AMERICA LIMPS TOWARD BANKRUPTCY

The year is 1991 and the country of Hungary is restructuring itself after the fall of the Soviet Empire. The scars that are left on Hungary's people include a dependency on a paternal government. The Soviet Union provided a generous social safety net coupled with harsh penalties for those caught cheating. When Hungary became independent, the people clung to their safety net, but they wanted it without the harsh tactics and punishments of the communists. The politicians, being politicians, promised the people whatever they wanted, no matter how dire a future it might create. What happened over the next 15 years would destroy the fledgling country and force it into bankruptcy. I now fear the same thing will happen here, in the United States of America.

Hungary's system was set up, as ours is, to provide for people in their old age and to help those that were too disabled to work. When Hungary was released from communism's grasp, the average age of it's disabled and retired people was 62, it is now 48. The politicians, smelling a good issue, promised more and more to a constituency that grew large as more and more of them joined the government disabled list. One politician even went so far as to promise and then deliver a "13th month" of pay for the retired and disabled. Politicians that opposed adding onto the programs were run over by the large constituency and simply lost. Soon 10 million of Hungary's 30 million people we're no longer working and the burden on the government grew and grew as did the taxes on those stupid enough to continue working. Because of the burden on the masses, people spent less, invested less, and saved less. Soon the outgoing money vastly surpassed the money coming in and Hungary fell in to the deep, dark pit of bankruptcy. It is now hanging on only with loans from the International Monetary Fund and is struggling to get it's people to understand the cuts and changes it must make to survive.

The United States is now heading down the exact same path.

As the "Baby Boomers" age, a great deal of them are finding themselves without pensions and without retirement funds. With no money or health insurance and with a declining economy squeezing them out of the workplace, many of them are turning to exaggerating their health problems. With liberalism taking a strong hold, particularly in the Social Services sector, claims for disability are being granted without much contesting. Word gets out fast and with the help of the Internet, aging boomers are working their way into the system and onto the disabled list.

Here in Michigan, we are especially hard hit by the sagging economy. We are now at 15.2% unemployment, the highest in the nation, and on pace to break all unemployment records dating back to the Great Depression. This has created even more incentive for people to game the system and the results are in. Over the past ten years, the amount of people on public insurance that are under 65 in Michigan has increased from 11% to 22% according to the Wall Street Journal. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that we cannot continue to fund these increases. The state of Michigan is now $1.4 billion in the red with another $2 billion owed the Feds for just unemployment benefits. Michigan has 1.84 million people on some sort of Social Security and with the Baby Boomers entering retirement age that number is sure to go up. We now have 274,000 people in Michigan on disability and that number is climbing the fastest of any group requesting Social Security assistance. With increased disability claims, an aging Baby boomer population, increased National Debt liabilities and decreasing GDP, it's hard to see a way out. When the amount of people on Social Security crosses 33%, it will take 2 people to cover the costs of 1 Social Security recipient. If we don't find a way to stop these increases, it's hard to see how this country will survive having both that kind of debt load and that percentage of a constituency that will refuse any cuts. Move over, Hungary, the U.S. is right behind you, following your lead. H.C.

FEMINISM TAKES A GIANT STEP BACKWARD

I'm a feminist. That's right, you don't need to read it over and over to make sure your eyes and brain didn't suddenly become disconnected. I know it's true because I have a friend who's a confirmed feminist and she told me so. Heather, (I didn't get permission to use her last name.) is a professor of Sociology and Gender Studies at the University where I work and is soon to become the head of our Women's Gender Studies. She gave me a flash quiz. Do I believe in equal rights for women? "Yep." Equal pay for equal work? "Yep." Am I against discrimination against women? "Yep." Do I support an Equal Rights Amendment? "Yep." With the authority granted to her by virtue of her education and gender she decreed me a feminist.

Now that we were in the same camp, I thought I would throw out a little test to see if we were really on the same page. "Heather," I queried, "Do you think Sarah Palin was the victim of sexism?" Her forehead squinched downward and her eyes became steely. "God, yes!" she practically shouted. "Do you really think they would have brought up her daughter's pregnancy if she were a man? Do you think they would have judged her clothes? Do you really think they would have compared a man to a slutty stewardess?" "Ummm, maybe Bill Clinton." I offered.

I was a tad taken back. Heather is as confirmed a Democrat as she is a Feminist. "Doesn't it matter to you that she's a Republican?" I questioned. "You don't stop having rights as a woman just because you picked the wrong Party." She answered grinning.

This got me thinking. How is it that the Democratic Party has gotten away with engaging in the most openly sexist attack on a woman I have seen since O.J. killed Nicole?

The truth is, I have been protecting Sarah Palin since the very first day she showed up on the scene and here's why. I believe that every single person in this country, man or woman, black, white or brown should have the opportunity to become all that their talents will allow them to become. I believe women have more to contribute to this country than being a housewife or a mother, although I believe both of those jobs are enormously important. I believe they should have the right to control their own body, a right I extend to everyone. I believe they have the right to hold high office and I believe they have the right to be given the same respect that would be given to a man, if they can do the same job.

And that's where I differ from my Democrat friends.

They believe you only get those rights if your a Democrat. They too believe that women can be something other than a mother or a housewife, but if you should choose either of those very honorable professions, you are not fulfilling your destiny, and are less of a woman for it. They believe that a woman should have choices, but if you choose to believe that abortion is wrong, you don't deserve the choice. They believe true women are animal activists, not hunters. They should be engineers, not PTA moms. They believe real women marry men who wear Khakis, drive a Prius and like to shop, not men who wear flannels, drive a truck and like to fish. On every level Sarah Palin violated that stereotype, and that infuriated them.

So they attacked her family, they attacked her clothes, they attacked her values, they attacked her culture, they attacked her accent, they attacked her beloved state, and when all else failed, they used their lawyers to bankrupt her. Finally, tired of it all, she retreated from public life and gave up her job of Governor of Alaska that she had fought so hard to get, both as a woman, and as a person.

To all you female Democrats out there who reveled in the destruction of Sarah Palin, I have a warning. Freedom is more than the right to abort a fetus.It's more than the right to vote. It's more than the right to become a doctor or a engineer or a Vice President. Freedom is about the right to choose your own destiny, by virtue of your own choices. If your choices are restricted to only the ones that the Democratic Party gives you, you really don't have choices at all, and you are once again in a "comfortable concentration camp." H.C.

THE BEST HEALTH CARE ON EARTH?

The claim made by a lot of people in the U.S. is that despite all it's faults, our health care is still the "Best health care on Earth". As the debate heats up in Congress about what to do about our uninsured, I thought I would try a different approach this time around to address my feelings about our flawed system.

I have addressed this issue before in my post "Tax the Rich", which brought me the ire of my right-leaning friends, and more recently in my post "The Universal Health Care Program No One Wants" which managed to piss off some of my left-leaning friends. This time around I'm going to take it to a personal level. I have warned you all before that "exampling" or pointing out an example proves nothing more than that something happened once. It's not a great way to make your point and is usually used by people who want you to react emotionally instead of looking at the facts. But, since I've already covered some of the facts in my previous posts, I though I could be forgiven for bringing the issue back home and personal.

The first time I really noticed the difference in having coverage or not was when I was in my twenties. My wife's brother Dave had just been diagnosed with lung cancer. He didn't have much of a problem getting a doctor to diagnose him, that part can be done in an emergency room or by a doctor willing to take payments. This is the part of our system that Republicans usually trumpet as "the health care everyone gets" after all, they'll tell you, "no one is denied treatment if they show up at the hospital door." What they don't want you to know, particularly if you have health coverage and don't know any different, is that that is only for the diagnosis, not the surgery or the treatment. Once you have been diagnosed as having a major health issue, everything changes. You can show up at the hospital a thousand times, and they'll simply tell you, "You have cancer, you need to find a surgeon." and send you home. Once Dave had been diagnosed, the long fight to find a surgeon willing to work on him with no coverage began. He went to Social Services who sent him to a doctor with a long waiting list. He tried to find another doctor, but each one simply pushed him off with delays, telling him he first needed to see if Medicaid would cover it (nope) then tried to push him through different Social Programs that he didn't qualify for because he had worked his whole life. Each effort to find coverage extends the delays. Finally, after three months, a surgery was scheduled. Prior to the surgery, Dave got another chest X-Ray, the news was very bad. During the three months, his cancer had spread throughout his body. Surgery was canceled and three months later he died. Leaving a wife and two kids. He was never once "denied", simply pushed over and over to the very back of the line.

Some time after that, I was diagnosed with cancer. During a visit for a lump on my abdomen (which was benign), the doctor was showing off his new ultra-sound machine and found a lump that wasn't benign. This happened on a Thursday and thankfully I had good Health Care from my job. On Monday of that very next week I was in surgery. By the end of that week I was in radiation treatment. There was not one delay and within 7 weeks I was done with my treatments and on the road to recovery. I asked my Oncologist what would have happened if I would have had no insurance like my Brother-in-law Dave? His response was chilling, "You wouldn't be here getting the treatment your getting now."

Fast forward to this year. I am now watching my daughter fight for her health with a system designed to provide her with nothing. Nine months ago she was diagnosed with an enlarged thyroid (again, getting diagnosed is not the problem.). The lump on her throat was the size of a acorn and only visible when she raised her chin. She has fought with Medicaid, who again refused her because she has a job (One social service worker suggested she quit.) She has tried to find help through the state, which has pushed her further back saying, "Our budgets are tight, programs no longer have the funding." She has scheduled with three doctors for the surgery, each one giving her dates months down the road and then canceling them at the last minute. Her last attempt got her all the way to surgery door only to have it canceled at the last minute because the doctor forgot to give her medication necessary before the surgery. Again the new date is months away. In desperation she is trying a new doctor who happened to hear of her plight and is willing to help. We're all praying it works out this time. Her lump is now the size of a half an apple and easily visible. She is a single mom with two kids who has worked her entire life.

During the arguments for and against revamping our health care system, a lot of lies and over statements are going to be made on both sides. But I want to lay one lie to rest. The one that, "Everyone gets treatment in America, no one is turned away." While there may be truth in the wording, the real truth is health care for those that are covered is quick and timely. For those that don't have it, it's a battle to stay alive until they can squeeze you in. Children are losing their mothers, sisters are losing their brothers, let's not candy-coat it with some distortion. The argument is that a Universal Health Care Program will result in people waiting for months for a knee replacement. Well, to them I have an answer. It's already happening, just not to you, and for things far more serious than a bum knee.H.C.

SUPREME COURT GETS IT RIGHT IN FIREFIGHTER CASE

It's been a hell of a news week since I wrote to all of you last. Infamous ponzi scheme artist, Bernie Madoff, got more time than the equally infamous Charlie Manson, Michael Jackson dies and it's not by the hands of an eight-year-old boy's angry father. Farah Fawcett succumbs to Cancer and famed pitchman Billy Mays dies under unusual circumstances. Yep, it's been a news-packed week. But the item that really caught my eye this week was the 5-4 judgment by the U.S. Supreme Court that a group of white firefighters from New Haven, Conn.,were discriminated against because of their race.

The main reason I find this judgment fascinating isn't because someone screamed "racism" because they were denied a promotion, hell, that happens every single day in the U.S.. It isn't even because it was white people who were doing the complaining-that happens more and more all the time. It's because the argument used by the City of New Haven and other opponents of the fire fighter's case, was that the tests given to the firefighters were racist in nature. The tests were racist, those groups contend, because the blacks that took it didn't do as well as the whites. For this reason, the white applicants who did well on the test were denied the advancement they were entitled to. The City of New Haven claimed they were only preventing racism. The Supreme Court disagreed.

Interestingly enough, one of the appellate judges on this very case that disagreed with the majority's opinion was none other than President Obama's Supreme Court nominee, Sonia Sottamayor.

It's not that I believe there is no racism in testing. I think we've all seen enough examples to know that racism in testing does exist. It's a "burden of proof" thing with me. In a lot of people's minds, the evidence is in the results. If blacks do not do as well as their white counterparts on a certain test, then it is a racist test. Period. In their minds, it's as simple as that. I could not disagree more. If you accuse someone of cheating, the burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused. To simply say that the fact that one group doesn't do as well as another makes the test racist denies the fact that different people are more suited to different jobs. (Here's where I get myself in trouble.)

The best example I can give you is this; My brother works for the Dept of Transportation here in Michigan. He is the foreman over several bridge maintenance groups. One day I noticed that every time I saw him on the job on one of our highways, the men were all sweating up a storm shovelling sand or running a jackhammer while the girls were taking turns flagging traffic (a far less physical job.) When I chastised him over his distribution of jobs, he informed me that none of his men wanted the job holding the signs. He further informed me that while the public generally smiled and waved at his female staff, they threw things and took out their anger on his male staff. Since both sides were happy the way things were, it was a simple case of best job for the best person. Is that sexist? Maybe on the part of the general public, but not by my brother or Michigan DOT.

What the Supreme Court was saying in it's majority ruling is that a test isn't racist simply because of the results, you have to prove that there was some intent by the parties to discriminate. Men won't always do as well on some tests as women, and yes, sometimes blacks won't do as well as whites on certain tests just as whites won't do as well on others. But if the test is designed to get the person best suited for the job, and not designed to stop someone from getting a job based on race, then there is no foul.

With this verdict, the door has been opened to a new line of thought, "It's not discrimination simply because the results aren't equally spread out." Over the past few decades the pendulum has swung too far, in my opinion, toward the belief that every slight is due to racism or sexism or homophobia or whatever. The accusers were allowed to put the accused on the defense without proving that they had any bad intent. Now the onus is where it belongs, on the accuser. Prove someone or something is racist and the perpetrators suffer the consequences as they should, fail that, and you lose, as you should. My accolades to the Supreme Court, they finally got something right and have earned my respect-for now. H.C.

DETROIT CITY DEN OF THIEVES

In the Bible, the towns of Sodom and Gomorrah became so vile and sinful that God decides to burn the cities to the ground. If it's true that God smites cities that have become so corrupt, then I have a suggestion for the remaining decent people of Detroit....RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!! Not since the famous biblical cities has there been a place where the streets are so filled with prostitution, killing, decadence, decay, public corruption and a complete lack of morals of any kind by nearly anyone' s standards. Hell, even Larry Flynt wouldn't live there.

I'm sure most of you are familiar with the antics of the new KKK (Kwame Kilpatrick Klan) and his tribe of shady lawyers, but today I'm going to outline for you a cast of characters from Detroit, Michigan that make the fabled city of Port Royal look like a convent.

Just for the record, for those of you that don't follow Michigan politics, Kwame Kilpatrick was Detroit's "Hip Hop" mayor up until this last year. Mr. Kilpatrick ran City Hall like a crack house, complete with pistol-whip beatings, a possible murder, fornicating with his staff and even using the public's monies to buy off his detractors to the tune of over $8 million+ dollars. All this while his city shrank both in population and funds. His public schools were, and still are, in complete shambles suffering from lack of funds while he and his staff rode around in Limos. Kwame himself enjoyed the biggest posse (security staff) of any big city mayor. K.K. served 100 days in jail as punishment for his role in covering up his affair with his chief of staff Christine Beatty with public funds, Kwame now lives in Texas (to be closer to some other well known thieves?) where he's trying to avoid paying his court-ordered fines. Now, let's look at the rest of the thieves that Detroit elected to rape their children's future.

*Detroit City Council*

The first thing you should know about the Detroit city council, and by extension, the people of Detroit, is that they don't seat white males any more. In fact, the people of Detroit haven't elected a white male to City Council or the mayor's office since 1990. Despite the fact that Detroit has a minority white population of approx. 20%. I wonder how well that would wash in a 20% black or Latino community? My guess is, not well.The second thing you should know about the DCC is that criminal behavior is not new to them. So, how have the City Council done? Well the Detroit Public School system is now in debt to the tune of $306 million dollars.(the entire state is only showing a $920 million deficit) The City of Detroit is in debt $300 million and climbing. It has lost thousands of residents and it now has the lowest possible bond rating according to Moody's.

*Nepotism Running Amok*

There are nine Detroit Council members, Ken Cockrel is the president, and he sits with fellow councilwoman Sheila Cockrel-his step-mother. Ken's father, Ken Cockrel Sr., cheated on his mother with Sheila and now she is the only white face currently allowed on the DCC. Monica Conyers is another councilwoman with in-family connections, her husband is Detroit U.S. Representative John Conyers, famous for introducing reparations legislation every year of his service and more recently infamous for using $46,000.00 of his campaign money in three months entertaining friends and himself while the Detroit Schools went down the sewer. It should be noted that he lead the entire 435 member U.S. House in spending and doubled the next closest Representative. To complete Detroit's record on nepotism, we should also note that ex-mayor Kwame Kilpatrick was the son of another Detroit U.S. House Representative, Caroline Cheeks-Kilpatrick.

*Now for the Crimes*

I don't even know where to start with this pack of thieves. To be fair, some of them haven't been convicted as of yet. But, it's interesting to note that the U.S. Justice Dept. as well as the F.B.I. is investigating all of them. Now, let's go down the list, Ken Cockrel is probably the cleanest of the bunch, having only tried to hide a $42,000 fine for failing to submit late contribution reports, money which he eventually claimed under pressure from the press. Sheila Cockrel's only known crime is one of morality, having fucked, cheated and blackmailed her way ahead. Fellow councilwoman, Monica Conyers is currently under investigation by the FBI for her involvement in a bribe-for-contract scheme involving the sludge hauling firm Synagro. The contract was for $1.2 billion and also involved Kwame's father, Bernard Kilpatrick. Councilwoman Barbara Rose-Collins is drawing fire recently for a trip to Dubai that cost the City of Detroit over $20,000, including $1,000 fo "incidentals" and $225 worth of souvenirs. An interesting side note; Kwame and his mother Rep. Caroline Cheeks-Kilpatrick were planning a similar trip on the taxpayers dime when the story broke. They immediately cancelled their trip. Now, add to that 48 possible crimes listed by the Detroit Public Schools in their investigation into the disappearance of school funds.

*The Heros*

If I were the kind of person that I see far too often, I would point out Detroit as proof positive that minority-run cities are simply a fleece of the taxpayer. But that would do a disservice to the two public officials I'm going to list next, both black. Kim Worthy is the prosecuting attorney for Wayne County. And even though I initially thought she would cover for all the thievery in Detroit (I'm so sorry, Kim), Ms. Worthy did her job as if they were stealing from the children of Detroit..... which they were. Despite terrible pressure from black apologists, Kim stuck to her guns and prosecuted Kwame Kilpatrick and his Chief of Staff Christine Beatty. And she is not done yet. The other hero is the Detroit Public School Emergency Financial Manager, Robert Bobb. This guy is so great I'm not even going to pick on his two first names. Since entering the scene, Mr. Bobb has rooted out millions in waste and missing funds in the DPS.The criminals are running in every direction and it's only a matter of time before we see even more indictments.

The City of Detroit has surely hit bottom. If God should see his way to forgive and not smite the former French port off the face of the Earth, maybe Detroit can return to it's original place as one of the U.S's finest cities. I can only hope. The children of Detroit deserve better than to have rundown schools while Detroit's leaders party and pillage. H.C.

ORWELLIAN ANNIVERSARY

Today marks the 60th anniversary of the publication of George Orwell's famous book "1984". For those of you not in the Orwellian loop, 1984 was a futuristic depiction of what George Orwell dreamed 1984 (from his point of view in 1949) would look like after the "Thought Police" and "Big Brother" had taken over. The Thought Police were police that used high tech devices to stop crimes before they were even committed. Big Brother was the dictator/government of Oceania, Orwell's fictitious state in the mists of a totalitarian Government . Big Brother, aka the government, had evolved into a sophisticated monitoring system to keep the people under control. Cameras were placed in your home, at your work, and in the streets. Your every move and thought was monitored. Thoughts against the government were not allowed as were thoughts not approved by the government. Those who engaged in them were punished harshly.The good people of Oceania were told constantly through propaganda that it was all for their benefit, that the government knew what was best for them and was creating a Utopia. I viewed it as a horror piece, as did everyone I knew.

When I was in my early teens, my best friend, Mike "Spikehorn" Trench turned me on to Orwell's "Animal Farm" and I was instantly captivated by his writing style. I went on to read "1984" immediately afterward and it has influenced my thoughts on government and free speech every since. At the time, we were in the early stages of the Cold War and the winding down of the Vietnam War. The Soviet Empire and communism were the enemies. The propaganda of the day was that communism would turn your kids against you, your teachers would only be allowed to teach what the government told them to teach, religion would be run out of your schools and homes, free speech would die as would free thought and the ability to question authority. At the time, these were precious things that everyone, Hippies and Conservatives alike, equated with being American. My, how times have changed.

George Orwell could not have envisioned how much worse the future would actually turn out. Cameras are now commonplace as he had predicted. Computers are monitored by your bosses, as is your mail. Corporations can demand your urine, saliva or blood. Religion has been all but done away with in the name of government, science and secularism. Your children are encouraged to "turn you in". Common religious-based morality has been replaced with Liberalism, Relativism and Humanism. The most frightening development that I have seen that mirrors "1984" is the advent of the mentality that crimes can be stopped by limiting speech and thought. In the University where I work, I sometimes have flashbacks to Orwell's ugly vision. "Hate Speech" is used by liberals to silence any contrary points of view. Opposition to Gay Marriage, support of religious points of view, corporal punishment of children, and criticism of minority agendas are just a few of the restrictions on speech that I have seen. Their philosophy is that words can lead to thoughts that lead to crimes. Like Orwell's vision, these "thought crimes" can get you punished harshly, even fired. The linchpin in their philosophy is that they, like Orwell's Big Brother, know what's best for you.

If you have never read Orwell's "1984", I would greatly encourage you to get a copy and let yourself drift back to a time when monitoring your speech was unthinkable in America, when disciplining your kids was your job, not the governments, when you could walk down the streets without a camera ever taking your picture. When a book like "1984" was a horror piece and not a piece on present history. They say all these things are for our own good, that it will help us become a Utopia much like Orwell's Oceania. But I am reminded of an old slave rallying cry."I would rather die standing like a man, than live contently on my knees." H.C.

FOLLOWING THE MONEY

If there was ever any doubt in your mind that your friendly neighborhood Hippie is a complete political dork, this should eliminate it. Just for fun, I was touring around in one of my favorite sites, opensecrets.org, and searching for relevant info on campaign contributions. (how am I doing so far?) When I stumbled upon a few tasty facts.

Now, I know President Obama has said that we need to look forward and not backward, but I believe that we do need to know what the heck went wrong before we can correct it. Plus, Barack unfortunately has to play in that arena, and therefore is a little too dirty to point at someone else's hygiene. I, however, am not so burdened.

As I'm sure all of you know by now, our country has been shoveling money in every direction to stop a complete financial meltdown. The majority of the money that has been handed out has been in the form of the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or as it is more commonly known, the TARP fund. This fund was created by the Bush Administration and pushed through Congress with next-to-no over site in the waning days of G.W's last term. Since then, we have seen top CEO's of the very organizations who caused this mess write themselves giant financial parachutes as the economy was speeding toward the Earth.

Out of curiosity, I decided to see who was writing big checks to the Bush campaign of 2004 long before anyone supposedly knew of our impeding doom. Guess what? The names of a lot of the top contributors match the top TARP recipients, whata surprise! Morgan Stanley leads the pack of Bush contributors and gave the G.W. Campaign $600,480.00, In second came Merrill Lynch with a tidy $580,004.00. For it's efforts, Morgan Stanley was handed the 8th largest handout from the TARP fund-$10 billion dollars. Merrill Lynch was bought out by Bank of America who then used their polluted ledger to rake in the biggest payout from TARP, $45 billion taxpayer dollars.

Now, keep in mind, this was way back in 2004 when supposedly no one knew anything of the impeding crisis.

If you want to get even more nauseous, check out the huge sums of money thrown in Bush's direction by the lobbyists for these firms. Bank of America gave $8,790,000, and Morgan Stanley gave $3,120,000.(Some money was given after the crisis began.) The average return on their investments and the investments of other financial giants? According to Opensecrets it was 258,449 percent!

After viewing some of these stats I have to come to one of two conclusions;

A) These companies knew nothing about our financial crises and this was an incredible coincidence. Or;

B) These rats knew we were in trouble and were lining up their exit plan long in advance.

A thinking person has to ask himself a question. Why would financial institutions such as Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley be the biggest contributors to the Bush Campaign if they had nothing to gain? Were they hoping for even more deregulation when they were already pulling every shady accounting scheme known to man totally unregulated? Or, were they way ahead of the curve and already planning how the government would bail them out. My guess is you know the answer, as well as you now know what a dork I really am. H.C.