HP bloatware can slow down your computer

I've turned off some of the programs, but some may still be running in the background and slowing down the computer. I may end up deleting most of it. Here is some advice about it from a forum:

Re: HP Advisor

03-09-2010 05:08 PM

Here's what HP software and hardware I removed from my HDX 18 and my dv8 : The first list is the software

1) HP Media Smart Flash Demo. (it's a demonstration an advertisement if you will ; it takes up space on the hard drive)

2) HP Support Assistant ( this one is very annoying, it runs in the back ground and starts up from boot and slows the computer down on start up. I don't want HP telling me that there is an update from HP to download some of there poorly designed software: if the HP software is working then LEAVE IT ALONE !)

3) HP Update ( another HP program that keeps the laptop busy. Again it starts up on boot and makes for a slow start up. Don't let HP update any of its own software. If it's working then leave it alone. Up dates should only be done if you are having problems with the software and not simply because there is an update available.

4) HP user Guides ( this is a big program, when I uninstalled it, it took about 7 minutes before it was finished. Windows has it's own guides and help topics with in the operating system, I found I simply did not need two. To this day I have never missed this software and even if it was still on my machines I never needed to access it.

5) HP Wireless Assistant ( Windows already has the software to turn off and on the WiFi and Blue Tooth radios. You don't need another from HP to do the same thing. To access the Windows WiFi switch go to control panel > choose icon view > find Windows Mobility Center > top row, far right box, you can turn it off and on from there. The Blue Tooth radio can be controlled with in the software itself. Go to your tool bar > if the Blue-tooth icon is not there then click the "show hidden icons arrow" > right click on the Blue Tooth icon > a list will appear > find "turn adapter off", second from the bottom. You can toggle between off and on. The Blue hot key above the key board turns both radios off and on all at ounce. Just to note that the Blue Tooth radio is actually a HP product, but you don't need the HP Wireless Assistant to control it.

There are a number of other HP programs as well. HP media Smart TV. I am in Canada, this didn't work up here, nothing was available. HP Media Smart Live TV. Again this didn't work in Canada. HP Media Smart MPV. If I get a cam-corder I will more than likely use the software that will come with it to edit my videos. HP Media Smart Smart Menu. This you need, it contains the software for the volume control and the eject button on the hot keys for my dv8 and HDX 18. I could uninstall it and use the volume control in the tool bar and simply use the eject button on the side of the dvd tray. It's your choice. HP Media Smart Web Cam. This is needed for the small camera on the lid at the top of the screen. HP tone Control. This is the software that controls the bass and treble hot keys. HP Media Smart Sling Player ??? Still haven't figured out what this is for. I uninstalled it and so far I haven't missed it.

HP drivers :

1) HP Drive Guard : This is very necessary if you drop your laptop. The software detects a fall and locks the hard drive to keep itself from being damaged on impact.

2) Hp Integrated module with Bluetooth wireless technology : You need this obviously for your Blue Tooth radio ( although if you were to uninstall it the windows software would take over)

3) Hp Quick Launch Buttons : I have uninstalled this. It is thought that it somehow interacts with the hot keys on these models. If some one could tell me what the use is, for this driver, well be my guest. The only thing that I have discovered where this software is needed is on my mothers 3 year old dv7. This some-what bloated software provides the audible clicking sounds when the volume is adjusted. When I uninstalled it that was the only thing that was affected. All the hot keys worked normally other wise.

All of the above can simply be reinstalled from the recovery manager. Open the recovery manager from the all programs list. On the far right pane there are choices to install the drivers and the software. Just follow the prompts to reinstall any of the software or hardware if you find it necessary to reinstall things that you have removed.

This also applies to Vista. How ever the recovery manager is arranged differently than In Windows 7, but it still does the same thing.

These instructions are for my HDX 18 and for my dv8. I am sure they will also work on most HP models. All of what I learned is from when I did a full install of a retail copy of Windows 7 on my HDX. I found out exactly what the bare minimum it took to operate my laptop and I found that most of the problematic HP stuff was not needed. It was really nice starting from scratch. All there was, was the operating system and nothing installed in "programs and features"

Most of the stuff seems redundant. I'd like to keep the "HP Health Check" Software, but I don't want it to run automatically, and to automatically update itself. It's MY computer, and I should be the one who decides if and when those things should happen.

I found this advice about turning off the HP Health Check:

Re: Turning off HP Health Check

04-04-2010 02:11 PM - last edited on 04-04-2010 06:44 PM

Try this: Go to the task manager and then "services" on the bottom left find "services" again and maximise. Look for HP health check services in the list and right click on it. About in the middle of that box is a drop down box that gives you choices on what that service does...choose to disable it and restart your machine. I just discovered that in order to disable the service you have to stop it first. If you try to disable with out stopping first it may say "access denied"

Personally I have uninstalled all of the HP stuff from my dv8 as I have no use for the HP bloat ware in my machine. I can always reinstall it from the recovery manager. It will allow you to install specific drivers and software.

If you choose to uninstall it just make sure it's listed in the recovery manager or on the HP web site specific to your model.

In all honesty you will probably never miss it. See this thread about HP bloat ware. [...]

So I went to apply this on my Windows 7 laptop. I would describe it as thus:

Go to "Control Panel/System Security/Administrative Tools". Click on "Services (Local)". Select/highlight "HP Health Check" from the list. To the right some options will appear, to "stop" or "restart" the service. Stop the service.

Then right click on "HP Health Check", and from the drop down menu that appears, select properties. A window will open that provides you some options.

In the center is an option for "start up type". It has a drop down menu next to it. The default selection is "automatic". You can choose "disable" as one of the options, but I chose "manual". Then I clicked on the "apply" button in the lower right, then on the "OK" button.

I hope that does it, but if that doesn't work out, I'll go back in and try "disable". Eventually I may start deleting a lot of the other stuff too. I don't want programs I'm not using and don't need, sucking up my system resources.
     

The book "When Money Dies" is back in print

When it was out of print, only used copies were available, and were selling for more than $900.00. Now the book has been republished and is available for a very affordable $10.00 on Amazon.com:



When Money Dies: The Nightmare of Deficit Spending, Devaluation, and Hyperinflation in Weimar Germany

Product Description

When Money Dies is the classic history of what happens when a nation’s currency depreciates beyond recovery. In 1923, with its currency effectively worthless (the exchange rate in December of that year was one dollar to 4,200,000,000,000 marks), the German republic was all but reduced to a barter economy. Expensive cigars, artworks, and jewels were routinely exchanged for staples such as bread; a cinema ticket could be bought for a lump of coal; and a bottle of paraffin for a silk shirt. People watched helplessly as their life savings disappeared and their loved ones starved. Germany’s finances descended into chaos, with severe social unrest in its wake.

Money may no longer be physically printed and distributed in the voluminous quantities of 1923. However, “quantitative easing,” that modern euphemism for surreptitious deficit financing in an electronic era, can no less become an assault on monetary discipline. Whatever the reason for a country’s deficit—necessity or profligacy, unwillingness to tax or blindness to expenditure—it is beguiling to suppose that if the day of reckoning is postponed economic recovery will come in time to prevent higher unemployment or deeper recession. What if it does not? Germany in 1923 provides a vivid, compelling, sobering moral tale.

“Engrossing and sobering.” —Daily Express (London)

Chilling, because it really happened. A timely lesson from the past for us all. There are some interesting comments about the book in the customer review section too.

Also see:

Has US Currency already "collapsed"?

What would a U.S. currency collapse look like?

What happens when Tax Cuts Expire in 2011?

Our true national debt: $130,000,000,000,000.

Argentina's Example: Are we heading there?


   

"TV White Space" next step in WiFi Revolution

"WiFi on steroids" gets final rules, drops spectrum sensing

At its monthly meeting today, all five FCC Commissioners set disagreements (mostly) aside and unanimously supported the final rules that will open empty TV channels to unlicensed broadband use. If all goes according to plan, these "TV white spaces" will be the raw material that unleashes another WiFi revolution—but this time with longer range, better building penetration, and even more speed.

White space devices will still need to query a special geolocation database before transmitting, in order to avoid broadcasting over existing TV channels and wireless mic users, but the FCC has ditched the expensive "spectrum sensing" tech it initially required back in 2008. On a conference call yesterday, reps from Google, Dell, and Public Knowledge worried that a requirement to include both the database check and spectrum-sensing hardware would make the new white space devices too costly and too difficult to build, while broadcasters and microphone users have long argued both techniques are necessary to avoid any interference.

In addition, the agency decided to handle the contentious issues of wireless microphones (most of which won't be recorded in the database) by setting aside two empty channels in every market for exclusive microphone use. Each channel should accommodate 12-16 wireless mics, but large productions (think NFL games or Broadway shows) can petition the FCC for more spectrum in advance; if approved, these productions would be temporarily added to the geolocation database.

The FCC meeting featured the "first appearance of an iPad" in the Commission's meeting room, as Chairman Genachowski noted, but it also featured a show of unity that has been hard to come by during more contentious proceedings, like the one about net neutrality. Every Commissioner loves the idea of white space devices, and each talked up the potential benefits of white space devices in no uncertain terms.
[...]

Another step towards wireless everywhere.
 

The "Jobless" Recovery. A Second "Dip"?

Recession May Be Over, but Joblessness Remains

The United States economy has lost more jobs than it has added since the recovery began over a year ago.

Yes, you read that correctly.

The downturn officially ended, and the recovery officially began, in June 2009, according to an announcement Monday by the official arbiter of economic turning points. Since that point, total output — the amount of goods and services produced by the United States — has increased, as have many other measures of economic activity.

[...]

The declaration of the recession’s end confirms what many suspected: The 2007-9 recession was not only the longest post-World War II recession, but also the deepest, in terms of both job losses and at least one measure of output declines.

The announcement also implies that any contraction that might lie ahead would be a separate and distinct recession, and one that the Obama administration could not claim to have inherited. While economists generally say such a double-dip recession seems unlikely, new monthly estimates of gross domestic product, released by two committee members, show that output shrank in May and June, the most recent months for which data are available. Output and other factors would have to shrink for a longer period of time before another contraction might be declared.

Even without a full-blown double dip in the economy, the recovery thus far has been so anemic that the job picture seems likely to stagnate, and perhaps even get worse, in the near future.

Many forecasters estimate that output needs to grow over the long run by about 2.5 percent to keep the unemployment rate, now at 9.6 percent, constant. The economy grew at an annual rate of just 1.6 percent in the second quarter of this year, and private forecasts indicate growth will not be much better in the third quarter. (The Business Cycle Dating Committee itself does not engage in forecasting.)

“The amount of unemployment we’ve already got and the slowness of recovery lead to predictions that we could have 9-plus percent unemployment even through the next presidential election,” said Robert J. Gordon, an economics professor at Northwestern University and a committee member.

“What’s really unique about this recession is the amount of unemployment in combination with the slowness of the recovery,” he said. “That’s just not happened before. We had a sharp recession followed by a sharp recovery in the 1980s. And in ’91 and ’01 we had slow recoveries, but those recessions were shallow recessions, so the slowness didn’t matter much.” [...]

The rest of the article compares this recession and recovery with ones that have occurred previously, and looks for explanations to account for the differences. Some of their findings are interesting, but the real question they should be asking is: "Why aren't employers hiring?" There ARE reasons. See the links below:

Why the "Recovery" is stalling

What happens when Tax Cuts Expire in 2011?

Obama's Anti-Business Policies Are Our Economic Katrina
     

Too much of a good thing? Are too many wireless plug-ins turning us into "The Borg"?

802.11n Wi-Fi making huge impact 1 year after standard ratified
Wave of RF innovation leading to Ethernet-like Wi-Fi

Shipments of 802.11n access points have accelerated since the IEEE standard was formally approved one year ago. But what the numbers alone don't show is the new reality of Wi-Fi networks: they are fast becoming the preferred way to connect and stay connected in the enterprise.

And that reality is sparking new demand from enterprise customers, and new innovation from wireless LAN vendors, to make Wi-Fi networks "work" like wired Ethernet – reliably, consistently, securely – for all kinds of traffic, including video.

"Enterprise wireless LAN vendors are continuing to work on spectrum management and other features for 2011 to create a self-adapting, self-healing wireless LAN," says Paul DeBeasi, vice president, research director, with Gartner's network and telecom strategies group. "The idea is a wireless network that will function like a wired network in terms of performance and reliability."

Ground zero for the 11n revolution is the college campus, with hospitals not far behind. Colleges and universities have a growing population of the unplugged: students who've never used an Ethernet cable. They have the expectation that whatever device they have will be able to connect wirelessly, and handle games, YouTube videos and "American Idol", all in addition to classroom applications.

What's more, says Jeffrey Sessler, director, information technology at Scripps College, Claremont, Calif., is that each student often now has "multiple Wi-Fi-enabled devices needing regular access." One student can have a game console, smartphone or Skype phone, laptop or tablet (or even both), printer, and Internet radio/alarm clock. [...]

When I was in college, I had an Underwood manual typewriter that wasn't wirelessly connected to anything. And neither was I. Somehow, I got by.

I'm not a Luddite, I love technology, when it's used wisely. It's just that I've noticed that the younger generation seems increasingly "plugged into" something, all the time. When people are always plugged into something that's bombarding them with information, it has to start to "shape" them. Perhaps even create a psychological dependency. I start to wonder what they would be like, without all the plug-ins.

Ideally, all this "information technology" is supposed to improve our lives by making our everyday reality easier by making the exchange and flow of information easier. But to what extent is it now creating our reality? Even a kind of "virtual" reality, a kind of mass-mind or "hive" consciousness, that actually distracts us from the more ordinary reality of just being alive, a living human being, the way we were in the pre-wireless world?

I used to take breaks from the computer and the internet, just stop using it for days or even weeks at a time, because I felt that using it constantly and relentlessly kind of put me in a "artificial" state of mind, living in a world of ideas more than living in the actual world I'm living in. Taking breaks from it made me feel more balanced. And when I went back to the computer/internet, I would enjoy it more, because of the contrast.

Nowadays, I find it harder to take those breaks. Oh sure, I take short breaks, but not for long. At minimum, I have to consult the internet to find out what the weather is going to be like, to see the on-line satellite maps, so I can plan my day on the farm or at work in town. Then there are work-related emails, and things I need to buy that I have to do on-line, or items or things I need to research on-line.

Clearly, I've become more dependent on the machine. But still, I'm not plugged in ALL the time. I don't have "the expectation that whatever device I have will be able to connect wirelessly", nor do I have "multiple Wi-Fi-enabled devices needing regular access." That just sounds kinda, well, creepy. People may want all that stuff; but do they really need it?

And let's not forget, that all this "wireless" stuff is done through radio waves. As this wireless radio traffic continues to increase, it's literally passing through our bodies and our brains. We may not be experiencing it on a conscious level, but does it affect us on an unconscious or subconscious level?

Have you ever been to a place that was so remote, that there were few or no radio waves? I have, and it seemed very quiet and restful in a way I had not experienced before. If I had not experienced that contrast, I would never have known about it. Such places are going to be increasingly hard to find in a wireless world.

No, I am not against radio waves or wireless devices. I enjoy them and think they are good things. I'm just asking, if perhaps it's possible that we are on the verge of overdoing, of over-indulging in a good thing, to the point where it's no longer such a good thing?

The rest of the article is about the growing use of wireless technology, and the changes that are coming. Whether we want them or not.

I know people have made these same arguments about other kinds of technology, like electricity and automobiles, etc. They all changed the way we live, and to some degree changed us. Most would argue that the changes have been mostly positive. We adapted, and struck a balance, to insure that the changes were positive. I suppose we will do the same with the wireless revolution. It's just that the idea of wireless everywhere, all the time, 24/7, seems so darn invasive. It will be yet another balancing act we will have to manage in our coming Brave New World.


Also see:

Bi-sacksual struggles with social networking
     

Restoring the Constitution to it's rightful place

It's being butchered piece by piece; can it be restored by a similar process?

Taking back Constitution piece by piece

It is an immutable fact that the Constitution is the law of the land, but the law of the land should not be presumed to be immutable.

It isn’t.

No artifact of the human mind can be maintained intact like a formalin-preserved insect on a pin. No matter how much comfort it would give us to have predictability and certainty in our law, the elements of human curiosity and cussedness would always give rise to unpredictability and chaos.

This introduces the possibility of improvement, whether through design or through accident, but it also raises the spectre of decline, whether through stupidity or sabotage.

Improvements have come in the form of amendments that accomplished the abolition of slavery and giving women the right to vote. Those were both long overdue by the time they passed.

But there have also been mistakes made in the amendment process, including the prohibition of alcohol and the decision to turn senators into panderers by making them directly electable by the people instead of through the choice of each state’s legislature.

With more than a hundred years of monkey-wrenching the prime law of the land through “progressive” court decisions, there is also lots of damage to undo that is based on “precedent” rather than the plain language of the Constitution.

You could start with the Commerce Clause, which has been shaped into a choke collar to restrict the freedom of the people to engage in trade and seek prosperity. You could start by re-instituting real limits on the powers of Congress or the president, as enumerated in Articles I and II. You could force the nation to honor the Ninth and 10th Amendments, which are included in the Bill of Rights but might as well have been written in invisible ink since they are treated as if they were nonexistent by the Supreme Court, Congress and many presidents. [...]

It's worth reading the whole thing. But we've already reached the point where many people don't know what the Constitution says, and they don't care. In fact, many see it as an obstacle to "progress", and want it abolished.

More people need to wake up, before it's too late.
     

"Restoring Honor" attracts big crowd

I was wondering if they would manage to fill up the mall.  They did. 300,000:

‘Restoring Honor’ at the Lincoln Memorial; Update: Live Stream Included

‘Restoring Honor’: The Day After Wrap-Up & Whitewash

Alveda King speaks on whether her uncle Martin Luther King Jr. would stand with Glenn Beck or NAACP on Aug. 28
     

Ground Zero Mosque: How close is it?

I call this too close for comfort:

Here’s Why It’s Called the ‘Ground Zero Mosque’

Much has been written about the so-called “Ground Zero Mosque” and its proximity to where the World Trade Center towers once stood, but here’s an aereal photo that puts the location into perspective.

The red box is the old Burlington Coat Factory building where landing gear from one of the hijacked planes crashed through the roof, and it is the proposed site for Park51 [...]

I am against this choice of a site, for reasons previously mentioned.

President Obama is right that legally, the mosque builders have the right to build there.  And if our laws mean anything, and are to be applied to all citizens equally, then it cannot and must not be legally stopped.  If we did so, the mosque builders could rightly claim that we lie about upholding our own laws, and don't apply them equally. That must not happen; we are better than that.

However, the mosque builders themselves claim they are building this place as a bridge to promote peace and understanding.  Their insistence on doing so, in a place that causes offense to so many people, beLIES their claim.  It's being seen for what it is; arrogant, insensitive and confrontational, and meant to provoke an angry response. A "bridge" to nowhere.

The Democrat leadership is largely supporting them in this provocation, because the Democrat party has been using a divide and conquer strategy for some time now.  They divide people up into groups, and pit them against each other, then offer themselves and their growing, bloated bureaucracy as the solution to conflicts they helped foster in the first place.

If you want to put restraints on that practice, vote them out in November.

As for the mosque builders, if you disapprove of their choice of location, use your legal right to free speech and let them know about it. The more our objections fall on deaf ears, the more they look like the transparent liars that they surely are.

Beware of the practitioners of Al-Takeyya. Their words hide their true intentions. And in cases like this, their actions speak louder than their lies.


Also see:

An atheist on the GZ mosque

The Mosque and Ground Zero!

The mosque - this made me think

Freedom of religion - let's make a deal with the Muzzies

The principle of al-Taqiyya

     

Afganistan: Russia returns as America departs

Russia Returns to Afghanistan with the U.S.'s Blessing

[...] Mounting Russian concerns that Islamist militancy and cheap drugs emanating from Afghanistan are a threat to its national security have made Moscow refocus on the region even as the U.S. and its NATO allies maneuver to draw down. Two decades after the Soviet army left Afghanistan in humiliating defeat, Russia is poised to spend billions in the war-wracked country to develop infrastructure, mineral and energy reserves, with new plans taking shape to boost military capability. This time around, it has America's blessing.

Mutual interests intersect in the former Cold War battleground. Nearly nine years on, the Taliban-led insurgency is costing the U.S. more lives and money than ever before. With a July 2011 deadline looming for troops to begin their withdrawal, the Obama Administration has been angling for regional partners to step in and shoulder a greater share of the burden.

[...]

Large-scale investment may also enter Afghanistan to help shore up the embattled Karzai regime - and to make money. Russian companies are currently trying to secure deals to upgrade dozens of Soviet-era installations, among them a $500 million plan to reconstruct hydroelectric plants and a similarly ambitious bid to build wells and irrigation systems in the Afghan countryside. Rosneft, the state-owned oil and gas giant, is exploring potentially lucrative gas fields in the north, while other companies are said to be hunting for minerals such as iron and aluminum. With big bucks to be made in a war economy, Russian officials and business leaders make no secret that they are out to help themselves to the spoils.

Moscow's decade-long occupation of Afghanistan from 1980 to 1989 may have left the Russians with advantages. Many Soviet-educated Afghans who fled the country under the Taliban have since returned, adding a degree of competence to a fledgling government - with perhaps more affinity for Moscow than for Washington. And, according to Haroun Mir, director of Afghanistan's Center for Research and Policy Studies, ex-communists heavily represented in the upper ranks of the national police and army remain the backbone of the security establishment. "They are knowledgeable and well-trained and we have to rely on them until a new corps can fill the vacuum," he says.

Faced with bigger worries and less reliable neighbors, the U.S. and NATO appear willing to accept growing Russian influence. "At this point, we can't afford to be too selective in terms of where we get help," says one Western diplomat in Kabul. Indeed, the gathering flurry of activity in Afghanistan is a sign: Russia is back.

Afghan president questions US timeline for leaving

[...] A statement by Karzai's office said the Afghan leader told the U.S. delegation that significant progress had been made in rebuilding the country after decades of war.

But he said the campaign against the Taliban and al-Qaida had faltered because of ongoing civilian casualties during NATO military operations and a lack of focus on "destroying the terrorists' refuge" across the border.

Karzai also said President Barack Obama's announcement that he would begin withdrawing U.S. forces from Afghanistan in July 2011 has given "the enemy a morale boost" because they believe they can simply hold out until the Americans leave.

Rep. Bob Inglis, a Republican from South Carolina and one of the four U.S. congressmen who attended the one-hour meeting, said Karzai focused primarily on criticism of private security contractors and the role of Afghan forces in the war.

Karzai has ordered all Afghan and international security contractors to cease operations by the end of the year, saying they have abused Afghan civil rights and undermined the authority of the state.

Karzai also emphasized that Afghans should take the lead in going into villages to clear out Taliban, with U.S. soldiers behind them playing a supporting role, Inglis told The Associated Press.

"I was glad he said that because it indicated a level of ownership and commitment to Afghans taking charge of the task," Inglis said. But, "I think it's an open question as to whether the Afghan security forces (are) at that level as of yet."

Karzai also raised concerns about Taliban hideouts in Pakistan, Inglis said, asking the lawmakers to provide more help in trying to stop attacks from across the border.

"He seemed pretty pumped up, very determined and energetic and optimistic, which was not the way I thought we'd find him," Inglis said.

Inglis said the lawmakers raised the issue of corruption and that Karzai assured them he is working on it. Karzai tried to describe the difference between low-level corruption and high-level corruption, but the lawmakers told him both were unacceptable, Inglis said. [...]

Yeah, whatever. I'm sure the Russian's won't bother Karzai with those pesky corruption complaints. As for the terrorists across the border in Pakistan. Russia may deal with them, IF they think it's in their interest to do so. Or perhaps they will make an alliance with them, to try to gain a foothold in Pakistan. The Russians are always over-reaching, so who knows?

Anyway, we won't have much to say about it once we are gone.
     

Ford Fiesta makes it's return to the USA

Ford Fiesta earns top safety award

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The new Ford Fiesta was chosen as a Top Safety Pick by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety on Wednesday, becoming the first minicar to win the top rating since the group added a rollover test to its requirements.

Both the 2011 Fiesta sedan and hatchback versions received top ratings for front, side, rollover, and rear crash protection, the IIHS said. The car was also praised for having electronic stability control as standard equipment.

But the award only applies to Fiestas built after July 2010, when Ford made design changes to minimize the possibility of doors opening in side impact crashes, according to IIHS.

[...]

Ford (F, Fortune 500) announced plans to reintroduce the Fiesta in the United States earlier this year as part of a plan to offer more small, fuel efficient cars. Along with the other major U.S. automakers, Ford sales have been slowly recovering after falling sharply during the Great Recession.

The 2011 Fiesta, with a base sticker price of $15,120, can travel an estimated 40 miles on one gallon of gasoline.

However, it remains to be seen how Fiesta sales will fare domestically.

More than 12 million Fiestas have been sold in Europe since it was introduced there in 1976. But the car was only sold in the U.S. market for a brief period between 1978 to 1980.

Well, it looks like a considerable improvement over the Fiesta's I remember from my youth. Still, not all reviews are thrilled:

2011 Ford Fiesta: I wish I could like it better

But in the comments section after that review, the reviewer himself is heavily criticized for nit-picking. The Fiesta is, after all, an ECONOMY car. Fine for tootling around town, great mileage, and safe too.


It's a great economy car to add to Ford's lineup. I hope it does well.


Also see:

The Ford 2009 Fiesta ECOnetic gets 65 mpg!
     

Congratulations to Emmy winner Ann-Margret!

Read why she is is "One of the good ones":

Why It’s Nice That Ann-Margret Won An Emmy Last Night

On Saturday night here in Los Angeles legendary actor Ann-Margret finally won an Emmy after 6 previous nominations (she’s also been nominated twice for an Oscar). While the main Emmy awards are next Sunday, the “Creative Arts” subset were handed out Saturday night to behind-the-scenes people and actors nominated for guest-starring roles. The now 69-year-old performer won her statuette for Guest Actress in a Drama Series on Law & Order: SVU. Why they would not have category like this air on the main show is beyond me, but that’s another issue.

I mention Ann-Margret because in this day of Hollywood leading the charge against our military, making movies and television shows that regularly cast our troops as villains, it’s worth remembering that not all actors are, or have been, that way. Some have a genuine and deep appreciation for what our military does and a love for this country. Ann-Margret is one of those people.

While she has never been publicly politically active or worn her personal politics on her sleeve, we know where she stands when it comes to our veterans. While Jane Fonda was encouraging the enemy in North Vietnam, Ann-Margret regularly traveled with Bob Hope to the war theater to entertain our troops. Considering the left’s attitude even then about that war, not every one was rushing to join Hope’s team, but Ann-Margret was there and was one of his “regulars.”

While that was quite some time ago, her commitment and appreciation for our troops has been consistent. Probably the most illustrative story of her impact on our vets is already all over the net, but it’s worth bringing to you here. It’s the simple telling by the wife of a Vietnam vet who went with her husband to a book-signing so he could meet Ann-Margret. What happened changed his life. [...]

Read it, it's a great story. There's also more about Ann, and pics and video clips too.
     

How to silence your critics: A tax on bloggers?

Yes. In Philadelpha, it's happening:

Philadelphia tax fever: Bloggers get hit

The Founding Fathers must be rolling in their graves. In Philadelphia, home of the Liberty Bell and Independence Hall, the city government has proposed smacking bloggers — our generation’s pamphleteers — with a $300 business tax. Yes, they are now requiring a license for Internet activists and hobbyists to exercise their free speech. [...]

Read the whole thing. They want to require blogs to have a business license, whether they make money or not, because blogs have the potential to make money, if they offer advertising.

Whatever happened to "free speech"? Remember free speech? The 1st Amendment? Is it soon to be nothing more than a relic of the past?


Also see:

Marxist Censorship Dreams, and the FCC

How much longer will our Republic last?
     

The Fannie and Freddie Question

In a previous post, I mentioned that Fannie and Freddie were costing taxpayers about $7 billion dollars per month. Is it time for them to go? A good case can be made for it:

Say Goodbye to Fannie and Freddie

[...] Fannie and Freddie had a license to print money. They could borrow at an interest rate only a bit over the Treasury rate and then accumulate large portfolios of mortgages and mortgage-backed securities earning the market rate. What a deal — borrow at the low rate, invest at a higher one, hold little capital and let the federal government bear the risk! Investors enjoyed high returns, and management enjoyed high salaries. Incidentally, politicians also got a steady flow of campaign contributions from the companies’ executives.

Fannie and Freddie’s risky policies led to their near collapse; in September 2008, the federal government brought them under federal conservatorship. Fannie and Freddie have cost taxpayers about $150 billion so far.

On Tuesday, the Obama administration plans to hold a conference to address the question of what to do with the two companies. Clearly, it would be an inexcusable mistake to reconstitute them as private companies in anything close to their prior form. Some people have suggested recasting them as a single new “Fan-Fred agency” that would continue to securitize and guarantee home mortgages. It’s true that Fannie and Freddie played an important role in developing the market for mortgage-backed securities. But they have completed that work, and they should not be preserved in any form. They should be thanked for their successes and gracefully retired.

Can the home mortgage market stand on its own, without support from federally sponsored mortgage companies? Experience tells us that the answer is an unambiguous yes. [...]

Read the whole thing for the nitty gritty details. There are many reasons why they should not continue, but this administration has been supporting a lot of things that should have died a natural death. We shall have to wait until Tuesday to see what they will do. Since Fannie and Freddie are government creations, and Big Government is growing not shrinking, I'm not confident that they will be retired. If they are kept, the question will be: "At what cost?"
     

Why the GOP needs to Get Christie Love

I don't mean the old '70's TV show. I'm referring to the fact that the GOP needs a campaign strategy, and they could start by loving what New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is doing, and using that as a role model. Peggy Noonan nails it here:

Try a Little Tenderness
Chris Christie, not the Tea Party, is the model for the Republicans.

[...] For those candidates who are themselves Tea Party, and who identify more with a rebellion than an organization, some advice: Get conservative, quick. Which is another way of saying: Get serious. Conservatives are not fringe and haven’t been accused of being fringe since they got themselves a president, in 1980. He cared about reality, about the facts of the world, and bothered to know them. He bothered to think about them. He respected process, or rather respected the reality of it and learned to master it.

He also tried to put his arms around those who disagreed with him; he loved his foes into submission by showing regard for them. “Come walk with me,” he said, in 1984. And they did. And they got a new name, Reagan Democrats. Some of them wear it proudly, still. Here’s something that sounds corny but is true: Only love makes great political movements. Movements based on resentment, anger and public rage always fade, they rise and fall, they never stay. If you came to play, get serious.

Members of the Tea Party are not going to vote Democratic, and the Democrats have figured this out. Someone noted on cable the other day that only months ago many Democrats still hoped they might benefit to some degree from the Tea Party’s populist spirit, and attempted a certain tentative sympathy. True, but they did it like anthropologists discovering a new tribe in Borneo: “Come. No hurt. Be friend.” Now, seeing the Tea Party is not gettable or co-optable, the Democrats are attempting to demonize them, and use them to demonize the GOP.

Thus the new DNC scare ad, which features the usual “Jaws”-like monster music, and then the charge that the Tea Party and the GOP are “one and the same.” Not only that, they’re cooking up a plan to “get rid of” or privatize Social Security and Medicare, repeal the 17th Amendment, and abolish the departments of energy and education and the EPA.

Your average viewer will see this not as information but as theater, like Demon Sheep, and of course propaganda, though some will perk up at abolishing the agencies. But the ad signals a central Democratic argument for the fall, which The Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder summed up as “We may be incompetent, but they’re crazy.”

It’s a sign of Democratic panic that a week ago they were saying what was wrong with the GOP was they have no plan, while now what’s wrong is that they do have one.

The problem for the Democrats, however, is not a new Contract With America, or the Tea Party. Their problem is Chris Christie.

National Republicans don’t want to talk about specific cuts in spending for the obvious reason: The Obama administration is killing itself, and when your foe is self-destructing, you must not interrupt. Let the media go forward each day reporting the bad polls. Turn it into “Franco: still dead.” Don’t let the media turn it into a two-part story: “Obama is Struggling and The Republicans Will Cut Your Benefits.”

That is classic, smart political thinking, but wrong. The public thinks we’re sinking as a nation. They want to know someone has a plan to help. The most promising leader in that respect is Mr. Christie, the New Jersey governor, who just closed an $11 billion budget gap without raising taxes. He is famously blunt and doesn’t speak in those talking points that make you wonder, “Should I kill myself now with rude stabs to the chest, or should I just jump screaming from the window?”

On “Morning Joe” this week he said, “There were a lot of hard cuts and difficult things to do in there, but fact of the matter is we’re trying to treat people like adults. They know that we’re in awful shape, and they know that no one else is around anymore to pay for the problems that won’t hurt them.” [...]

Read the whole thing. It's not a rant against the tea party; far from it. It's about understanding politics, and letting the Tea Party be the supporting force that it is, to get common sense problem solvers like Chris Christie elected into office.

Rich Lowry also understands how important the "Christie" role model is:

Look Outside D.C. for Grown Up Government

[...] The sweep of Obama's ambition has necessarily forced congressional Republicans into a perpetual posture of "no," but they are reluctant to outline their own agenda of "yes." Out across the United States, a populist movement of great moment and promise wants to pull the country back to its constitutional moorings. Its favored candidates, though, are often shaky vessels, the likes of Rand Paul in Kentucky and Sharron Angle in Nevada, who are always one gaffe away from self-immolation.

For adults, look to the statehouses. Look in particular to New Jersey and Indiana, where Govs. Chris Christie and Mitch Daniels are forging a limited-government Republicanism that connects with people and solves problems. They are models of how to take inchoate dissatisfaction with the status quo, launder it through political talent, and apply it in a practical way to governance.

Christie has just concluded a six-month whirlwind through Trenton that should be studied by political scientists for years to come. In tackling a fiscal crisis in a state groaning under an $11 billion deficit, he did his fellow New Jerseyans the favor of being as forthright as a punch in the mouth. And it worked.

Christie traveled the state making the case for budgetary retrenchment, and he frontally took on the state's most powerful interest, the teachers' union. He rallied the public and split the Democrats, in a bravura performance in the lost art of persuasion. At the national level, George W. Bush thought repeating the same stalwart lines over and over again counted as making an argument, and Barack Obama has simply muscled through his agenda on inflated Democratic majorities. Christie actually connected.

He matched unyielding principle (determined to balance the budget without raising taxes, he vetoed a millionaires' tax within minutes of its passage) with a willingness to take half a loaf (he wanted a constitutional amendment to limit property taxes to 2.5 percent, but settled with Democrats for an imperfect statutory limit). He'll need an Act II to get deeper, institutional reforms, but New Jersey is now separating itself from those other notorious wastrels, California and Illinois. [...]

Read the whole thing. The article talks about Mitch Daniels, too. The more the merrier. It's going to take real adults who talk straight, talk the talk and walk the walk, not spend-thrifts with talking-points, who avoid town hall meetings and skirt around issues, to get us out of this mess. Christie, Daniels and those like them are showing us the way out. The GOP needs to be the party that supports the folks who are leading the way, who are DOING it.
     

God vs Science: Nothing to do with Einstein, everything to do with an "Urban Legend"

My Dad has a Christian friend from his days in the Navy, whom he emails with. He forwards a lot of joke emails he gets, and some of the emails are from his Christian friend. This is one of those:

Subject: God vs Science

This has been around before, but worth reading again! Some of you may have not seen it a great arguement.

God vs. Science

'Let me explain the problem science has with religion.' The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students to stand.

'You're a Christian, aren't you, son?'

'Yes sir,' the student says.

'So you believe in God?'

'Absolutely. '

'Is God good?'

'Sure! God's good.'

'Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?'

'Yes'

'Are you good or evil?'

'The Bible says I'm evil.'

The professor grins knowingly. 'Aha! The Bible! He considers for a moment. 'Here's one for you. Let's say there's a sick person over here and you can cure him. You can do it. Would you help him? Would you try?'

'Yes sir, I would.'

'So you're good!'

'I wouldn't say that.'

'But why not say that? You'd help a sick and maimed person if you could. Most of us would if we could. But God doesn't.'

The student does not answer, so the professor continues. 'He doesn't, does he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer, even though he prayed to Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good? Can you answer that one?'

The student remains silent. 'No, you can't, can you?', the professor says.

He takes a sip of water from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax. 'Let's start again, young fella. Is God good?'

'Er..yes,' the student says..

'Is Satan good?'

The student doesn't hesitate on this one. 'No.'

'Then where does Satan come from?'

The student falters. 'From God'

'That's right. God made Satan, didn't he? Tell me, son. Is there evil in this world?'

'Yes, sir..'

'Evil's everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything, correct?'

'Yes'

'So who created evil?' The professor continued, 'If God created everything, then God created evil, since evil exists, and according to the principle that our works define who we are, then God is evil.'

Again, the student has no answer. 'Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things, do they exist in this world?'

The student squirms on his feet. 'Yes.'

'So who created them?'

The student does not answer again, so the professor repeats his question.

'Who created them?' There is still no answer. Suddenly the lecturer breaks away to pace in front of the classroom. The class is mesmerized. 'Tell me,' he continues onto another student. 'Do you believe in Jesus Christ, son?'

The student's voice betrays him and cracks. 'Yes, professor, I do.'

The old man stops pacing. 'Science says you have five senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen Jesus?'

'No sir. I've never seen Him.'

'Then tell us if you've ever heard your Jesus?'

'No, sir, I have not..'

'Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your Jesus? Have you ever had any sensory perception of Jesus Christ, or God for that matter?'

'No, sir, I'm afraid I haven't.'

'Yet you still believe in him?'

'Yes'

'According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your God doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son?'

'Nothing,' the student replies.. 'I only have my faith.'

'Yes, faith,' the professor repeats. 'And that is the problem science has with God. There is no evidence, only faith.'

The student stands quietly for a moment, before asking a question of His own. 'Professor, is there such thing as heat? '

Yes.

'And is there such a thing as cold?'

'Yes, son, there's cold too.'

'No sir, there isn't.'

The professor turns to face the student, obviously interested. The room suddenly becomes very quiet. The student begins to explain.' You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, unlimited heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don't have anything called 'cold'.

We can get down to 458 degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold; otherwise we would be able to go colder than the lowest -458 degrees. Everybody or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (-458 F) is the total absence of heat.

You see, sir, cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.'

Silence across the room. A pen drops somewhere in the classroom, sounding like a hammer.

'What about darkness, professor. Is there such a thing as darkness?'

'Yes,' the professor replies without hesitation. 'What is night if it isn't darkness?'

'You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something; it is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light, but if you have no light constantly you have nothing and it's called darkness, isn't it? That's the meaning we use to define the word. In reality, darkness isn't. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn't you?'

The professor begins to smile at the student in front of him. This will be a good semester. 'So what point are you making, young man?'

'Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start with, and so your conclusion must also be flawed.'

The professor's face cannot hide his surprise this time. 'Flawed? Can you explain how?'

'You are working on the premise of duality,' the student explains. 'You argue that there is life and then there's death; a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can't even explain a thought.' 'It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one.

To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life, just the absence of it.' 'Now tell me, professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?'

'If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes, of course I do.'

'Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?'

The professor begins to shake his head, still smiling, as he realizes where the argument is going. A very good semester, indeed.

'Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a preacher?'

The class is in uproar. The student remains silent until the commotion has subsided. 'To continue the point you were making earlier to the other student, let me give you an example of what I mean.' The student looks around the room. 'Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the professor's brain?' The class breaks out into laughter. 'Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor's brain, felt the professor's brain, touched or smelt the professor's brain? No one appears to have done so.

So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, with all due respect, sir.'

'So if science says you have no brain, how can we trust your lectures, sir?'

Now the room is silent. The professor just stares at the student, his face unreadable. Finally, after what seems an eternity, the old man answers. 'I Guess you'll have to take them on faith.'

'Now, you accept that there is faith, and, in fact, faith exists with life,' the student continues. 'Now, sir, is there such a thing as evil?' Now uncertain, the professor responds, 'Of course, there is. We see it every day. It is in the daily example of man's inhumanity to man. It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil.'

To this the student replied, 'Evil does not exist sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light.'

The professor sat down.

If you read it all the way through and had a smile on your face when you finished, mail to your friends and family with the title 'God vs. Science'

PS: the student was Albert Einstein

Albert Einstein wrote a book titled God vs. Science in 1921.

[END]

The whole thing seemed a bit "off" to me. Einstein was Jewish, and I never heard of him being a Christian, so I did some research. It turns out that Einstein never wrote a book called "God vs Science". He did not believe in a personal God, and was resentful of the stories being told by religious people, claiming that he did. This from Einstein's Wikipedia page sums it up:

Religious views

Main article: Albert Einstein's religious views

The question of scientific determinism gave rise to questions about Einstein's position on theological determinism, and whether or not he believed in God, or in a god. In 1929, Einstein told Rabbi Herbert S. Goldstein "I believe in Spinoza's God, who reveals Himself in the lawful harmony of the world, not in a God Who concerns Himself with the fate and the doings of mankind."^[94] In a 1954 letter, he wrote, "I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly."^[95] In a letter to philosopher Erik Gutkind, Einstein remarked, "The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weakness, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still purely primitive, legends which are nevertheless pretty childish."^[96]

Repeated attempts by the press to present Albert Einstein as a religious man provoked the following statement:

It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.

—Albert Einstein^[97]

Einstein had previously explored this belief, that man could not understand the nature of God, when he gave an interview to Time Magazine explaining:

I'm not an atheist and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many different languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God.

—Albert Einstein^[98]

I also read other sources on line about this, belittling Christians for "knowingly spreading this lie around the internet, to advance their religion".

That may be too harsh an accusation. I suspect many Christians pass this on because they believe it, and are ignorant of the facts. Ideally they ought to check the facts first before passing it on, but that can be said about many things that get passed around through email. In the end, the reader must verify.

I'm sure lots of Christians liked this story too because, it let's God off the hook where evil is concerned, and argues for the existence of faith. Yet I think it's ironic, too. The argument by the Christian against the atheist is that the atheist is working from a premise of duality. Yet isn't much of conventional Christian doctrine also based on the belief in duality? The argument against duality actually sounds like an argument in support of Eastern religion.

Snopes.com says that this email is actually a variation of an urban legend, where a Christian student puts an atheist professor in his place:

Snopes.com: Einstein and the "Evil is the absence of God" argument

Snopes gives all the details, and similar popular arguments that are often used to bolster religious faith in the face of atheistic arguments. And explains why Einstein got pulled into the story.

Here is another post by a blogger about this email story:

God vs Evil: A Philosophical Chain Email

In the comments below it, someone quotes some excerpts from a paper by Albert Einstein, called “Science and Religion.” While Einstein was not conventionally religious, he wasn't an atheist either. If you follow the link, there are some interesting quotes from the paper, as well as some other quotes by Einstein.

According to Snopes, Einstein, as a "generic genius", got incorporated into this Urban Legend. I suspect that his paper then got referred to as a book, the title got changed slightly, and claims were made about the content and the author's beliefs that don't hold up to scrutiny.

It's interesting to see how facts over time can get distorted. And it's great that a bit of searching on the internet can explain it all, uncover the history and connect the dots, and set the record straight again.

     

Nearly ALL of our budget deficits come not from reduced tax revenues, but from spending increases

WHERE DO PEOPLE LIKE THIS COME FROM?

[...] One liberal writes that "the government actually ran a surplus during the Clinton administration's last few years, and it was former President George W. Bush's wars and tax cuts for the rich that turned our federal budget into the red." This is typical liberal thinking based more on an intense dislike of George Bush - possibly born of bitterness over the 2000 election - than on economic facts. The writer ignores the fact that tax revenues actually increased after the Bush tax cuts. Tax revenues were then and remain now above historical averages - even after the tax cuts. The Heritage Foundation has published studies showing that nearly ALL of our budget deficits come not from reduced tax revenues ... but from spending increases; both from George W. Bush and Barack Obama. It's the spending - not the tax cuts - that have brought us our immense debt. But you don't want to confuse this letter writer with those facts. [...]

But it's a fact that bears repeating. When the tax cuts are allowed to expire, what do you think will happen to tax revenue? We are about to see:

What happens when Tax Cuts Expire in 2011?

Those who don't learn from the mistakes of the past, are doomed to keep repeating them.
     

South Africa: Everything old is new again?

Wasn't government censorship of the press one of the things that was WRONG with the Old South Africa? Isn't that what the ANC used to claim? Are they now saying censorship is OK, as long as they are the one's doing it?

SAfrica's ANC party wants tribunal for journalists

JOHANNESBURG – South Africa's governing party said Tuesday that the country needs a special tribunal to regulate the work of journalists, a proposal that has drawn sharp criticism from local and international media organizations.

The tribunal would be given powers to rule on media content and to impose unspecified penalties on journalists.

African National Congress spokesman Jackson Mthembu said the party has found numerous instances of news stories that were intentionally damaging to subjects' reputations and dignity.

"Your freedom does not supersede the other freedoms that are there," Jackson told journalists Tuesday. "We say there must be punishment when journalists mess up with reputations and dignity of members of the society."

South African journalists have launched a campaign to fight what they say is an attempt to curtail media freedoms in a nation known for one of Africa's freest and most open constitutions.

Other legislation under consideration would allow South Africa's government to classify a broad range of material that is currently not secret. Under the new law, it would be illegal to leak or to publish information deemed classified by the government, and the offense would be punishable by imprisonment.

On Tuesday, the South African National Editors Forum (SANEF) said it will do what ever it can to stop the proposed "Protection of Information Bill" and media tribunal.

"We are not opposing the ANC government but the bill and tribunal," said Guy David, secretary general of SANEF.

When the old, white ruled government of South Africa censored the South African press, outrage was expressed worldwide, and boycotts and sanctions were imposed on the country.

Now, years later, we have a black ruled government, proposing similar or even worse censorship of the press. Where is the outrage, the world-wide indignation? Will we even hear a peep out of the international press about this?

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting.
     

A new variation on an old theme ...

Car Henge

My kids and I were returning home by way of a very random traverse in late summer of 1994, when we found this roadside attraction just outside Alliance, Nebraska, up in the sand hills on the way to Rapid City and Mt Rushmore. [...]

Follow the link for more photos and commentary.
     

The Government's Mill Stone for Our Necks

Don't let them tie it onto us:

ObamaCare: A Tangled Knot Around America's Throat

Bureaucratic Web: Those who wondered what was in the health care overhaul bill now have a chance to look inside. What they see is a snarl of lines, arrows and geometric shapes that will do nothing to improve medical care.

Republican Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas, GOP Rep. Kevin Brady of Texas and the minority staff of the Joint Economic Committee have provided a priceless public service by creating a flow chart (below) of the federal health care system that is being created by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.


The chart displays, in words we can't improve, "a bewildering array of new government agencies, regulations and mandates."

At the center of the new federal health care universe is the secretary of Health and Human Services, who has been granted supernational powers. Radiating from that hub are the lesser celestial objects, such as Congress in the upper right corner, the president in the upper left, and doctors in the lower left.

Patients can be found near the bottom right corner. Remember them? They were supposed to be what the health care overhaul was all about. But they've been nudged, as almost an afterthought, to the fringe of this expanding universe.

Between patients and the secretary of Health and Human Services sit galaxies of red tape, taxes, regulations, federal programs, state agencies, mandates — and thousands of bureaucrats.

But the HHS secretary does not treat patients. Doctors do. And the expanse between them, according to this chart, is vast. They are separated by a government that is growing deeper, wider and more labyrinthine, an administrative state that will ration, dilute and ineffectively manage health care. [...]

Read the rest; it's even worse than the chart!

Remember in November, so we can REPEAL and REPLACE this garbage.


Also see:

Why Obamacare is a "healthcare bridge to nowhere" that can't be "tweaked"     

From California's Stark Raving Mad Pete Stark

Has power gone to his head? Sounds like it:

No, Congressman, government does have limits

When Rep. Pete Stark, D-Calif., was told during a July 24 town hall meeting with constituents that he and public officials like him were "destroying this nation," he smirkingly replied, "And I guess you're here to save it. And that makes me very uncomfortable." This derision of a constituent was particularly poignant, considering that the questioner had only asked what limits would remain on the federal government if Congress could get away with passing a bill as destructive of individual rights as Obamacare. Stark responded that "I think that there are very few constitutional limits that would prevent the federal government from rules that could affect your private life." He was roundly booed, but then given another opportunity to respond. He observed that "the federal government, yes, can do most anything in this country."

Unfortunately, Stark's extreme views are common among the current congressional majority. Still, we have no doubt that those who wrote the Constitution would be astounded to hear such monarchical attitudes today since they were exactly what the American Revolution was fought to overcome.

Sadly, it probably comes as no surprise to most Americans that Washington politicians like Stark hold such a self-serving view of the Constitution. It's still shocking to hear it put in such stark terms. But Americans have been hearing this theme from their leaders throughout the current economic crisis: Those in power are mainstream agents of change, whereas those who, like Tea Partiers, protest bailouts, deficits, tax hikes and exploding national debt are disreputable radicals and even racists. This is the incumbent- protection narrative that seeks to discredit the middle-American rebellion sparked in 2009 when President Obama proposed an $862 billion economic stimulus program that most knew would mostly line the pockets of his political allies. [...]

Read the rest of it. It's time to vote these jerks out in November, while we still have a vote.


Also see:

American politics has caught the British disease

Pampered Populists

THE RULING CLASS