Thursday’s Thoughts for October 24, 2013

I was in the shower this morning and an item on the radio news made me think of our Pledge of Allegiance.

“I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”

I was thinking the Pledge arose in the aftermath of the Civil War when Southerners were required to swear loyalty oaths to regain citizenship. Many Southerners, did not.

After a bit of research, I was surprised to learn that our current Pledge arose in the late 19th Century. It was originally drafted by Francis Bellamy (1855-1931), a progressive—what we would call today a socialist.

You can follow the links to read about Bellamy and his socialists views. I do not subscribe to his politics, nor, if they knew of them, would many today—except for democrats.

There have been three versions of the Pledge, the original one, another from 1923 and our current version that was adopted in 1954. I can remember the controversy when the words, “under God,” was added. The atheists complained, as expected, that it violated the Constitution. When asked to provide chapter and verse, they could not. But there is one word that is common in all of the versions, the word, “indivisible.”

I attended a meeting earlier this week. The meeting opened, as are many such meetings, with a Prayer and the Pledge. As I recited the Pledge, we said, “…one nation, indivisible, with…” It struck me that we are no longer ‘indivisible’ and have not been for more than 50 years. We are a nation of factions, no longer united.

In my opinion, the trend started with FDR’s New Deal. (Most current histories of the New Deal fail to mention that large portions of it were later declared unconstitutional and the measures, instead of ending the depression, extended it for more than eight years.) The divisions accelerated with Johnson’s Great Society. Now, with Obama in office, divisive policies have been used to widen the divisions in the country to maintain political power of the administration and to lessen that of their opponents.

Is the Pledge of Allegiance still valid? I would like to believe it is, but there is that niggling thought that it is no longer valid and has not been for some time.

Look around us at the divisions that exists just within the Republican Party. The Karl Roves of the establishment plot against conservatives and the non-establishment ‘Pubs, the so-called ‘moderates’ like John McCain and Lindsey Graham vote against their fellow party members and actively support the party’s political opponents. Then, add the divisions created by partisan politics, the creation and expansion of the Welfare State that takes from those who produce and gives to those who will not. No, I believe the Pledge is no longer appropriate, no matter how much we wish it was.

***

FUBAR. That is being used to describe Obamacare. The polite version of FUBAR is Fouled Up Beyond all Repair or Recognition. Of course, there are many other translations of that acronym and all are correct. I came across this article that applies the term in another venue.

The Military Has A Term (or Acronym) To Describe The ObamaCare Rollout: FUBAR

October 23rd, 2013 at 10:00 PM

With the White House now hinting agreement with the Republicans who called for a delay in penalizing individuals under the ObamaCare mandate, the disastrous rollout of Barack Obama’s singular signature piece of legislation passed during his presidency can be summed up in one military term (or acronym): FUBAR*.

Notwithstanding the fact that the mainstream media has been near-unanimously stuck on declaring that healthcare.gov’s problems were caused by a mere “glitch,” everything about ObamaCare’s rollout, thus far, has proved to be a disaster of epic proportions. It has lived down to the most dire warnings of becoming a “third-world experience.”

When critics claimed that ObamaCare would cause people to lose their employer-sponsored coverage and that prices would skyrocket, they were heckled and jeered. It turns out, though, they were right.

Despite Obama’s promises to the contrary, millions of Americans are, in fact, losing their health insurance and, based on this chart, most others are seeing their healthcare costs soar.IB-premium-exchange-by-state-table-1-600Source Report: How Will You Fare in the Obamacare Exchanges?

In addition to the Administration also trying to hide how many people have actually signed up on the healthcare.gov, CBS News has uncovered a serious pricing problem on the Obamacare site.

…A new online feature can dramatically underestimate the cost of insurance.

The administration announced it would provide a new “shop and browse” feature Sunday, but it’s not giving consumers the real picture. In some cases, people could end up paying double of what they see on the website, CBS News’ Jan Crawford reported Wednesday on “CBS This Morning.” [Emphasis added.]

To make matters worse, in addition to the Obama Administration enlisting ACORN, SEIU and other union allies to become ObamaCare “navigators” at up to $48 per hour, it turns out that many of them haven’t even been certified on how to navigate a Prius let alone ObamaCare.

This is only further complicated by the fact that “cyber squatters” are hijacking private, personal information, according to the Washington Times:

More than 700 websites have been created with names playing off of Obamacare or Healthcare.gov, making it likely that some Americans will mistakenly hand over private information to unknown third-parties.

With all that has happened in the first days of the ObamaCare rollout, it appears that the military term SNAFU will become the norm under ObamaCare.

However, it wasn’t like we didn’t know it was coming, right?

No wonder Jon Stewart is upset.

***

My post for today is getting a bit long. Here’s a link to a story about the UAW’s drive to unionize a VW plant in Tennessee is being halted by employees who do not want to be unionized!  Tennessee is a Right-to-Work state.

‘Transplant’ laborers may put brakes on UAW drive in right-to-work states

By Tim Devaney, The Washington Times, Wednesday, October 23, 2013

A United Auto Workers drive to organize workers at the Volkswagen Passat plant in Tennessee is turning into a critical battle in labor’s drive to breach the wall of foreign automakers who have flocked to the American South and other right-to-work states in recent years to open nonunion plants.

But in a twist of typical labor-management game plan, the UAW fight is not with the German-owned Volkswagen, where some executives have indicated they are more willing to work with the union, but with the plant’s workers, Tennessee state officials and anti-labor advocacy groups who fear the precedent a successful organizing drive could set.

Follow the link and read the complete article. It shows why Unions fear Right-to-Work.

Friday Follies for August, 19, 2011

The libs and state media are up in arms over Rick Perry’s “almost treason” comment the other day.  They claim that Perry was threatening Bernake.  In his speech, Perry was about to say, “treachery,” but in mid-word changed it to “almost treasonous.”

To those who’ve never traveled outside the BosWash corridor,  that “almost treasonous” term is common usage. It portrays the feeling that Washington is out-of-touch and is actively working against the welfare of most of the country.  Some, including myself, would have preferred Perry continued and used “treachery.”  It was more appropriate to the conditions we see in Washington—a betrayal of trust.

It got the libs so upset they are soliciting prostitutes, “exotic” dancers, and gays to claim Perry visited strip joints, spent time with prostitutes and was gay.

This ad appeared in a sleazy little “alternative” paper in Austin, TX.  Ads for “personal services” and solicitiation of prostitution are its normal fare.

We really shouldn’t be surprised something like this has appeared. It a common lib/dem tactic.

***

It’s a sad sign of the politicization of NASA.  The Obama administration ordered NASA to verify that human caused global warming was true.  Instead, NASA discovered that the original data used to justify the myth had been falsified.  

That could not happen.  So the overseers of NASA came up with this idea. 

Aliens Could Attack Earth to End Global Warming, NASA Frets

Published August 19, 2011

We’ve all heard of the ravaged rain forests and the plight of the polar bear. But as far as reasons for saving the planet go, the one offered by scientists Thursday is truly out of this world.
A team of American researchers have produced a range of scenarios in which aliens could attack the earth, and curiously, one revolves around climate change.
They speculate that extraterrestrial environmentalists could be so appalled by our planet-polluting ways that they view us as a threat to the intergalactic ecosystem and decide to destroy us.
The thought-provoking scenario is one of many envisaged in a joint study by Penn State and the NASA Planetary Science Division, entitled “Would Contact with Extraterrestrials Benefit or Harm Humanity? A Scenario Analysis.”
It divides projected close encounters into “neutral,” those that cause mankind “unintentional harm” and, more worryingly, those in which aliens do us “intentional harm.”
Extraterrestrial intelligence (ETI) “could attack and kill us, enslave us, or potentially even eat us. ETI could attack us out of selfishness or out of a more altruistic desire to protect the galaxy from us. We might be a threat to the galaxy just as we are a threat to our home planet,” it warns.
Sigh…

***

When Obama stopped in rural Illinois for a meet ‘n greet, a farmer complained about the massive federal paperwork he had to produce.  Obama told him to call Washington.

A reporter did just that to see if anything could be done.  This is what happened.

Obama’s unhelpful advice

At Wednesday’s town hall in Atkinson, Ill., a local farmer who said he grows corn and soybeans expressed his concerns to President Obama about “more rules and regulations” – including those concerning dust, noise and water runoff — that he heard would negatively affect his business.

The president, on day three of his Midwest bus tour, replied: “If you hear something is happening, but it hasn’t happened, don’t always believe what you hear.”

When the room broke into soft laughter, the president added, “No — and I’m serious about that.”

When this POLITICO reporter decided to take the president’s advice and call USDA for an answer to the Atkinson town hall attendee’s question, I found myself in a bureaucratic equivalent of hot potato — getting bounced from the feds to Illinois state agriculture officials to the state farm bureau.

Here’s a rundown of what happened when I started by calling USDA’s general hotline to inquire about information related to the effects of noise and dust pollution rules on Illinois farmers:

Wednesday, 2:40 p.m. ET: After calling the USDA’s main line, I am told to call the Illinois Department of Agriculture. Here, I am patched through to a man who is identified as being in charge of “support services.” I leave a message.

3:53 p.m.: The man calls me back and recommends in a voicemail message that I call the Illinois Farm Bureau — a non-governmental organization.

4:02 p.m.: A woman at the Illinois Farm Bureau connects me to someone in the organization’s government affairs department. That person tells me they “don’t quite know who to refer you to.”

4:06 p.m.: I call the Illinois Department of Agriculture again, letting the person I spoke with earlier know that calling the Illinois Farm Bureau had not been fruitful. He says “those are the kinds of groups that are kind of on top of this or kind of follow things like this. We deal with pesticide here in our bureau.”

“You only deal with pesticides?” I ask.

“We deal with other things … but we mainly deal with pesticides here,” he said, and gives me the phone number for the office of the department’s director, where he says there are “policy people” as well as the director’s staff.

4:10 p.m.: Someone at the director’s office transfers me to the agriculture products inspection department, where a woman says their branch deals with things like animal feed, seed and fertilizer.

“I’m going to transfer you to one of the guys at environmental programs.”

4:15 p.m.: I reach the answering machine at the environmental programs department, and leave a message.

4:57 p.m.: A man from the environmental programs department gets back to me: “I hate to be the regular state worker that’s always accused of passing the buck, but noise and dust regulation would be under our environmental protection agency, rather than the Agriculture Department,” he says, adding that he has forwarded my name and number to the agriculture adviser at IEPA. (The Illinois EPA.)

Well, you get the idea. It was a complete runaround.  It’s obvious that Obama has never had to deal with his own bureaucracy.  There is much more about the reporter’s efforts at the Politico Website.  Go there and read it all.

***

On a final note, here’s something to chuckle over during the weekend.