Saturday, April 30, 2011

You Reap What You Sow!

As life goes on, changes come. New dawns bring opportunity, and the sun sets on phases that's time has come and gone. We eagerly await the new challenges, and sentimentally look back on the fading past.

Today I make a final voyage, close a page on a five year venture. It's time to bring my baby back from college, degree in hand. As that page closes, another one will open, and I have to say I'm excited to see what lies ahead. Junior leaves college with his mark imbedded in time. He left his name on their record books for all to see, and future athletes to aspire to, but now it's time for him to leave his mark on society. Most would ask if that learning institution has filled him with the knowledge he needs to compete in today's society, I do not. While I relied on that institution to teach him some life lessons, I refused to allow it to mold his character. That was developed through principles taught outside the system, in the home. Armed with that ability, life won't be such a challenge, because his preparation began from birth. That my friends is what's lacking in child rearing today.

Your child, grandchild, niece or nephew is your message to people you'll never meet. What does that message say? Your actions have a direct impact upon the completed project, make your statement to the world one of character and integrity, they will continue to live the principles you inspire in them.

God Bless!
Capt. Bill

Friday, April 29, 2011

Know Why You Know!

I think it's necessary to caution everyone to choose their words wisely. Often we are baited into calling our Republic a democratic society, which is a bit of a perversion of the intent of a Republic. This maybe by design, an effort by the left to nudge us away from the principles our nation was founded upon. Let's examine this further....

"Individual freedom" is not a primary political principle in a democracy. It cannot be defined, defended, or practiced without the primary principle of individual rights. A traditional "democratic society," means unlimited majority rule, which through the will of "mob rule', (democracy) can trample the rights of an individual. The "will of the people" can trump the "rights of the individual," obliterating the concept of rights.

Let's take an pause for an example. Suppose a democratic society has voted itself cradle to grave entitlements. Everything the people need is supplied by the government. This eventually causes budgetary problems as incomes never meet needs. So the younger voting block decide to put an age cap on resources, once your outside your productive years, say 55, your no longer given healthcare because it's a drain on the budget. To quote the Star Trek character Spock, "the needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few." It's popular with the majority, but it infringes on the rights of the more aged population, ergo, individual rights. This type of example is the downside of an unchecked democratic society, and I propose why our forefathers designed our nation as a Republic.

A Republic, in it's original form, has a set of checks and balances limiting the power of the "mob rule," and putting first and foremost the rights of the individual. So why is it suggested to us that we are a democracy? Well, there are people who are frustrated with the system that limits their push for power, a democracy suits their needs better. What is a union but a democracy? Doesn't the entire "mob" vote their agenda? Aren't the majority of teachers, who school our youth, part of this same system? Would it be easier to achieve their agenda by promoting democratic rule, rather than the constraints of a system that holds power in check and upholds the rights of an individual? Don't those same unions finance, (to the tune of millions of dollars), the campaigns of politicians to gain favor and influence legislation? This is but one example of those who hunger to destroy the Republic for a personal utopia, cloaked under the guise of protecting the individual by grouping them together as a mob. It's contradictory, at best, and at worse, self serving and selfish.

Next time someone vocalizes that we are a democracy, take the time to explain the difference. The future of the Republic depends upon it!

God Bless!
Capt. Bill


Thursday, April 28, 2011

The More Things Change, The More They Remain The Same!

It's interesting how history repeats itself. We would do well to have a grasp on the past, it would save us oh, so much pain. Ayn Rand gave a lecture on April 16,1967, in Boston, at the Ford Hall, where she highlighted some of the issues of the Vietnam War. See if any of these ring true today....

"When a country is at war, it has to use all it's power to fight and win as fast as possible. It cannot fight and non-fight at the same time. It cannot send it's soldiers to die as cannon fodder, forbidding them to win. (Sounds like one of the complaints of the current wars we are fighting?)

What is the moral state of a country that spreads smears about itself and ignores or suppresses the facts about the enemies atrocities? What kind of society allows it's citizens to stage parades carrying the enemies flag? Or to promote the enemies philosophy on university campuses? (not much changes in four decades).

The ugliest evil of the Vietnam war is it does not serve any national interest of the United States. (Again a lesson we could have learned from the past).

None of us know why we are in that war, how we got in, or what will take us out. (Sentiment sounds familiar)

They tell us the spread of communism must be contained in Asia- but not in Africa. They tell us that communism aggression must be resisted in Vietnam-but not in Europe. they tell us we must defend the freedom of South Vietnam-but not the freedom of east Germany, Poland, Hungary,Latvia, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Katanga, etc. They tell us North Vietnam is a threat to our national security-but Cuba is not. They tell us we must defend South Vietnam's right to hold a democratic election. ( You know if you just switch around the names of the countries, this is exactly the situation today)!

It's pretty evident history is repeating itself, as we've all been told it does. Forty four years later and the situation is basically the same. The only thing we don't have similar is the draft.

God Bless!
Capt. Bill


Wednesday, April 27, 2011

Flip Floppers!

There was a time in this nation, where we existed on a two party system. The Republican's based their ideology on creating a strong business atmosphere, a working America was a strong America. The Democrats were a party based upon the interests of the working man who supplied the labor that made those businesses great, ergo boosting America.

A political ideology is a set of principles aimed at establishing or maintaining a certain social system; it is a program of long range action, with defined principles serving to unify an integrate particular steps into a consistent course.

I propose we've strayed from the above definition. Actually, there doesn't seem to be a long range plan, rather a day to day assessment defining what serves who best at the moment. See if this next definition doesn't apply better to today's political atmosphere...

Anti-ideology consists of the attempts to shrink men's minds down to the range of the immediate moment, without regard to past or future, without context or memory- above all without memory, so the contradictions cannot be contested, and errors or disasters can be blamed on the victims.

Those who practice anti-ideology, use it to disarm the opposition, switching at will, when it suits the purpose of the moment. That purpose becomes the "gang" they serve. Sometimes it's the unions, sometimes it's big business. The criteria seems to be which "gang" will serve the politician come election day, rather than principles they stand for!

How many times has Washington acted in defiance of the results proven by history?

God Bless!
Capt. Bill


Tuesday, April 26, 2011

Time To Check And Adjust!

Every once in a while it's a great idea to reflect upon how well a course of action is going. Leadership guru Orrin Woodward calls this process, "plan, do, check ,and adjust." So I thought I'd take pause today and review the old adage, "how's it going?"

During the previous election we were told President Bush was hated throughout the world and considered a cowboy, when it came to foreign policy. We were sold the idea that we needed to coddle other nations, then we proceeded to apologize for our past perceived indiscretions. Our current President humbly apologized for our arrogance across the Middle East, and promised a more nurturing posture, offering an extended hand of friendship. The President aligned himself with Bush's harshest foreign policy critic, Hillary Clinton and assigned he the job of Secretary of State, his ambassador to the world. He's leaned heavily on the foreign policy experience of the master of foreign affairs, Joe Biden, every big gun opposed to the way we were doing things has been consulted and used. Stepping back and taking a 30,000 foot view, I'm not seeing much progress. We have an additional war going on, the other two are still active, the Middle east is one giant revolution, Iran has now acquired nuclear means, and North Korea is more rebellious than ever. Apparently ignorant power hungry dictators don't understand Harvard diplomacy tactics! Who might of foreseen that?

Now on our energy policy. When our current administration took office gas was under two dollars a gallon, it has now doubled. The introduction of green electric powered cars has resulted in a vehicle that is overpriced, and hardly practical for the average consumer. I'll also highlight it's responsible for burning down one devoted green minded owner's home, apparently you can't park two in a garage to charge as one caught fire. Though the government has thrown all kinds of subsidies at the solar and wind power industry, there isn't much going on there. We are also burning our food supply to refine ethanol so we can water down the gasoline we use at the pump and not be so dependent on foreign oil. The result is higher prices in the food market. Who could have imagined that happening? I've always been taught that to be independent of something or someone, you have to stop relying upon them for whatever you lack. So until technology creates an industry that provides us with an affordable and practical means to replace foreign oil, we might consider using our won resources. Just a suggestion, because sending our tax dollars to Brazil so they can supply us with oil, just seems like more of the same.

Now it's time to reflect on our fiscal policy. How's that working for you? Despite the influx of cash in an attempt to "stimulate" our market, we're not seeing much in the way of results. You might point to the rise of the Stock Market as a shining star in the sea of bleakness, but that is totally predictable. If you crash the value of the dollar, and you have, then the stock market rises in concert with the decline. Check the graphs of the big Stock Market crash back in the 20's, we're on the same path. Unemployment is abysmal, and food prices are climbing rapidly. Even thought they are trying to disguise those increases with decreased volume in the product, we are feeling it in our pocketbooks. The debt is rising faster than the space shuttle is coming to an end, and there is no sign of a balanced budget anywhere in sight. Basically America is broke and living on maxed out credit cards.

The immigration policy seems to be working though. Most of the illegal's who ventured here for a new and prosperous life have fled back to their homeland to find jobs. We are left with just the criminals who feed off the drug and gang lifestyles at least now when you find one you can be sure of their intent when you check their immigration status. Oh wait, we're not supposed to do that. They might take exception and think we are profiling criminals. Is that policy of expanding a suspect's rights beyond the normal, right to remain silent, and the right to counsel, really such a good idea?

So as we reflect, the plan part was flawless. The do part, they did just fine. While we are checking, the results seem less than desired. Now can this administration humble itself like it did with foreign policy, and admit it has taken the wrong direction? It's easy to apologize for someone else, do they have the spine to do it for themselves? Let's see if they taught that at Harvard!

God Bless!
Capt. Bill


Monday, April 25, 2011

As We Slip Away..........

I've never been a strong believer of happenstance, honestly I'm basically certain most everything is by design. So, with that in mind let me state the obvious and see if you reach the same conclusion as I...

First we need a couple of quick definitions.

Socialism- a theory or system of social organization which advocates the vesting of ownership and control of the means of production, capital, land, etc, in the community as a whole

Fascism- a governmental system with strong central power, permitting no opposition or criticism, controlling all affairs of the nation.

Statism- the principle or policy of concentrating extensive economic, political, and related controls in the state at the cost of individual liberty.

Now we have traded morality and principles for the criteria of acceptability. Doesn't the news immediately turn to polls to see what the popularity of any action or proposition within our governmental structure? Our definition of what is right for our country has turned into emotion. What ever stirs the masses as good for them has been deemed acceptable, side stepping principles and morality. We have forgotten that often what is good for us as a nation, as define by morality and principle based thought, is not sometimes easy to swallow. It's like a diet plan, or personal savings, they demand sacrifice for long term gain, or in a diet's case, loss.

Now what has this to do with Socialism, Fascism , or Statism? Well, since we've defined or morality as what is acceptable to the masses driven by emotion, can we assume whomever assembles the largest "gang," and pose the greatest threat by riling up it's base, will drive popular opinion, thereby encouraging government decisions? If this starts to sound like the unions, stop me. A mixed economy ruled by pressure groups is an amoral institutionalized civil war of special interests and lobbies all fighting for control of the legislative process, seeking to exhort some special privilege at other's expense. At best they are attempting to change the size and scope of government by using this pressure to gain compromise. Enough compromise in your direction, and you've moved the nation toward your goal.

The doctrine of compromise, that we hear so often called for in Washington, applies to everything except one issue: any suggestion to expand the power of government. It's also mandatory it's not used to water down morals or principles. There is no use for moderation there.

If you've noticed our President has no specific policy, in fact it changes daily with the wind. a blank check on power is all he seeks. Thereafter he adjusts to whatever pressure group fits his needs. He's made the average businessmen the milch-cows of his economy demonizing them as the wealthy who need to pony up more to feed his welfare projects, social and industrial as his next election requires. A random mongrel of socialistic schemes, communistic influences, fascists controls shrinking the remnants of capitalism and personal freedom, rolling in the direction of a fascist state. His vision extends barely beyond the next election.

Our President, and the left, view our wealthy businessmen as domestic animals who need to be trained to carry the nation's burden, and do their bidding. And they are using the emotion of the "gangs" and calling for compromise to achieve this goal. The notion of a "partnership' between a private group and public officials, between business and government, between production and the force of government on those businesses is a corruption of free market principles, and typical of a fascist ideology, that imposes force as a basic element and ultimate arbiter in all human relationships. This is where the left uses union pickets, uprisings, and small riots inspired by emotion, not principle to apply pressure.

While we have embarked down the path of Socialism influenced by compromise, and maintained by emotion; the grim joke is on them. Their alleged ideals have paved the way for, not toward Socialism, but toward Fascism. Soon the class warfare will allow the privileged "elite" of "intellectual" profiteer of this Fascist oversight of our nation. The camel's nose is under the tent, and compromise of morality and principles has allowed that.

Fascism requires one party rule.- What will the notion of government by consensus do then? We've seen the result of one party rule prior to the 2010 election, it isn't pretty. How was the opinion regarded during the health care debate?

Fascist goal is the conquest of the world. George Soro's and his "one world order" comes to mind, along with the global minded United Nations. Are they not currently interfering in changing the government of a sovereign nation?

See if this sounds familiar....

We demand the sharing of the profit of big business.

We demand a broad extension of the care for the aged.

The government must provide an all around enlargement of the entire system of public education. We demand the education of poor students at government expense.

We demand every capable and industrious citizen the attainment of higher education.

The government must undertake the improvement of public health.

Sound like the talking points of our current administration? It isn't...It's the excerpts adopted by a certain political party in Munich, Germany on February 24, 1920. That party was the National Socialist Workers Party of Germany, which was later shortened to the Nazi party. The premier fascist regime.

God Bless!
Capt. Bill


Sunday, April 24, 2011

Happy Easter!

Happy Easter!

Today is the day we celebrate how Jesus separated himself form the rest of us mere mortals. Anyone could have died a merciless death, and many have! John the Baptist was beheaded and Joan of Arc was burned at the stake, just to mention two, but here's where Jesus rose above the crowd,(pun intended). Today he reclaimed his earthly body and walked among us, proving he is truly the Son of God. This is the cherry on the top of his sacrifice, dying for our sins, and what better time than today to hit our knees and give thanks for being forgiven?

Can you imagine being one of those morons who persecuted him? Even though he asked that God forgive them from the cross, because, "they know not what they've done," it had to be a religious experience to find out the fellow you just put to death was back, in all His glory no less! Talk about having cause to repent! That's right up there with God hurling lightening bolts!

While today is filled with scripture about the event, I'm taking a different tack. This message has a reminder for all of us.....

For no good tree bears bad fruit, nor again does a bad tree bear good fruit, for each tree is know by it's own fruit. For figs are not gathered from thorns, nor are grapes gathered from a bramble bush. The good man out of the good treasure of his heart produces good, and the evil man out of his evil treasure produces evil; for out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks. -Luke 6:43

See you in Church!

God Bless!
Capt. Bill

Saturday, April 23, 2011

Washington Exposed!

Today I want to touch on this tax the rich hullabaloo. We are dancing on the edge of a class warfare battle, inspired by out of control politicians, hungry for our tax money. The evil party here isn't the successful people who drive our nation's economy and produce the jobs necessary to have a healthy GDP, but it's the wreck loose spenders running unchecked in Washington. They are trying to deflect attention from their irresponsible behavior by demonizing a sector of the very people they were sent to Washington to serve.

The argument they don't do their share absolutely floors me. They twist math around like it doesn't exist! Let's begin with one of the principles our nation was founded upon. "All men are created equal." Now call me silly but that implies to me that you and I are the same, we put on our pants one leg at a time, we need to eat to survive, and we all START life naked, crying, and without a grasp of the language. Add to that another principle that is engraved, not written in pencil, over the Supreme Court building, " Equal justice under the law." I get the impression that a written law is applied the same to you as it is to me. Is not the tax code a law? So why is it applied progressively? Is this the liberal progressive's idea of making progress? At least it's named after those who try to use it as a weapon against the successful.

I love the talking point the tax thirsty left uses that this country supplied the means for the wealthy to acquire that wealth, and they should give back. Let's dissect that. First of all if everyone is created equal, as I described above, weren't we all supplied with the same level playing field at birth? Didn't society supply us with the same education opportunities as each other? Isn't the difference between the successful and the unsuccessful how they applied those opportunities? We are the result of our decisions. Since the unsuccessful chose not to apply themselves, why should those who did be punished? The successful managed somehow, to see through the crappy financial education supplied by those who don't know how to handle money in the first place, and learn the principles that allowed them to accumulate wealth. Shame on them, for not falling in line and being a slacker as they were taught in school. Speaking of shame, the second part of that statement suggests the top income earners give back, that's a great idea! Except they should give back to those who know how to distribute charity without waste and fraud. I'm afraid that leaves the government, out. Personally, I would rather see endowments to provide educational opportunities given to private concerns, monies distributed to St. Jude's Children's Hospital, or The Shriner's medical programs, where they are applied without waste or fraud, void of bureaucracy. Where does the government get off being the social conscience? Isn't that, along with charitable distributions the job of the church? Why is it they want separation of church and state, yet insist on doing the charity work of the church?

Answer; Because it feeds their greedy need to control your money. If they have this giant pot of funds, they can "control" how it is distributed, and use it for their own gains. If the top wage earners ever decide to unify their financial resources, they could mount quite an opposition to those power hungry so and so's in Washington. Now do you see the need to tap into their funds? They fear what they cannot control. What financial fear do they have of the average Joe? Can you see why they despise the Tea Party movement so? All those "Joe the plumber" types got together and threw a wet rag on their "control" party they were throwing. They can't tax those people into submission!

So they raise the ire of the nose pickers of society and incite them to band together against those who have earned more than they. "It's not fair they have something you don't," they are told. Well, that didn't work when you were two, and it doesn't work now. The truth is the wealthy, be it corporations or individuals, pay the majority of the taxes Washington receives. Do they get tax breaks? Yes, but they are the same as for you and I. The reason they've got money is; they learned the lessons of how to keep it! There is no special breaks in the tax code for high income earners, it applies the same to us equally. They have learned Washington's game, and Washington hates them for it, and wants you to as well.

Example: General Electric paid no income taxes last year. Are they to blame for following the law, or is Washington the villain for putting the law in place that allowed them the deductions? Washington would like you to believe it's GE's civic duty to just fork the money over, absolving them of guilt.

One of their favorite targets is the evil oil companies. Your going to hear how they are making, "record profits," frequently. Here's why....

If you operate on an 8% profit margin and gas is $2.00 a gallon you make sixteen cents, a gallon pumped. If you still make 8% profit margin on gas that's $5.00 a gallon, you make forty cents a gallon. Same volume, same percentage, different price at the pump. Since gas prices have risen, because Washington has printed money and devalued the dollar, profits will increase. Who's really the villain, the company who has changed nothing but the price due to market increases, or the government who devalued the currency causing the market increase? Washington would like you to believe it's the oil company, those who possess common sense know better. Here's what they neglect to tell you...Increased profits equal increased tax revenue. Washington is full of intellectuals, just ask them!

"Intellectuals are those people who make complicated explanations against common sense!"-Chris Brady

"....the rest of us work for a living."-Capt. Bill

God Bless!
Capt. Bill

Friday, April 22, 2011

Liberal Hype!

"If you are not a Liberal at 20, you have no heart. If you are not Conservative by 40, you have no brain."-Winston Churchill

I love this quote, so I started to research it. Can you believe something as simple as this statement actually draws a lot of attention, and a lot of ire? The first attempt to respond to this, apparently by a liberal, went like this...

"We are quite taken with our celebrities and sports stars, I'm surprised anyone has time for a cigar-smoking British politician?"

Now I thought that was kind of petty but I continued my research and found, oh so much more....

"First of all, this is becoming very cliche-ish."

I guess this remark is really getting under their skin, but wait there is more....

"Do people that quote Churchill understand what context he made the remark? And that the British political view of liberalism is very different than the American view? Most importantly the demographics of American voting patterns do not bear this out. It really isn't clever anymore." (Author's note: they misspelled American I corrected it)

So they first attacked the person, note this is a perfect example of liberal tactics, discredit the opposition. Then they proceed to go into the liberal playbook to deny it authenticity......

"According to research by Mark T. Shirey, citing Nice Guys Finish Seventh: False Phrases, Spurious Sayings, and Familiar Misquotations by Ralph Keyes, 1992, this quote was first uttered by mid-nineteenth century historian and statesman Fran├žois Guizot when he observed, Not to be a republican at 20 is proof of want of heart; to be one at 30 is proof of want of head. This quote has been attributed variously to George Bernard Shaw, Benjamin Disraeli, Otto von Bismarck, and others.

Furthermore, the Churchill Centre, on its Falsely Attributed Quotations page, states "there is no record of anyone hearing Churchill say this." Paul Addison of Edinburgh University is quoted as stating: "Surely Churchill can't have used the words attributed to him. He'd been a Conservative at 15 and a Liberal at 35! And would he have talked so disrespectfully of Clemmie, who is generally thought to have been a lifelong Liberal?"

The point of the whole quote is lost in this barrage designed to alter the discussion. Liberals prey on the youth, whether those liberals are young or old, they need to be naive. I believe it was Lenin that called them, "useful idiots," but they'll likely say he never said that, or never existed. The quickest cure for liberalism is a job and a tax bill. All of a sudden, when money starts to flow from your pockets, your world view changes.

There was recently a study at a major University where a group of students were asked in the best liberal light, if their grade point average, GPA, could be "redistributed" throughout the whole college. It seems the ones who'd worked hard to achieve a 4.0 and above took exception. After all they had worked hard and studied for that recognition, and those who'd achieved lower GPA's, not so much. Apparently raising the whole University's GPA to a average passing grade was too much of a sacrifice for even the most devout liberal student. Instant conservative thinking!

God Bless!
Capt. Bill


Thursday, April 21, 2011

An Abundance Of Love!

I don't know what compels me today, but for some unknown reason the topic of abundance comes into my head. As I took my morning stroll with Bear, we came across one of our favorite couples. They are retired and speak with an accent, so I'm guessing they migrated here. Whenever we cross paths, we take a pause to exchange pleasantries, and Bear get his pet from both of them. Our conversation always begins with, how have you been? This time that question was met with a different response. The gentleman tipped his hat and said, "not good" pointing to his head. His wife said he just got back from a month long stay in the hospital. So I asked if he'd had skin cancer, because he was pointing to his bald spot. His wife told me he's had a stroke. As the encounter drew to an end, I could see the fear and concern in her eyes. Her life partner had been reminded that life on earth is short. I can understand her fear, they have been blessed with an abundance of love, which is apparent whenever you see them walked down the street hand in hand. Today that grip was a little tighter, and they walked noticeably closer. That abundance had been threatened after so many years of familiarity.

When we are blessed with an abundance of anything, it's a great idea to pay it forward. This couple lives that principle everyday. As they take their daily walk everyone is greeted, and treated, to the love they share. Although they struggle a little with the language, it's not hard to understand the message they exude. The abundance of love they share is a blessing, and they pay it forward everywhere they go. They are fantastic examples for us all, and Lord knows I get reminded of that every time we cross paths.

God Bless!
Capt. Bill


Wednesday, April 20, 2011

A Lack Of Leadership!

What's lacking in the White House is leadership. While leadership has many definitions, and it's difficult to arrive at an airtight explanation of it, a lack of it glares at us like a new born dawn. Everyone knows when leadership is present, and sadly, when it's not. Perhaps the most outstanding offense perpetrated by this administration is when a leader moves, so does the country, and that movement is slow if not absent. A leader creates a culture that produces results, they raise the bar on themselves and will allow no excuse. A leader is first in line to accept responsibility, and last in line to accept recognition. This last sentence alone defines why our President has failed. His dithering, lack of accepting responsibility, and need to receive credit defines his inexperience as a leader.

"If you don't take full responsibility for where you are, you'll never believe you have the full power to get yourself where you want to go."- Chris Brady

"The problem with incompetence is it fails to recognize itself."- Orrin Woodward

Authors Chris Brady and Orrin Woodward have defined the infection currently running rampant in the White House in their new book "LIFE." It's appropriately diagnosed as Improvement Deficiency Syndrome, or IDS. Some of the most prominent symptoms are...

The continual placement of self at the center of the universe.

Making excuses for to cover for one's lack of achievement.

The ability to see any self-serving action as justifiable and righteous.

Sudden anger and/or jealousy, taking offense based on the behavior of other people.

Inborn selfishness that exhibits itself with repeated flare ups.

I'm thinking there is a fatal case of this present in the oval office. That intellectual our country place in a position of leadership has fallen right under Chris Brady's insight.

"Intellectuals are those people who make complicated explanations against common sense."-Chris Brady

And of course Orrin isn't to be left out of the fray, he has a quote that sums up our current President's dithering.

"The worst decision is indecision."-Orrin Woodward

Orrin also has some advice to correct this problem.

"Learn from the past, live in the present, lead into the future"-Orrin Woodward

How much further down the road to solving our problems would we be if the President's advisors would just point him in this direction. Quit blaming the past and move on to the future. We are all aware of how we got here, and pointing fingers doesn't accomplish anything. accept the present and "lead into the future."

It's not hard to see why America is disappointed in it's leadership, and it's not just in the White House. This infection is running rampant in Washington,and I believe we need to quarantine it, and sterilize it, and I'm not alone. although I'm not a big fan of polls, they do answer the question; "How am I doing?" The simple answer is.....


God Bless!
Capt. Bill

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

Could He Trump The Field?

Everyone else has weighed in on Donald Trump's latest endeavor, so I thought I'd add my two cents. Some are calling it a cry for attention or an attempt to boost his ratings for his television show, personally I think he's simply had enough! So why is his bid at the presidential run so interesting? Simply put, America has also had enough! Washington speaks in sound bytes, spinning the truth to it's constituents, being oh so politically correct, then doing whatever the heck it pleases, often time contrary to the message it puts forth.

Our representatives in Washington don't have a clue how business works. Most of their knowledge has been preached from a book, lacking the reinforcement of practical experience. You can't expect to perform successful brain surgery following an instruction manual, it takes experience. We actually have elected officials who sought a career as a politician, they are void of any sense of reality experience by you and me. How could one expect to represent what one does not understand? It would be like me trying to be an advocate for nuclear physicists, while I might perceive to be able, I just don't have the experience.

He's where The Donald's attraction comes in, he makes no attempt to be politically correct, he'd rather just be correct. He says what he feels, and that's relatable to a great deal of us. The media fears him, and won't seriously challenge or disparage him, because he could buy their paper, TV station, or radio outlet and fire the finger pointer, and he's just liable to do that! Donald is one of the few that can keep the liberal media in check, neutering it's ability to influence an election. He takes a tough stand on our economy that most of us agree with, pointing out you cannot run a home or business as we financially run our country. All this is hitting home with the voters.

Is he a serious candidate for the presidency? Your guess is as good as mine! He does bring delicate issues to the surface, and opens them for discussion, breaking the politically correct taboos. This is a good thing, we need to have adult conversations about many, many issues. The Donald is stirring the pot, and God knows it's long overdue. Say what you will, he brings diversity to the field, and that's what has been lacking in the past. How many times during the last presidential election did you encounter a voter who wasn't happy with the choices offered to vote for?

God Bless!
Capt. Bill

Monday, April 18, 2011

It's By Design!

In politics, as well as life, conflict is ever present. You might be surprised to know there are actually three basic rules that define behavior during conflict. While this is a deep subject, what's listed below is by no means mean to be exhaustive, but simply a first understanding.

1) In any conflict between two parties, who hold the same basic principles, it is the more consistent party that wins.

2) In any collaboration between two men, who hold different basic principles, it is the more evil, or the more irrational one who claims victory.

3) When opposite basic principles are clearly and openly defined, it works to the advantage of the rational side; when they are not openly defined, but hidden or evaded, it works to the advantage of the irrational side.

If this doesn't explain exactly the behavior of our politicians in Washington, I don't know what does. For example, let look at say, Nancy Pelosi's statement during the healthcare legislation debate....

"We have to pass the bill to know what's in the bill."

That simple incoherent statement is a combination of rule #2 and rule #3. It was done intentionally and not a random rambling of a confused mind as one might suppose. It was designed to deflect and confuse the debate, and it did exactly that. No one in the crowd challenged that absurd exchange. She got a pass, smiled, and walked away from the podium, and continued to jamb the unpopular legislation down our throats.

These three rules speak volumes to what goes on daily in Washington. I'll bet you look differently at a politician next time they get in front of a camera, with this knowledge in hand. I know I do.

God Bless!
Capt. Bill

Sunday, April 17, 2011

Laissez-Nous Faire!

In 1962 Ayn Rand wrote a paper Titled, "Let Us Alone!" Stop me if anything I cite from this sounds familiar, or pertinent to today's economic situation....

Since economic growth is today's great problem, and our present Administration is promising to "stimulate"it- to achieve general prosperity by ever widening government controls, while spreading unproduced wealth- I wonder how many people know the origin of the term laissez-faire?

She goes on to tell of seventeenth century France and the reign of Louis XlV, and how his economic policies had the entire country in ruins. Ole Louis was one of the first statists. He believed that government regulation and controls could create national prosperity, and that higher tax revenues could be obtained only by the increase of economic growth; so he devoted himself to, " a general increase in wealth by the encouragement of industry." The encouragement consisted of countless government controls choking business activity, the result was a dismal failure. I believe President Obama calls this "investing in America's future."

Colbert, chief advisor of Louis XlV, who was no more an enemy of business than our present Administration, asked a group of manufacturers what he could do for industry? A manufacturer named Legendre answered: "Laisses-nous faire!" (leave us alone)

Sound familiar?

God Bless!
Capt. Bill


Saturday, April 16, 2011

"Hands Off!"

Just the other day a question was asked on Facebook, that I'd like to respond to. It's a fantastic question, one I'm sure many people are wondering the answer to. So without further ado....

" According to a report by Health Care for America Now, America's five biggest for-profit health insurance companies ended 2009 with a combined profit of $12.2 billion.


Let me reiterate, This is one fantastic question! The answer lies in government's interjection in our free market economy. Without this interference, the insurance market, though it may spike occasionally, will self correct. The free market system leaves an individual producer free to earn as much as he can by lowering his costs and by increasing efficiency. There is a seldom recognized principle that no single commodity, material, or service can be indispensable to an economy regardless of price. A free market is it's own protector, but the government has allowed the insurance companies to create a coercive monopoly through prohibiting interstate competition.

Occasionally those who champion government interference will offer the excuse that the consumer will fall victim to a lesser quality product. Nay,nay! If the government will keep it's hands off business, the companies offering inferior products will be driven to offer the highest quality product they can bring to market, at the most affordable price. Competition will demand that, unless of course government has interfered, creating some imbalance that gives one an upper hand over another.

Capitalism, by it's nature, entails a constant process of motion, of growth, of progress: no one has the vested right to a position if others can do better than he can. This can only result by means of government interference. We need separation of State and Economics!

When critics denounce the free market system as "cruel," the fact they are decrying is that the market is ruled by one single moral principle: justice! Those who offer inferior products at any price will fall to the wayside, and those who strive to bring to market the best quality at the lowest price will thrive.

God Bless!
Capt. Bill


Friday, April 15, 2011

I've Met The Enemy, And We Are It!

We in America have a daunting enemy! More powerful than Nazi Germany ever was, potentially more devastating than Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor, and bolder than the Muslim extremists that brought down the twin towers. This evil lurks silently in the background awaiting it's turn to destroy our country. It's ignored by our military, not even on the radar of the CIA, the people at homeland security are hardly aware it exists, and the FBI doesn't have it on the top ten most wanted list. It's not a virus, yet it grows like the quickest of cancer, looming to poison our very existence. Most politicians ignore it, some even embrace it, and use it as a campaign endorsement. Here's the worse part....

It's a self inflicted wound! We, or should I say the liberals, created it!

There is not an economist our there that won't tell you that Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid going to consume every tax dollar America generates very shortly, collapsing our economy. They only differ on when! On it's current growth rate, it'll ruin our nation economically. Why oh why, do we stand indifferent and allow the cry of, "but I deserve those entitlements," threaten our freedom?

The government was neither designed nor allowed by the founding fathers to become a charitable organization to aid the poor and elderly. That is the job of first the individual, then the family, then the church, then the community.

When a charity is running low on funds, it hits the streets, knocks on doors, and raises the money to stay in existence. When the government funds, designed to hand out to those in need, run low, they borrow money. Which is more industrious and least likely to fail? Charities encourage the people they help to become self sufficient, as they have others to lend resources to, the government, on the other hand, simply keeps writing checks. Again, which do you assume has a better success rate at rehabilitation?

There are those who'll never be capable of helping themselves. Those, I can assure you, number far less than the current number of actual recipients of aid. Yet every time we try to address these entitlements we are shouted down as uncaring. People our vessel is knee deep in water and going down, it's time to jettison the unnecessary items to stay afloat! Let charities serve those in need, and let government, govern.

Isn't it interesting, the liberal party has been responsible for the design of those programs designed to implode, and bring down our country from within? How does one with any sense of self responsibility, love of our country, and a desire to remain free and sovereign, continue to send these individuals back to Washington and positions of leadership?

God Bless!
Capt. Bill


Thursday, April 14, 2011

My Attempt To "Screw Up A Free Lunch!"

Now we know Washington doesn't get it. Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats seem to understand that the only way out of this mess is a balanced budget. If you have a budget that spends 1.6 trillion dollars over what it takes in, and you cut the spending by 4.4 trillion over 12 years, or you cut it 6.6 trillion over 10 years, your still losing money. Respectively, at that rate of spending, you have a ...

19.2 trillion deficit minus 4.4 trillion in cuts=14.8 trillion dollar shortfall, and likewise the Republican plan has us looking at 16 trillion deficit minus 6.6 trillion in cuts= 9.4 trillion in the hole, atop the already existing 14. whatever trillion that currently exists.

You can spin this anyway you like it's still a shortfall. Don't they teach basic math at Harvard or Yale? BALANCE THE BUDGET NOW!!!!

You can cry that Grandma isn't going to have money to eat, or we're going to kill women because they aren't going to get the free healthcare the government has been providing, that's all poppycock! Each and everyone of those items they are using to justify overspending is a social issue, not a government one. They should be addressed by society, not the government. The government is not an arm of charity! It is to do for us, what we cannot do for ourselves, and we are more than capable of providing those services to the public without government intervention. Where is it written that the government is a charity, I mean besides in a liberal's handbook? Get out of the business of being the social conscience of our nation.

Because our government has enabled our poor to live a life that people in real poverty can only dream of, they have no incentive to be anything but poor. Why save and delay our gratification to save for retirement? The government is going to provide us with social security, medicaid, and medicare. Well, here's why....

Relying on those programs just allowed the government to define your lifestyle or your retirement. All those programs fall woefully short of providing an acceptable lifestyle during retirement. Why do you think there are so many retired people employed at Wal-Mart or as baggers in the grocery store? Do you think that's how they planned to spend their golden years? Not a chance, they got duped into believing the government was going to supply them enough to retire on. Washington can't do the math required to operate a nation debt free, what made us think they could understand what type of income it would take to retire on?

Whenever you allow the "collective" to provide for your welfare, and ignore your personal responsibility, your going to be deeply disappointed. This is why Socialism, and Communism has failed in every political theater. Someone else cannot begin to understand what your hopes and dreams are, so your supplied with the bare minimum, that others maybe served also. Is life meant to be lived at the bare minimum? If you answer is yes, then get in the line for the government cheese.

God Bless!
Capt. Bill


Wednesday, April 13, 2011

Do The Math!

Okay, the President is going to reveal his plan to reduce the debt today. Let me be the first to comment on what he's about to say, and at the same time arm you with the math to make sense of it.

Our current debt, as of the moment I wrote this, (as it's climbing faster than I can write), is $14,299,355,790,000, fourteen trillion dollars and change.

Our current GDP, again as I write this, (it's climbing just as fast), is $14,660,384,317,000, that's fourteen and a shade over one half trillion dollars.

Here's the point, if we tax every penny of that income @ 100% we can just pay the debt off. The President is going to tell us we need to tax the top income earners. Nice plan, but according to the talking heads that will only increase tax revenue $81 billion to 100 billion depending on your source. Since our annual deficit is 1.6 trillion, that won't cut it. They do agree if we tax everyone as we did pre-Bush tax cuts, it will increase our tax revenue 550 billion. Even that leaves us woefully short of what we need, with a deficit of over 1 trillion still outstanding. We'll be going backward still.

You don't have to be a math major to understand we need to cut spending, and cut spending deep to even begin to turn this in our direction. First we need to balance the budget, NOW! Then we need to address our tax revenue to lower the money we owe. It's not complicated, income has to exceed spending and debt. There is no way raising taxes on anyone alone will solve this issue, so let's put the horse BEFORE the cart and address spending. If anything else is offered in the President's fiscal plan, it's simply kicking the can down the road. That time has passed!

We've created a welfare state, which is nothing more than a mechanism by which the government has confiscated the wealth of the productive members of our society to support a variety of entitlement schemes. They cloaked this taxation under the guise of deficit spending, because they didn't have the backbone to tell the American taxpayers they were taxing them into oblivion. This is not a modern day problem, it began to worsen when we left the gold standard and has snowballed ever since. That elimination allowed the welfare liberals to use the banking system as a means to expand credit. They created paper bonds they sold to increase their borrowing ability, and now we have a monumental mess to address. The law of supply and demand cannot be conned, not by the most savvy politician. The time has come to pay the piper!

God Bless!
Capt. Bill


Tuesday, April 12, 2011

One For All, And All For None!

In America we have anti-trust laws that prohibit companies, in part, from uniting together and setting pricing on goods and services. The government feels this gives merchants an unfair advantage when supplying it's customers, as they can demand inflated price gouging to the consumer. The anti-trust laws also prohibit large companies from buying up the competition and cornering the market, again there by controlling the market.

So why is it so critical that business remain independent and kept in check, but the labor force is not? How does the same principle not apply to unionization of the work force? Doesn't that fix the price of labor to the employer? Do they not collude to collectively bargain, and hold an employer ransom for collective entitlements and pay?

Some would argue that unionization serves the working class by bartering for worker's rights, and better working conditions. Well, we have a minimum wage law, we have a whole government agency devoted to safety in the work place,(OSHA), we have child labor laws, and we have federal guidelines to ensure overtime is paid is the standard workweek is extended. All this is reinforced by a contingency of lawyers eager to sue anyone who violates those statutes. So what does the union do but collect dues and use that money to influence elections?

Unions enjoy a unique monopolistic power over many aspects of the economy. This has been achieved by legislation which has forced men to join these unions, enacted by those same politicians who were indebted to the union for influencing their election outcomes, forcing both the employees and the employers to deal with these unions whether they wished to or not.

Non unionized workers enjoy the same steady rise in wages as their union counterparts, because it is in the economic self interest of employers to keep seasoned trained employees, rather than allow the competition to gobble them up. Those same workers are forced to subsidize the unjustifiably high wages of the union workers unacknowledged victims of the unions "social gains." Case in point, the Federal Government union employees.

Needless to say, men have the right to organize into unions, provided they do so voluntarily, so no one is forced to join. Unions can have value as a fraternal organization, as a means of keeping members informed of current market conditions, and effectively training skilled labor to new updates in their craft. But to say the unions cause a general rise in the standard of living is a myth, started by, you guessed it, the unions!

Unemployment is the inevitable result of forcing wage rates above their free market level. Again just look to the teacher's union, when faced with taking cuts or laying off workers, they opted for laying off workers. How does that serve the teachers? It's nothing but self serving to the bureaucrats who sponge off the union dues.

God Bless!
Capt. Bill


Monday, April 11, 2011

It's None Of Their Business!

In past posts I've laid out how our nation's tax revenue is directly proportionate to the GDP. It doesn't matter the level of taxation, the percent is irrelevant, as our production goes up, so does the income. So to address any shortfall it's important we encourage productivity. Yet there are those in Washington who continue to beat the drum, pressing the political power over economic power. Economic power, (that supplied by business) is a positive, it offers men a reward, an incentive, a payment, a value: political power is a negative, by threat of punishment, taxation. The businessman's tool is value, while the bureaucrat's tool is fear.

How many times have you heard a politician damning business for the economic downfall we are in? Wasn't it the "big business", or Wall Street that caused our woes? The politicians keep passing the buck, exonerating government and it's intrusion, switching the burden of guilt to the economic power of business. This turning business into the persecuted minority, the scapegoat of the bureaucrats. When in fact it was Washington's interference in the lending institutions that made the field ripe for picking.

Here we stand villainizing the very sector that holds the key to this mess, while the publicity seeking politician points the finger, without definable criteria or the burden of proof satisfied. We are in fact victims of scheming the statist, and the support of their financial backers, the unions. As long as those two have a say in how our economy is defined, expect similar results similar to what your currently familiar with.

God Bless!
Capt. Bill


Sunday, April 10, 2011

War Mongers!

As I study history it reveals some absolutely amazing things, and I have to chuckle as I listen to our elected officials in Washington, and their stance on war. Apparently the left wing liberals have an awful taste in their mouths about our involvement in any conflict, that uses our armed forces. They constantly squeal like pigs whenever there is a camera around, about how we are spending good tax payer dollars on all the conflict in the Middle East. This is consistent and traditional with the liberal party. They are the same people who back in the 1960's executed sit ins, and protested the Vietnam war by burning flags, bras, draft cards, and doing pretty much anything radical to get attention. Not much has changed, except they trade their radical actions for radical words.

In the same breath they suggest we could use that money for "social" programs, (that's code for socialist). Today's supposed peace loving left, professes love and concern for the survival of mankind, and all our military actions should be abolished. We should have no involvement in settling disputes militarily, yet these same peace nicks do not oppose dictatorships. The political views of the democratic party range through all spectrums of government intervention, from socialism to fascism, to communism. Many of them are outright members of the communist party.

So they are opposed to the use of coercion by one nation against another, but not by the government of a nation against it's own citizens. It's a no-no to have two parties have an armed conflict, but perfectly acceptable to have an armed government use force against it's unarmed citizens. Note: you might remember this next time a liberal is ranting about removing your second amendment right to bear arms. How many of our liberal politicians support the Middle East actions of those opposed to the nation of Israel? Those are all dictatorships fighting the democracy of our allies, especially the state of Israel. Have you also notice an affection for Hugo Chavez? Aren't they taking trips to visit the communist nation of Cuba, also a dictatorship?

Here's the interesting part of this hypocrisy, the liberal party is responsible for........

World War 1, credit, Woodrow Wilson, a liberal reformer. The result of this war led to not to democracy but the creation of three dictatorships

World War 2, credit Franklin D. Roosevelt, another "liberal", conservatives were opposed to our involvement in this war. They were smeared as, "isolationists," "reactionaries," and "America-Firster's"

The Korean Conflict, credit Harry Truman, liberal democrat.

Vietnam, credit John F. Kennedy. Do I need to point out he was also a democrat?

Iraq and Afghanistan, George Bush, okay you got me on one, or is that two?

Libya, that's all Obama's baby!

Kind of ironic those who tell us we cannot afford to be at war, and spent their youth protesting it, are the elected officials who get us involved in them. They are also supported of some of the most ruthless dictatorships in history. Is this a coincidence? I've also noticed the liberals are big proponents of the "have-nots", but has anyone noticed the "haves" are the countries that are rooted in freedom, not dictatorships? The degree of a country's freedom is the degree of it's prosperity. The democrats are commonly heard saying "poverty breeds war," but what breeds poverty? Pssst, a heavy handed government, socialism, fascism, or communism.......

God Bless!
Capt. Bill

Saturday, April 9, 2011

Charitable Responsibility!

There is a basic metaphysical fact of man's nature, that his survival is based upon his use of reason. Does anyone else feel that based upon the lack of reason of late, that man's very existence is threatened?

Anyone who has ever been an employer, or an employee, has even observed men at work, or has done an honest day's work himself knows the crucial role of ability, of intelligence, of a focused and competent mind- in any and all kinds of work, from the lowest form of labor, to the highest paid position. These are the roots of American exceptionalism! Our abundance was not created by sacrifices to "the common good," but by the productive genius of free men who pursued their own personal interests and the making of their own personal fortunes.

Altruism, the cloak the American left wraps itself in, seeks to rob intelligence of it's rewards by asserting that the moral duty of the competent, is to serve the incompetent, and sacrifice themselves to anyone's need. They even go a step further by denying the existence of intelligence and it's role in the creation of wealth. How many times have they sought to tax the heirs of those who've created wealth, and likened it to the winning of a lottery? It is morally obscene to regard wealth as an anonymous by-product of "the collective" and speak of it's redistribution. That my friends is up to the creator of the wealth as to what charity they wish to support.

This and this alone is responsible for our country's economic problems. Depressions and mass unemployment is never caused by those who create wealth, (this is for you Washington, quit blaming Wall Street), it's caused by government interference in the economy, and it's attempt to level men down to some common denominator, by interfering with charitable donations, assuming government knows best what to do with it's citizen's money. Funding of entitlements for their own personal gain, and bankrupting the tax pool.

How do we solve this? Simple....In a culture where such a statement is made, the guilty are not the left wing collectivists; the guilty are those who, lack the courage to challenge the altruists. We are afraid they'll play the morality card. The simplest of weapons lie right in our won checkbooks, be above reproach with your charity. It shows how irrational it is for them to label your morals, defeating the argument for the redistribution of wealth! Then shine the spotlight on your critic, and let's wash their charitable donations with the cleansing light of exposure. All too often, those who are pointing the finger at you are overly guilty of neglecting charitable causes. They hide behind the current redistribution of wealth the government uses our taxes for.

Leadership and the creation of wealth has it's responsibilities. We need to hold ourselves personally accountable to the small minority who are unable rather than unwilling to work, so the altruists have no excuse for government intervention. It's your hard earned money, let it be your decision what causes it supports!

God Bless!
Capt. Bill

Friday, April 8, 2011


There are some real meaty tidbits that our leadership, the members of our government, and we ourselves, should either remember, or be taught. They are simple premises that a free nation is founded upon....

The basic principle governing justice is; no man can obtain values from others without the owner's consent and, as a corollary, that man's rights may not be left at the mercy of unilateral decision, the arbitrary choice,the irrationality, the whim of another man.

The purpose of law and government is the protection of individual rights. All laws must be based on individual rights and be aimed at their protection.

There is only one basic principle to which an individual must consent if he wishes to live in a free, civilized society; The separation of whim and force. Remember that the forcible restrain of men is the only service the government really has to offer!

And finally, the Constitution is a limitation of the government, not on private individuals, and it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of government- it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizens' protection against the government.

While your on your leadership journey, it's important to know what you believe, and why you believe it. What's posted above should hit you like a brick, it is the eye opening moment that clarifies where Washington has gone astray.

God Bless!
Capt. Bill

Thursday, April 7, 2011

The "ISM" of Freedom!

Capitalism allows a man to be a sovereign individual, who owns his person, his mind, his life, his work and it's products. It's a social system based on the recognition of individual rights, including property rights, where property and all it produces is privately owned. It allows men to be free, independent individuals, the premise of the founding fathers. It's based on the right to life, which is the source of all rights, including the right to property!

There are those who want your gains to become property of the state. They feel you are part of the collective. Your efforts should be to serve the tribe, an indentured servant, if you will. Allowing them to control your property, your production, your products, and expropriate it for the good of the state, in the manner they please. If they observe a shoemaker, they find it difficult to understand he is working in order to make a living, and to survive. It is their belief his real purpose, and duty, is to provide society with shoes.

What's really sad is, those same people, when they hear the communist doctrine that all property should belong to the state, they reject it emphatically, and claim they'd fight that tyranny to their death. Yet in the same breath, speak of government's duty to effect "a fair redistribution of wealth." The entrepreneur is taxed, because he owes the tribe, (society), as they could have prospered without the collective's natural resources.

Isn't that a bit hypocritical?

God Bless!
Capt. Bill

Wednesday, April 6, 2011

Man Overboard!

The headlines are chock full of the threat of a government shutdown because Congress has failed to pass a budget. Both sides are at odds over how our tax dollars are to be spent. I don't think it's a secret that the democrats would feel more comfortable if they didn't have the constraints of a budget to tie their hands when it comes to spending. After all, if they were fiscally responsible, the budget would already be in place, as it was the responsibility of the former Congress. The "old guard" republicans want spending reeled in, but not at the expense of their next election. They lack the political will to make the hard core cuts this nation needs to get back on track financially. The newly elected members of the Tea Party, want a balanced budget and America to live within their means, they believe that's what they were elected to do. Who's right?

What we have here is akin to a sinking ship. There is a giant hole in the bottom, and the waters of deficit are pouring in, threatening to sink our vessel. The democrats want to buy more bilge pumps, and keep the status quo. They don't see the problem as long as they are afloat. The "old guard" republicans want to patch the hole with some duct tape, and keep those bilge pumps running. They only wish to bring the vessel to port and let the next crew deal with the issue. The Tea Party representatives want to bring the boat to the yard, have it hauled out, and go through the painful and costly task of repairing the hole, so the vessel is sound and can weather any storm that might come it's way.

Now as a passenger on this yacht, which one do you feel most comfortable with having command? Effective leadership always shines when exposed to the light of day!

God Bless!
Capt. Bill

Tuesday, April 5, 2011

David And Goliath!

I heard an interesting talk given by Orrin Woodward just the other day, about taking personal responsibility, and doing it in a timely manner. Now if I addressed that topic like I just did, how many of you would be anxious to listen? That's the genius of his teaching! Orrin likened the issue of personal responsibility to the battle of David and Goliath. The Goliaths in your life are the issues you need to hold yourself accountable for. Maybe for you it's finance, perhaps it's a family relationship. Just maybe you need to get yourself into the gym, and work on your fitness. How about your faith, are you comfortable with your relationship with God?

We all have our Goliaths, but the interesting point is if they aren't confronted in a timely manner, they double or triple in size when you next confront them. Does that financial obligation become any easier to pay if tossed aside out of fear, or does it ease your mind to confront it, and get it off your plate? Don't we have enough to concern ourselves with, without causing unnecessary stress by avoiding confrontation? How many times have we said, "that wasn't as bad as I thought it would be," after handling an issue that was causing us undue stress? Don't let your Goliath grow! He's only as big as you allow him to become. He feeds on your fear, and intimidates you, only with your permission. In the immortal words of Larry the Cable Guy, "Git er done!"

God Bless!
Capt. Bill

Monday, April 4, 2011

Why America, And GM, Are Broke!

Time for a little liberal government math! The Chevrolet volt, General Motors answer to the green economy, and President Obama's signature issue list price (MSRP) is $40,280.00 plus tax title and delivery charges. It's combined EPA fuel economy rating is 60 miles per gallon. After 90,000 miles it needs it's battery bank replaced to the tune of about $7,200.00. During that period of time it'll consume 1,500 gallons of gas to travel 90,000 miles. The government has decided in order to convince you to purchase this economy car, it has to ask the tax payers to rebate you a $7,500.00 tax credit. So for you to travel 90,000 miles, disregarding normal maintenance costs, (tires, belts, brakes, hoses, etc) your going to have....
Purchase price $40,280
Battery replacement $7200
Fuel cost @$3.50/ Gal. $5250
Federal tax rebate -$7500.00
Total investment $45230

In contrast the Ford Motor Company offers a vehicle for comparison they named the Fusion. The suggested retail price is $ 19,280.00 plus tax,tag, title, and delivery fees. A $21,000.00 dollar savings on the retail price alone! Maybe that's because the government didn't have to bail them out? Anyway, it's EPA fuel economy rating is 27 MPG combined, not quite as fuel friendly. The fuel to operate this vehicle 90,000 miles will be 3334 gallons, just a hair over twice as much as the Volt. It'll cost the consumer $11,669.00 to operate this vehicle 90,000 miles. No Federal Tax Rebate, no Battery bank replacement. If it does need a battery, we can expect to pay less than $150.00. So this total cost to the consumer is....
Purchase price $19,280.00
Battery replacement $150.00
Fuel cost @ $3.50/ Gal. $11669.00
No Federal Tax Rebate
Total investment $ 31,099

Difference in cost to the consumer to operate both vehicles 90,000 miles, $14,131.00, the Volt loses. That's after the Federal Government, (you and me), gifts the Volt owner $7500.00. Realistically, if the Volt had to stand on it's own, the cost to the consumer to operate this green technology would be a $21,631.00 difference, again the Volt loses. Is it a mystery to anyone reading this why they only sell 200 a month? Do you now understand with this type of financial logic in Washington, why this country is so far in debt? With the difference between the two vehicles, I could buy a spare Fusion, and put twice as many people to work at the Ford Assembly Plant. This would also generate more tax revenue, and lower the jobless rate. Here's another ditty, the extra fuel it takes to run the Fusion is taxed by the Federal, State, and Local Governments. Pssst, Washington, this generates twice as much revenue!!!!!

Wait, I forgot something! It also costs the Volt owner $2,000.00 to update the electrical system in his garage and install the charger for this car, add that to the bottom line. But wait, there's more..... How much greater is the Volt owner's electric bill? I didn't include that! How much coal does it burn to create the electricity to charge this green machine? Is the coal we burn cleaner than operating a modern day automobile engine for the same distance a charge gives the Volt? Want to bet the carbon footprint is worse for the coal?

Never step over a dollar to pick up a dime, (from the mind of Orrin Woodward).

God Bless!
Capt. Bill

Sunday, April 3, 2011

Who Serves Who?

It's really interesting the twist from the norm this experiment we call America has brought to the world. Imagine, if you will, back in the day, countries were ruled by monarchs, and/or tyrants. Citizens were overseen by a ruler. People were put on earth to serve the ruler. Then along comes along this country that declares, enough!

Our forefathers designed and implemented a form of government where it's function was to serve the people, not visa versa! The Constitution mandated what a government cannot do, and the Bill of rights was directed against government control and for the freedom of the individual. An exclusive declaration of individual rights that supercede any public or social power! They focused on the concept of individual rights and gave birth to a free society.

Does anyone recognize that model anymore? The elderly rely on government to pay them a retirement bonus. The poor to feed and house them. The sick to pay for their health care. They pay the unemployed to remain idle. Instead of focusing on the power of the individual, we look to "collectively bargain," union workers benefits and pay increases. We've begun to rely on the government to fill the role of a charitable organization, and we forfeit our tax dollars as donations to continue this assault on individual responsibility. I'm afraid we've strayed from the intent of the original design.

Each and everyone of us has a responsibility to ourselves, and our nation. It's time to remind ourselves what independence means. We are morally and ethically bound to rely upon government as little as possible, in every situation. Each time government intercedes for us, we, by default gift our independence to a bureaucracy that will treat us like a herd. One size fits all! Are we individuals, or a flock of sheep? Every step toward dependence on government is a step way from freedom.

God Bless!
Capt. Bill

Saturday, April 2, 2011

Society Demands?

When involved in a conversation, has anyone ever coined the phrase, "society demands,"... blah, blah, blah? It seems whenever a discussion occurs about current social or economic terms, someone will pull out the, "society demands," card. Society cannot demand anything, it's not an entity, it's a collective. When someone hands you this explanation during a discussion, they've just revealed a strong tendency toward a socialist view. They view the will of the "collective" over the rights of the individual. This is simply an excuse for twisting morality, or ethics. Society cannot be held accountable, ergo, that's how they excuse bad behavior. The individual can be held accountable, they actually exist as something to be held responsible for their actions. Granting permission for a mythical entity's collective opinion absolves individual ethics!

It's what makes America such a great nation. We invented a political system that encourages and holds the individual as a moral contributor. There are two potential violators of man's individual rights: the criminals and government. If each man, woman, and child protects their individuality, society, or the government cannot infringe on their rights. America forbids the government from legally acting like criminals by enforcing the rights of each person, not the collective. We break free from the herd, encouraging each citizen to pursue entrepreneurial endeavors within a moral code of conduct. Any attempt to put the collective demands of society on that premise, is an assault on individual freedom!

God Bless!
Capt. Bill

Friday, April 1, 2011

America's Finest!

In my never ending study of leadership, spurred on by my mentor, Orrin Woodward, I've taken his advice and sought out historical examples of great leadership. Arguably, one of America's pillars of leadership has been George Washington. I thought I'd share a comparison of Washington and Napoleon, written in 1932 by Noel Porter, Arch Deacon of California....

"Finally Washington manifested the spirit of the Cross of Jesus Christ-the spirit of self sacrifice and unselfish service. During the time that Washington lived there was another great general in the person of Napoleon. Napoleon was a great military genius, but Washington was the greater man. France can never repay Napoleon for rescuing her from the hands of the despoilers; yet while he waded through the seas of blood he thought only of a crown and a bauble for his son. Washington waded through blood and hunger and privation for his country's sake and when it was done he asked no reward save to be left alone in his Virginia farm. Napoleon asked for a crown and received nothing; Washington asked for nothing and received a crown."

Washington was a selfless soldier committed to his calling, strategically minded, fearless in battle, concerned for the welfare of his soldiers and civilians alike. It's easy to see why he's taken his place in history as a premier example of leadership.

God Bless!
Capt. Bill