Doomed Polar Bears

From KOTA, a story that spells doom for the polar bears.

Most of the world's polar bears could be gone -- perhaps in your lifetime.

Government scientists are predicting that more than two-thirds of the world's polar bears will be killed off by the year 2050 -- including the entire polar bear population in Alaska.

They say it's because of thinning sea ice from global warming in the Arctic.

First of all, the data that global warming is even happening is inconclusive. Second, I think it's laughable to believe man is causing global warming.

And even if global warming is happening, there is a solution to save the polar bears. Watch the video below:

Gulfstreaming Against Global Warming

The Drudge Report has a piece on a video of eco-warrior Al Gore on a luxury jet. The piece says Sean Hannity will reveal the video on his show Sunday night on Fox News.

If Gore can just convince enough of the little people to suck it up and sacrifice, maybe it will make up the difference and he can ride his luxury jet without feeling guilty.

Uninsured Only about 5 Percent

James Shott's column at Spero News shines the light of facts on the "uninsured" in America.

He points out that 9.5 million of the "uninsured" aren't even U.S. citizens, and 17 million make more than $50,000 a year and should be able to afford insurance.

This brings us down to about 20 million, or about 7% of the population. Then...

If we believe the Kaiser Family Foundation, which is a frequent source for the mainstream media, Americans who do not qualify for current government programs and who make less than $50,000 a year total somewhere between 13.9 million and 8.2 million, no more than 5 percent of the population. Furthermore, according to the Congressional Budget Office, 45 percent of uninsured people will be uninsured for less than four months.

Which brings us to the ultimate question: Does it make any sense to destroy a health care system that 5 out of 100 people do not have adequate access to? Rational people will, of course, say “no.”

If the "remedy" is socialized medicine as the "mainstream" media and other socialists advocate, the answer is definitely, "No."

Congress Gives China a Free Pass...Again

From Fox News:

In just over a month, Mattel Inc., the world's largest toy maker, has announced three major recalls due to concerns about excessive lead paint in the Chinese-made toys.

Hearings in the House and the Senate are expected to examine Mattel's dealings with the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which oversees product safety and recalls, the Wall Street Journal reported Friday.

Lawmakers are also expected to focus on the commission's budget, enforcement practices and record in identifying toys with lead paint and other defects.

You know what's missing from this picture? I'm not aware of any talk of sanctions against China for selling us dangerous goods.

We engage in massively unbalanced trade (they make a lot more off of us than we do off of them) with an oppressive, barbaric communist regime that has shown overt hostility toward us...and we're surprised when some of the trade goods are deadly?

Yet there's no talk of sanctions or restrictions on trade with communist China; only hammering American businesses.

What's wrong with this picture?

When the State Fails to Protect

From the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, vigilantes in Pennsylvania beat the daylights out of a suspected child predator:

Investigators said Mr. Newingham, 43, had been inviting children to his home since last month. Only once did any of them accept, police said.

On Tuesday evening he tried to lure a 10-year-old boy and an 8-year-old girl who did not go inside, police said.

Officers had been patrolling the neighborhood around 8:30 p.m. when they found the suspect outside bleeding from injuries suffered in the beating.

I don't condone vigilantism, but unfortunately we may see more of this in the future, if government (mainly the judicial system) continues its failure to protect the public.

People feel like there's little justice anymore (they're right), and that the "justice" system isn't willing to protect them from evil men (they're right again). When people feel they can't trust the state to do it's job, right or wrong they feel compelled to get the job done themselves.

It's hard enough to convict dangerous criminals these days, due to all the games played with legal technicalities, but even if you do get them convicted, bleeding-heart judges and parole boards too often release these dangerous animals back on society.

Consider this case from WJZ-TV about a child predator that almost got away with victimizing another child.

Melinda Jarrell's husband, Brian, woke up to go to the bathroom early Monday morning, when he noticed a strange chemical smell coming from his son's bedroom. When he opened the door to check on his sleeping son, he found Marks hiding behind a dresser.

Police found at the home a list of evidence, including rags soaked in chemicals, apparently meant to drug the boy unconscious so that he could be molested.

Why was this animal still on the streets?

Court documents show Marks has been arrested several times for burglaries involving sexual acts on young male victims, but he was never been convicted on those charges.

Justice today isn't just blind, it's deaf and dumb and bereft of any common sense.

And there are countless other cases of young children kidnapped, molested and murdered by men who had been locked up for sex crimes before, only to be let out after short sentences or paroled early by bleeding heart boards. Why aren't these judges and parole boards being held accountable for their dereliction of duty and public endangerment?

The twisted sense of priorities held by our judicial system is a travesty. The concern the system should have for the innocent public is eclipsed by their obsession with the "rights" and "rehabilitation" of these beasts--which is seldom possible because those in charge of the corrections system seldom allow the life-changing ministries that could make a difference.

Our "justice" system might as well turn loose a bunch of feral wolves on our neighborhoods; at least you could tell right away that the wolf was a threat.

Giuliani: Illegal Immigration Isn't Illegal

Glenn Beck's website has an inconsistent interview with Rudy Giuliani
on illegal immigration.

First, Guiliani says illegal immigration isn't illegal.

GLENN: Right. But isn't illegal immigration a crime in and of itself?

GIULIANI: No.

Then Guiliani says it shouldn't be illegal:

GLENN: Should it be?

GIULIANI: Should it be? No, it shouldn't be because the government wouldn't be able to prosecute it. We couldn't prosecute 12 million people. We have only 2 million people in jail right now for all the crimes that are committed in the country, 2.5 million. If you were to make it a crime, you would have to take the resources of the criminal justice system and increase it by about 6. In other words, you'd have to take all the 800,000 police, and who knows how many police we would have to have.

Then Guiliani says he'd close the border to an illegal activity that he says isn't illegal in the first place:

GIULIANI: My solution is close the border to illegal immigration.

Huh?

Democrats Smack the Troops Yet Again

Once again, national Democrats malign U.S. troops.

From Investors Business Daily:

"Let me be clear," Schumer said on the floor of the Senate, "the violence in Anbar has gone down despite the surge, not because of the surge. The inability of American soldiers to protect these tribes from al-Qaida said to these tribes, 'We have to fight al-Qaida ourselves.' It wasn't that the surge brought peace here."

So our troops are a bunch of incompetent boobs who just get innocent people killed? Even a former Democrat, Senator Joe Lieberman, realizes this is an insult:

it’s an insult to the American troops. And look, beyond that, because the American troops don’t insult easily, this is just factually wrong.

In ages past, when Americans had a more well defined sense of what was right and what was wrong, I believe this would have been called treasonous.

Why would Democrats bad-mouth their own country and their own troops, especially in time of war? I believe the IBD piece explains it:

What an awful place for a major party in the world's greatest democracy to find itself: rooting quietly for America's defeat in war, just to win an election. But, sadly, that's where we are today.

I know not all everyday Democrats despise our troops like this. When will average Democrats call their party's leadership on the carpet for this reprehensible behavior?

New RSS Feed

I've created a "combo feed" called "Dakota Voice Full Feed" and placed it in the menu in the upper left side of the blog.

It combines exclusive Dakota Voice content with the "recommended reading" items found in the sections on the right side of the blog: Recommended Articles, Recommended Op/Eds, and Recommended Blog Posts.

These "recommended" sections include interesting articles from dozens of sources, so if you'd like to include the whole ball of wax in your RSS feed reader, click on the "Dakota Voice Full Feed" link and get ready to be informed!

Note that while some of the items in this feed will be manually added by me, probably at least half of them automatically update to the feed, so the feed will have new items rolling in constantly, 24/7.

Dinosaur SUVs

From the Discovery Channel comes an article about the global warming that occurred "300 million years ago":

The emerging story of a global climate shift a third of a billion years ago seems to be a prequel to what climate scientists expect from the current trend in global warming.

Using the same sort of Global Circulation Models as those which predict climate change today, University of Michigan researcher Christopher Poulsen and his colleagues have reproduced what might have happened on the supercontinent Pangea in the late Paleozoic era, about 300 million years ago, when the polar ice melted.

I wonder what the SUVs looked like that the dinosaur's drove around in. They must have made a Hummer look like a toy. What a pity that dinosaurs didn't take better care of their planet by driving hybrids and using more windmills. Maybe too many of them were skeptics, too.

The Wicked Borrow and Do Not Repay

Rick Kahler,president of Kahler Financial Group, has a good column on the subprime lending crisis in the Rapid City Weekly News this week. I agree with him that it would be funny if it weren't so sad.

Lenders are faced with losing the difference or foreclosing on the loans and taking the houses to sell themselves.

Again predictably, subprime borrowers and their elected officials are looking for someone to blame. Perhaps they don’t need to look far. A recent study cited by The Wall Street Journal, done by Carolina Katz Reid, suggests the fundamental cause may be a flawed government policy.

If the lenders broke the terms of the loan agreement, then they would be in the wrong. If the borrower breaks the terms of the loan agreement (i.e. specifying that $X amount is paid monthly on X date), then the borrower is in the wrong. If the borrower continues to fall farther and farther behind on their payments, the lender has no choice but to protect their financial interest.

As the Bible says, "The wicked borrow and do not repay." Blaming loan companies when borrowers don't repay their loans is just Marxist class envy.

Porn Purveyor LodgeNet Expanding Operations

From the Argus Leader:

LodgeNet Entertainment Corp. is planning a significant expansion to its Sioux Falls headquarters.

The Sioux Falls-based company plans to build two two-story office space additions to its building on the city’s north side, according to plans filed with the city’s building department.

The expansion to the company’s administration building will total about 40,000 square feet, according to the plans filed late Thursday.

That's good news for a South Dakota business. However, you might recall (or you might not, since the "mainstream" media isn't concerned about it) that LodgeNet is the largest distributor of pornography to hotels across the country (1.8 million rooms). Not a thing to be proud of.

It's true that you can choose whether to watch the pornographic channels or not. But then, you can choose whether to do drugs or not...but we punish the dealers much harder than the buyer--perhaps we view it negatively when someone sells something harmful to another person?

It's also true that while you can choose whether to smoke, we come down on businesses that sell tobacco to minors. Maybe we view selling something harmful negatively?

It's also true that we limit the kind of (pornographic, violent?) material that can be viewed by minors with ratings and other regulations. Maybe we see that there's something dangerous in this material that we want to protect children from? If it's dangerous for children, is it harmless for adults?

While it may be legal for LodgeNet to sell pornography to hotel guests across the country, is it a good thing to do? Is it something to be proud of?

Maybe LodgeNet would consider removing this material from the entertainment fare they offer to hotels, and we could be completely proud of a successful South Dakota business.

Clinton Fugitive Fundraiser Caught

From Breitbart.com, looks like they've caught up with crooked Democrat fundraiser Norman Hsu:

Disgraced Democratic fundraiser Norman Hsu was arrested in Colorado late Thursday after he failed to show up for a court appearance related to a felony theft conviction.

FBI agents took Hsu into custody at St. Mary's Hospital in Grand Junction, Colo., said FBI spokesman Joseph Schadler.

Hsu had been scheduled to appear in court Wednesday to turn over his passport and ask a judge to cut in half the $2 million bail he posted last week when he turned himself in after spending 15 years on the lam from a felony theft conviction.

I guess he should have got out of the country and run to China like the Clinton's other money doctors.

Need Help Understanding Pride Festival Participants

I read an interesting letter to the editor in the Rapid City Weekly News today. It was from Michael Coats, a local homosexual activist and organizer of a recent homosexual Pride Festival.

Mr Coats routinely writes letters like this as a part of the strategy of "normalizing" homosexuality in the eyes of the public and "desensitizing" people to it, so that's nothing new. What I found interesting was some of the organizations he listed as participating in the event:

Thanks to all vendors and organizations making the event memorable: Equality South Dakota, The ACLU, PFLAG, Integrity, Matthew Shepard Foundation, GLAAD, Victory Fund, Gay Men’s Social Network, Gay RALLY, Paha Sapa Two Spirit, Living Positive in the Hills, S.D. Women’s Health Fund, Planned Parenthood and South Dakota Department of Health.

Now I'm just an old fashioned kind of guy, so can somebody explain a couple of things to me?

If homosexuality is "normal, natural and health," why was the Department of Health at a homosexual event? If the Dept of Health comes to LifeLight, Hills Alive, the Heritage Festival, the Lincoln Day Dinner or other events, I'm not aware of it. Why would this be?

Also, why would Planned Parenthood, a contraceptive organization, participate in an event for people whose sexual unions cannot under any circumstances produce children?

Kucinich Cuddles Tyranny and Terrorism

From the Jerusalem Post, Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), who is also a presidential candidate, will apparently malign the commander in chief of his own country while visiting terrorist havens like Syria and Lebanon, yet won't visit a country we've set free from tyrrany and are helping onto the road of democracy:

"I feel the United States is engaging in an illegal occupation ... I don't want to bless that occupation with my presence," he said in an interview in Lebanon, after visiting Syria. "I will not do it."

People like Kucinich, especially leaders, always make me wonder why, if they love tyrannical regimes so much and loathe their own country so greatly, why they don't just move there and leave the rest of us freedom-lovers in America in peace.

LifeLight Set to Expand to Colorado

From the Argus Leader, it looks like the Sioux Falls Christian music festival LifeLight is getting ready to branch out and do events in other locations such as Colorado:

Organizers think those elements are in place. They're moving ahead with a festival June 6-8 near Glenwood Springs, a tourist town in one of the nation's most picturesque travel areas.

LifeLight is estimated to have had 320,000 in attendance over its three days last weekend, but the new one in Colorado expects to start smaller. Still, it sounds like they want to remain true to their ministry vision:

Greene said LifeLight has many requests to try to reproduce itself in other cities. He looks for two essentials when such requests come up. The event must be free, and it must be based on Bible preaching. Many festivals are music only. He doesn't criticize them, but they don't fit the mission.

He went to Colorado and met with supporters. He said the county there has the highest suicide rate in Colorado.

"What is the significance of that? Our calling is to bring light into darkness, taking the church outside the walls. So there's a need there. ... Through prayer and counsel with our board, this one seemed right, the next logical step," Greene said.

President Bush 'Does Tears'

Yahoo News has a story on George W. Bush, the man behind the mantle of the presidency.

The article takes a look at Robert Draper's book "Dead Certain: The Presidency of George W. Bush," which went on sale Tuesday.

One passage reveals the difference between his public persona and his private turmoils.

President Bush told the author of a new book on his presidency that "I try not to wear my worries on my sleeve" or show anything less than steadfastness in public, especially in a time of war.

"I fully understand that the enemy watches me, the Iraqis are watching me, the troops watch me, and the people watch me," he said. Yet, he said, "I do tears."

"I've got God's shoulder to cry on. And I cry a lot. I do a lot of crying in this job. I'll bet I've shed more tears than you can count, as president. I'll shed some tomorrow."

This is one thing that liberals, to the detriment of our nation, either don't understand or don't want to accept: a president must lead, he must show strength, he must show certainty, he must be decisive.

A good leader doesn't have the luxury of wearing his heart on his sleeve, and a good leader doesn't vacillate in public. These appearances of indecisiveness and weakness undermine respect for our country, and ultimately cost American lives when our enemies try to exploit that weakness.

I disagree with President Bush in several areas and in several things he has done/supported. But I have never doubted his sincerity, even in the areas where I've disagreed with him.

President Bush isn't perfect, but thank God that he understands his need to portray strength. And I hope he knows how many Americans are praying for him each day.

Hillary on Video Affirming U.S. Subservience

WorldNetDaily has a report on Walter Cronkite's desire for a world government where U.S. sovereignty would be subservient to that "world federation."

I've never been the first to jump on these "one-world government conspiracies," but take a look for yourself. Here's what Cronkite said:

"First, we Americans are going to have to yield up some of our sovereignty," Cronkite said. "That's going to be to many a bitter pill. It would take a lot of courage, a lot of faith in the new world order."

He continued, "What Alexander Hamilton wrote about the need for law among the 13 states applies today to the approximate 200 sovereignties in our global village, all of which are going to have to be convinced to give up some of that sovereignty to the better, greater union; and it's not going to be easy."

And here's the video of Hillary affirming Cronkite's vision of a United States subservient to a world government body:



There is also a longer video of Cronkite expounding on his views here.

Socialized Medicine: Dictating How You Live

This is how socialism and totalitarianism slowly, inexorably overcomes a free civilization.

From ThisIsLondon, the "Conservatives" in the UK want to control how citizens live their lives, down to what they eat and how much the exercise.

The inroad for this kind of Orwellian control? Their National Health Service.
Patients who refuse to change their unhealthy lifestyles should not be treated by the NHS, the Conservatives said today.

In a bid to ease spiralling levels of obesity and other health concerns, a Tory panel said certain treatments should be denied to patients who refuse to co-operate with health professionals and live healthier lifestyles.

And those who do manage to improve their general health by losing weight and quitting smoking, for example, would receive "Health Miles" cards.

Points earned could then be used to pay for health-related products such as gym membership and fresh vegetables.

I don't think anyone would argue that eating healthy food and getting regular exercise are good. But shouldn't people have the freedom to choose what they eat and how much they exercise? I think all but the most rabid Marxist would agree that this is outrageous in a free society...but when you have socialism, you don't have a free society.

That's one of the key aspects of socialism that very few people understand, yet it's very elementary. Whoever is paying the bills gets to call the shots. If you're paying your health care bills, and you find that eating pizza and Twinkies every day with little or no exercise has cost you a triple heart bypass, that might incent you to adopt a healthier lifestyle. Or it might not. But it's your choice, because you're paying the bills.

But if Big Daddy Government is paying your bills (what Democrats and some liberal Republicans want) then guess who gets to call the shots? Who gets to decide whether you have that second Hostess Cupcake or not? Who gets to decide if you go down to the gym or not? It isn't you...not if you want health care, it isn't. Your Big Brother gets to tell you what to do if want medical treatment. Congratulations! How does it feel as a grown adult to be treated like a 5-year-old again?

I despise socialism, but it really makes sense from a fiscal standpoint, and even a fairness one. After all, if other taxpayers are on the hook for your health care, it's not unreasonable that the taxpayer's custodian (the government) should be able to dictate matters affecting the payout from the taxpayers.

Perhaps there are some folks in the United States who are either ignorant enough or stupid enough or ideologically brainwashed enough to be presented with this reality and still say "Okay with me" (after all, a lot of Democrats continue to be elected).

But can anyone who says they love the American way of life, can anyone who says they love freedom, can anyone who says they would rather live their life the way they want to live it, really and consistently embrace socialism?

Promoting Marriage Would Provide Economic Benefit

OneNewsNow cites a statement from Dr. Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation that if only families were started and maintained intact, child poverty would be greatly reduced.

According to Rector, the major reason for that is that each year, about 38 percent of American children -- the equivalent of about 1.5 million children -- are born into homes without a father.

"Those children are about seven times more likely to live in poverty through their childhood, than are kids raised in a married couple's family," says Rector. "In fact, you can take data on the mother and the father, and if that mother [who] gave birth without being married was actually married to the real father of the child, in about 70 percent of the cases the child would be raised immediately out of poverty."

The researcher says the average family with poor children only works about 16 hours a week on a yearly average. According to Rector, if the number of hours worked per week were raised to 40, those children would be "immediately raised out of poverty."

Note that Rector also says poverty also results when parents aren't working full time. While there may be a few that simply cannot find full-time employment, there are many who don't want full-time work. I can think of several individuals I've encountered in the past year in my local area who don't work a 40 hour week...not because they can't get the hours, but because they are too hung over, claim they are too sick (probably from said hangover), or just flat don't want to go to work (why their employers put up with this, I don't know, but some do). Statistics on work lost due to addictions (drugs, alcohol, gambling) also bear this out.

We say we can't "legislate morality" (and I do consider a poor work ethic to be a moral issue), but we somehow believe we can successfully legislate aid packages for people who haven't earned them, legislate your money out of your pocket and into someone elses, and minimum wages for people who may or may not have earned them.

Why does our society put so much stock in solutions with little accountability that gouge the taxpayer, leaving the suffering in a perpetual state of enablement...but we refuse to adopt solutions that make value judgments, hold people responsible, and could lead people to become productive, self sufficient citizens? Why do we do that?

Another ADULT Stem Cell Advance

Science Daily is reporting yet another adult stem cell advance.

This one involves adult stem cells taken from blood vessels and researchers believe it will be effective in repairing heart tissue, bone, cartilage and muscles.

"To make this available as a therapy, we would take a muscle biopsy from a patient with a muscle injury or disease, remove the myoendothelial cells and treat the cells in the lab. The stem cells would then be re-injected into the patient to repair the muscle damage. Because this is an autologous transplant, meaning from the patient to himself, there is not the risk of rejection you would have if you took the stem cells from another source."

There is simply no need to destroy human life through embryonic stem cell research when adult stem cell research is already helping people.

Rapid City TIF Approvals Explode in Last Six Years

In my column in the Rapid City Journal today, I share some of my observations about TIFs (Tax Increment Financing) as I continue my personal quest to get a handle on this complex issue.

I had hoped to talk to and include comments from city council members on both sides of this issue, but was not able to match orbits with any of the "pro-TIF" side in time for the column.. Actually, I don't think any aldermen are "anti-TIF" as some have been portrayed; just that some want to use them more frequently than others who think requirements and approvals need to be tightened.

One of the most interesting things I found? While the Growth Management Office wasn't able to provide me with enough data to determine the TIF application approval rate,

the information did reveal that the number of TIFs approved has gone up dramatically in the past six years.

From 1983 to 1989, 12 TIFs were approved. During the 1990s, 11 TIFs were approved. But since 2001, 29 TIFs have been approved with an assessed base valuation of $264.5 million. That’s a 142 percent increase in the number of TIFs approved in 40 percent less time.

I think anytime you see an increase of that magnitude of anything, it's worth taking a look at it to ensure nothing is amiss.

I did get to talk to Councilman Bill Okrepkie yesterday (too late for the column deadline). We had a long chat in which he told me he not only believes TIFs are not being used too much, but he believes Rapid City badly needs a long-term strategic vision and plan for future development.

My hope is the TIF Revision Committee recently appointed by Mayor Alan Hanks will take an honest, in-depth look at whether the definition of "blighted" real estate is being stretched, and at TIFs in general.

Values Voter Presidential Debate Coming September 17

FT. LAUDERDALE, Fla., Aug. 29 /Christian Newswire/ -- A Values Voter Presidential debate will be held at the Broward Center for the Performing Arts on Monday, September 17th at 7:30 p.m. The majority of the Republican candidates have confirmed their attendance at the event.

30 of the nation's most influential groups will asking the questions of the presidential candidates that matter most to the Values Voters - the largest voting block in America. (Full Article)

Conquering M Hill

My children and I hiked up "M Hill" in Rapid City yesterday. M Hill is so named because of the big "M" on it, put there by the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology.

Here is a view of M Hill from an opposing hill which we hiked up first. Not knowing exactly what trail to take to get to the top of M Hill, I brought us up the wrong hill first (if I'd only listened to my 4-year-old son, he originally wanted to go up what I later realized was the most direct path up M Hill). We hiked down this hill again and up M Hill. The picture doesn't do justice to how steep the hill is, but it's a booger. I'm no spring chicken anymore, but it got the goats of both my kids (it was about 94 degrees when we hiked up the hill). But the view was worth it up there. You could see all of Rapid City, both east and west sides, plus out to Rapid Valley in the east and Harney Peak to the southwest.

I already knew my daugter was a go-bot, but my son, who's 4, did much better than I thought he would (only a little complaining, and it went away when we reached the top).



Here's a picture of downtown Rapid City, using quite a bit of zoom.



You can click on these to get larger versions.

I said to myself, 'Someday I'm going to marry that gal'

By Gordon Garnos

EXPLANATION: It probably all started when I was asked to join the 100-voice Cestrian Welsh Male Voice Choir. It was in Chester, England, and I was stationed with the U. S. Air Force nearby. Some may remember that choir as it toured eastern South Dakota, presenting some 12 concerts, almost 25 years to the day I left England. But that is another story. Different members invited me into their homes, some for a cup of tea and others for a meal, something a serviceman would never turn down. (Full Article)

Edwards' Plan Forces You to See Doctor

If you give liberals long enough, they'll slip up and reveal that they want run your life for you.

Democrat presidential candidate John Edwards revealed today that his idea for "health care reform" would force Americans to go to the doctor whether they want to or not.

From Yahoo News:

"It requires that everybody be covered. It requires that everybody get preventive care," he told a crowd sitting in lawn chairs in front of the Cedar County Courthouse. "If you are going to be in the system, you can't choose not to go to the doctor for 20 years. You have to go in and be checked and make sure that you are OK."

If it weren't for a nagging, recurring sinus infection for which I have to go to the doctor two or three times a year to get antibiotics (because apparently I'm too stupid to know for myself what I need), I don't think I would have been to the doctor in 20 years myself.

Beyond the fact that the idea of forcing Americans to go to the doctor whether they want to or not is so patently offensive and un-American that I don't even know where to begin, Edwards has demonstrated that under socialized medicine--where you're told what to do like a little child--the overall cost of health care is going to skyrocket so badly that it'll leave the bonds of earth long behind.

Just the cost of sending everyone to the doctor on an annual basis alone will be staggering. Then consider the cost of tests and referrals that may or may not be necessary. Then consider that you'll be getting people into a mindset of going to the doctor when they feel the slightest bit under the weather or feel like they need some attention...and you'll end up with the kind of broken, unsustainable system they have in Canada and England.

Want to be treated like an idiot or a child? John Edwards is your man. Want to wait a year and a half for a surgery? John Edwards is here to help.

On one hand, it's outrageous to hear an American politician utter something like this. On the other hand, it's refreshing, having the rare opportunity to hear a liberal tell you what they really have in mind for you.

Thanks, Mr. Edwards.

Winds Shifting in Climate Debate

Meteorologist Chris Orr's weekly weather column in the Rapid City Journal today points out that the climate data used to fuel Al Gore's new global warming religion is pretty weak:

Stephen MacIntyre went through the official government database of climate records and discovered that 1998 was not the hottest year on record for the United States. The hottest year was actually 1934.

Not only that, but MacIntyre discovered that five of the 11 warmest years on record occurred before 1940.

Granted, much of the reordering of the hottest years occurred thanks to an increase in the significant digits used, but apparently going to the hundredth’s place did manage to change the statistics used most by the media, scientists and politicians.

For example, only one of the hottest 11 years has occurred this century. The years 2000, 2002, 2003 and 2004 are now recalculated to be cooler than the year 1900.

Orr acknowledges this data may do little to dissuade the true believers, but he does call on the "mainstream" media to give this data--and the recalculation--the attention it deserves.

Napoli Letter is Dead On

South Dakota state senator Bill Napoli has a good letter in today's Rapid City Journal, which accurately fits the culture shift being pushed on us:

Extremists are now called mainstreamers

I had a nice talk the other day with a self proclaimed liberal who was trying to convince me how far our country has moved forward. Yes, indeed!

Anyone who marries a person of a different gender, goes to church, raises responsible children and demands accountability is called an extremist. A person who believes in less taxes, taking care of yourself and your family without meddling government programs, the right to own, possess and use guns is called a radical.

People who believe in morals, integrity, honesty, respect for life, and yes, even virginity, are Right Wing Zealots.

And, anyone who dares to profess any of these beliefs publicly are called Wing Nuts.

Oh yes, we have come a long way.

Now we have the Progressive Era. People who believe in same sex marriage, abortion on demand, (paid for by taxpayers), anything goes, do whatever makes you feel good, increase government programs no matter what the cost is, while raising taxes believe they are on the politically correct path. Honesty and responsibility just doesn’t matter. It’s all the government or society’s fault.

These people are now called moderates or mainstreamers. Yeah, we’ve come a long way in the name of progress.

Bill Napoli
Rapid City

And someday, the bill will come due. I don't want to be around when that happens.