THE COUNTERINTUITIVE RESPONSE

Gun-Free School Zones must go away.

If that is the first response to the Newton tragedy, our children will be safer tomorrow than they are today.

For many of you, this sounds like the opposite of a sane statement.  You may be thinking, "Surely we need to find a way to keep guns away from schools; even more so now." But, let's examine what you are asking.

Today the law is that, with a few exceptions, firearms are restricted not only on school property, but within a designated area around the schools.  Yet, despite this law, guns were brought illegally onto campus.  So the question is, what type of new gun law would have prevented this murderer from bringing guns to the Sandy Hook school?

There are three different paths we can go:
1.  Ban sale of certain types of firearms such as assault rifle, or ammo, etc.
2.  Restrict access to guns for certain people.
3.  Confiscate all firearms and repeal 2nd amendment.

Looking at the evidence, we can immediately see that 1. and 2. would not have, and have not previously been effective in eliminating shooting rampages at schools.  During the 1990's, there was an assault weapons ban in place and access to firearms was restricted somewhat by the waiting period to purchase a firearm.  Despite these laws, gun violence still happened on school grounds in equal or greater numbers as it had prior to the new laws.

Over the past two decades, total gun violence has decreased and shooting rampages are no more prevalent than they have been in the past century.  In surveying the statistics of all mass murder incidents, the US had 42 in the 1990's and 26 in the 2000's.  There is and has been no uptick in such violence since Congress allowed the Assault Weapons ban to expire well over a decade ago.

So, banned or not banned, this murderer brought guns that did belong to him illegally into a location with the intent of murdering small children.  The truth is there is one law and only one gun law that would have kept him from bringing a gun to that school with any degree of certainty.  That's a total ban on all firearms along with forced confiscation of all 300 million firearms currently held in private possession in the US.

Unless you are offering that as your new gun law, then understand that you have very little chance of preventing the next madman from stepping up to the school house door with evil in his heart and a gun in his hand.

Now, I don't say that to mock anyone.  But let's be realistic.  In an America, in a land of such bountiful private ownership of firearms, you are limited in what you can do to prevent someone from walking around armed to the hilt, with a mindset of seek and destroy.  That's the reality.

Now, as I discussed after the Aurora shooting, we can do better in how we identify or treat the mentally ill.  Statistics show that about 50% of rampage killings are by those who have displayed signs of mental health problems.  I'm all for loosening many of the restrictions that have been put in place over the past 50 years intervene, identify and treat mental illness. 

But that still leaves the other 50%.  What do we do about them?

Be vigilant and prepared.

There are two key actions that will do more to keep our students safe than all other actions.

1.  Repeal the Gun Free School Zones law
2.  Bring firearms into the schools by arming the proper people.

First, the notion of a gun free zone has no basis in reality.  Its only gun free from those who respect the law.  No person who chooses to harm students will look at such a law and see an impediment.  Its a meaningless designation.  Let each school district & municipality craft its own reasonable law.

Second, with one excepton, "every public shooting since at least 1950 in the U.S. in which more than three people have been killed has taken place where citizens are not allowed to carry guns." 

Even law enforcement understand that gun free zones are counterproductive.  “Guns are already banned in schools. That is why the shootings happen in schools. A school is a ‘helpless-victim zone", says Richard Mack, a former Arizona sheriff. “Preventing any adult at a school from having access to a firearm eliminates any chance the killer can be stopped in time to prevent a rampage,” Jim Kouri, the public-information officer of the National Association of Chiefs of Police.

Economists John Lott and William Landes conducted a groundbreaking study in 1999, and found that a common theme of mass shootings is that they occur in places where guns are banned and killers know everyone will be unarmed. Lott  noted that the Aurora shooter, who killed twelve people earlier this year, had a choice of seven movie theaters that were showing the Batman movie he was obsessed with. All were within a 20-minute drive of his home. The Cinemark Theater the killer ultimately chose wasn’t the closest, but it was the only one that posted signs saying it banned concealed handguns carried by law-abiding individuals. All of the other theaters allowed the approximately 4 percent of Colorado adults who have a concealed-handgun permit to enter with their weapons.

The grim truth is that sooner or later a madman will take up a handgun, a rifle or even a whole arsenal, and seek a path of self-destruction that will seek to take as many lives with him/her as possible.  Given the abundance of evidence, the only rational response is to allow our local schools to staff armed guards and/or arm certain staff members so as to deter a shooter away from schools and if that fails, to put an end to their plans with a quick on-site response.

I've spoken to a couple of our local school board members to voice my support for moving in this direction.  Whether it means bringing in local police on site, hiring armed security guards or having members of their current staff seek and obtain CCW permits, each school district can find the solution that will work best for its own individual situation. Its a small expense for our schools to prevent or limit the senseless murder of our children.  Without some credible action, we may move our child to a private school in the fall.

No one seeks to protect their home by putting out a sign that reads, "Beware!  No guns are present on this property."  People can be so intent on deterring criminals, that I've seen some post, "Beware of Dog" signs outside their homes despite the fact that they didn't own a dog. 

How much safer will our children be when we take down the "Gun-Free Zone" signs and put up one that reads,

"BEWARE!  This school is protected by Smith & Wesson."?

'MERICA - YOUR DREAM IS CURRENTLY BEING LIQUIDATED

After a mad dash sprint toward the election, I took a well earned break from politics and instead spent all my free time at my normal job filling in while my co-workers went out in search of Bambi's now grown grandchildren.  So in the 11 days since election day, I have worked just over 110 hours, with little time for any thing else except coaching my son's basketball team.

But you will not see me complain even one iota about working too much, since at the very least I still have a job post-election.  In the early days following President Obama's re-election victory, all hell has broken loose. 

In the past 11 days, we've seen dozens of companies announce layoffs, Europe has gone into recession, with the US to soon follow and our economy still sits at the edge of a fiscal cliff.  Our nation's top military figure and intelligence chief has resigned in scandal as we continue to seek information regarding the Benghazi coverup, precious energy land resources have been closed off from production by the government and Israel and Hamas have seen hostilities escalate again.

The census bureau's new report shows that an all-time high 49.7 million Americans are now living in poverty.  In addition, first-time jobless claims surged by a mult-year high of 104,548 for a weekly total of 466,348 new jobless claims. 

The Latinos that voted in record numbers to keep Obama and his policies, should also note another record milestone for Latinos - their poverty rate has now reached a high of 28%.  Bienvenido al 'Merica.

Denny's, Papa Johns, Applebee's and many other eateries and dining establishments have announced that keeping the Healthcare reform law intact will cause price increases on the menu and job cuts among their staff to remain profitable.  Employers across many industries have intimated that they may drop all health coverage for their employees.

It has now even reached the point that in 'Merica, the land of the massively obese, Hostess, maker of the Twinkie, can no longer make money and will close its doors, taking its 18,500 jobs with it.

Even as this is happening, my friends on Facebook are clamoring for a bailout for Hostess.  All I can say is, "Have we learned nothing?"

And I can sum up the mindset of everyone who has just read everything I just wrote and are thinking to themselves, "Yep, that's just like them greedy companies and Republicans.  Take from the workers to keep making their profit".  I will simply quote one of the soon to be unemployed Hostess workers.  Roger Harrison, a 56 year old who bags buns had this to say, 

"The people who are running this company are not interested in making bread...They are not in the baking industry; they are just interested in the money."

Uh, yeah, you think so?

Well, of course they're just interested in making money.  That's why they took their own money, $130 million of it, and invested it in the company to salvage it from bankruptcy just a few years ago.  If there was no hope of profit, they would have found a better place to invest their $130 million and Hostess may have folded at that time.  What Rex Harrison doesn't understand is that he kept his job an extra three years because a company that was not in the baking industry saw Hostess as an opportunity to make money and invested $130 million to do just that.

I mean, if someone had $130 million sitting around and an interest in baking but not making money, they could have just stayed home, grabbed an apron and a mixer, turned the oven on and let the flour fury fly.  And they could have done that while living on the interest for their $130 million.  So, no, they didn't buy Hostess because of a deepseated desire to be bakers; they did it to make money.

But alas, that effort has failed due to many reasons - a poor economy, stricter food standards in schools, more health conscious eating habits, high union labor costs, etc.  Businesses fail for many reasons.  Yet, I can tell you that the one thing that didn't cause Hostess to go under is that ownership was trying to make money.  I don't care how interested or vested one is in the baking industry or in the process of making bread, if one fails to understand that making money is the chief objective at the end of the day, then one will not be in business long.

My wife and I owned and operated a florist/gift shop a few years ago that ultimately failed to make money.  It didn't matter how much my wife was interested in flowers.  Because it was unprofitable, we closed it.  This made my wife jobless.  (There were no newstories written about my wife's jobless situation, that I can recall.) 

A few months back, we began a home based business promoting the ViSalus Body By Vi 90 Day Challenge that we feel very strongly about.  Our life has been transformed by the 90 Day Challenge, so we are very motivated to share our experiences with as many people as we can and hopefully, help facilitate the personal transformation of as many people as possible. (For info on our transfomation click here or for more info on the 90 Day Challenge, click here)

But its a business.  We need it to make money.  If it ever stopped being profitable, we would quit doing it.  As much as we may be helping people, we still have bills to pay at home.  We have children to feed, a mortgage to pay off.  If our business was not a profit making venture, we could not afford the gas to get to our appointments or the phone to make our calls or even the computer to take our orders and run our business.

In a business, you either make money or you don't.  When you don't, you don't stay in business long.  People once understood that.  Today I don't think they do.  Which I feel is a big reason why we had the election results we had last week. 

Once upon a time in America, any person could work and save his/her money and one day investe this money into a business, where he/she would scrimp and save and work to make it profitable.  But I'm not sure we live in that America anymore.  We seem to be living in a cheap knock-off country - 'Merica.  The American Dream is being shortchanged by a people who don't even understand what it is anymore.  Instead we are left with the notion that business is a government partnership where we all work together to make a better life and making money is optional.  But that doesn't work.  It can't.  Businesses exist for one reason - to make money.  That's it.

So even as the avalanche of bad news is falling around us, too many will fail to see the underlying truth.  Instead, we are a nation where nearly 50% of the voting electorate would agree with this poor misguided woman as she marched on the picket line Thursday outside a bankrupt Hostess factory in Indianapolis,

"Do it.  Shut it down."

Well 'Merica - you just got what you asked for.

RISING DAWN: A PROJECT 10 CHALLENGE STORY

I absolutely love my wife.  As all my Facebook friends are aware, I not only have a nickname for her, but she even gets her own acronym - TBD.  This story is about the beautiful Dawn.

When this story began, I thought it was about me.  My friend Jerry called me one day out of the blue.  He seemed unusually worked up about something.  He had something he wanted me to see.  In truth, I had just woke up from an afternoon nap (don't judge me - I was working the overnight shift that week) and I was a bit groggy.  He tried to give me a website, but I asked him to have Traci just email it to me then I told him I'd look at it when I got a chance.

( this would be a good time in the story to see what I'm talking about)

I didn't bother with it til the next day, but when I did, I was intrigued - a little.  He called me back and asked me a few questions, then invited me to come and get some more info about this great opportunity.  We finally found a day where my schedule was open.  Dawn watched the video as she walked in and out of the room.  When I told her about hooking up with Jerry and Traci to find out about this, she didn't seem too pleased.  When I told her we were going to drive all the way to St Louis for it too, her expression, oddly enough, didn't seem to improve.  I guess at this point she figured she was being drug into one of my stories. (cue irony toned laughter from the crowd)

That was 78 days ago.  78 days that have flown by.  78 days that have been like no other that we experienced.  78 days that have led to what I like to call my rising Dawn.

The following story I tell in the strictest confidence.  If this story had ended in any manner different than it has, I would be signing my divorce papers for revealing any of this.  Because of the highly sensitive nature of the details contained herein, if you choose to read further, you are hereby obligated to share it with as many people as you possibly can.  The beautiful Dawn's story is inspirational and deserves as wide an audience as can be provided.

 

<-------- This was my beautiful Dawn on July 30th, 2012.

 

This is my newly reborn, Rising Dawn on October 7th, 2012 --->

<initiate flashback sequence>

Two years ago, we stepped up and took a chance on operating a Florist/Gift Shop in the historic downtown Ste. Genevieve district.  With extensive clothing retail, but limited floral experience and absolutely no experience in sales, TBD delved into business ownership.  What we found out after less than a year was that while she had an incredible ability, drawn from years in retail, to manage the storefront, the back office was not her forte and sales calls were these really scary things that sent shivers down her spine. 

Needless to say, when she fell off her stepladder while decorating the store for the holidays, we took that as a proper cue to cut our losses and exit business ownership.  My best guess was that our foray into a brick and mortar business set us back about $20k.  That meant a lot of effort was spent with a negative outcome.  In other words, Dawn was working her butt off and we were paying some faceless entity named Mr. Overhead, a few hundred dollars a week for the privilege.

It took nearly a year for my poor sweet TBD to deal with the disappointment.  Just as the time she was most in need of some validation, the economy was still having trouble producing jobs, so at home she sat, sulking if not sobbing.  It was a very difficult time and I really didn't know how to make it better.  When someone needs a job, trying to help them find a job gives the impression that you don't think they're trying hard enough.  (Which is great information that I wish I had at that time)

After nearly 10 months, TBD was hired into the bakery at the local supermarket (Super? What's so super about groceries anyway?).  Slight depression, plentiful baked goods and a husband who loves to eat?  What could go wrong?  (Perhaps its better to cutaway from this ugly scene ala Tarantino in Reservoir Dogs)

<flash forward to present>

Later today, our family is heading to Fright Fest at Six Flags in St. Louis with our good friends (oh, and the  Bova's too - Haha!).   Today, we will fulfill the beautiful Dawn's final Challenge goal.  When we started the Challenge, TBD wrote down four specific goals.  This one is the most important and the most personal of her Challenge goals.

<insert backstory>

We and the Bova's hit Fright Fest at Six Flags together last year too.  (No, I'm not sure if it's an annual thing yet, but I'll be sure to get the invitations out as soon as I know next year.)  While we were there, TBD had one of those moments; a moment that you try so hard to wish away, yet keep it seared into your memory.  As we were seating ourselves on the Superman ride, she was having an issue with her belt.  It took a few moments, but I soon realized what was happening - the belt couldn't reach far enough to latch.  A few different employees gave their efforts to get it buckled, but it wouldn't give. 

Finally, my sweet, beautiful Dawn was forced to exit the ride.  Now let it be said, that I have had a similar experience before, although for a guy who would blab on Facebook about food all the time, this was no big deal.  But for my wife, I could see the tears as she walked away from the ride.  I, even today, can't imagine how she felt that day.

So her primary goal on this Body By Vi Challenge was simple.  She wanted to go to Six Flags during Fright Fest and be able to ride everything.  Today we do that.  But hidden in her heart were three other goals, all that contained meaning for her.

Over the past few years, she has taken various steps to lose weight, all to no avail.  Understand, I'm not talking about tried but quickly forgotten steps.  When she quit drinking soda two years ago, she stuck with it, even to this day.  But none of them worked.  So she made an outlandish, pie in the sky goal of losing 40 lbs on the Challenge.

The next goal was about redemption.  Losing the flower shop was difficult for her.  Forced to head off to make the donuts at 4am was defeating at times.  In taking the step to not only do the Challenge, but also to promote the Challenge her goal was to be successful enough to quit setting an alarm clock that screamed, "Time to make the donuts".

The last goal was probably one that came from somewhere deep in her heart, that sat there for many years.  Being the wonderful wife that she was, Dawn never sought the spotlight from myself or the children.  She was always satisfied to be the backbone of our family, but I can imagine that part of her aspired to have some bit of recognition for all her efforts.  In seeking to achieve the BMW Bonus Award and get that "Told U So" license plate, she was really just looking for that moment when all eyes turned to her and said, "Great Job Dawn!  Way to go! We knew you could do it!" 

On Monday, October 1st, on Day 62 of her 90 Day Challenge, the beautiful Dawn achieved her BMW Bonus Award.  On Thursday, October 4th, on Day 66, the beautiful Dawn worked her last day as a full-time employee in the bakery.  On Sunday, October 7th, on Day 69, she lost her 40th pound and received her "Told U So" license plate.  Today, October 13th, on Day 76 of her TOTALLY AWESOME 90 Day Challenge, we will get on every ride, with plenty of room to spare, and we will have the time of our life. 

These dreams are coming true before our eyes as my now radiant wife has arisen from those humbling ashes to become the beautiful Dawn that I always saw, but she didn't.  To my beautiful wife, I can only say, "Great Job Dawn!  Way to go! I knew you could do it!"

How beautiful is my Rising Dawn in all her glory.

-----------------------------------------------------------

That is the beautiful Dawn's story on the PROJECT 10 Challenge.

What's your story?                  

Are you ready to Challenge yourself?

We were.

samanddawn.BODYBYVI.com

Start your Challenge today.

Update:  That pic above was in the fall of 2012.
Here are a couple of more recent before and after pics.

Truth is, anyone can do this.  There is definitely nothing special about me.  I was just a person who never ate well.  Age and a slowing metabolism caught up with me.  I like Fried Chicken, pizza and burgers - I didn't want to give them up.  I also like cakes, cookies and candy bars - I didn't want to give them up either.  Thanks to ViSalus, I didn't have to.  For two meals a day, I can have milkshakes that taste like a butterfinger or brownies.  For one meal a day, I can still have fried chicken or pizza - just not everyday.  And that works for us.  Really, it can work for anyone.

A POLITICS-FREE ZONE TODAY...

No politics in the Chaos today, as all Americans stand together; united as one.  Much has been said & much more will be said.  We will not seek to add more than what we've already said before.

Here's a link to what we wrote a year ago.
http://samschaos.blogspot.com/2011/09/of-life-and-love-and-death-remembering.html

WE ARE LABOR

Labor is good.  Labor works.  Labor built America.  Labor will meet the challenges of tomorrow.

If only we, the Unions, don't get in the way.

From the words in Genesis, "By the sweat of the brow, you shall eat bread" to the letter of  Paul, "If a man will not work, he shall not eat" whose word were echoed by our early settlers Miles Standish and John Smith, America has been built by the labor of our people.

From our early communities of shared property and limited prosperity, we progressed to a bountiful land of private property and free markets.  Unfortunately, much of that early prosperity was built by a labor that knew no freedom.  But thanks to the spirit of our American ideals, this nation came to fight against the plague of slavery.

But we find a lesson within our darkened past.  Despite all that we know of the evils that lurk within it, our free market economy is the greatest system of prosperity and wealth creation known to man.  But we must remain vigilant that sinful man in his greed is held in check from abusing the lowly station of the common laborer.  The sin of greed lies in the heart of all men, waiting to be released; in both that of the master and of the slave. 

Today we celebrate Labor Day, not for the excess of our unions, but for the work and productivity of our people.  Labor has organized to serve as a counterweight to the worst designs of our masters.  Like a balancing scale, the balance of power requires constant adjustment to maintain an equitable relationship. 

In Washington, many of our union masters fall under the same greed motive as the owners of production.  Despite their actions and words, the true power of labor resides in the heart of the working man.  We are at our best when we can all work together to make America the most productive nation on earth.  That desire must not be overshadowed and distracted by the petty issues of our union leadership.  Labor is much more than the words and desires of a powerful few.

We are Labor.
We are American pride.
We are the American working men & women.
We stand together for a better tomorrow for our families and a better, more united America for your family.
We are Labor.

WHO WATCHES THE WATCHMEN?

"Facts Take a Beating in Acceptance Speeches" - New York Times
"FACT CHECK: Romney's deficit vow lacks specifics" - AP 
Top 5 Fibs In Paul Ryan’s Convention Speech - Talking Points Memo

Paul Ryan’s brazen lies  - Salon

FACT CHECK: Romney's deficit vow lacks specifics - Yahoo

 

Fact Checkers, the Watchmen of our political arena seek to help us find the truth among a sea of lies; or so they say.  In theory, there is probably not a need for such a thing as a fact check.  But like the question of the title, who watches the watchmen?  In a media world where finding a non-partisan is not only impossible, but actually un-American, where do we go?  Well, sometimes there is no oracle who can simply step in and give you the anwers you seek.  I, for one, am definitly a partisan part of the conservative right, but I will do my best to simply lead you to the evidence and let you decide.

In the final headline above you will notice that Yahoo's fact check attacked vagueness.  I'm not sure how that is a fact check unless, Romney stated, "My plan is not vague in anyway."  Some of these fact checks have gotten out of hand as they no longer check statements for factual content, but for intents, impressions and ineptitude.  Fact checks should stick to, well...you know, facts.  So I will attempt to do Fact Check the Fact Checkers.  Follow at your own discretion.

The majority of all the fact checks for both Romney and Ryan's speeches at the RNC found these to be the facts in question.

1.  As part of Obamacare,  $716 B was cut from Medicare to pay for the health care reform law.

2.  Obama pledged to keep the Janesville, WI plant open yet it closed under Obama.

3.  Obama failed to listen to his own deficit commission.

4.  Ryan attacked Obama for the credit rating downgrade.

5.  Romney said Obama went on an apology tour.

6.  The 2009 Stimulus failed.

Let's get started with these quick ground rules.  I will do my best to keep my 'opinion' to a minimum and will attempt to note where it appears.  I will simply do my best to quote authoritative sources or the subjects own words.

1.  Was $716 B cut from Medicare?  Here's President Obama in his own words being interviewed by Jake Tapper:

TAPPER: “One of the concerns about health care and how you pay for it — one third of the funding comes from cuts to Medicare.”

BARACK OBAMA: “Right.”

TAPPER: “A lot of times, as you know, what happens in Congress is somebody will do something bold and then Congress, close to election season, will undo it.”

OBAMA: “Right.”

TAPPER: “You saw that with the ‘doc fix’.”

OBAMA: “Right.”

TAPPER: “Are you willing to pledge that whatever cuts in Medicare are being made to fund health insurance, one third of it, that you will veto anything that tries to undo that?”

OBAMA: “Yes. I actually have said that it is important for us to make sure this thing is deficit neutral, without tricks. I said I wouldn’t sign a bill that didn’t meet that criteria.”

Obama's main argument for the cuts is that they are only cuts to provider payments which will extend the life of the program.  But that is not true as the cuts that he says pay for health care reform are the same money he says is to be used for strengthening medicare.  Here's HHS Sec'y Kathleen Sebellius under questioning before a Congressional subcommittee (when the cuts were estimated to be $500 B),

In her first appearance before the House Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee since the health-care law passed, Kathleen Sebelius responded to a line of questioning by Republican Rep. John Shimkus of Illinois about whether $500 billion in Medicare cuts were used to sustain the program or pay for the law.

“There is an issue here on the budget because your own actuary has said you can’t double-count,” said Shimkus. “You can’t count — they’re attacking Medicare on the CR when their bill, your law, cut $500 billion from Medicare.”

He continued: “Then you’re also using the same $500 billion to what? Say your funding health care. Your own actuary says you can’t do both. […] What’s the $500 billion in cuts for? Preserving Medicare or funding the health-care law?

Sebelius’ reply? “Both.”

Did the actuary really say that there was double counting going on?  Actually, yes and that even if not, they concluded that any lower payments to providers would be unsustainable in the long term.

"We estimate that the aggregate net savings to the Part A trust fund under the PPACA would postpone the exhaustion of trust fund assets by 12 years—that is, from 2017 under prior law to 2029 under the proposed legislation.

The combination of lower Part A costs and higher tax revenues contributes to a lower Federal deficit based on budget accounting rules. However, trust fund accounting considers the same lower expenditures and additional revenues as extending the exhaustion date of the Part A trust fund. In practice, the improved Part A financing cannot be simultaneously used to finance other Federal outlays (such as the coverage expansions under the PPACA) and to

extend the trust fund, despite the appearance of this result from the respective accounting conventions.

The estimated postponement of asset exhaustion for the Part A trust fund does not reflect the relatively small impact on HI payroll taxes due to economic effects of the legislation or the increase in administrative expenses resulting from the HI provisions. As noted in our April 20, 2010 memorandum on the estimated financial and other effects of the PPACA, reductions in Medicare payment updates to Part A providers, based on economy-wide productivity gains, are unlikely to be sustainable on a permanent annual basis. If such reductions were to prove unworkable within the period 2010-2029, then the actual HI savings from these provisions would be less than estimated, and the postponement in the trust fund exhaustion date would be shorter."

Read the evidence and decide for yourself if Ryan lied about Obama's cuts to Medicare.

2.   In his RNC speech, Ryan noted that Mr. Obama had visited the plant in 2008 and said,

“I believe that if our government is there to support you, this plant will be here for another hundred years.

“Well, as it turned out, that plant didn’t last another year. It is locked up and empty to this day.”

When did the Janesville plant close?  That's not the issue because he never said when, only within a year of Obama's speech.  The point was about auto bailouts, but about a false promise and failed policies. Here's the timeline:

* On February 13, 2008 Obama said in Janesville : “I believe that if our government is there to support you, and give you the assistance you need to re-tool and make this transition, that this plant will be here for another hundred years.”

* In June 2008 GM announced that the Janesville plant would stop production of medium-duty trucks by the end of 2009, and stop production of large SUVs in 2010 or sooner.

* In October 2008 Obama doubled down on his promise to keep Janesville plant open: “As president, I will lead an effort to retool plants like the GM facility in Janesville so we can build the fuel-efficient cars of tomorrow and create good-paying jobs in Wisconsin and all across America.”

* In December 2008 GM idled production of GM SUVs at the Janesville plant. Medium-duty truck assembly continued.

* In April 2009, four months after Obama was inaugurated, GM idled production of medium-duty trucks.

* In September 2011, more than two years after Obama was inaugurated, GM reiterates that Janesville plant is on “stand by status.” Auto industry observer David Cole, tells the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel it would be premature to say the Janesville plant will never reopen.

* Today the GM facility in Janesville still has not been retooled “so we can build the fuel-efficient cars of tomorrow and create good-paying jobs,” as Obama promised

Again, you decide if Ryan told the truth here.

3.  Ryan never said whether he supported the final report from Obama's appointed commission, only that the president ignored it.  Some Fact Checks have stated that because Ryan voted against the final report, this as a lie.

Here is what the Democratic co-chair of Obama's deficit commission and Clinton's former WH Chief of Staff, Erskine Bowles had to say about Paul Ryan.

“Have any of you met Paul Ryan? We should get him to come to the university. I’m telling you this guy is amazing, uh. I always thought that I was OK with arithmetic, but this guy can run circles around me. And, he is honest. He is straightforward. He is sincere. And, the budget that he came forward with is just like Paul Ryan. It is a sensible, straightforward, serious budget and it cut the budget deficit by $4 trillion…just like we did.

The President came out with his own plan and the President came out, as you will remember, with a budget and I don’t think anyone took that budget very seriously. Um, the Senate voted against it 97 to nothing. He, therefore, after a lot of pressure from folks like me, he came out with a new budget framework and, in the new budget framework, he cut the budget deficit by $4 trillion over 12 years. And, to be candid, this $4 trillion cut was very heavily back-end loaded. So, if you looked at it on a 10 year basis and compared apples-to-apples, it was about a $2.5 trillion cut.”

 So did the President try to ignore the commission?  Did Ryan try to put together a proposal similar to the commission?  You decide.

4.  Who's to blame for the credit rating downgrade?  Was it because of a debt limit fight?  Or is it because the Obama administration was preventing a serious discussion about getting our debt in order as Ryan suggests?

Here is what S&P said.

• We have lowered our long-term sovereign credit rating on the United
  States of America to 'AA+' from 'AAA' and affirmed the 'A-1+' short-term
  rating.
• We have also removed both the short- and long-term ratings from
  CreditWatch negative.
• The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan
  that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of
  what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's
  medium-term debt dynamics.
• More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness,
  stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political
  institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic
  challenges to a degree more than we envisioned when we assigned a
  negative outlook to the rating on April 18, 2011.
• Since then, we have changed our view of the difficulties in bridging the
  gulf between the political parties over fiscal policy, which makes us
  pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the Administration to be
  able to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal
  consolidation plan that stabilizes the government's debt dynamics any
  time soon.
• The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. We could lower the
  long-term rating to 'AA' within the next two years if we see that less
  reduction in spending than agreed to, higher interest rates, or new
  fiscal pressures during the period result in a higher general government
  debt trajectory than we currently assume in our base case.
  ...........................................................................................

We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because we believe that the

prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling and the related

fiscal policy debate indicate that further near-term progress containing the

growth in public spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an

agreement on raising revenues is less likely than we previously assumed and

will remain a contentious and fitful process. We also believe that the fiscal

consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration agreed to this week

falls short of the amount that we believe is necessary to stabilize the

general government debt burden by the middle of the decade.

S&P blames a contentious fight that failed to cut spending and entitlements heavily enough to instill confidence that the government's debt would be stablilized in the next few years.

So which side do you blame for not cutting spending or entitlements?  Was it the fight, or that the fight was unsuccessful for the side that wanted to cut spending?  So who deserves any blame for the downgrade?  You decide.

5.  This one isn't even worth mentioning.  Rhetoric is just that rhetoric.  We don't fact check rhetoric.

6.  Do we really need to fact check whether the stimulus failed?  Well here we go.  Here's a good summation from a year ago.  Let me know if anything since then has changed enought to consider the stimulus a success.

The president's economic advisors projected that in the stimulus would halt unemployment at eight percent.  In its absence, they warned, unemployment could reach as high as nine percent.  This was a major selling point of the bill.  Two years and hundreds of billions of dollars later, the national unemployment rate remains above nine percent, and the numbers aren't improving.  If the active labor force were the same size as it was when Obama took office (it has shrunk considerably due to discouraged workers), the national unemployment rate would be approaching 12 percent.

(2) The president said the stimulus would "lift two million Americans from poverty."  US poverty levels have now reached all-time highs.  In the year after the stimulus passed, 2.6 million Americans fell into poverty.

(3) The president said middle class family incomes would soar by thousands of dollars thanks to his stimulus.  As reported above, the national median income (a good measure of the middle class' collective financial standing) has dipped to its lowest level since 1997.

(4) The president incessantly trumpeted the promise of countless "shovel-ready" projects to sell the public on the stimulus.  Earlier this year, Obama himself joked that such projects didn't really exist. 

On top of all that, just last week the Wall Street Journal had a report that median income was down $4019 since the beginning of the recession in 2007, but that over half of that decrease came after the recession ended.

Once again, you decide whether to call the stimulus a failure is a lie.

I've heard a lot of people on TV claim that Romney and Ryan have lied.  I'm still waiting for any of them to present a solid case for it.  Disagree with me if you want. Think you have the facts to back it up? 

Then as my new favorite Republican would say,

"Make my day."

GO CRAZY, FOLKS! GO CRAZY! - (UPDATED)

When I finished watching Paul Ryan's speech at the RNC, I was really curious to see what the liberal talking heads over at MSNBC thought.  I, despite our well known "mancrush" on Paul Ryan here at the Chaos (heck, even my daughter said, "He's hot!"), tried to remain objective and see the speech as an independent voter might.  After flipping stations, I heard Lawrence O'Donnell complain that although the speech was very good and effective, it lacked much substance. With that, I smiled and got ready to head to work.

What, pray tell, caused me to smile you might ask. (No, really, ask me)  It was this.  My chief complaint about Ryan's speech was that it didn't include the type of policy depth that I like about him.  The truth is that the young VP candidate is totally in his element when the facts & figures are flying.  He's sincere, he's knowledgable, he controls the discussion with a fully logical and rational mind and temperment.  His sincere honesty, in tackling America's great fiscal problems exposes a deep and abiding love of this nation.

So I smiled.

CALM DOWN. LET'S TRY TO TALK THIS OUT.

Here is a letter that I received from one Sandra Fluke on behalf of President Barack Obama's relection campaign.  Following it I also submit my response and following that, I will also include the entire wording of the Sanctity & Dignity of Human Life plank of the Republican Platform.

From: Sandra Fluke <info@barackobama.com>

Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 18:37:40 -0400

To: <samschaos@att.net>

ReplyTo: info@barackobama.com

Subject: "Legitimate rape"

Friend -- In a recent statement that was both factually inaccurate and horribly offensive, Republican Missouri Senate candidate Rep. Todd Akin said that victims of "legitimate rape" don't get pregnant because "the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down." Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan tried to distance themselves from the remark -- but the fact is they're in lockstep with Akin on the major women's health issues of our time. Just this morning, the Republican Party voted to include the "Human Life Amendment" in their platform, calling for a constitutional ban on abortions nationwide, even for rape victims. Several Romney supporters and advisers stood silently by while this vote took place, and the Los Angeles Times reports that the platform "was written at the direction of Romney's campaign." President Obama spoke out in response to Akin's comments: "What I think these comments do underscore is why we shouldn't have a bunch of politicians, a majority of whom are men, making health care decisions on behalf of women." This controversy is not an accident, or a mistake, or an isolated incident. It's a reflection of a Republican Party whose policies are dangerous for women. There is a clear choice for women in this election: Stand with President Obama. I entered this national debate on women's rights in February, when, as a Georgetown Law student, I testified before members of Congress on the issue of contraception. Without knowing me or my story, Rush Limbaugh called me a "slut" and a "prostitute" on his radio show. Many Americans stepped forward to tell me they agreed with me, and supported my right to speak out without being verbally attacked. President Obama stood with us. Mitt Romney, on the other hand? He didn't even condemn the remark, instead saying only: "It's not the language I would have used." Since that moment, I'm even more resolved to continue the fight to make sure every single woman -- and every man who cares about the women in his life -- knows exactly what's at stake in this election. The Republicans are frighteningly clear on these issues. The party platform itself includes a "salute" to states that have pushed "informed consent" laws, such as those that force women seeking an abortion to first undergo an invasive and medically unnecessary ultrasound. Just last year, Paul Ryan joined Todd Akin and more than 200 other Republicans in co-sponsoring legislation that would have narrowed the definition of rape, limiting which victims of rape were "legitimate" enough to receive financial assistance for access to abortion care. Mitt Romney famously says he would "get rid of" Planned Parenthood if he had the chance. And both Romney and Ryan pledge to go back to a system where insurance companies can discriminate against women and charge us more than men for the same health insurance. Akin's comments shouldn't be surprising. But this isn't about him -- just like it was never about me. President Obama has told us what he's fighting for: "I want women to control their own health choices, just like I want my daughters to have the same opportunities as your sons." Republicans, led by Romney and Ryan, have made it clear that they want to make our decisions for us. President Obama trusts us to make our own. It's as simple as that. Join me and stand with him today: http://my.barackobama.com/A-Clear-Choice Thanks, Sandra Fluke ----- Election Day is closer than you think -- make a donation to fund this campaign in the time we have left.

Contributions or gifts to Obama for America are not tax deductible

This email was sent to: samschaos@att.net. If that is not your preferred email address, you can update your information here. We believe that emails are a vital way for the campaign to stay in direct contact with supporters. Click here if you'd like to unsubscribe from these messages. This campaign is a community, and all ideas are welcome. We appreciate any feedback you might have -- positive or negative. Click here to contact the campaign with any questions or concerns. Obama for America, P.O. Box 803638, Chicago, IL, 60680

Here was my response.

From: "Sam Ritter" <samschaos@att.net>

Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 01:25:49 +0000

To: <info@barackobama.com>

ReplyTo: samschaos@att.net

Subject: Re: "Legitimate rape"

Miss Fluke,

Doesn't the President's Health Care Law put more & more of our health care decisions in the hands of such men? Wouldn't it be more prudent to achieve health care reform that seeks more outright liberty & freedom rather than mandates & requirements if you seek to avoid governmental interference?

Does sex-selective abortion to achieve a greater certainty of having a male child qualify as part of the "War on Women"? Were you aware that banning such an act that is highly offensive to women is part of the Republican Platform as well as greater protections for all babies or infants once they have been born?

Are our quarrels over the unborn worth such derogatory & inflammatory words for a group that has always sought to act out of a deep & abiding love for innocent life in all its forms?

I hold no ill will for you & I hope that you will thoughtfully reconsider your words of hate.

Thank you & God bless,

Sam Ritter
Sam's Taste of Chaos
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

 

Here is the GOP Platform section.  Its always better to form an opinion from actually reading something, than just reading about it.

 

The Sanctity and Dignity of Human Life

Faithful to the self-evident truths enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, we assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children. We oppose using public revenues to promote or perform abortion or fund organizations which perform or advocate it and will not fund or subsidize health care which includes abortion coverage. We support the appointment of judges who respect traditional family values and the sanctity of innocent human life. We oppose the non-consensual withholding or withdrawal of care or treatment, including food and water, from people with disabilities, including newborns, as well as the elderly and infirm, just as we oppose active and passive euthanasia and assisted suicide.

Republican leadership has led the effort to prohibit the barbaric practice of partial-birth abortion, permitted States to extend health care coverage to children before birth. We urge Congress to strengthen the Born Alive Infant Protection Act by enacting appropriate civil and criminal penalties to health care providers who fail to provide treatment and care to an infant who survives an abortion, including early induction delivery where the death is intended. We call for legislation to ban sex-selective abortions – gender discrimination in its most lethal form – and to protect from abortion unborn children who are capable of feeling pain; and we applaud the U.S. House of Representatives for leading the effort to protect the lives of pain-capable unborn children in the District of Columbia. We call for a revision of federal law 42 USC 289.92 to bar the use of body parts from aborted fetuses for research. We support and applaud adult stem cell research to develop lifesaving therapies, and we oppose the killing of embryos for their stem cells. We oppose Federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.

We also salute the many States that have passed laws for informed consent, mandatory waiting periods prior to an abortion, and health-protective clinic regulation. We seek to protect young girls from exploitation through a parental consent requirement; and we affirm our moral obligation to assist, rather than penalize, women challenged by an unplanned pregnancy. We salute those who provide them with counseling and adoption alternatives and empower them to choose life, and we take conform in the tremendous increases in adoptions that has followed Republican legislative initiatives.

This is just my opinion, but I'm not sure where I see any extremism in these words. If everything we disagree about must be thought extreme, how can we ever continue our conversation?  This isn't about Todd Akin.  It's about Americans living side by side in harmony. 

So, calm down.  Let's try to talk this out.

SHOW-ME THE RECOVERY (BECAUSE WE CAN'T SEE IT)

[I'm posting this, because its always good to hear a proper Missouri "Show-me" view in Washington.]

Weekly Republican Remarks by Rep. Vicky Hartzler

Hi, I’m Congresswoman Vicky Hartzler from the great state of Missouri. Just a little bit about myself: in addition to serving on the House Agriculture Committee, my husband and I own and operate a farm near Harrisonville, where we raise cattle and grow corn, wheat, and soybeans. We also run a small business that sells and services farm equipment — we’ve got three stores and about 50 employees.

Around the country, it’s that State Fair time of year. Our fair, taking place this week in Sedalia, showcases the best of Missouri agriculture, and this year that means recognizing the perseverance of our farmers and ranchers as they face the worst drought our country has suffered in decades.

Like you, I was relieved earlier this month when the House passed a bipartisan measure helping farmers devastated by the ongoing drought. A lot was riding on this bill, but the Senate, a body controlled by the president’s party, left Washington for the month of August without even bringing it to a vote. The president has seen fit to politicize this issue, but the fact is he didn’t urge the Senate to act.

That is a true shame. Drought conditions continue to worsen, and the shaky state of the economy only amplifies our anxiety.

You’ve probably heard the president say recently that the private sector is ‘doing fine’ and that his plan ‘worked.’ If only that were true. Just take a look at the chilling report the Associated Press issued a few days ago confirming our fears, that this is the weakest economic recovery since the Great Depression. 

Unemployment has never been this high for this long after a recession. Even those who have jobs are seeing their paychecks shrink. Rising prices on everyday things from gas to groceries certainly doesn’t help matters.

Yet, hard as it is to believe, the president and his party think now is a good time to raise taxes on small businesses. Perhaps they haven’t read the independent report from accounting firm Ernst & Young, which shows this tax hike would destroy more than 700,000 jobs. Perhaps they haven’t been listening to the manufacturers and small business owners who are already canceling plans to hire and expand. Or the group of 88 economists who warn this tax hike must be stopped.

Senate Democrats haven’t acted to stop the small business tax hike scheduled for January 1st, but the House has.  Because while the president tells small business owners like me ‘you didn’t build that,’ Republicans know better and are committed to getting government out of their way.

That’s why the House has passed more than 30 jobs bills that eliminate excessive red tape, empower small businesses, and approve the Keystone XL pipeline — a critical project the president and his party continue to block.

We’ve also passed a budget that protects our economy for the long-term by fixing our tax code and preserving Medicare for today’s seniors while strengthening it for future generations. The president, on the other hand, still has no plan to save Medicare — in fact, he took hundreds of billions of dollars from it to help pay for ObamaCare — while Senate Democrats haven’t even offered a budget in more than three years.

Here in the Show Me State, we expect our leaders to offer solutions to our most pressing challenges, especially when the going gets tough. But these days, the president doesn’t even want to talk about the bad economy, let alone do anything about it. That, too, is a shame.

Focusing on jobs and acting on better solutions remains Republicans’ pledge to you.

Thanks for taking the time, and may God bless the United States of America.  

CHOOSING PAUL RYAN.....

If there is only one thing you take from me today, I want it to be this - vote for PAUL RYAN. 

If you would ever, ever consider voting for me - vote for PAUL RYAN. 

If you would like to see America restored to her greatness and see much of the past decade erased - vote for PAUL RYAN. 

In case this is the only chance you will ever have to do so - vote for PAUL RYAN. 

If you hold out any hope that this nation will ever find a way to balance the budget and erase the deficit - vote for PAUL RYAN. 

If you are tired of seeing politicians talk, but not do - vote for PAUL RYAN. 

If you ever wanted to vote for someone who you knew was doing his absolute best to make America the best she can be - vote for PAUL RYAN. 

If you ever wanted to have a politician drop the political talk and level with you - vote for PAUL RYAN. 

If you think a politician should know more about his work than his staffers - vote for PAUL RYAN. 

If you think achieving affordable health care  for all is more important than paying for college student's contraception - vote for PAUL RYAN. 

If you want every man, woman and child living in these United States to have a better tomorrow - vote for PAUL RYAN. 

If you disagree with commentators and still believe in your heart that America has better days ahead - vote for PAUL RYAN. 

If you cheered for Tony Stark (Ironman) when he stood before the Senate and, talking about something that he had built, said, "You want my property? You can't have it." - vote for PAUL RYAN.

If you believe that America is an evil place without free health care - don't vote for PAUL RYAN.

If you believe that it's so important to keep abortion-at-will, that allowing a parent to abort all girls to get a boy is fine - don't vote for PAUL RYAN. 

If you're looking for dumbed down education standards- don't vote for PAUL RYAN. 

If you like higher taxes and even higher spending - don't vote for PAUL RYAN. 

If you want crony capitalism instead of free enterprise - don't vote for PAUL RYAN. 

If you want the President to use your tax dollars to make deals with green companies that will soon go bankrupt - don't vote for PAUL RYAN. 

If you want more sleazeball tactics that disrupt and distort the real issues - don't vote for PAUL RYAN. 

If you want higher energy costs - don't vote for PAUL RYAN.

If despite its success, you think taking work out of welfare is a good idea - don't vote for PAUL RYAN. 

If you booed when Tony Stark told the Senate they couldn't have his property, and thought to yourself, "He didn't build that!" - don't vote for PAUL RYAN.

With Mitt Romney's selection of PAUL RYAN as his running mate, the lines are drawn and the choice before us couldn't be more clear.  We must choose ROMNEY/RYAN.

1-21-2013

THE RECOVERY BEGINS

After Aurora: SolvingThe Wrong Problem

First, before I speak further let say that my heart & prayers go out to the lives that have been lost or harmed by one deranged individual. I do not seek to exploit this horrific event with an axe to grind. I am simply joining a discussion already in progress at this point. I will add that whatever decision is to be made must be made in the light of reason & not in the heat of the moment.
.......................................................

Our first instinct in times such as these are off predetermined by our biases. When we first heard that a gunmen had shot up a theater in Aurora, Colorado our individual reactions were varied. Some asked "why?". Others instead asked "how?".

Many followed that initial reaction with "See, I told you so". A few probably thought of their own idealogical group & prayed, "please don't let him be one of us".

Soon the discussion turned from hospitals to politics. While one friend said that it's time for the public to say "Enough!", I couldn't help but think "Tread carefully".

Hidden from view behind our petty disagreements & fear mongering is this truth - sick & disturbed people sometimes do bad things.

The guns weren't the cause, they were only the tool. While they were purchased legally, they could have just as easily been acquired illegally. The cannisters of irritants & the booby-trapped apartment show that he had the ability to use other means to accomplish his goal.

The argument goes that access to such deadly weapons caused the heavy loss of life. But that's not really true either. Think of other mass murderers of recent memory. Truck bombs & airplanes come to mind as quickly as guns, killing thousands in the process.

In 2011, there were 8,775 deaths from firearms (of that, the majority are suicides). As a comparison, there were over 32,000 motor vehicle deaths last year. Firearm deaths reached their high point of 17,075 in 1993.  Background checks were instituted that same year.

Since 1993, deadly firearm encounters have decreased even as gun ownership & gun control laws have eased. In 1999 gun deaths began a small uptick through 2004 & have decreased since then. The assault gun ban expired in 2004 after seeing a decrease & increase while in effect. During that same time, concealed carry laws have expanded nationwide.

I've spent the past couple days looking at the statistics & the best conclusion that I can make based on the available data is that concealed carry & quality background checks have had the greatest effect on gun violence in America. I believe that its because of these two policies that firearm fatalities have dropped nearly 50% since 1993. (Read that again - a 50% decrease over the last 20 years).

As for our current debate, all I can really say is that James Holmes was a disturbed individual, possibly mentally ill. If society has dropped the ball, it is not on guns, but on how we treat the mentally ill.

Guns don't shoot 71 innocent people, crazed minds do. Arguing for greater gun control at this time goes against all the statistics & implies that shooting only 7 instead of 71 is more acceptable. Far better to learn the greater lesson of Aurora's pain & suffering by disarming the next James Holmes before he acts & let today's successful gun laws continue their good work.

Taking the emotion out of it & examining the issue in the light of reason shows me one thing. Keeping guns out of criminal & unbalanced hands while allowing greater access for law-abiding citizens is still the better path forward.