A citizen's lament: one less freedom

The fundamental reason for my opposition to present versions of the health care reform push is because it reduces my (and every US citizen's) freedom. If this is not, by now, obvious and ominous, you are either blind or we do not share a common concept of freedom. My opposition is not about the money! Not because Medicare is or is not almost bankrupt and not because it is fiscually prudent or otherwise. It is about the core of what America was set up to be: a free country.

The House of Representatives has passed a bill that will take away a very personal freedom (and what is to stop them from legally and systematically stripping me of more freedoms in other areas of my life). According to the US House of Representatives I am no longer free to not carry health insurance. This is a right I no longer have, a decision I am no longer free to make. By force of punishment including the threat of prison or seizure of my treasure, I will be forced against my will to purchase health insurance. And to add insult to injury, who must I pay for this mandated product? Who is enriched by this law? Government, the very institution that forces me to purchase is themselves the vendor. That is an evil and immoral business? For all those anti-capitalists who have ever bemoaned "big business" and the evil for-profit sector, I ask you what company has ever weilded such power to imprison a consumer who refuses to purchase their product?

How to destroy freedoms and strip a nation of their rights...

One of the most important questions we can ask ourselves: How would you strip a free people of their rights and freedoms?

I would bring about a condition, carefully and slowly, where they would not notice the erosion of their rights. I would confuse them about the very definition of rights, priveledges, entitlements, obligations and responsibilities. I would never speak of their individual responsibilities but of the governments responsibilities TO them. I would convince them that they deserve more and better and that the government's job is to provide them both (more and better). I would confound concepts of liberty, equality, sameness, justice, oppression, tolerance particularly with reference to the role of the branches of government in each of these. I would convince them that the matters of governance are too large for the individual citizen to concern themselves with and they are better left to professional politicians whose purpose is the beneficient oversight of the populace. I would construct a facade of freedom while undermining the foundations. I would find a way to dismiss the logic and arguments of the original framers as "out of date" or "from a fundamentally different era" or I would simply water down the education regarding those original framers so that their principles were lost or become spectulative assertions subject to interpretation. The main object would be to create a citizenry that is so dependent on the government that it would happily surrender some of their freedoms or rights for some supposed benefit (most preferrably a financial benefit that could only be provided by the government).

Eternal vigilence is not a condition that is concordant with our contemporary cultural characteristics of apathy and leisure. Indeed, a realist (those who are now dubbed "pessimists" or even "fanatics") might declare that our current social character is ripe for fundamental political transformation. Some might call this transformation "real change".

Down but not Out

I rarely get sick. Perhaps this is largely a matter of semantics... I really don't consider myself sick unless I throw up or have a migrane (and therefore can't see anything except bright lights that are not UFOs). This rules out nagging colds and coughs. Those, like runny noses are simply par for the course of mortality as far as I'm concerned. "Buck up Cowboy" and get to work. But I've got to admit that I have a monster cold that has knocked me on my perverbial buttocks. Contrary to how the media and county health workers would classify my current condition, it IS NOT the swine flu (seems like "swine flu" is the classification de jure this year).

No, I simply have a cold that is tearing up my throat, rendering me hazey in the head, causing me aches in my muscles, bones and even on my skin. I am "out of it". Accordingly, I've been negligent in my blogging. Don't worry, I'll be back!

A Rare Prediction: When will Pres. Obama finally decide on Afghanistan?

I usually do not like to open myself up to the potential of being wrong. I HATE being wrong! It is not that I am so smart that I am right a large percentage of the time. I am very cautious and take great pains before I speak, act or make a decision. When I am wrong I feel like I've let myself or others (particularly the person I may have wronged) down -I'm sure there is some kind of mild psychopathology about this reaction. I know it has a negative effect on Mrs. Wicke since I have such a difficult time saying "I'm wrong" and its confessional cousin, "I'm sorry" (since this, by inference, also means "I screwed up").

But enough about me and my personality faults. I am going to make a bold political predicition. We've been hearing lots of "we must act quickly" in regards to health care reform and, ironically, "we must take our time" in regards to our military strategy in Afghanistan. Really..., in the latter issue people are dying NOW due to inaction but in the former, no one is going to die in what is the world's most charitable medical system.

So why the rush on health care and "dithering" over a military policy? These two are clearly entertwined because they are both political issues and President Obama is fighting for his political life. If he does not succeed in his efforts to enlarged government and extend de facto socialist policies he will bring down the ire of his liberal base. If he follows the battlefield informed recommendation of his own appointed General he will bring down the ire of his liberal base. BUT he has to follow the military recommendations or he will lose a war he himself has identified as vital to our national interests. So it becomes a matter of timing: pass health care reform quickly (to soothe the left) and then bolster our troops in Afghanistan.

Hence the feet dragging on the military decision and the fast tracking of the health care plan both make perfect sense. The question of when will President Obama finally decide (more precisely: "announce") his Afghanistan military policy? This finally brings us to my prediction: President Obama will announce his plans in Afghanistan (a troop buildup) within one or two weeks after some version of health care reform passes.

I will be my health care on it (which will be insolvent within 10 years after it passes anyway).

Saturday Enlightenment: Men and Women Differences (Prager University, Vol. 5)

About 30 years ago (a result of the 1960's reverse-enlightenment) so called "intelligent" people started to adnvance a theory that there is no real difference between men and women -how could there be if we are all equal (remember in the field of education it was determined that seperate, of different, but equal was an impossibility... but what is accurate in one realm of life does not necessarily carry to all others). They suggested that any differences that did exist were due to nurture or socialization. Hence if you did not surround girls with pink or give them dolls to nurture they would grow up to be as analytical and aggressive as men and be able to compete in a male-oriented business world. At the foundation it was a view of male domination and this perspective took the battle to all things male. The first artilce of faith, however, had to be that there is no difference between men and women. A logical extention of this arguement is that, if there is no difference, then why cannot a man marry a man and a woman marry a woman and it be considered the same (in every way) as a man marrying a woman?

Sorry but common sense, logic AND an inexhaustible number of scientific studies have shown that there are significant differences between men and women. Here is a little primer on just one of the differences between the male and the female:

Most Influential Books: Dennis Prager's List

This is the second post of a permanent feature of my blog: introducing my readers to some of the best minds I know and the books that made them so darn smart. I am not, however, just searching out "smarts" since some of the most intelligent people have also been some of the worst people in the world. To qualify as contributors, these are also people I look to for their wisdom, integrity and compassion.


Today I am sharing the books that have most influenced someone I do not know personally although I've listened intently to him for almost a decade. If you think the thoughts I share in this blog have any merit (or are at least peak your interest and ire), you should become more familiar with Dennis Prager.


Here is his list:
Man's Search for Meaning by Viktor Frankl
Modern Times by Paul M. Johnson
The Arab Mind by Rapahel Patai
For the Glory of God by Rodney Stark
God and the Astronomers by Robert Jastow
In Bluebeard's Castle by George Steiner
The Jewish Mystique by Earnest Van Den Haag
Men and Marriage by George Gilder
Mao The Unknown Story by Jung Chang


Now go read a good book!

The Healthcare Catastrophe

• The King James version of the Bible (at least the one I have) including the Old and New Testament is 1,590 pages long.
• The American Heritage Dictionary (again, the version I use) is 878 pages long.
• The Constitution of the United States (1787) contains 4,543 words including the signer's names.
• The Declaration of Independence has 458 words.

The current (latest as of Oct. 26th) Senate version of the Health Care bill is 1,502 pages long! That is two sheets of paper more than 3 reams of single sided copy paper. That is larger than the Phoenix East Valley Dex yellow page book (2008 edition). Aside from the mammoth size of the bill, I have several questions that address the content of the bill:

1. how many members of the Senate and House of Representatives will read this Bill from front to back? I think they should all be forced (yes, upon threat of imprisonment) to read every word before they vote on it.
2. how long would it take for a person with above average intelligence to read such a document?
3. how long would it take to digest, analyze and consider the social ramifications, fiscal consequences (intended and unintended) as well as the short, medium and long-term implications of this bill?
4. Once the items in #3 have been accomplished, how long would it take to seriously debate the provisions in such a document?

Friends and neigbors, I don't think we can honestly expect to have anything like a serious vote on this matter until July 2010 at the earliest. This is very aggressive and assumes we entirely set aside all other legislation such as the "Cap and Trade" and other bills on the docket. To move this bill without the most serious and sober consideration of every elected national politician is not fair to the American people at best and a dereliction of duties, a violation of civic trust and worthy for removal from office at worst. ANYONE, I don't care if you are my city councilperson or President Barak Obama, who suggests some need for expediency that does not allow for such thorough inspection does not deserve the office they've been elected to. I say to my fellow Americans, be wary of such a politician: they are seeking to introduce an unprecedented degree of power over your most basic and personal rights cloaked in the guise of social wellbeing.

If God is able to give mankind moral and spiritual direction over a timespan of 3,500 years in a text totaling just over 1,500 pages, how is it that our government cannot address the single issue of health care in significantly less than 1,500 pages. The enormity of the volume alone is evidence of government that has become much too expansive. Hobbes' dreaded Leviathon is alive and becoming stronger.