No one Talks about The Road NOT Taken

I spent a good deal of time yesterday talking with a bright young relative about what she's being brainwashed into believing at that bastion of Liberal thought,  called the University of Colorado.  She is into the concept of "fairness" as the only measure of outcome that matters.   For example, she believes the evil white man stole America from the noble Indian (Native American , excuse me), and that they should have stayed in England.   At least she hasn't said we should give it back.

She believes she is being taught "critical thinking," but both points of view are not represented equally, if at all.  As the beneficiaries of the white man's creation of the best country on earth, Liberals can complain that the ends do not justify the means (stealing the land and killing the peaceful Indians) as if the means and the end were of equal weight.   On the one hand you have a loosely connected group of nomads, living in about  the 7th century style, who had not even discovered the wheel yet; on the other you have the creation, by predominately white Englishmen, of a new kind of government, based on English history and English law, and extending freedom to the common man .  This common heritage of the Founding Fathers formed the basis of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, and the self-evident truth that "All Men are Created equal".

This was RADICAL for its time.  It challenged the power structure.  It challenged the existence of kings and challenged the authority of nobles.  One could argue this would have eventually happened had we stayed in England.  Perhaps, in time.  But without the American Revolution in 1776 we likely would not have had the French Revolution in 1989.  Of course our revolution was much more civilized than theirs.

History would be changed, and not for the better.  America itself would not exist if we had not claimed and colonized this land.  Did the Indians really own this land?    They were almost exclusively nomadic tribes who wandered about the different geographic regions and frequently warred with other tribes over land.  We did buy it when we could, but in most cases how do you establish ownership?  The last tribe that camped there wins?  How do we know they're not just squatters?  What if two tribes claim the same campsite - how is the ownership established?

Very simply, the two tribes would fight over it and the stronger tribe would win the territory for as long as it could hold it.  Eventually they would lose to a stronger tribe.  So what is so different about them losing to the stronger tribe of white settlers, other than race?

Do what works!Let the Airlines handle it!

Fire the TSA and let the airlines handle all the security issues.  They'd do a better job, for a lot less money, and they'd stop treating Americans like potential terrorists while ignoring the realities of who the enemy really is.  

Who has the biggest vested interest in assuring that none of their planes go down?  The airline industry.  Anti-capitalists argue that profit is an evil motive that leads to taking shortcuts with safety which endangers the lives of passengers, blah blah blah.  I argue that a plane going down because they let a terrorist on board would be devastating to the bottom line, probably wipe the company out and put the execs responsible in jail!

I guarantee, that unless the government sticks its nose in and outright  prohibits profiling,  the airlines will do exactly that and the 99% of us who look like Americans [as opposed to middle-Eastern, acting suspiciously] will cheer as we keep our shoes on, go back to normal sized toiletries and can take our unopened cans of normal priced soda and bottles of water with us instead of having to "surrender" them at security (look sometimes at the contents of the "contraband" tables.  It's laughable and anyone who thinks stealing this stuff from people is going to keep us safer is insane.)

The airlines will do what works, making the most efficient use of their resources, because that is Basic Economics 101.  A corporation exists to make a profit for its shareholders    

I

Political Correctness Trumps Common Sense and makes Life HELL for travelers

I've decided to weigh in on the TSA controversy.  I fly once or twice a year and the last couple of years it has turned into a hellish experience that makes NO SENSE.   To those 80% of you who think the TSA's policy is just fine, that we must "do whatever it takes"to guarantee our safety, you must not have travelled lately.

There are plenty of travel horror stories out there and I have my share.  In addition to having to deal with the late, missed or cancelled flights, weather delays and all the other miseries that accompany airline travel, we now have to suffer the indignity of submitting to either a machine that scans and films your naked body, or be subjected to "gate rape".

The really chilling aspect of this is that our own government is doing this to us.  In the name of "keeping us safe" they are herding us like cattle into a pen and giving us a Hobson's Choice.  Surrender your 4th Amendment rights or don't fly.  Doesn't it remind you of something?

But are all these "security" procedures really keeping us safe?  Has the TSA apprehended a single terrorist as a result of these screenings?  The answer is no.  This is because our response to the Islamic Jihadists threat is always REactive when it should be PROactive.   We waste too many resources treating everyone the same in the name of political correctness.  

We Americans know our enemy and it is not us.  So why do our "leaders" treat us like the enemy?  What on earth is wrong with making the most efficient use of the limited resources we have and targeting the most likely suspects for further inspection instead of adopting this one-size-fits-all, "everyone-is-equally suspect" approach to 'keeping us safe'?  

Think of the DUI Stops the cops do to keep drunk drivers off the road.  They only have so many cops and cars (resources) and they have allocate the cars they have among the myriad of responsibilities the police have (limited resources).  So what is the best use of these limited resources - putting the DUI Stop in the area where the bars are or spreading them all over town so as not to offend the alcoholics and their enablers?

How they fooled some of the people all of the time

Regardless of what a candidate says in the campaign, if he has a "D" after his name he's going to vote with Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi.  The Democrats put party loyalty ahead of their constituents.  Witness the Obamacare and "stimulus" bills that the Democrats passed when the majority of the country was against it.  And our appointed Senator just went to Washington and put his lips firmly on Harry Reid's butt.

So when Michael Bennett pretends to be a moderate and says he is "fighting for Colorado" you have to know this is total BS.  Of course he certainly can't campaign on his record (his only hope is that the voters don't know anything about his record), so he resorts to telling lies about who and what he is.. He is a Democrat first, lat and always.

Mark Udall faked enough people out when he ran for the Senate 2 years ago.  This Boulder liberal ran as a "moderate" and the fools in this state voted for him based on that.  But like all liberals do, he ran "right"in the campaign  and is voting "left" in the Senate.

With Bennett and Udall in the Senate, that's 2 votes Harry Reid could count on when his party was busy raping the country.

How exactly did you "fight" for us Mr. Bennett?  70% of Colorado was against the takeover of our healthcare system, but you voted "Yes" like a good little soldier in the Obama's war on America.

This is pro-Israel?

I asked a friend who voted for Obama but says she is pro-Israel (she was married to a German Jew whose family had to escape the Holocaust.) Her response:
"I'm pro-Israel but I'm very upset with them for putting themselves in this position. The entire world community is against them."

I was dumbstruck. But her words were very familiar - it's the spin the lame stream media has put on Israel defending herself. She was only parroting what she had heard on CNN or MSNBC.

The same friend, when asked anything about what Obama has done, or any criticism of the man and she gets hysterical and rants about Sarah Palin. I don't believe she ever thinks about what she believes. She just follows the party line. It's like Christians who believe in a literal Bible.

Have you SEEN the SMART car?

It has become “conventional wisdom” that the lifestyle of the American people is causing Global Warming, and we should be following the example of those great world leaders in Europe. Yes, that’s right. Those same Europeans who led us into two world wars, then who rode on our back throughout the Cold War, saving defense dollars for themselves and still prancing around preaching to us. But that’s for another day.

Still slobbering over the Messiah, the main stream media spin is this: President Obama is going to take us down the road to Salvation! Say Amen! He is going to introduce new energy policies that will persuade (read: force) us us into giving up our trucks and SUVs, as well as any car that is large enough to provide a modicum of safety. He wants us driving little coffins on wheels called “Smart Cars” in Europe (an oxymoron if ever there was one). Are these the same politicians who give us a ticket if we don’t buckle up? I doubt they see the irony.