The "Great Reset" - Are You and Your Family At Risk?

 

Anyone who is not financially secure within the next 2-4 years is apt to find themselves in a very, very bad place as the globalist elite make their final push to their New World Order - the "Great Reset."

You may not believe that is possible, but history is replete with instances where tyrants gained control and destroyed even the strongest civilizations in their quest for domination. It is a fact of life - power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Today, in liberal, blue states and cities we can see examples of how it begins.

Look at the places where dictatorial mayors and governors have shuttered small businesses and crippled their cities and states. Those who already had financial independence are relatively safe and unaffected. But everyone else suffers terribly, even to the point of suicide. If ever there was a time to become financially secure in order to survive, that time is now. Not next year, next month or even next week - NOW! Those who wait will suffer.

A lot of people will just give up, believing there is no avenue for them to achieve financial security, but such a belief is unfounded. There are ways for virtually anyone to create more wealth for themselves - all it takes are two things, neither of which requires a college degree nor a pile of cash:

1) desire, determination and a little effort, and
2) knowledge - knowing what the options are, and knowing how to make them work

So, just what are the best options for people who are limited by circumstances that, so far, have kept them from getting ahead? There are two options. One is risky -- buying into cryptocurrency or, as some are doing now, jumping on shorted stocks like many did with GameStop. Such methods are very volatile and while you can make big money, it can be lost just as quickly. And crypto plays into the hands of those same globalist elites that do NOT want your genes in their pool - the push for a cashless society. You would be feeding the very monster that is coming for you.

The other option that anyone can succeed with, and involves minimal risk is real estate. And before you say you cannot afford it, or that it is too complicated, or that it takes too long, know right now that it does not require cash, it need not be at all complicated and profits can be made in as little as two weeks. As long as you can take a few hours to learn how, and you have someone to mentor you, to take you by the hand and guide you, you can do this. There are many "gurus" who will help you do that - some good, others not so good. One of the most popular is FortuneBuilders by Than Merrill - but the cost for his "Mastery" program is roughly $35,000 - far beyond the means of most people.

On the other end of the spectrum we find "The Simple Man's Guide to Real Estate", a program that teaches all 24 methods of investing and provides everything necessary for success - including unlimited mentoring. The investor who created this program has over 50 years experience. And because it is offered on a non-profit basis and all the mentors (actual investors) are volunteers, they can offer the entire course for under $100 - well within the means of everyone.

Whatever route you take (or do not), the point remains the same - if you are not financially secure in the next couple of years, you may very well find yourself at the hard bottom and with no other options left.

/

How To Win Elections in 2022

 

Brought to you by IntelliBiz

 

We are living in troubled and dangerous times, made all the more dangerous by the left instituting a frontal assault on free speech, making if very difficult to oppose them and their narrative - which is, of course, the point. Which means we must try harder, and go "low tech", since they control most of the high tech. And here is a plan...

For the next two years the end game is to retake the House of Representatives, disabling the arm of government that writes bills with the intent of passing laws. At the same time we need to try and regain a majority in the Senate. By doing this, we would completely neuter the Biden administration. And while that seems like a tough hill to climb, it is far from insurmountable.

Some of the angrier people on the right are so ticked off at the Republicans in the GOP that they are calling to start a 3rd party. But that would be self-defeating - we only have two years, and we need half of that to run candidates. That leaves little time (and money) to build an effective, powerful infrastructure. And a third party means competing not with one powerful party, but against two. We would be dead in the water before we even get this tugboat away from the pier.

Here's the only viable option: we RETAKE the GOP, and remake it into the party that serves us, not the establishment. If we do our job well, we can do that rather easily, simply because we have the numbers - there are at least 75 million of us which represents the majority of Republicans in the country. And as the left continues their purge tactics, our numbers are sure to grow. The GOP has the infrastructure and mega-donors, but none of that will do them any good if they do not have We, the People to vote - we have the power. Therefore, our FIRST task is to display that power. To accomplish that, we must unify; work as a unit. We need to find and elevate "generals", people who can pull our movement together, quickly. This, then, is the first and most important task.

Once we have unified, much like the Tea Party did but with a lot more people, we would put the GOP on notice that the power is ours, not theirs, as we have the numbers. Roughly 31% of Americans are Republican, 33% Democrat and 36% are Independents or "other". As of February 2020, there were roughly 45.7 million registered Democrats, 33.3 million Republicans, 33.5 million Independents, 600,000 Libertarians and a handful of Green and other parties. So, what does that tell us?

A strong majority of Independents end up voting Republican as do the majority of Libertarians and the 100,000+ Constitutionalists. Those people are more closely tied to Republican ideals, but chose to separate because thev GOP has failed them. It is safe to assume that, with the right message and presenting it in a convincing and memorable manner, we could amass a majority of voters nationwide.

While we would work to spread our message far and wide, there are specific seats we should set our sights on for 2022 - the most vulnerable seats now held by Democrats and some Republicans who empower the left. Thirty-six Democrat House seats are particularly vulnerable along with (6) vulnerable Democrat Senate seats up for grabs in 2022, all listed at the American Patriot Party website, here. Also listed in that site are the names of "RINO's" that need to be primaried.

As soon as possible upon organizing in a unified movement, we need to identify patriots who, like Donald Trump and Ronald Reagan (who won 49 states), are populists and constitutionalists, and then strongarm the GOP to embrace them. They will have little choice since we would be financially supporting each candidates' individual campaign, and not contributing to the GOP. For example, Virginia Republicans would contribute directly to the individual campaigns of Virginia candidates. If the GOP wants money from us, they would need to support OUR candidates. In this manner we retake and reshape the GOP to our standards, and eliminate RINO's.

Even before we choose and support candidates (which we have vetted extremely well) we need to build a policy platform and form the messages we will be putting forth. It is critical that the platform be simple and attractive to the majority of the general population - ideally it would be a platform that 80% of the country would find appealing.  The "messages" that sell the platform would be tailored independently for each candidate based on the needs and desires of their specific constituents - voters in farm country would have different needs and desires than people in industrial areas, for example. We are talking salesmanship, folks! That is how messages get sold.

We cannot be all things to all people, but we CAN be MOST things to MOST people. In fact, it is conceivable that we can "borrow" portions of the Democrat platform that can be remodeled and reshaped to conservative standards which would take fuel away from Democrat candidates.

As an example, take health care. Democrats beat us up on that subject not because they have a better plan, but because we don't even have a plan. We could add health care to our platform and sell a better plan - instead of a "one size fits all" government health plan, we could offer several individual plans that, combined, fix the system, as Donald Trump started to do with lower drug costs and price transparency. His mistake was that he did not message it well, and the media did not tell people. We should have a policy plan to reduce the cost of medical insurance by capping lawsuits for medical errors; a plan that reduces health care needs by promoting and subsidizing certain industries such as fitness centers, and rebates on fitness equipment. A plan to defeat unhealthy lifestyle choices by increasing costs of junk foods and applying that extra money to lower costs of healthy whole foods. And another plan to reduce the revolving door of referrals and excessive testing currently mandated to reduce lawsuits and pump up profits. In this manner we can come up with a combination of mini-plans that, together, make health care not only more affordable, but also make the population healthier, requiring less health care. You can find a series of these health care ideas here...

In short, we need a platform designed to attract the greatest number of voters, which means co-opting parts of the Democrat platform in ways that change the narrative, providing different and better solutions than socialism offers. We can get lousy healthcare via government control, or great health care via the free market and ingenuity.

We can do the same with other parts of the Democrat platform such as education by creating a message that convinces people that school choice will provide their kids with better education (feature) that results in greater success in life (benefit).

Now that we have a coalition with good leaders and have begun the search for great candidates, we need to enlist people experienced in advertising to help craft our messages for each platform policy - how to sell it to the greatest number of people. For the most part the Republican party has tried to succeed by stating facts and logic because conservatives are "left brain" thinkers while liberals tend to be "right brain" thinkers (emotion and sensory stimulation). Jesus, Aesop and Ronnie Reagan all understood that you simply cannot win people over with facts or logic because as the best salesmen know, people do NOT buy "features". They buy "benefits" that arise from those features. If you want to sell more steaks, throw one on the grill and let people smell it. Instead of trying to sell the steak, sell the SIZZLE.

People do not react to mere facts or features. They react to sensory input (the smell of fresh-baked brownies, the sound of patriotic music) and respond to their emotions which is why Democrats beat us to death - they sell the imagery (pushing granny over a cliff) and whip up emotions. We have to get great salesmen to craft such messages for us. After all, you cannot win over a person by preaching to them - you must first gain their attention by entertaining them, then use the entertaining message to point out the truth in the message, like the parables of Jesus and Aesop, or the humorous stories of Reagan. Those are the messages people react to and remember - and they vote accordingly.

Think about it - do you remember the facts and logic that republicans have used to sell health care? Probably not. Yet you likely recall the simple Democrat ad of a Republican pushing granny over a cliff. Therein lies the difference between winning and losing. We need to sell our platform with messages that are entertaining, funny and memorable. Appeal to people's emotions and sensory perceptions. To this last point, we should make it a point to highlight that all the violence, loss of businesses and income was at the hands of people on the left, and we will reverse that and restore peace in the land. Play on those emotions to win over non-socialist democrats and independents, showing how Republicans will restore law, order, stability, fairness, family.

This, then, is how we win:
1. Coalesce, become a single, unified army and enlist good leaders, "generals" to lead the way
2. Create a solid platform that appeals the at least 80% of the public to a large degree
3. Create messages that concentrate on law and order for safety; economics, liberty, independence and power to the people to drive the policies home
 4. As the new driving force of the party we convince the GOP through strength of numbers, great platform and super messaging  to restructure or get out of our way
5. Choose and support great candidates that are charismatic and smart, like Reagan & Trump

If we stick to such a plan, we will retake the House and Senate in 2022, and stifle the socialist agenda of the Biden administration. We can then concentrate on 2024, and the new "great reset" will be a strong, independent nation as a beacon to the world instead of the reset planned by the destructive "Illuminati" globalists that want everything for themselves.

Economics for Dummies - Left vs Right

There is a growing misconception in America concerning economics. On one side you have people like Bernie Sanders and others on the left who believe the economy is a sum total thing that needs to support all people equally, and on the other side you have people like Donald Trump and others on the right who believe the economy is not sum total - that it can be expanded to "raise all boats". The simple, glaring fact that the American economy has expanded exponentially since the Declaration of Independence only proves that capitalism is the economic engine that works. During that same time period, countless socialist and communist economies - in fact, every one -  have failed miserably.


Think of the economy as if it were a pie, and everyone grabs a piece. Some people only get a small piece while others get larger pieces,  determined primarily upon ones education and personal effort. The left sees this as unfair to those with a small piece, so they want to take from those with bigger pieces and redistribute it among the less fortunate, in an effort to create "equality". The left equates equality with fairness, though one has nothing to do with the other. It simply is not "fair" to take from someone who spent years in higher education, worked hard for 25 years and risked everything he or she had, and give it to someone who did little or nothing to earn it, having spent their life doing none of that. It may make things more "equal", but it is anything but "fair".


The economic theory of the left also does not consider unintended consequences - when you take productive wealth that is typically used by the wealthy to create jobs, develop new products etc. and turn it into unproductive wealth that is not used to make society better and richer, you effectively REDUCE the amount of pie available by stifling an expansion of the amount of pie available. You simply cannot make more pie without adding more of the ingredients - investing in growth, production, jobs.


Capitalists like Trump understand that the best way to insure everyone has enough pie is to make the pie bigger, or to bake more pies. Certainly, the less fortunate will always have less than others, but they will still have MORE PIE! If you doubt that, just take a look at Americas poor compared to the poor in socialist "single pie" nations. Where once even our own poor were truly living in poverty, dying in sweat shops and starving, most of our poor today have cell phones, iPads, microwave ovens, internet access and widescreen TV. Americas poor are wealthier than many "middle class" families in other countries. They have been raised up through capitalism, where those who earn great wealth are permitted to reinvest it into baking more pies, rather than have their wealth confiscated and tossed onto barren ground.


In America, Republicans believe a person is entitled only to that which he or she earns as long as they are physically and/or mentally capable of supporting themselves. Those who are handicapped to a point where they are unable to do so should be provided for by those of us who are able. This excludes those who are capable, but unwilling. The unwilling should be allowed to wallow in the misery of their own making. "All men are created equal", but they must work and do their part to maintain their equality. As my dad used to tell us kids, "Yes, the world DOES owe you a living. But you have to work like Hell to collect!"


Democrats on the other hand believe not in fairness, but equality.  The mistake they make is in believing that the two are one in the same. They also mistakenly believe that "equal" means "same" - that to be equal, we must all have the same amount of everything. Again, the two are not synonymous - a pound of feathers is equal in weight to s pound of gold, but they certainly are not the same.


If a person fails to get educated, and fails to put in the effort required to succeed, they will assuredly have less than others, but what they have will be equal to the effort put into it. And THAT is fair.


Now, Democrats and Socialists will, perhaps rightfully claim that many people do not have the same access to education and opportunity as some others may have. That is true - but it does not change anything. Such persons must try harder than others. Abe Lincoln never went to school - he educated himself and became President. Henry Ford only had a 4th grade education but went on to build one of the biggest companies in America, and in doing so, transformed America. In an era where blacks had little access to opportunity, people like Sidney Poitier worked harder and created his own opportunity. Certainly, some of us face greater obstacles than other, but that just means you have to try harder, and it makes a person stronger, which is one ingredient for greatness. Adversity is a positive, not the negative that the left assumes with their "victim" mentality. It does not give you a right to take from others. Stealing is stealing, whether you do it yourself or let the government do it for you. [As a side note, it is the Democrats who always vote against school choice, which would help level the road to a good education for the less fortunate]


Here is the short take - fair does not mean equal, and equal does not mean same. A person can complain about the size of their piece of the pie, and attempt to steal from another, or that person can get to work and bake his own damned pie. He is the only one standing in his way. Like one of my earlier bosses said, "I don't want excuses and I don't want reasons. I want RESULTS!"


"When you spend as many years getting educated as I have; spend as many years busting your butt 100+ hours a week to build a business; and risk every cent you have, or ever will have to make it all work, then and only then will you be entitled to have what I have". - Bill Vaughn



/

Combatting Homelessness - Doing Everything Wrong?

by Bill Vaughn

For several years I ran the largest homeless shelter in New Hampshire - New Horizons for New Hampshire - which usually housed up to 120 people each night. Our shelter also included a soup kitchen and a community food pantry. Before that I was a resident at that shelter, having been homeless for three years after a very traumatic event. And from those experiences, and statistics I gathered, I believe I have a pretty fair idea as to what can and what cannot help combat homelessness effectively. But even so, this is still not a complete solution.

When a mayor like DeBlasio (or even a governor) tries to "solve" the problem by shipping the homeless to other states, the only problem he is solving is his own. And when other lawmakers like those in California try to solve the problem by putting millions of taxpayer funds into "low cost housing", they simply do not understand homelessness at all - they may as well throw all that money right into the dumpster for all the good it will do.

The first step is to determine, and then separate the usual "causes". You cannot cure something if you do not know what causes it. Here are some stats from my tenure running the shelter, for the major issues. Bear in mind that some suffered more than one causation. For example, an alcoholic might also have a mental issue. The following are the primary causes:

• Alcohol/drug addiction - 61%
• Mental impairment - 32%
• Just want a free ride and no obligations - 4%
• Temporarily dispossessed - 3% (often marital or family issues)

Each of the above would naturally require a different type of intervention. A one-size-fits-all solution such as increasing low-cost housing is both absurd and ignorant. Low cost housing or subsidies would only be helpful for the 3% dispossessed, with a smattering of the less hardcore addicts and those with only minor mental issues.

At New Horizons we had case workers during the day who would attempt to help the residents overcome whatever issues they had, and referred residents to medical or mental health professionals as needed. For those temporarily dispossed, they would assist is "smoothing" out the path forward - bus tickets to get back and forth to a job; finding temporary, low cost housing; finding jobs - whatever  was needed, including family counseling. For those who were simply avoiding responsibility (lazy) they were given 60 days to find and keep a job, and get a place of their own. Failure to do so would result in being denied further shelter services (except the soup kitchen).

About 1/3 of the addicted residents (drugs or alcohol) were beyond help. They were provided all the basic needs without any strings attached, usually until they died.

And those with severe mental impairments were also cared for with the basics - when a leftist Supreme Court ordered the closing of mental institutions nationwide, hundreds of thousands of seriously ill people were just put onto the streets, most without benefit of any follow-up or out-patient care. The best and most compassionate intervention for those people would be for the states to reopen facilities for such individuals. They cannot be be incarcerated by force, but they should still have access to a "home" under supervision where they can be cared for and provided with medical needs.

Homelessness, therefore, is not the problem. It is the result of some other, less obvious problem. Root out the core problem(s) for a homeless person and you greatly increase the chance of being able to help.

[Brought to you as a PSA by "The Simple Man's Guide top Real Estate Investing"] 

The Dirty Little Secret About Free Tuition

By Bill Vaughn

It is a popular political cry on the left these days - Free College Tuition. And while it seems like a great idea at first blush, there's a lot more wrong with it than just the extreme cost to taxpayers. I'll let others hammer at that point. Here, we will examine the not-so-well understood "unintended consequences" of such a rabid idea.

First, the more obvious, and lesser problems with free tuition...

Most sane and reasonable people (this leaves out AOC, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and several other politicians on the left)understand that not everyone is suited for college - or even want it. Moreover, a growing number of high school graduates are not even educated well enough to be able to cut it in college. But because it's free, they might waste taxpayer money and try anyway, only to drop out in the first semester. We would be far better off to find ways to instill a better education in our public schools.

Along those same lines, many students are far better suited to attending a good trade school - we have a dire shortage of tradespeople in America, and they make as much - if not more - than a college educated snowflake.

Now for the biggest reason to avoid free college for all who want it. Throughout history, and without regard for any specific economic situation, there have always been a limited number of "slots at the top". In fact, statistics show that only 4% of a population will ever achieve substantial financial success and wealth. For every few hundred employees, there are only a handful of salaried, "college-educated" management positions. What this means is that college education would become virtually useless, as it would be watered down with many students who are barely average and will never land a great job.

In the 1940's few people had any college degrees. In the '50's, that rose substantially as parents began to push their kids to get  a Bachelor's Degree, and it grew even further in the '60's. By that time so many students were graduating college that there were not enough well-paying jobs for all of them. So businesses began requiring not a Bachelor's, but a Masters Degree. The Bachelor's Degree lost most of it's power. By the late '80's and into today, the Bachelor's is nothing more than window dressing as businesses are forced to weed out the wheat from the chaff. And now even the Masters is just beginning to lose its punch, as more and more professions are requiring a doctorate.

In short, only 4% can be at the top of the work pyramid, and with 20% of the population is graduating college, three-quarters of them STILL end up working at WalMart, or flipping burgers. Imagine when 50% are graduating because callege was free!

The question then becomes: is it worth having taxpayers who are already heavily burdened to pay for "college for all" if it accomplishes nothing of value?

As proof, just check out any successful business. You will find that it takes at least 100 high-school grads and drop-outs to support 10 supervisors, who support  3 managers who support one top dog. The managers and boss represent the 4%. In other words, we NEED a lot of people who do not require a college degree in order to do the job they will end up with, anyway. After all, if everyone were a boss or a manager, how could they earn a living if there are no workers to manage? Who will MAKE the products, or PERFORM the services?

The short take for people like AOC who cannot seem to understand reality: It is not sane or reasonable to have already over-burdened taxpayers pay for the college education of other peoples' children only to have those young men and women working for minimum wage. No matter how much money you spend, you cannot make a silk purse from a sow's ear.

What DOES make sense: Have businesses "scout" high schools, just like sports scouts do, and offer to pay for a promising students' college provided they work for that business for a specified time, at a good salary. If Microsoft is going to benefit from a talented smart kid's education, then perhaps Microsoft should pay for that education.

And the taxpayers could more easily afford to "subsidize" (only) the most promising students who do not have the means to pay college. Those from poorer families and communities, who excel in school, would contribute more to our society from a college education than it would cost us to fund it. After all, if you need a lawyer, would you rather have one who barely passed the bar, or one who graduated top of the class?

Then we could take some of the money saved by not providing free college for all and use it to "funnel" high school students into two different scholastic groups - one geared for those who prefer to learn a trade, or otherwise have a limited scholastic ability, and a  college preparatory group designed to give the best-of-the-best a head start, maybe to even include internship. And that could easily reduce the number of years - and the cost - of their secondary education.


/

Crunchy, Nutty Caramel Apple Pie

Hope some of my readers enjoy this recipe - it once took first place at the fair. Topping, however, my be too sweet for diabetics, so maybe you can adjust that a bit if needed.

Enjoy! And Happy Holidays to your home from ours.

BILL'S CRUNCHY, NUTTY CARAMEL APPLE PIE

Ingredients:

1 pastry crust, deep-dish 9 inch
1/2 cup sugar
3 Tbsp all-purpose flour
1 Tsp ground cinnamon
1/8 Tsp salt
6 cups thinly sliced apples - I prefer a mix of Golden Delicious & Fuji

1 recipe for crumb topping (below)
1/2 cup chopped pecans
1/4 cup caramel topping

Ingredients for crumb topping

1 cup packed brown sugar
1/2 cup all-purpose flour
1/2 cup quick-cook rolled oats
1/2 cup butter

Directions for crumb topping:

1. Stir together brown sugar, flour, rolled oats
2. Cut in 1/2 cup butter until topping is course crumbs. Set aside

DIRECTIONS:

1. In large mixing bowl stir together sugar, flour, cinnamon, salt
2. Add apple slices & gently toss until coated
3. Transfer apple mixture to pie shell
4. Sprinkle crumb topping over apple mixture
5. Place pie on cookie sheet
6. Cover edges with aluminum foil
7. Bake in preheated 375 degree oven 25 minutes. Remove foil, bake for another 25 minutes
8. Remove from oven, sprinkle pie with pecans then drizzle caramel on top
9. Cool on wire rack

God Winks...

 

 

by Bill Vaughn

Belief in God MUST be taken as a matter of faith, not as a matter of provable fact.

And anyone who cares to open their eyes would find all the evidence needed for faith. Take my own experiences as an example.

As a homeless person in '91 I needed $5 to buy a suit at Goodwill for an interview. I certainly did not have $5. Instead, I went to the clothing room at the homeless shelter and got a pair of clean pants. In the pocket I found a $5 bill - exactly the amount I needed to buy the suit!

God winked...

My wife was told by two doctors that her multiple operations rendered her incapable of having children of her own. When she asked God if I was the right person for her, she got pregnant that very night (by me, of course).

God winked...

My Dad, born in 1898 went off to WWI in 1917, leaving his fiance behind until the war was over. After the war, she was gone, her family had moved away. In 1983 Dad was visiting my Mother's grave. A woman was across from him, visiting her husband's grave. She saw the last name on my mother's stone and asked if my father was related to the man she had been engaged to over 65 years earlier - it was her! It wasn't possible for such a one in a billion shot to happen, but it did!

God winked ...They finally married in 1985.

I tried quitting smoking for over 40 years to no avail. One night I prayed and asked God to help. I have not smoked since (it's been 17 years) [UPDATE - now 24 years], and I have never suffered any withdrawal symptoms or any cravings!

God winked...

I can list dozens of such "coincidences". But I do not believe much in coincidence. Especially the convoluted ones that are so improbable. A coincidence is just God, winking...

Yes, I know these things do not prove there is a God. But that's the point - if God can be proved, faith would have no value. And that would make our "free will" rather pointless - if the existence of God could be proved, we would have no choice but to believe in Him. And then God would have a difficult time trying to figure out which of us are worthy because we CHOOSE to believe, and not because we had no choice.

Atheists also like to say they do not fear God because you cannot fear that which does not exist - which is precisely why they fear God more than believers do. You see, they cannot prove God does NOT exist any more than believers can prove He does. Since they cannot prove God does not exist, deep down they know that there is a possibility that He does. They BELIEVE He does not exist, but believing it does not make it a fact. Naturally, to any person spending their life denying God, the possibility He may actually exist scares the Hell out of them.

I fear God because I may not measure up. The atheist fears God because he doesn't even try.

/

The REAL Reason Trump Is Pulling Troops From Syria

It appears that a majority of pundits, military people, the media, Democrats and even some Republicans are up in arms (pardon the pun) about Trump pulling our troops from Syria, leaving our "friends", the Kurds, at the mercy of the Turks and everyone else.

But here is what Trump knows that all those others may not have considered...

Turkey had already begun to set the stage on their border to invade Syria and squash the Kurds. We know this to be true. If our troops remained, the Turkish army would be firing on them since the U.S. forces would be in their way. And if  that were to occur, our forces would have a choice - either fire back, or just roll over and die with the Kurds. Neither is a viable option, because Turkey is a NATO ally and under the NATO treaty, we must defend other NATO allies. We CANNOT make war against them unless or until they make war with us. 

If faced with the choice of killing Turks or Kurds, we would have no choice - we must, by treaty, side with Turkey, even though they are not our friend. If we were to stay, we would be required to fight on the side of our enemy, and fight against our friend.

Imagine what the media and pundits would say about that!

As much as it pains me that we are abandoning the Kurds, it is the only thing we can do at this point, as Turkey, a NATO "ally", was going to invade whether we were there or not. And the choice was clear - pull out, or go to war with a NATO member, which would virtually undo NATO altogether, as all other NATO countries would be forced, by treaty, to go to war with the U.S. for attacking a NATO member - which is the ultimate dream of Vladimir Putin and Iranian leaders. 

So, to those pundits, the media, the generals and the politicians that think Trump had made a huge blunder, I say they need a reality check, and they should extrapolate it out to its logical conclusion. And then either support Trump's decision, or just shut up.

/

Sen. Warren Dishonestly Cherry-Picks the Bible

Sen. Elizabeth Warren invoked Matthew 25 in a speech to Christians, claiming "The Lord calls us to act." But that is neither the narrative of Matthew 25 nor  the intent.

Matthew 25 consists of three parables (posted below for reference). The parable of the ten virgins is in reference to entering the Kingdom of Heaven and tells us we cannot be foolish and unwise and then expect the Lord to "open the door" for you afterward.

The second parable is the one of the servants and the talents. God gives each of us what we need, and tasks us with using his gifts to us wisely. Those who do not are punished. This is one of the many chapters in the Bible that speak well of EARNING what you want, and using it responsibly. The Lord gives us responsibility, and those who act accordingly are granted greater responsibility and  the rewards include a share in the Master’s joy for their work. It denounces the lazy and irresponsible. He does NOT call for the wise and fruitful to support the lazy and irresponsible - just the less fortunate; those UNABLE by fate to care for themselves.

The third parable is the "sheep and the goats". The sheep are the righteous, being granted the Kingdom of Heaven because they took care of the less fortunate  (but NOT the lazy and irresponsible, as shown in the first two parables). They cared for the sick, the hungry, the thirsty etc.

We are tasked to act in His name to be good stewards of His gifts to us. As He said in another story, we should only sow our seeds  the Word of God and God's gifts to us) on FERTILE ground, and to not waste it on barren, rocky or thorny ground . The Lord told what he meant by “good” soil - the person who readily listens to the His word (symbolized by the seed) and understands it (Mt. 13:23). Mark describes the good soil as those who “accept” the seed (4:20), while Luke characterizes the fruit-producing soil as those who have an “honest and good heart, having heard the word, hold it fast...” (8:15).

Senator Warren does not know nor understand the Bible, and like so many others, cherry-picks verses for her own personal benefit - which is very much in opposition of what the Lord calls us to do.

Matthew 25:1-13

1“Then the kingdom of heaven will be like ten virgins who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom.
2 Five of them were foolish and five were wise.
3 The foolish ones, when taking their lamps, brought no oil with them,
4 But the wise brought flasks of oil with their lamps.
5 Since the bridegroom was long delayed, they all became drowsy and fell asleep.
6 At midnight, there was a cry, ‘Behold, the bridegroom! Come out to meet him!’
7 Then all those virgins got up and trimmed their lamps.
8 The foolish ones said to the wise, ‘Give us some of your oil, for our lamps are going out.’
9 But the wise ones replied, ‘No, for there may not be enough for us and you. Go instead to the merchants and buy some for yourselves.’
10 While they went off to buy it, the bridegroom came and those who were ready went into the wedding feast with him. Then the door was locked.
11 Afterwards the other virgins came and said, ‘Lord, Lord, open the door for us!’
12 But he said in reply, ‘Amen, I say to you, I do not know you.’
13 Therefore, stay awake, for you know neither the day nor the hour.

Matthew 25:14-30

14 “It will be as when a man who was going on a journey called in his servants and entrusted his possessions to them.
15To one he gave five talents; to another, two; to a third, one—to each according to his ability. Then he went away. Immediately
16 the one who received five talents went and traded with them, and made another five.
17 Likewise, the one who received two made another two.
18 But the man who received one went off and dug a hole in the ground and buried his master’s money.
19 After a long time the master of those servants came back and settled accounts with them.
20 The one who had received five talents came forward bringing the additional five. He said, ‘Master, you gave me five talents. See, I have made five more.’
21 His master said to him, ‘Well done, my good and faithful servant. Since you were faithful in small matters, I will give you great responsibilities. Come, share your master’s joy.’
22 [Then] the one who had received two talents also came forward and said, ‘Master, you gave me two talents. See, I have made two more.’
23 His master said to him, ‘Well done, my good and faithful servant. Since you were faithful in small matters, I will give you great responsibilities. Come, share your master’s joy.’
24 Then the one who had received the one talent came forward and said, ‘Master, I knew you were a demanding person, harvesting where you did not plant and gathering where you did not scatter;
25 So out of fear I went off and buried your talent in the ground. Here it is back.’
26 His master said to him in reply, ‘You wicked, lazy servant! So you knew that I harvest where I did not plant and gather where I did not scatter?
27 Should you not then have put my money in the bank so that I could have got it back with interest on my return?
28Now then! Take the talent from him and give it to the one with ten.
29 For to everyone who has, more will be given and he will grow rich; but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away.
30 And throw this useless servant into the darkness outside, where there will be wailing and grinding of teeth.’

Matthew 25:31-46

31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit upon his glorious throne,
32 and all the nations will be assembled before him. And he will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.
33 He will place the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
34 Then the king will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.
35 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me,
36 naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me.’
37 Then the righteous will answer him and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink?
38 When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you?
39 When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you?’
40 And the king will say to them in reply, ‘Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.’
41 Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
42 For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink,
43 A stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.’
44 Then they will answer and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?’
45 He will answer them, ‘Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.’
46 And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

The REAL Reason the Left Wants "Gun Control"

You have heard all the rhetoric - from both sides - as to why we need more gun controls, or why we do not. What you have NOT heard is the real reason those on the left want more gun control.

To begin, understand that the left has always used the "Overton Window" strategy to get their way. You can think of it as getting to the (moving) goal post incrementally. They want the legalization of drugs, so they start with fighting for something so innocuous as "decriminalization", then moving to "medicinal use", and now to recreational use. With that in mind, make no mistake - "gun controls" are just the first step in their very real quest to do away with our right to own and bear arms. They want to take our guns. Period. And there is plenty of proof if you doubt this.

But the real question is: WHY?

Here's why - the radical left plans on being in control of Congress and the White House again someday. And when that day comes, they intend to put through their radical, socialist agenda. We know this because they tell us that is their goal. Most people are aware of that. But what many may not be aware of is that they play a "long game". They realize that pushing through their socialist agenda, to achieve more - and permanent - power for themselves, it would very likely start a civil war - a SHOOTING war - as millions of Americans will fight to the death to preserve the Constitution and our freedoms. They know that millions of citizens will take arms against ANY government that tries to take away their guns and push through socialism.

And the left knows that the only way they can retain their control, permanently, is to disarm the opponents. Without weapons, We, the People would not be able to stand against the full power of a government that is under the left's control.

They plan a coup. They want complete and permanent control. But they could never achieve it as long as millions of everyday citizens have guns.

Sure, you could say this is a "conspiracy theory". But if you research the things powerful people on the left have actually been saying and doing, it becomes all to clear that this is reality. For example, at a town hall meeting in Keene NH in October 2015, Hillary Clinton said that a mandatory gun buyback program is something “worth looking at,” referring to Australia’s firearms confiscation programs in 1996 and 2003, which collected roughly 700,000 banned semiautomatic rifles and other firearms. And SHE was almost elected president!

Conspiracy theory? Perhaps - but unlikely!

How To Create A Mass Murderer

Although gun ownership is way up, but shooting deaths are down in comparison, there is a lot of angst and the wringing of hands when some unstable person goes on a shooting spree. And in the midst of this, people seem to be at a loss as to what we can do to put a cork in it. And that is what perplexes me - people seem unable to grasp that it is a waste of time trying to to fix the problem by RE-acting instead of by acting.

Before we can  figure out what to do, we must first figure out what we have already done that contributes to the instability of some people to the extent that they can commit such insane crimes. Why, after hundreds of years are young people now bouncing off walls - even the suicide rate is escalating?

The first thing we need to understand is that most shootings are not a product of mental illness, though it appears that way. It is actually a result of mental conditioning. More and more young people are being conditioned by our current culture to act with anti-social behaviors. After all, mental illness has always been with us, but has not resulted in so many mass murders in so short a time. No - but what is new is our rapidly changing - and deteriorating - culture.

If I were tasked with creating a culture where people feel so disassociated with others that it would result in a mass shooting, here is what I would do - ask yourself if this hits a chord.

The very first thing I would do is disable the persons' conscience. To do this, I would take God out of his or her life. It makes no difference whether or not there is a God - whether God created us or we created Him does not make a difference in how we do or do not have a moral conscience. In other words, if we do not fear God because we do not believe in a Heaven and Hell, we have much less reason to lead a life of morality.

Then I would take away the old-fashioned idea of taking personal responsibility for our actions; that life choices should be like those in video games, where there is a do-over for any choice - simply end the game and start over. No consequences for making poor choices.

Along that same line, the next thing I would do to insure a good crop of mass murderers would be to get rid of any semblance that there is any sanctity of life; that life, itself, is not all that important. To this end I would promote abortion, ensuring that children grow up with the realization that it is just hunky dory to end a human life as long as it is deemed to be inconvenient. If you make poor choices, it's just time for a do-over. No consequences. This takes the lack of personal responsibility to it's highest level - life and death.

To further the development of a mind that is capable of mass murder, I would invent addictive video games that teach developing minds not only how to kill everything in sight, but to feel excitement, and even joy at doing so - an adrenaline rush. And that is the addictive part of such games. And like any other adrenaline rush, it drives adrenaline junkies to move up to a bigger, better rush. Seeking the ultimate high.

And to make sure unstable minds have no reason to NOT commit murder, I would invent social media, where such individuals can live in a world where there is no need to actually meet face-to-face with other people, or make real, human, personal connections that would otherwise provide the individual with relationships that can ground them to reality. In a recent poll, 22% of millennials  say they have NO FRIENDS! So, who in their life is anchoring them? Who is instilling personal connections with others, to provide them with a sense that other people have value?

Finally, I would fill the teaching staff at colleges and universities with professors intent on indoctrinating students with radical ideas, and put the mainstream media into the hands of those who would further promote radicalism, and brainwash people by not offering an unbiased view of their story lines.

Of course, it is even more complicated than this, but these are the things I would do that would insure that susceptible people would be prone to mass violence. And I am absolutely certain that these things do contribute heavily. And that is why we, as a people, need to reconsider the long-range results of changes in our culture and begin working on making changes to those changes.

And just how do we do that? In the home! Families - particularly parents - need to take an active role in reducing the impact of such things. Provide your children with a moral compass through religion. Teach them the importance of taking responsibility for their choices so they will be more likely to use greater care in making those choices. Then work to teach sanctity of life by ending abortions of convenience, and limit them to those that involve a life-threatening issue or incest. And limit your child's dependence on addictive video games, even if non-violent, and severely limit their use of social media. In fact, ban social media for any child under the age of 16 - give them a chance to make real, face-to-face relationships with others. And require your representatives to set up a program that monitors universities and forces them to teach our kids HOW to think, and not WHAT to think. And stop watching/listening/reading media that show a clear bias in their reporting.

Do these things in every family, and mass murders will become the rarity they should be. And if a child's family is unable to do so, for whatever reasons, we need after school programs that help to fill that void.

/

Twitter - Internet Cancer

"Your account has been locked for violating the Twitter Rules.
Specifically for:
Violating our rules against hateful conduct.
You may not promote violence against, threaten, or harass other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or serious disease."
That was the message I received. And here is the tweet that they say threatens, or harrasses based on race, ethnicity etc.... 
 
"Rusty K
@chelseahandler calls Sarah Huckabee Sanders a "trollop" for wearing make-up. Hey, Handler, if make-up makes one a trollop, then you lead the pack. Look in a mirror, bimbo"

Now here is the challenge: Can ANYONE find ANYTHING in that tweet that is based on ANY of those criterion? Race? Ethnicity? National Origin? Sexual Orientation? Gender? Gender Identity? Religious Affiliation? Age? Disability? Serious  Disease?

Let's see - here is how the dictionary defines "bimbo":




[ˈbimbō]
NOUN
    an attractive but unintelligent OR frivolous young woman

Point made.



Handler can call Huckabee-Sanders a trollop, and Twitter says that's just fine. But let someone call Handler a bimbo, and the Twitter censors go nuts. Why? Because Sanders is a conservative, and Handler is a liberal.

Is there ANY threat of ANY kind?

The answer to all is a resounding "NO". So, what is REALLY going on here?

In the news it has been reported that the anti-American radicals at Twitter have been systematically locking and/or deleting the accounts of CONSERVATIVES. If you doubt this, check it out at https://nypost.com/2020/05/27/twitter-targets-conservatives-with-none-of-a-publishers-responsibilities/. At one point they even deleted the President's account. And Twitter has been using dubious (to say the least) excuses for their purge of conservative thought, much the same as Berkley U. has beeen doing the same.

Everyone knows that Twitter is populated primarily by what is known as "trolls" - radical, hateful nuts who use Twitter to attack conservatives on every minute issue, right down to what shoes Melania wore. And Twitter has yet to lock any of them out. But when a far-left radical like Chelsea Handler publicly calls a conservative woman like Sarah Sanders a "trollop" (which is not only hateful, but slanderous), Twitter turns a blind eye, but locks the account of those who call her out for her disgusting rhetoric.

It's a fairly well-known fact that Twitter is extremely damaging to society as a whole, as it provides a platform for the real haters and cancers to spread their vile agenda, and far too many ignorant people take it all in as if it were God's own words. And it is sick that so many in the mainstream media actually get their news from these anonymous Twitter trolls that live in mommy's basement.

Perhaps the time has come for We, the People, to boycott Twitter and stop using it, and to stop reading it.

   

They're Looking At Health Care All Wrong

Politicians and pundits on all sides are looking at health care costs all wrong. They are all focused on INSURANCE, and not the cost of the health care, itself.  If we want to decrease the expense of health care, we must first address the actual needs and the costs of those needs, and THEN we can address insurance to cover them.

Let's begin with the most obvious issue. First and foremost we need to address the poor lifestyle choices that contribute to 70% of all health issues. One hundred years ago the average person was in good health, barring an injury or contagious disease. In nature, the normal state of health is good health, and poor health is abnormal. We have managed to turn that on its head with our proclivity towards making poor choices like smoking, too many sweets, fake foods (if it wasn't food a hundred years ago it is not food now), an over abundance of chemicals and perservatives and an aversion to actual exercise and physical labor. You don't have to be a doctor to understand that our choices are largely responsible for our health. It is estimated that over 70%, and perhaps as much as 80% of all health care needs are attributed to poor lifestyle choices. If we were to all live by the Biblical statement, "All things, in moderation", and get sufficient exercise, we could cut health care costs in half.

And we could cut them even more by using our tax system to discourage poor and harmful lifestyle choices and apply those taxes to directly reduce the cost of healthier options. For example, increase tax on sodas and cigarettes and use those taxes EXPRESSLY to reduce the cost of healthy, whole food and/or fitness equipment or gym memberships.

Costs can be reduced further by capping malpractice awards. Medicine is an imperfect science; honest mistakes can be made. The ONLY lawsuits that should be permitted are for instances of gross neglect or incompetence, and then the awards should be capped at reasonable levels. This would reduce costs in two ways: first, by reducing the exhorbitant costs that doctors and medical establishments must pay for malpractice insurance, and second, because doctors will not feel obligated to "over-test" in an effort to cover their butts. Currently, doctors must test a patient for many things unrelated to the health issue, just to play it safe.

To reduce health care costs further, it is as simple as stopping the "revolving door of referrals." If you know you need a gastroenterologist, why should you be required to first see a personal care physician for a "referral"? The cost of seeing the PCP adds significantly to the cost. We should be able to schedule our own appointments with specialists.

Case in point - I suspected my medication for ulcerative colitis may have caused PML, a serious viral infection, so I wanted to see a professional to get an MRI to see if I was infected. I had to first see my PCP ($225) to get a referral to see the neurologist ($640) who referred me to an unnecessary HEART specialist (my heart is perfect) at a cost of $1200, who then, finally, got me an appointment for an MRI ($1550). A total of $3615.00, when all I needed was the MRI at less than half that cost. As it turned out, I did not have PML. But $2,000.00 was wasted in getting to that eventual determination.

Now that we have lowered the actual costs of health care into the realm of sanity, we can NOW address the cost of insurance. Having reduced health care costs by at least 50-75%, it is safe to assume one of two things - either the cost of insurance can be reduced by 50-75% OR most people can afford their health care costs without the need of insurance, as they would only be paying as much for their health care as they would have had to pay in insurance deductibles, anyway.

As a  final thought, assuming we bring costs down significantly, the ONLY insurance a person should need is catastrophic insurance, to cover things most people cannot afford, such as cancer treatment. If insurance covers only catastrophic issues, the cost is significantly reduced even more. And that is the only type of insurance that should be subsidized by the government (with the exception of Medicare and general health care for the poor - Medicaid)

Together, these things are not difficult to achieve. Certainly, many  people will still make lifestyle choices detrimental to their health, but the high taxes on those things would help offset the costs incurred. In other words, people choosing to harm themselves would be the same people carrying the brunt of the costs of their treatment. No longer will you and I be paying too much for insurance because someone else chooses to drink, smoke or junk food themselves into oblivion.

/

Memory Loss - Can It Be Overcome?

Having reached old age, I find that certain memories are getting difficult to bring forward when I want them. I see a movie star from the 40's or 50's whose name I know as well as my own, yet struggle to recall it (though eventually I do). Or I get up from the couch to go to the kitchen, and before getting there I have forgotten why I was going, though eventually, and with a struggle I do recall the reason.

I have a theory, and if the theory is true we might be able to overcome much "memory loss". Because in cases like these, the memories are not really lost - eventually they can be brought to mind.

The brain is a powerful and complex "natural computer". And I think, like a computer, as it becomes cluttered with vast amounts of input, it becomes less efficient; slower, and could even crash. So when a person reaches their elder years, the brain has amassed a vast amount of input - every little thing you have ever heard, seen, smelled, tasted, touched or learned. The brain becomes a bit cluttered, and, in order to protect its host (us) it stores unnecessary memories "in the attic" much as a computer might compress files to make room for necessary functions. If there is no need to recall Burt Lancaster's name, it gets stored and becomes difficult to unlock.

OK, if this theory has any basis in fact, and the brain puts certain info into a storage unit, then all we should need is access to the storage area, on demand. A way to unlock the memory closet. A key.

I don't think there is any technology (yet) that is capable of doing that, but perhaps the brain, itself, can provide the answer. I can't help but wonder if we could use hypnosis to convince the brain to provide access to the "attic" by use of a "password", just like a computer. For example, under hypnosis it might be suggested that any time you have trouble recalling a name, event etc. that by consciously saying "eureka", or thinking of a specific image, such as a babbling brook, that the brain would recognize that as a key, allowing access to the dusty, cob-webbed attic

I am going to try and find a good hypnotist, and try it on myself. If anyone else who reads this should also try it, please let me know the results.

Of course, this all rests upon whether or not I REMEMBER to find a hypnotist...

Sen. Warren's Insane Tax Proposal

Just when I thought I had heard every moronic attack on capitalism, leave it to Senator Warren to top them all - even Ocasio-Cortez.

As president, Ms Warren wants to institute a "Wealth Tax". For those who think, "Great - the wealthy will pay", think again. A wealth tax means the IRS would assess YOUR wealth every year, and tax you on it. Everything you own, personal or business, would be taxed again and again, year after year, UNTIL IT IS GONE!

Just one small example: you are 25 and have $10,000 in the stock market, or in cash, or equity in your home - whatever. You pay incomes tax on it when you earn it. Then, every year, the government taxes you on it yet again. At even a 2% tax rate, that's $200 per year. By the time you retire, it's GONE your cash, your investments, your home, your business...

But she gets even crazier. She wants to also institute an "Exit Tax". If you decide that either you want to leave the country in order gain more favorable tax treatment (or for ANY reason), the government would confiscate 40% of your entire wealth as punishment. That is in addition to the income taxes and wealth taxes you have already paid! You would leave as a pauper.

Senator Warren should just come out and be honest - she wants the government to own everything. And if that ever happens, we have seen what the result would be, in feudal England, where the king and the Lords owned everything, and the masses were merely pawns, living and dying at the mercy of the "overlords".

Everyone should understand this one important and irrevocable fact - whenever an entity gains power, other entities must lose it, just like in a poker game. The more power the government has over us, the less power we have over ourselves. And with the loss of power comes the loss of liberty. If government power continues to grow, kiss your freedoms good-bye.

We have already lost much of our freedom. Can you build a needed addition on your home without government permission (zoning)? We can't even grow certain crops for our own use without permission of the Commerce department. And if your community wants to take your property and give it to someone else who will improve it and pay more taxes, they can now do so. Can you pray in a public place? Can you own and carry a firearm wherever you go? We have lost a tremendous amount of freedom since March 4, 1789 when the Constitution became the law of the land.

If America is to remain the land of the free, it must remain the home of the brave - those who will fight people like Warren, Ocasio-Cortez, Bloomberg and any other little tyrant who wants to destroy it by granting more power to the government.

/

Soul Mates

 

                                                                    by Bill Vaughn

Have you ever had the uneasy feeling of impending doom? Or have you ever suffered a mild anxiety attack? And did it begin when you were six years old?

I started first grade when I was six. I was looking forward to it because so many others of my age would be there. But as I  met the other kids, I began to get that anxious feeling of impending doom because I knew she was not there.

I know that sounds crazy - a six year old looking for that "someone".  And that uneasy feeling rushed over me because I did not even understand what, exactly, I was looking for and could not find in that classroom. I was confused and scared. Scared that I might never find "her".

I told my Mom about it, but she did not understand any more than I did, because at six, you simply do not know how to explain a lot of things.

I vividly recall throughout school I tried to find a "girl friend". Most of the other kids had girlfriends or boyfriends. Not me. And even as I graduated High School, I still had never had a girlfriend - someone to share "growing up" with, because I could not find "her". And I still did not know who she was, where she was, or even if she existed. And that uneasy feeling was still there, and growing as time passed. With each passing year, the fear that "she" would never appear grew.

By the time I was 25 several of my friends remarked that I seemed to have a "death wish"; always taking huge chances that could easily have gone very wrong. There were few places in North America that I did not travel through on my motorcycle, forever looking for I knew not what. I was driven! And I did not even know what was driving me. I just felt, deeply, that I was not whole; that I was missing a big part of myself. It is extremely difficult to explain to anyone who has not "been there".

The only thing that kept me going was the hope that, whoever it was, I would someday I find her. And when I did, I would "magically" and instinctively know it. But would I really? Every night as I lay myself down, I would pray to God that He would help me find her.

The years rolled by. At age 42, I had given up, and I became homeless. I ended up in a homeless shelter in Manchester, New Hampshire. I resigned myself to living out my life on the streets. Without "her", there was nothing else I wanted, or needed. And each night as I lay my head down, I would cry silently. Not just for myself, but also for "her", as I envisioned she was going through the same agony.

One evening as I sat at a table in the local soup kitchen, I looked up as several guys came in, accompanied by a young woman. There is no way, or words, to explain it, but it was like getting hit by lightning! She was wearing an old leather motorcycle jacket and jeans, and as she walked up to the chow line, those guys followed her, like chicks following the mother hen. And I was completely taken by her - while she was apparently the head of that bunch of misfits, I instinctively knew that, in reality, she was a scared, lost  waif. Like me. She surrounded herself with men who needed a "mother"; men who would protect her.

It was "HER"! I just knew it. There was no doubt in my mind. As unbelievable as it seemed, and after 35 years of searching, and traveling tens of thousands of miles, here she was, right in front of me, like some God-given miracle. And then my heart sank!

As I looked at her, I realized she had to be at least 10-15 years younger than me. The first 10 years I was looking for her she had not even been born yet! No wonder it had been so hard to find her. But what good would it do me - I had no chance  with her! What would she see in a used up homeless guy almost old enough to be her father? It felt like I had been hit by a PeterBilt.

I left the soup kitchen, never even speaking a word to the woman I knew was my soul mate.
The shelter is above the soup kitchen, and I went upstairs and just hit the sack. I felt empty. All those years. All that anxiety. All that hope. And in just three minutes it had all been wiped out completely.

I was earning my coffee and cigarette money by "canning" each night -I would get up at 2AM and walk all the back alleys, going through dumpsters and trash looking for aluminum cans I would get a nickle for. On a good night I might earn $5.00

That next night I returned to the shelter, and as I passed the manager's desk, I heard someone give me a "wolf whistle". Wise guy, I thought, as I turned to see who it was. I cannot explain the fluttering feeling in my gut that overtook me when I saw it was HER! And I just knew she was only making fun of me, because I was just another homeless bum. I quickly headed to the dorm.

The next evening, as I approached the manager's desk, I was just going to rush by, not knowing if SHE was there again. She was. And she whistled again, and she had the most wicked smile, and that look in her eyes that said "trouble". You know the look! That gleam...

Again I hurried back to the dorm. She could not possibly be interested - she  was just teasing me, having fun at my expense. And it was tearing me apart because I dearly wanted to just pick her up, hold her close and never, ever let go. But I knew it could never be. Though she was 30, she was "just a kid" compared to me. And I was just a homeless man, with absolutely nothing to offer anyone. Everything I owned was in my right front pocket - a lighter and an old jackknife. (My Dad taught us to never be caught without those two items - they could save your life).

The next morning I was pushing "my" shopping cart full of cans and assorted junk down Maple Street when I heard someone well behind me yell "HEY!". I turned, and to my horror I saw it was her, leading her little band of lost losers. I was mortified because, though I knew there was no chance for me, I did not want her to see me like this. It was humiliating. And here she was chasing me down the street so she could tease me some more. I pushed my cart faster as I tried to out-distance her. But she would not have it - that little girl easily caught up with me.

"My name is Robin", she blurted out. I can't remember what I said, exactly, but I think I mumbled something like, "I'm Bill", and I turned and left. Filled to the brim with mixed feeling of confusion and the fear of forever losing that which I had spent my entire life searching for in vain. And more than ever I wanted to hold her close and never let her go.

Now the reader should understand something about me - while I was incredibly street smart and nobody's fool, but when it came to girls, I was a lamb among wolves. If a girl wanted to get my attention, she would almost have to smack me with a 2X4. I never took the lead, simply because I had never found that ONE. And now that I had found her, I was running away - for her sake.

I could not believe it was possible to be so totally and completely in love with someone I did not even know, and who I had never said but two words to. But I was. And it hurt so bad, because I could do nothing about it.

But SHE could - and did! She "hit me with a 2X4".

I had been to the "clothing room" where the homeless could trade old clothes for clean ones, and I grabbed a really nice pair of baggie Calvin Klein's with big pockets on the thighs. As I attempted to quiety slink unnoticed by the Manager's desk, that little gal said, "I really like those jeans - can I have them?" And hoping to get the best of her in her teasing, I remarked, "Are you saying you want to get into my pants?" THAT would shut her up.

But she just gave me that oh, so sexy and wicked smile again and said, "Maybe".

All of a sudden I was not in any hurry to leave. We talked for what seemed like minutes, but it was hours. Robin was also living in that shelter on the women's side. And as we talked, I think we both realized that we had both spent our lives looking for each other.

And it was strange - we had both criss-crossed the country, staying in many of the same places, but always missing each other. It was as if the Good Lord was saying, "Not yet - you still need trials and tribulations, to grow and learn, so when you do find each other you will be ready to bond forever."
That was in 1991. And we have been together every day since.

About two months after we met, while we were eating in the soup kitchen, Robin (remember that 2X4?) proposed to me.

We married in '92, right there in the shelter where we had met. And though we had nothing, we had everything. We had each other.

We remarried on our 10th Anniversary. And on our 25th, I showed up at her work, and in front of her co-workers, about a dozen customers and in front of our grown daughter, I finally did the right thing - I got down on bended knee, put yet another diamond ring on her finger and then in a voice that cracked with emotion I proposed to her for a change.

Everyone cried, of course. Even me.

And just so you know - once we had found each other and joined hearts, life got a lot better. We worked together to form our own business and achieved a great deal of success.

Some of you will still refuse to believe in "love at first sight" and "soul mates", but I assure you, my sweetheart and I have no doubts. Nor do we have any doubt that it was all God's will - after all, an operation as a teen resulted in Robin not being able to have children. But on November 17th, 1990 Robin prayed to Him for a sign, to let her know for sure if I was the right one. That night, we got pregnant with our daughter.

Now THAT'S a sign!

"Mom, if you are looking down from your place in Heaven - I FOUND HER!"

(SIDE NOTE: we were married the day after Valentine's day. Here is a pic of the Valentine cards and Anniversary cards we got each other last year - soulmates, for sure. Some would say "coincidence". We say that God winked!)

/

Health Care - Simple, Affordable

First, low income persons are eligible for Medicaid, and as long as that remains in place, that takes care of those people. And the wealthy have no problem getting whatever coverage they desire, so let's not concern ourselves with them. That leaves the rest of us - the folks in the middle who are struggling, but not "poor" enough for Medicaid, nor rich enough to get the best care available at any time, and certainly unable to afford ObamaCare premiums and huge deductibles.

For the rest of us, the solution is simple: make only CATASTROPHIC care available to all, at a reasonable cost - such policies are relatively inexpensive, and people can choose their own deductible, just like car or house insurance. Simply choose a higher deductible to reduce premiums.

The rest of your health care can - and should - be paid by the individual. Preferably, we would be allowed to build tax-free health savings accounts to cover all those minor health costs, like exams, shots etc. Let's have a little personal responsibility, folks! And if the individual has to cover the minor costs of health care, they would have greater incentive to live a healthier lifestyle. There is no excuse for expecting insurance to cover costs for things like condoms, Viagra, or even your annual physical.

Think of it this way - your car insurance pays for major damages and medical for people involved in an accident, but it does not cover gas, oil, tires, registration etc. Same with your homeowner's policy. Health insurance should be the same - designed to cover the BIG things that are otherwise unaffordable.

And policies should be available nationwide, across state lines, to create competition that reduces costs.

Add tort reform and award caps to lower malpractice insurance and voila! Affordable health care made simple.

And those Senators that complain they want to represent the needs of THEIR people? No problem - ALL Americans would have these same options and choices, and each can craft the coverage they need.

To those in the House & Senate - BOTH parties - I suggest if you want to do what is best for the people, and insure your own re-election, stop with all the posturing for dumb reasons like being anti-Trump, or anti one party or the other and get the job done. And above all, understand this SIMPLE concept - health care should NOT be run by the government. I know you love the idea of being in control of such a valuable necessity, but STOP! It is not in the best interests of America.

 

(brought to you by IntelliBiz)

/

Why is President Trump Flip-Flopping - or IS He?

Critics of the president are accusing him of flip-flopping on issues such as NATO and China. But is he really flip-flopping, or is he simply employing "The Art of the Deal"?

Trump is a great negotiator. As such, he is all too aware that it is nearly impossible to get a good deal from an opponent who believes he is in a position of strength. If you meet an opponent, and tell him up front that he's really great and a credit to his position, you will be strengthening a belief he already has, and from that point on he will feel superior to you. If you then demand something from him, he has little reason to bow to your demands, and you have lost.

A good negotiator will first try to weaken the oppoenent by berating, belittling or otherwise calling their strength into question. In doing so, you at least make it appear that you are the one coming from a position of strength. In nature, it is the bluff and bluster between two opponents that helps to win the battle. Have you never seen the hackles raise and the baring of teeth on a dog?

So, you first weaken the opponent's resolve by instilling doubt. Only then can you approach them with some praise. This creates something not unlike the Stockholm Syndrome, where a kidnap victim comes to identify with, and even protect their abductor. By helping to replenish their feeling of self-worth, they are more apt to show a little gratitude, and they may even be anxious to do things for you, to get your approval.

And if you doubt any of this, think back to you and your father - did you ever find yourself bending over backward in order to gain Dad's approval? Or that of a strict teacher?

President Trump is already getting NATO to update, and getting NATO countries to carry their weight. And he is getting China to help with North Korea - things that previous presidents were unable to accomplish.

Is Trump flip-flopping? Or is he just putting America on the winning side?

/

Hey, Republicans, the Latino Vote is Not Hard to Get

I am perplexed by Republican's inability to figure out how to get the Latino vote, since it is a no-brainer.

First, seal the border except at legal check-points. All polls show Latinos want to prevent further illegal immigration, mostly because it is THEIR jobs that illegals go after. So, step one to pleasing Latinos is to prevent illegals from getting in. This is non-negotiable, not only for Latinos, but for most Americans nationwide. This also solves the "anchor baby" problem - if they can't get in, they can't give birth here.

Then comes the part where we need to deal with the illegals that are already here. While Latinos are opposed to more illegals coming in, they are also opposed to deporting those who are already here, as many of those are family members or friends. So, if you want to win the Latino vote, we need a fair way of dealing with the illegal population. And that, to, is simple.

First, make it public that illegals already here, provided they have no criminal record may stay, be issued a work visa and have legal status simply by coming in and signing up. They may NOT become citizens unless they go through all the same steps as any other legal immigrant, and must learn English. Otherwise, they are legal and may work here, and pay taxes. These special visas will be renewable every 2 or 3 years - if they have not committed a crime, their visa is renewed. And any illegal who does not sign up would be considered a criminal - why else would they not sign up and get a "free pass"? So, upon being located or arrested for anything else, see below.

Criminal illegals would first be tried for illegally entering the U.S., which would be made a felony, and if it is their first offense, they would be placed on probation and deported. If they return, they would automatically be arrested for violation of probation and sent to prison to serve their term, not less than 5 years for the first offense, and 10 for the second.

Republicans need to understand this simple concept - Latino Americans are just like any other segment of our society. They want to keep family and friends close; they want to keep their jobs to feed their families; and they do not want criminals roaming the streets. How do I figure this? I did what most Republican politicians never do - I asked legal Latinos on the street how THEY would deal with the issue. I did not ask illegals, nor Latino pundits like Geraldo. I asked the folks on the street, the ones who will vote.

To win the Latino vote is as simple as sealing the border, deporting or jailing criminals, and providing the current population of illegals a means for remaining here legally, to work.

As a side benefit - the children they have will be citizens, with the right to vote someday - and they will remember it was Republcans who mde life better for their families.

Simple.

/

The Dirty Little Secret About Minimum Wage

By Bill Vaughn

It is understood that many people in this country do not earn what some may call a "living" wage. To combat this, some believe it is necessary to increase the minimum wage, which will "lift those people out of poverty". One proponent of this is Bill O'Reilly, who says "$10.00 an hour won't hurt anyone." He's wrong - it will hurt everyone! Bill should stick with subjects he knows and comprehends, because he obviously does not understand the intricacies of economics, nor has he taken the time to figure out the unintended consequences.

I am not just talking about the jobs that will be lost as companies must make cuts to cover increased costs, or decide to incorporate robotics, as would happen with waitpersons at the local restaurant, greeters and stockboys. I am talking about how it hurts every person in America without doing so much as a penny's worth of good for the poor.

Here's the dirty little secret that few understand, and fewer will talk about...

Consider, for the sake of an example, the Ramen soup company. (I chose this because many poor people rely heavily on the low cost of Ramen in order to feed their families.)

Assume they have line workers at minimum wage - say, $7.50/hour. They also have line supers at $10.00/hour who oversee the line workers, and those line supers work for line managers who earn $15/hour.

In come the "do-gooders" like O'Reilly, clamoring to raise the minimum wage to $10.00 - a 33.3% raise. So now you have line workers earning the same as their bosses, which just is not right - the bosses have greater responsibilities, so now they, too, need a raise. And now THEIR bosses, the managers, need a raise, because they need to be paid more than those who work for them.

The result: every employee of the Ramen company has to get a raise. There is absolutely no change in the "income disparity" that the minimum wage is intended to solve. But more important, whereas wages and benefits make up roughly 75% of the costs of running the business, the cost of making and marketing Ramen has now increased by roughly 25%, an increase that can only be met by raising the price of Ramen. This is because the employer only has two choices for making up the added cost of wages - lay people off, or raise prices. He cannot go into the basement and print money ,like the government can.

But it gets worse - the people who market Ramen, ship Ramen and sell Ramen are also getting those raises, and their costs must be added to the end price. 

So, now poor people are making 33.3% more on their one wage, but the cost of living has increased substantially on every item they buy - not just the Ramen soup. Everything goes up, because every business is paying employees more. And though they are now earning more, those employees are also required to spend even more than their raise will cover. Meanwhile, every person in America is now paying more for everything.

Raising the minimum wage does not add to the economy - it simply adds cost without adding to the GDP, which in turn harms the economy. In fact, it CANNOT add to the economy because employers cannot print money - they can only transfer it from one place to another.

The short take - you cannot simply raise the minimum wage of low income employees and not expect every other employee in the company to require a similar increase. It's not "just" an extra $2.50/hour for a few people. It's an extra $2.50/hour for EVERY employee in the company. So, pundits like O'Reilly who do not fully understand economics are very, very wrong when they say "It won't break anyone." If a business has 200 employees, raising the minimum wage to $10/hour will increase that company's costs by a whopping $500 for every hour they operate.

Here's a clue, Mr. O'Reilly - in real life, there are few things that are as they appear on the surface. I never would have thought Bill O'Reilly to be a "surface" thinker.

Examples of other things that are the opposite of what they appear to be:

PAIN - while it certainly does not feel good, it is a good thing. It tells us when something is wrong, so we can get treatment. Without pain to tell us when to take action, Mankind would have been extinct long ago.

WAR - Man has no superior predator to keep our numbers in check. If not for war and disease, we would have overburdened this planets resources hundreds of years ago, depleting all food and water supplies, bringing about extinction.

ANTI-BACTERIAL SOAP - Most bacteria are good, and necessary for health. Anti-bacterial soap kills more good bacteria than bad. And if you have a septic system that requires bacteria to do its job, flushing anti-bacterial agents can destroy your septic system, costing thousands in repairs.

REGULATIONS - while some are necessary, most are not, and only serve special interests. Regulation is the opposite of freedom - with each new regulation, we, the people lose freedom, and the government gains power OVER the people, which is the opposite of the intent of the founding fathers.

It would certainly be helpful if more people would take the time to THINK about ALL the unintended consequences of things before they advocate for or against them.

/