if the health care bill passes. Most doctors oppose the bill.
Finally, here’s an entertaining history of the bill in 90 seconds:
I’ve been reading Darwin recently. I am trying to clarify the answer to this question: In the most advanced scientific understanding today, are evolution’s mutations thought to occur randomly, or is DNA influenced by an organism’s environment and/or experiences to mutate in a specific way needed for optimum survivablility? Does anyone have knowledge on this?
If Scott Brown wins we’d have a political earthquake, turning Obama into a lame duck, per Robert Tracinski. http://www.brownforussenate.com/6:39 AM Jan 7thThis is urgent! To reverse the tide, throw your support to Scott Brown. Donate to Scott Brown!
Isn’t all this security unnecessary if Israel & USA actually tried to win wars instead of funding enemies? How does Israel avoid unions taking over and ruining security? How do you avoid anti-discrimination lawsuits re eye-contact-evasion profiling? http://bit.ly/5Tp5RD11:59 PM Jan 4th
If anyone knows of an agent who seeks new writers (especially TV/film scripts and nonfiction books) Pls write me: firstname.lastname@example.org. Thanks! 4:11 AM Dec 26th, 2009
Hello everyone! Season’s Greetings! I hope you got what you wanted on Christmas if you celebrate Christmas! I got to watch my happy children 4:09 AM Dec 26th, 2009
The unoriginal “ideas” in Avatar’s screenplay are such cliched, non-
intellectual, California-Liberal New Age mysticism, that the basic
storyline, minus the physical-peril suspense and special effects,
could read as a satire.
Its references include Native American Mother Earth worship, the
evils of American imperialism, becoming “one” with one’s tribal
ancestors, and the purity of primitivism and its superiority to
industrialization. All of this is presented as if based on biological
and geological reality.
Besides this, as usual with a James Cameron screenplay (see
“Titanic”), the dialogue is trite and the characters are shallow
stereotypes copied from hundreds of previous films and novels.
But most offensive of all is the imagery that is easily interpreted as
anti-American symbolism to leftist and international audiences. An
Earthling general is presented as the stereotype of a tough American
military man, in the mold of Patton. He is presented as evil and
corrupt. The invasion of the Na’vi nation is presented with no
subtlety at all as a war whose purpose is to “steal” the “oil” inside
their planet. (“Unobtainium” is invented to stand in for oil).
At the end, the sight in 3-D of Earth’s (America’s) helicopters
attacking Na’vi aliens (Third Worlders) and burning down their
homes is obvious, heavy handed symbolism, harking back to
Vietnam. It is presented so that the audience roots for the Third
Worlders to defeat the Americans. It’s almost like treasonous
propaganda, created to incite anti-American anger.
A character who abandons Western Civilization to live among the
collectivist Nature Worshippers is shown to be noble and heroic.
I believe and hope the reason most people see the film is to marvel
at the phenomenal technical achievements in visual effects, the
remarkably believable designs of the diverse alien creatures, the
excellent pacing, and the suspenseful scenes of physical peril, which
reflect James Cameron’s true talents.
I took my old camcorder to New York City’s Tax Day Tea Party back on April 15 to do some interviews and generally videotape the event. I intended to do this as a volunteer reporter for www.PJTV.com (Pajamas TV).
Unfortunately, I discovered that my old camcorder recorded in a format that YouTube and other sites would not accept. Eventually, I downloaded format-conversion software, but the urgency (newsworthiness) seemed to pass, and I became busy with other activities. More problematic was that my computer memory modules were not working properly, causing the computer to keep freezing up. Then the video was too long for YouTube so I had to figure out how to break it into smaller chunks.
So, to summarize, the internet debut of my videos were delayed due to technical difficulties.
Now, I have replaced the memory modules in my computer. Also, I have a new camcorder for future ease of uploading.
The good news is, I finally uploaded the Tax Day Tea Party video in time for the renewed interest created by the Independence Day Tea Parties! And the message of the Tax Day Tea Party is even more relevant now. The administration’s reckless spending and regulations have only compounded since April. Taxation and hyperinflation fears are even more well-founded.
And since the Tax Day Tea Parties, some on the left have claimed that the Tea Party Protesters are racists, or are a bunch of rich white guys, or are organized and paid to show up by large corporations.
These allegations have made my videos perhaps more valuable. I interview an Asian woman, a lesbian mother, and a young ordinary middle class couple. I videotaped an anti-tax sign proudly displayed by an African American woman, and a sign protesting the banks’ mishandling of money that clearly wasn’t being held by a wealthy Wall Street banker. It’s plain to see that there are people of all ages and all walks of life in the crowd.
Some of the signs refer to Ayn Rand and “Atlas Shrugged” and “John Galt.” I brought my own copy of Atlas Shrugged to hold up in lieu of a sign (My hands were full enough with the camcorder). Several people commented as they walked by, “Good book!”
The spirit was one of benevolence, and a deep desire to stop the destruction of America’s future, stop the violations of the Constitution (especially the Tenth Amendment), and of our rights. More than one member of the crowd told me they had recently been laid off, as I had just been laid off myself, after working for 23 years at the same firm.
I did see a few “VIPs” in the crowd although they are not in my video. I said hello to radio host and Fox News contributor Monica Crowley, and I met Kevin Williamson, an editor and writer at National Review. My video does include a few moments of a speech by KT McFarland, a New York politician.
To his credit, Rush Limbaugh yesterday said, “Tax-paying people who make it all work will not put up long rewarding failure, being forced to reward failure. Beware this huge backlash. It’ll turn. It’ll turn slowly, and like the tide coming in, it is unstoppable. It has already started, in fact. The pulse of the backlash has begun. The pulse of revolution is out there, and at some point the anger that you know is there will surface and you will see it and you will hear it. People will overcome their fear of opposition to this because at the end of the day they will not sit there and let everything they’ve worked for be destroyed, particularly on the basis that they deserve to be destroyed because it’s been unfair in the first place that they succeeded.”
I woke up planning to write a post about this very subject. Leftists, the hippie protesters and their intellectual leaders, tend to be angry. They are always protesting something. There is always someone who has less and someone else who has more, and they think this cannot stand.
Rush Limbaugh said, “We are all competitive, and it is in our genes to want to improve our lives for our families. It is called working in our own self-interests.”
Success is the result of this work. It is not unfair for some to succeed because of work and thought. The phony anger of the leftists against those who succeed, those who are productive, is nothing. It looks phony, it sounds phony. It will pale in comparison to the real anger of the productive against those who would steal the fruits of their labor.
Here is an early sign of anger, but couched in sarcastic humor, to make it bearable:
Whether through inflation due to deficit spending, or through direct taxation, or through endless regulations strangling productivity, or through the vanishing value of stocks and your 401(K), your nest egg will be taken from you.
I say, are you angry yet? Maybe you’re too angry. You’re jumping up and down. But you don’t know what to do about it. Let’s calm down. Have a seat. Let’s look at this more deliberately, from a rational, thoughtful stance.
Does this considered analysis somehow make you even more angry?
Well, then fight. Fight with all your intellectual might against Washington’s power-mad parasites of the productive.
Why not organize a march on Washington? The leftists do this all the time. It costs money to publicize and organize it. I don’t know if it does any good besides getting TV coverage, but it’s a thought. The theme? “I am not your serf.” “I did not vote for a fascist/socialist state.” “I work for my own sake.” “My property is not yours to steal and redistribute.”
Why not write a letter to the editor?
Why not write a blog or a comment to someone else’s blog?
How about filing a lawsuit against the U.S. Congress for passing a bill that violates Constitutional rights?
Call up and write to people in Congress and in the White House with your opposition.
Send money to organizations that really, truly defend your rights and your freedoms, in an uncompromising way.
Send money in support of, and volunteer for, real pro-Capitalism, anti-statism political candidates, those who are for limited government and the rights of the individual. Are there any candidates like that? They may not be perfect but there are some candidates who are going to fight the current encroachments on our liberty. Support them.
And be sure to fight the Fairness Doctrine, local content regulations, public interest content regulations, and any other proposed limitations on free speech. I’m going to send you to Rush Limbaugh one more time. Here is his excellent letter to President Obama, published in the Wall Street Journal on February 20, 2009, in defense of freedom of speech:
Jerry Lewis will receive the Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award at the Oscars on Sunday. Unfortunately, he has never received an Oscar for his filmmaking or performances. I think “The Bellboy” and “The Nutty Professor,” as well as parts of other Lewis-directed films including “The Errand Boy” and “The Disorderly Orderly,” deserve recognition.
Ayn Rand said in a radio interview, regarding her personal taste in comedians, “I cannot stand Jerry Lewis and Phyllis Diller.” As I recall, she didn’t like their image of Man or Woman as a non-heroic, under-achieving, juvenile (Lewis) or miserable (Diller) type. I’m not sure when the interview took place, possibly the early 60s, but I suspect she was referring to Jerry’s work with Dean Martin. In my opinion, Jerry Lewis’s characters were less whiny, unintelligent and irritating, and more funny and whimsical, in his 1960s solo movies. I do think the live TV shows with Dean Martin had spontaneous moments of unrepeatable hilarity, mainly when they ad-libbed, because of the dynamic of the team, the exhilerating timing and the relationship of the two performers, as described beautifully in Jerry Lewis’s book “Dean and Me”.
Jerry Lewis has steered clear of politics most of the time, but I understand he has usually supported Democrats, notably JFK. His few political comments tend to be common sense, and I usually find myself agreeing with his stated opinions.
In his book, “The Total Filmmaker,” which helped to inspire me as a teenager to want to make films or otherwise be involved in creative expression (I’m still working on that), Lewis refers to the bureaucratic way film studios are run and describes it as exactly like the scene in Ayn Rand’s “The Fountainhead” where a committee alters Howard Roark’s building design.
In Thursday’s Wall Street Journal, Rush Limbaugh contributes aneditorial that proposes a “bipartisan stimulus”that allows for infrastructure spending but also includes major tax cuts for corporations and on capital gains.I think that’s still allowing Obama too much spending, but by setting it up as bipartisan, it’s a strategic effort to prove what actually stimulates the economy. I don’t know that it would prove anything and it doesn’t address draconian regulations and federal control of banks and so many other horrors now in process. But it’s an honorable effort in the right direction.
What I do oppose in the writings and broadcasts of Rush Limbaugh include his beliefs in religion as the foundation of America, and his derivation of morality from religion rather than from reality, leading to his belief that a fetus has rights over that of the mother, or that assisted suicide is immoral and should be illegal. I disagree with those and other religion-influenced viewpoints he expresses, especially those that support theocratic laws, and I also disagree with him on limiting immigration. He is a Conservative and not an Objectivist, so I would not try to defend him on his Conservatism.
Having expressed my caveats, when it comes to issues of economics and political power (outside of the issue of separation of church and state) his daily radio broadcast can be an indispensible guide to understanding the news and what important facts most mainstream journalists regularly fail to investigate.
Once he is on a topic that isn’t directly connected with religious conservative views, in my opinion he resorts to a common-sense type of self-interest and reason as his apparent, implied philosophy. Outside of sacrificing one’s life for the sake of a fetus, or sacrificing the right of a terminal patient to avoid pain via assisted suicide, he is not particularly altruistic or pro-sacrifice.
His whole persona is of one that enjoys the good life, the wealth he has achieved on his own initiative, rather than a persona of humility and guilt and slavish service to the downtrodden. He is opposed to a victim mentality and he applauds individual accomplishment and self-responsibility.
He does, however, ascribe his talent as on loan from God. He is wrong to suggest his talent is from a supernatural source, but on the other hand it doesn’t sound like he’s kneeling and bowing his head in atonement and guilt for his success.
In fact, he has often recommended “Atlas Shrugged” by atheist Ayn Rand,to explain capitalism to people. Not only that, but he is on the front lines of daring to question environmentalism and for the right reasons. He sees the scam of it, that it’s just a ploy to impose socialism and big government regulations. And I will always be grateful to him for being the only voice against feminism in the 1980s. At that time and in the later 1970s, everywhere men and boys were being unjustly criticized for their natural masculinity. Any differences they had from women were considered flaws, and flirtation in office settings was on the verge of becoming illegal. Since then,that type of feminism has lost most mainstream support thanks in large part to Limbaugh.
He also usually expresses a reasonable, self-defense based foreign policy.
So as we enter the Obama years, I consider Limbaugh’s radio program useful. It’s telling that Obama has said, “Stop listening to Rush Limbaugh”.
As long as Rush sticks to economics and political power issues, his clarity of thought and expression, mixed with satirical humor, is excellent. His points about how Obama/Congress’s stimulus packages are a new “New Deal” and that such programs cannot correct a recession, and only extends it or turns it into a full blown Depression, are on target. I would recommend that people listen to his broadcast, especially now.
Once the economic crisis is over and he returns to more religious-right issues, I don’t expect to find as much value in his program. And he is no substitute for the secular pro-capitalistic and rational philosophy expressed in Op-Eds and essays and speeches by Objectivists found at The Ayn Rand Center, the Ayn Rand Bookstore and The Objective Standard. But he covers more of the intricacies from day to day than they are able to cover, so he is a fine supplement, if you discard all his religionist inclinations.
The only philosophy that will protect individual rights is Objectivism, not Conservatism. Rush is a Conservative, and Conservatism needs to be rejected in the long run. If you can separate out his rational views from his irrational views, he is a valuable supplement to Objectivist sources like The Objective Standard and The Ayn Rand Center.
It’s because the TV networks and news magazines and newspapers are so reluctant–to an unprecedented extreme–to criticize, investigate and analyze the Obama administration’s and the Democratic Congress’s actions and motivations,that I recommend Limbaugh. But I repeat that I am not a Conservative and the only philosophy that can save America in the long run is Objectivism.
P.S. Another interesting radio program, which covers in depth various newsworthy topics that you won’t hear much about in most of the media, is The John Batchelor Show. This world-news oriented program heightens dramatic emphasis by means of musical intros, the host’s striking references to parallel events in history, and his use of dramatic language, metaphors and images. Batchelor recently spoke with Stephen Moore about his Wall Street Journal article suggesting that “Atlas Shrugged” is coming true.