The Teeter-Totter Paradox

Why Republicans are NOT far-right and Democrats ARE far-left.

When I was growing up, before politics, I had an image of the meanings of conservative and liberal. Conservatives were staunchy, stiff, un-willing to compromise and opposed to change and likely to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change. Conservative meant lacking imagination and slow to consider different ideas.

Liberal meant free thinking; open to new ideas, far reaching in accepting change and all about the freedoms of man and ideas. Favoring or permitting freedom of action, especially in matters of personal belief or expression. Favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible,
I was anything but a conservative.

Come to find out, after watching politicians over the years, the political parties actually are complete opposites of what the labels depicted. Republicans are more free thinking, open to new ideas, far reaching in accepting change and all about the freedoms of man and ideas. Republicans believe people should be allowed to advance in class, yearn to achieve success and rise above their current circumstances.

While Democrats are more restrictive, un-willing to compromise and opposed to change, lacking imagination and slow to consider different ideas. Democrats want people to be kept at their current status, prohibited from advancing upward in class and become successful.

Far-right, extreme right, hard right, radical right, and ultra-right are terms used to discuss the qualitative or quantitative position a group or person occupies within right-wing politics. Far right politics involves support of strong or complete social hierarchy in society, and supports supremacy of certain individuals or groups deemed to be innately superior who are to be more valued than those deemed to be innately inferior.

The far right has historically supported elitist society, that's why the far-left use the "elitist" term in every debate. Far-right is too extreme, it stifles growth and fosters a class society, which is very counter to the Republican ideology.

Far left (also known as the revolutionary left, radical left, and extreme left) are the highest degree of leftist positions among left-wing politics. The far left seeks the creation of strong or complete social equality in society. It seeks to dismantle all forms of social hierarchy, particularly to end unequal distribution of wealth - especially identifying capitalism as a major source of social inequality.

The far left seeks the complete equalization of the distribution of wealth, and a society where in theory everyone is to be completely equal and where no one will have excessive power or wealth over others. Funny, since Democrats are wealthier that Republicans, on several scales.

Yes, America, there is a wealth gap.

Seven of the top ten wealthiest members in Congress are Democrats.
According to the Center for Responsive Politics, 36 Senate Democrats and 30 Senate Republicans reported an average net worth in excess of $1 million in 2010. The median estimated net worth among members of the Senate Democrats was $2.58 million. Senate Republican median net worth was $2.43 million.

And wealthy Democrats tend to inherit their money, while Republicans tend to earn it.
http://bluecollarphilosophy.com/2011/11/democrats-in-congress-are-richer-than-republicans/

FYI: Who is richer, Democrats or Republicans? 

It depends where you draw the line for being 'Rich'.

Among the Uberrich, or top 2%, the majority are Democrats.
If you lower the threshold to include the merely Filthy Rich (say top 10% or so) then it starts to even out more. Continuing down this curve, the more weight you give to the middle class (down to about 40%), the higher the percentage of people identifying as Republicans will be. When you get down to the lower end of the curve, the percentage being Democrat comes back up again.

With a 100% counted, the Democrats are in the majority. The optimal point for Republicans is closer to the 50% threshold. Republicans actually represent a greater portion of the middle income group than their wealthier democrats. There is actually a bigger gap between poor vs wealthy Democrats and poor vs wealthy Republicans. Yet, there is the red--blue paradox: Rich states vote for the Democrats, but
rich people vote Republican.

There is an old saying: 
If you are conservative at 25 you haven't got a heart. If you are liberal at 45 you haven't got a brain.

Democrats say they want a classless society, that's why they say they want to redistribute the wealth. But, Democrats need to be class society, since the poor tend to vote Democratic, they want the poor to remain poor, and want to attract more poor. Entitlement programs are designed to keep you poor. Entitlement programs discourage people from wanting to improve. Democrats are not willing to give up their wealthy status, but would rather not have any more join the wealthy class. They can only achieve this if they continue with a far-left ideology.

Republicans actually believe we should be encouraged to rise above our current class and become richer than we currently are, with no limitations. Republicans know that the country can not grow if people are in a have's vs have-not situation. Rich vs poor has never worked, so people need encouragement to rise from poor to middle to rich. Entitlement programs are not supposed to be a career choice. That is why they must maintain a center-right ideology.

Burn the Los Angeles Times Newspapers

LA Times editor Davan Maharaj must be a member of the Taliban  as he has relegated the paper to the status resembling the Taliban.

They have decided to publish pictures that are intended to incite violence, rioting and bloodshed. The LA Times Editor Davan Maharaj has no regard for the innocent lives that will surely be put in peril, both the lives of our own military and the lives of civilians. The LA Times is only interested in creating sensationalized news, to sell newspapers.

The LA Times Editor Davan Maharaj published photos from over two years ago, against the recommendations of our military, of our soldiers posing with dead terrorist bombers and body parts, when they could just as easily have written the story without photos. Although the acts of our military personnel are reprehensible and those individuals need to be prosecuted, as well as the one who took the photos. Posting the photos will surely cause some innocent life to be lost. That death will be on the hands of LA Times Editor Davan Maharaj and the LA Times organization.

Call 800-252-9141to cancel your subscription 

to the LA Times, as I have just done!

Liar, liar, pants on fire, Hanging by your tongue on a telephone wire…

http://lifeslittleinspirations.com/liar-liar-pants-on-fire by Wendi Kelly


When I was a youngster, this little jump rope chat could be heard daily on the playground as little girls gathered in groups to skip to the beat of the rope. There were other versions too, “Liar, liar, pants on fire, Hanging by a telephone wire!” and “Liar, liar, pants on fire,Your belt’s hanging on the telephone wire!”  are two that I still can recall. Every now and then, when someone is not quite as truthful as I expected, I still hear the little chant inside my head, forever imprinted there.
Liar, liar, pant’s on fire…
Sadly…every now and then, I have to say it to myself.

Not because I have told somebody a lie ( I try REALLY hard never to do that). But because I told one to myself. I don’t MEAN to tell a lie. They just sometimes fall out of my thoughts.
Like the famous, “Today, I’m not eating a single bit of white flour or bread. I don’t eat that stuff.” (Liar, liar…I’ve been scarfing it down for a week now,)
Or, how about, “I’m going to bed early tonight, my sleep is important to me.” (Oh yeah? So why did the clock strike pumpkin time before I ever saw my sheets? Liar, liar…)
I makes my shoulders slump. I feel like I let myself down. I feel like a fraud. It creates pot shots in my self-esteem. I question my personal integrity.

Does this ever happen to you?
If you are human, it probably does. So then, if everyone is doing it, no harm done right? We can just chalk it up to being part of the human race and accept that the things we say to ourselves just don’t matter.

Except that this is the biggest lie of them all.
The truth is, that when we let ourselves down, it digs a hole. When we make ourselves promises that we don’t keep, we feel untrustworthy. We begin to doubt our personal integrity, our motivation, our will power and our ability to make our dreams come true. We begin to look toward outside influences for our accountability because we can’t trust ourselves to be accountable to our own internal being.

Does that mean you have to be perfect?
You won’t be. You can’t be. Perfection isn’t of this world, we call that place heaven. But what you can be is accountable. You can take stock of what you are saying to yourself, sit down and ask yourself,” Hey Self, What’s up with this?”
Get to the bottom of why you are not accountable to your personal word to yourself. There are probably really good, fixable reasons.Here are a few of the most common.

A Few Reasons We Lie To Ourselves
The Goal isn’t really important to us. It’s important to somebody else, but secretly, we really don’t care. We are people-pleasing all over ourselves and our inner being isn’t buying into the program. First available chance and our subconscious mind whispers, “Just kidding! Never had any intention of waking up early to exercise! And we are more than happy to fall back asleep. We never wanted to get up in the first place!
The Goal is overwhelming. We bit off so much that we are choking and our subconscious is talking back through the ginormous bites screaming that this is unsustainable so why even bother?

The Goal is no match for our fatigue. When we are exhausted, there is very little that can keep us on task and motivated without considerable effort. It’s easy to break promises when we have no energy. In order to have more personal integrity, we need to take better physical care of ourselves. In order to take better physical care of ourselves, we need better personal integrity. It’s a tricky one and the trick is this. Establish a bare minimum, no matter what threshold that keeps you honest. That way when you are feeling run down, you can institute Personal Pampering Day, and get by on your bare minimum without breaking your integrity. But at least you are doing something!

The Goal is not part of your routine. Out of sight, out of mind. Routines and systems help us to keep our personal integrity by making habits automatic. The more automatic a habit is, the less time the Liar and excuses voices can sit on your shoulder and tempt you to quit. Here is a tip. Link your new habit to an existing habit so that your brain will accept it more readily and not argue.

Let’s face it, none of us want to be liars. We all want to have integrity, faith in ourselves and great self-esteem. It isn’t like we are TRYING to sabotage ourselves with excuses, lies and broken promises.
When it does happen, be kind. Recover with grace and forgiveness to your struggling self and see if you can implement a few systems or ideas to help your poor self out.
Yourself will thank you for it!

also: http://bluesunstudio-inc.com/

check out http://www.amazon.com/Bonds-Blood-Spirit-Loyalties-ebook/dp/B004GXAW14/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1292979105&sr=1-1

Are you leaving holes in your fence?

NAILS IN THE FENCE
There once was a little boy who had a bad temper...  His Father gave him a bag of nails and told him that every time he lost his temper, he must hammer a nail into the back of the fence.

The first day the boy had driven 37 nails into the fence...  Over the next few weeks, as he learned to control his anger, the number of nails hammered daily gradually dwindled down.  He discovered it was easier to hold his temper than to drive those nails into the fence.  Finally the day came when the boy didn't lose his temper at all.

He told his father about it and the father suggested that the boy now pull out one nail for each day that he was able to hold his temper.

The days passed and the young boy was finally able to tell his father that all the nails were gone.

The father took his son by the hand and led him to the fence.  He said, 'You have done well, my son, but look at the holes in the fence.  The fence will never be the same.  When you say things in anger, they leave a scar, just like this one.  You can put a knife in a man and draw it out.  But It won't matter how many times you say I'm sorry, the wound will still be there.  A verbal wound is as bad as a physical one.

Remember that friends are very rare jewels indeed. They make you smile and encourage you to succeed; They lend an ear, they share words of praise and they always want to open their hearts to us.

Please forgive me if I have ever left a hole in your fence!

The next time you get angry with someone and are about to speak, ask yourself if there was a way to say what you want to say with neutral words. Picture the holes in your fence.
Often the habit of reacting angrily is just that - a habit you learned when you were young and haven´t questioned since. You might have become blind to the effect it has on your life.

It is really so that the world reflects back your own attitude. If you constantly wonder why people are angry at you, perhaps it is you who treated them with anger first? Listen to the words and tone of voice you use. And try, really try to speak neutrally to someone who are angry with. If you know it will be difficult, write the words down first. Rehearse it in your mind. Decide on a prize you will give to yourself if you succeed.

Teach your mind intentionally to use respectful words. And you just might find that life begins to feel a lot nicer - because people aren´t angry at you anymore.
DON'T BE BLUE

Media news bias is ratings driven

Just another reason I don't watch "Prime Time News" or nationally syndicated news shows like 60 minutes, they bend the news to drive up ratings, in some cases they will just make it up.

Why are the major media outlets content to manufacture or bend the hot news stories in order to drive up ratings?
It's because of the mentality of the old saying, "it's easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission"! Unfortunately the bastardized news stories last for days or weeks, if not months, and the asking for forgiveness by broadcast never happens, or in the case of printed news, it's relegated to the back pages or a footnote.

Trayvon Martin didn’t deserve to be lying mute in an underground box at the age of 17. Nobody does. He committed no offense to warrant such a fate. He was simply returning from the convenience store and chatting with his girlfriend on his cell phone, a scene that could be replicated a million times across America on any given evening. http://themoderatevoice.com/142893/pictures-and-prejudice-in-the-trayvon-martin-case/

Here’s all we know for certain about the killing of Trayvon Martin: Zimmerman noticed the black teen wearing a hoodie, tailed him as a suspicious character within the confines of the gated community, stepped out of his car to challenge him (despite instructions from police to keep on moving), exchanged words with Martin and ended up on the ground. Someone moaned for help around the moment that the gun went off, and Martin died on the spot.

Was the neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman out for blood or just taking his job a little too seriously? 

Why was the only picture used by ABC, NBC, CBS, the NY Times and every other major newspaper, from when Trayvon Martin was only 14 years old?
The contrasting photos of cute Trayvon and nasty George undoubtedly contributed to the call for vengeance.
Was the exposure on Zimmerman’s photo altered in some versions to make the half-Hispanic killer look “whiter”?
George Zimmerman is multi-racial. In fact, it’s said that he has black relatives.

For most of the black community and the left-of-center crowd, it’s an open-and-shut case of a light-skinned racist murdering an innocent African American kid for the crime of “walking while black.” The Revs. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton showed up to make racial politics, just to add fuel to the fire. The fact that Trayvon was wearing a hoodie has catapulted that essential item of hip-hop apparel to unprecedented glory as a political symbol of unjustly maligned black youth. By now, every Trayvon Martin sympathizer and his brother has been photographed wearing a hoodie. Congressman Bobby Rush was even kicked out of a congressional hearing because he showed up wearing a hoodie. He was kicked out because he did not adhere to the dress code for appearing before congress. Dress code, 'That' is a subject for another day.

NBC altered the 911 call by Zimmerman to make it seem as if Zimmerman was race obsessed, and every news story used it as part of their coverage. 

Photographs, videos, and recordings can be indispensable clues, but our biases, conscious or not, have a way of tampering with the evidence.
Neither man was all saint or all villain. Both should be given an equal chance to be vindicated or judged by proper authorities.

NBC News has since fired the producer who was involved in the production of a misleading segment about the Trayvon Martin case in Florida. On April 6th, 39 days after the maelstrom, it appeared as a blip in the news, but not on any prime time news broadcast.
The action came in the wake of an internal investigation by NBC News into the production of the segment, which strung together audio clips in such a way that made George Zimmerman’s shooting of Mr. Martin sound racially motivated. Ever since the Feb. 26 shooting, there has been a continuing debate about whether race was a factor in the incident.

Of course the damage has been done in the wake of a rioting public driven to the media frenzy, just as they wanted.

Sometimes you just can't help but be BLUE!

Heroes, terrors and terrorism

A couple of notes on Heroes, terrors and terrorism.

March 29, 2012
US Soldier Killed Trying to Save Afghan Girl
Sgt. Dennis Weichel, 29, of the Rhode Island National Guard died saving the life of a little girl in northeast Afghanistan.

According to the report, Weichel was in a convoy in Laghman Province last week when he noticed some children were in the path of the moving vehicles. Weichel and other soldiers got out to move them out of the way. while most of the children scattered away, one girl went back to the road, as a Mine-Resistant Ambush-Protected vehicle continued moving toward her. Weichel saw the massive truck moving toward the girl and grabbed her out of the way. The girl survived, but Weichel died after the armored vehicle ran over him.

These types of stories go unreported everyday. Our soldier's heroic actions are unnoticed by most, if not all, of our major news stations. Certainly lost to the journalists of MSNBC and CBS, who most likely just throw the stories in the trash, deemed not worthy of the liberal rhetoric.

I found this story below and also decided to add it to the mix.

After reading the headlines today about the US soldier who shot up Afghanistan civilians, I couldn’t help noticing an irony.  There is all this clamor to try this guy quickly and execute him, never mind his having suffered a traumatic brain injury.
His actions were that of a disturbed mind and should be delt with by the harshest of penalties.

Yet (another soldier) Major Hasan, who shot up Fort Hood while screaming Allah akbar, still hasn’t stood trial, and they are still debating whether he was insane, even with the clear evidence regarding his motive: slay as many infidels as possible.

So we have a guy in a war zone who cracks, and he must be executed immediately.

But this Muslim psychiatrist who was stateside in a nice safe office all day, murders 13, wounds 29 of our own guys,and they try to argue the poor lad suffered post-traumatic stress syndrome, from listening to real soldiers, and heroes, who had actual battle experience.

Two and a half years later, they still haven’t tried the murderous bastard.

Poor lad my ass, he murdered our own soldiers!

The Value of Deductive Reasioning

This was a Chemistry Question

The following is an actual question given on a University of Washington chemistry mid-term. The answer by one student was so "profound" that the professor shared it with colleagues, via the Internet.

Bonus Question: Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or endothermic (absorbs heat)?

Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle's Law (gas cools when it expands and heats when it is compressed) or some variant.

One student, however, wrote the following:

First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So we need to know the rate at which souls are moving into Hell and the rate at which they are leaving. I think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave.
Therefore, no souls are leaving.

As for how many souls are entering Hell, let's look at the different Religions that exist in the world today. Most of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to Hell. Since there is more than one of these religions and since people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all souls go to Hell.

With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in Hell to increase exponentially. Now, we have to look at the rate of change of the volume in Hell, because Boyle's Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay the same, the volume of Hell has to expand proportionately as souls are added.

This gives two possibilities:
1. If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter Hell, then the temperature and pressure in Hell will increase until all Hell breaks loose.

2. If Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in Hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes over.

So which is it?

If we accept the postulate given to me by Teresa during my Freshman year that, "it will be a cold day in Hell before I sleep with you, and take into account the fact that I slept with her last night, then number 2 must be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is exothermic and has already frozen over. The corollary of this theory is that since Hell has frozen over, it
follows that it is not accepting any more souls and is therefore, extinct...leaving only Heaven; thereby proving the existence of a divine being which explains why, last night, Teresa kept shouting  "Oh...my....God....Oh....MY....G O D !"

THIS STUDENT RECEIVED THE ONLY "A

Who wants to live forever? Scientist sees aging cured

The first person who will live to see their 150th birthday has already been born.

Space Age Retirement Homes?

A biomedical gerontologist and chief scientist of a foundation dedicated to longevity research,Aubrey de Grey, reckons that within his own lifetime doctors could have all the tools they need to "cure" aging -- banishing diseases that come with it and extending life indefinitely.
De Grey sees a time when people will go to their doctors for regular "maintenance," which by then will include gene therapies, stem cell therapies, immune stimulation and a range of other advanced medical techniques to keep them in good shape.

That being said,
Does the government really want you to live, forever? Do you really want to live forever?
Retirement ages are getting longer, now it's 66, but in the next 20 years, will senior citizens be living in internment camps or dependent on their children? Social Security will not be able to keep up, but more importantly, Social Security will not be enough. What will the quality of life be like for the Old People? We may be able to advance medically to a point where many of the ailments that plague the aging are eliminated, but many people who retire, lose the willingness to continue. They don't really have a good reason to get out of bed.
We are rapidly getting to the point where the government takes all of your money and issues vouchers to pay your bills, especially if the redistribution of wealth programs become a reality. More to the point is that, if amnesty is given to illegal immigrants, our obligation to those who don't, or won't, or can't work, will quadruple our national debt.

What's your definition of "Millionaire"?

Obama: Anyone who makes over $200,000.
Wikipedia: an individual whose net worth or wealth is equal to or exceeds one million units of currency.
Merriam-Webster: A person whose wealth is estimated at a million or more (as of dollars or pounds).
Dictionary.com: A person whose wealth amounts to a million or more in some unit of currancy, as dollars.
Investopedia.com: It is important to note that paper millionaires are not the same as true millionaires, which generally refers to people who have more than $1 million in cash in the bank.
Urbandictionary.com: A person or organisation that is in possession of over one million of a pre-set currency in liquid assets, except property.

I don't know about you, but I have a great deal of diifficulty believing anything that comes out of the mouth of someone who makes-up definitions of the words they use.

In practically every speech on taxes, President Obama likes to pit the wealthier population against everyone else by using the term “millionaires” to pay their “fair share” of taxes.  Class warfare is unnecessary.  As you know, President Obama wants to raise taxes on individuals making $200,000 and families making $250,000.  First of all, how $200,000 + $200,000 = $250,000, instead of $400,000 as a couple, is beyond me.  Is one spouse supposed to suddenly make only $50,000 from $200,000?  Give me a break. http://www.financialsamurai.com/2011/08/17/how-long-does-it-take-to-become-a-millionaire/

One of the problems of taxation needs to also be applied to Social Security.  The maximum taxable earnings amount for Social Security (OASDI) taxes, 2012, is $110,100. True Millionaires don't have to pay any more into Social Security after they earn $110,100. Fortunately there is no cap on income and payments into Healthcare. However, both Social Security and Healthcare, as well as all government relief programs, are destined to bankrupt the United States, if illegal immigrants are allowed amnesty.

First we need to change the US Constitution to eliminate birth right citizenship for people who are born here, but neither of the parents are legal citizens. Then we need to establish a guest worker visa program that insures that only citizens can get any government relief.