Another Defeat for Sanity in Our Health Care System.

****************************************************************************************************************

I was disheartened at the defeat of the  Medicare adjustment bill that was defeated last week.  Something must be done and yet everyone is doing their best to see that the program fails completely and takes down our young and our economy and ultimately our country.  EVERYONE has had a hand in creating the problems we are now facing and yet every  group insists on their little piece of the pie being sacrosanct with no consideration of the overall  picture and what needs to be done.  No group is willing to cooperate or compromise.

This particular reform measure was supposed to be a series of reductions in doctors fees over a period of  time.   However as these fee cuts were to be taking place the normal health care double digit inflation would continue.  So even with the cuts in fees the doctors rate of payment would still be well above the rate of overall inflation.   But doctors and doctors groups were opposed.

The reason behind the measure was, I believe,  that if doctors fees were cut then the avalanche of unnecessary tests and procedures ordered by doctors would have gone down too.  Only makes sense that if they are not going to get as much for doing them then they would stop doing them, doesn’t it?  And this was just the beginning of  many more adjustments to the program that would have affected everyone.   But as I said, no one wants to give up their little piece of the pie.

I was very much opposed to Medicare when it was first discussed in the early 1960’s, but the Democrats under Johnson’s Great Society pushed it thru.   And of course we have had nothing but double digit inflation in medical costs since.  The only other area to have inflated at this rate is education, and here again only after the government got involved.  I don’t understand how people who are calling for more government involvement in all areas of our life can not see what happens every time the government takes over!  It really is a no brainer to look up the costs before the programs and then compare the costs 10 years after the program has been active.  Then compare the rate of inflation in the area of the program  with the general inflation rate.

60% of seniors in 1965 had their own private insurance,  but were forced to enroll in the Medicare program.  Many resisted but like me as a younger woman with an  excellent policy  simply had to give it up when the premiums became more than I (and they) could afford  due to the rapid enormous inflation spurred by Medicare.  Prior to Medicare insurance rates rose at generally the same rate as the economy.   Due to these outrageous prices for my private health care plan I was forced to go under the Champus military  health  care  plan which certainly was no where near what I had with my  private health insurance plan.

This same escalation in costs  forced workers to demand insurance from their employers which depressed wages so that now we see that wages have been far out  distanced by inflation.  The same as  government backed student loans caused education cost to escalate  making it necessary for young people to get these loans to get thru college  so that  now  young people find themselves with student loans that will be a burden to them for the rest of their lives.

Doctors were also instrumental in causing the horrendously rising costs of medical care by doing procedures that were  totally unnecessary so they could bill Medicare.  I can not tell you how many outrageous things I saw as a voluntary social worker that doctors performed on the elderly.  My very first case  was to pick up and return to the nursing home an elderly lady who was riddled with cancer  and only given a few months at the most to live.  What had been done to her at the time I got involved?  She had had a radical MASTECTOMY!  As if cutting off her breast was going to save her life.

Now since I am on Medicare I am having to police my own health care and actually refuse some treatments suggested not just by my primary care doctor but even more so from specialists he sends me to.  I also test medications prescribed and if I see (feel) no beneficial results I refuse to take them.  I do this because the system  and especially young workers are so overburdened. I see my actions here  in the same light as recycling my trash.  Just trying to do my part.  I know however that   I am  probably less that .001% of the elderly population in this endeavor.

In fact, the elderly because medical care is so low cost to them are demanding treatment that simply will not help them, but their doctors give it to them if they demand it just to keep from getting into a debate with them.  Every “new” drug advertised on television  the seniors have to have.  Stupid!  Getting old is no bed of roses and there are some things for which  just nothing can be done.  A 65 year old can not expect to have the body they had at 35 that’s all there is to it.  No miracle pill is going to give that 35 year old body back to them.  Seniors have been spoiled and really need to be told by their doctors that they will just have to suck up some hard truths.  (Fact: more is spent on an elderly person in the last year of their life than all the years previous.)

Medicare like everything the government has gotten into is an easy mark for the unscrupulous  and greedy.  Now we have young people calling for more government involvement  with universal health care.  Dear Lord, have we not put a large enough burden on our young?  Have we not put our great grandchildren far enough in debt?  Don’t these people understand that  universal health care is just not possible in the United States.   Why is it not possible?  Because we have been spoiled by having instantaneous excellent health care available and if this is offered to all Americans at the tax payers expense then there simply is not enough money period!  Something will have to give and the only thing that can give is the quality of health care we have become accustomed to.  Those who are in their ignorance screaming loudest for Universal Health Care will not  honestly compare our system with any other country that has niversal health care.  If they did their attitudes would change and they would be able to see that their “wants” just aren’t possible so they had better be satified with their “needs”, and at the same time try to get the “wants” of theor Senior Citizens  adjusted to some sort of realism also.

So there you have three groups who are now, and will later, refuse any compromise: doctors, seniors and younger citizens who can’t seem to understand basic math.

The passage of this bit  of sane reform made to the  Medicare system by reducing doctors payments would surely  have resulted in a reduction in unnecessary procedures.  And an elimination  or reduction in unnecessary procedures is the only course I see in perhaps “saving” Medicare  as it would naturally lead to realization of the  need  of rationing  what is done to patients’  and especially on the elderly and those who will not benefit from the procedure to prolong their life or improve their health.   The State of Oregon has a program that would be a good beginning in this endeavor.

I suppose we will just never learn that we can not have all of our wants.  BB

A Virtual World? Please don’t be kidding.

**********************************************************************************************************

“If current trends hold, the Internet will evolve into a 3D space, and virtual worlds will become an integral part of human communication. Real life will never be the same.” See:  July 17, 2008   The Wall Street Journal Editorial Page–Opinion  “The 3D Internet Will Change How We Live”  by Benjamin Duransky

Mr. Duranske, a writer and attorney, is the author of “Virtual Law: Navigating the Legal Landscape of Virtual Worlds” (American Bar Association Publishing, 2008).”

I don’t know how you all feel about this, but BB can’t wait.     For a person who was born in 1941 and was 9 years old before I saw my first television program, the Internet as it is right now is a miracle.  Virtual internet is going to blow the pants right off my fat old buns!  BB

PS:  Okay, I know you could have survived the day without that picture being lodged in your mind, but I simply could not resist.  LOL and Much love!  BB

Caught Up in Our Own Greedy Consumption with No Easy Fix.

*****************************************************************************************

Here is an interesting article from FactCheck.org that hits at both presidential candidates and their  quick fix for the energy crisis.    There is no “quick fix” for the mess we have gotten ourselves into by living like we were not aware that fossil fuels were a finite resource.  Of course as long as the United States was the only  profligate user we could continue in our greedy ways. Like who knew  India and China both with larger populations  than the United  States would ever wake up from their long sleep stuck in the pre-oil days and suddenly demand their share of this resource?

Thinking about this is rather ironic is it not?  That we would be caught up in our own greedy consumption and now be crying like the spoiled brats we are because we are suddenly having to pay the actual price of oil as the rest of the world have always done.  Still at $4 a gallon we in the US are still being pampered  since the costs in Europe is now up to $8 a gallon.

And after reading the fallowing that exposes the clay feet of Obama’s fix it be sure to go to the bottom of the age and click on the article entitled “McCain’s Power Outage”.    BB
_________________________________

From FactCheck.org

Straining a Point

July 16, 2008

An Obama ad says he has a “fast track alternative” to imported oil. Actually, it’s a 10-year proposal with no guarantees.

Summary

Obama released a national ad saying he has “fast-track alternatives” to imported oil. On closer examination, those turn out to be his proposal to spend $150 billion over the coming decade on energy research. Ten years doesn’t sound all that “fast” to us, and there’s no guarantee that the research will result in less oil being imported.

Analysis

Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign released the ad and said it would run on national cable TV networks starting July 17. According to the news release, the 30-second spot “underscores Barack Obama’s understanding of national security in a new century.” Perhaps so. Much of what it says is accurate enough, but on one point we find that it strains the truth and could easily give viewers a false impression.

Obama 08 Ad:

Changing World

Announcer: 40 years ago it was missile silos and the Cold War.
Today, it’s cyber attacks…loose nukes…oil money funding terrorism.
Barack Obama understands our changing world.

On the Foreign Relations Committee, he co-sponsored a law to lock down loose nuclear weapons.

As president, he’ll rebuild our alliances to take out terrorist networks… And fast-track alternatives so we stop spending billions on oil from hostile nations.

New leadership for a changing world.

Obama: I’m Barack Obama and I approve this message.

Fast Track

As an example of Obama’s supposed grasp of 21st-century security threats, the ad says he has “fast-track alternatives so we stop spending billions on oil from hostile nations.” Pictured on screen are images of whirling windmills generating electricity, a solar array against a blue sky, and a couple of white-coated lab workers, one of them peering into a microscope.

The campaign says the ad is referring to Obama’s long-standing proposal to spend $150 billion over 10 years for research into alternative energy – “to advance the next generation of biofuels and fuel infrastructure, accelerate the commercialization of plug-in hybrids, promote development of commercial-scale renewable energy, invest in low-emissions coal plants, and begin the transition to a new digital electricity grid.”

Spending that money may well be a good idea, but it’s not our place to judge. We do object to describing a decade-long program, which in all probability could not even begin until sometime in late 2009, as a “fast track” to anything.

We also point out that even over the long term there can be no guarantee that just spending more for research will produce the sort of new fuels, vehicles or other breakthroughs that would actually reverse the growth of oil imports. Keep in mind that the U.S. imported the equivalent of 13.4 million barrels of oil per day last year, up nearly 17 percent from just five years earlier and 32 percent higher than in 1997. This is a huge problem that has been getting worse for a long time. Reversing it will not be “fast” or painless.

We repeat: We’re not knocking Obama’s 10-year plan. We cited it in our July 9 article as the reason that a Republican National Committee ad was wrong to say that Obama has “no new solutions” to the energy problem. We’re not endorsing Obama’s plan either. We are saying Obama is stretching the truth to call this decade-long program a “fast-track” alternative or to say that “we [will] stop spending billions on oil from hostile nations” as a result.

by Brooks Jackson

Sources

Obama08 “OBAMA FOR AMERICA, “CHANGING WORLD,” :30 FOR TV” campaign fact sheet 17 July 2008.

U.S. Energy Information Administration, “U.S. Crude Oil and Petroleum Products Imports from All Countries (Thousand Barrels per Day)” Web site accessed 17 July 2008.

Related Articles

A False Accusation About Energy

An RNC ad claims Obama has “no new solutions” to the energy problem, when he actually proposes $150 billion worth.

McCain’s Power Outage

Contradictions and misstatements short-circuit McCain’s energy policy pronouncements.

The “Worthy” Homeless

**********************************************************************************************************

I read a great many articles in the areas of social problems, educational problems and psychology just because I guess I did for so many years of my life that it has become a habit.  One very troubling word seems to be cropping up more and more: references to the “worthy homeless”.   This always leaves me puzzled because in all my years of  working with, thru and around some of these problems I don’t think I have ever met a homeless person whom I would consider “worthy”.    Now granted I have been out of the field for a long time so could someone out there please help me out here and tell me what a “Worthy” homeless person is?  And while you are at it you might also explain “unworthy”  homeless because it stands to reason that if there is worthy there must be unworthy.

The vast majority of homeless are the mentally ill, the mentally handicapped and those addicted to some drug (narcotics and/or   alcohol) .   If my understanding is correct none of these homeless are “worthy”.  So I can only conclude the if we are  concerned only with the “worthy” homeless ( who ever they are)  we simply wouldn’t have a homeless problem because these “worthy” people wouldn’t be homeless. Or, homeless for long.

It is unfortunate that so many people including public officials and even some of those who serve on boards for the homeless have this attitude.  These so-called experts who are on these boards and writing these articles and studies have of course never allowed a dirty, smelly homeless person near enough to contaminate their person I am sure.  If they had been then I don’t know how they could differentiate the worthy homeless from the unworthy homeless.

(SIGH)  If there were more people who are actually on the front lines and the homeless themselves who were dictating policy then so much more could be done and the allocated money spent where needed. There are any number of programs that have been undertaken and shown to be effective, but all the officials and experts seem to want to do is have another study done.  I get so tired of the studies that are then put on a shelf and yet another study is ordered.  But then again the Bureaucracies do have to do something to justify themselves don’t they?  BB

Thieves Strike in the Night. A Warning!

************************************************************************************************************

The thieves

My thighs were stolen from me during the night a few years ago. I went to
sleep and woke up with someone else’s thighs. It was just that quick.
The replacements had the texture of cooked oatmeal.

I spent the entire summer looking for my thighs.
Finally, hurt and angry, I resigned myself to living out my life in jeans.

And then the thieves struck again.

My butt was next.  But,  these thieves are cruel. they attached
my new butt  three inches lower than my original!  I realized I’d have to give up my jeans in favor of long skirts.

Two years ago I realized my arms had been switched. One morning I was
fixing my hair and was horrified to see the flesh of my upper arm swing to
and fro,
This was really getting scary -. What could they do to me next?

When my poor neck suddenly disappeared and was replaced with a turkey
neck, I decided to tell my story.

Women of the world, wake up and smell the coffee! Those ‘plastic’ surgeons
are using REAL replacement body parts - stolen from you and me!

The next time someone you know has something ‘lifted’, look again - was it
lifted from you?

THIS IS NOT A HOAX.

This is happening to women  (and men) everywhere every night.

WARN YOUR FRIENDS!

P. S.

Last year I thought someone had stolen my Boobs. I was lying in bed
and they were gone! But when I jumped out of bed, I was relieved to see
that they had just been hiding in my armpits as I slept.

Now, I keep them hidden in my waistband.

Thought this was too ‘important’ not to pass on.   BB

Muslim’s Make a huge breech in the Dam

 ****************************************************************************************************

I am passing this on because I am frankly both appalled and terrified.  The British are giving in to their Muslim populations.  This week they removed the Holocaust from their curriculum because it offended the Muslims who do not believe it happened. They also  have agreed to allow Sharia Law to be used within the Muslim communities.

 Lord Chief Justice Lord Phillips said, “Those entering into a contractual agreement can agree that the agreement shall be governed by a law other than English law.”

The laws of a country are the basis for it’s social interaction and cohesion .  Nothing is more important than preserving the laws of a country!  Nothing!  And yet the British, our staunchest allies and friends have  allowed a small segment of their population to ignore the law of the land in favor of a law of intolerance and  ignorance.

 Lord Phillips said Muslims could use Sharia law, or Islamic legal principles as long as punishments comply with English Law.  Sharia Law is a law of intolerance and ignorance and dominion over women.  There is no way that Sharia Law can comply with English Law.   Look up Sharia Law and see for yourself how different it is from our own laws which are based mostly on English law.

Is this then the break in the dam that the Muslims have been trying to get anywhere in the infidel world?  I have written a great deal on this subject if you care to check my articles under the category “Muslims”.  References are always presented. 

These stories came from the BBC news network.    I also received and am passing on this e-mail since it so well illustrates what happened.  I am also recommending Cal Thomas’ article in the Opinion Pages of Saturday July 11, 2008 News & Record Greensboro, NC.  BB

see:  http://triadblogs.com/BrendaFayBowers

How Low Can They Go? AFL-CIO Lies About McClain

**********************************************************************************************************

How low can they go?  Politicians and labor unions know no depth at which they will stop to smear an opponent.   Why they are supporting Obama when the higher taxes will only harm their own members is typical behavior because the AFL-CIO leadership  has always backed the Democrats.

I have said many times that my political Independent as I vote the person and not the party.  My political views tend to the conservative liberal in most cases.  Tho as in most thi8ngs I look individually at  issues and make up my mind only after careful study.

I am sorry to see this kind of outright lying so early in the game.  It is a lie that as you see below can be easily disproved  by anyone who cares to check it out.  Unfortunately not many people do.  This is especially the case of  the voting in groves elderly whostill believe their government, their preachers, their unions and their dogs will not lie to them.  You see they came of age and their views were set before making the acquaintance of Duke!  BB

AFL-CIO Falsely Attacks McCain

July 10, 2008

It runs an ad claiming McCain voted “against increasing health care benefits for veterans,” when he actually voted repeatedly to increase them.

Summary

The AFL-CIO is attacking McCain with a TV spot saying he voted “against increasing health care benefits for veterans.” Actually, he voted for increases in those benefits.The labor federation points to McCain’s votes against Democratic proposals to increase funding. Those were defeated along party lines, and then quickly followed by alternative measures to increase benefits by smaller amounts, all of which passed unanimously or with

near-unanimous majorities. McCain supported all of them.The AFL-CIO also points to a McCain vote against a war spending supplemental appropriations measure from 2007 that included additional funding for veterans’ health care, along with much else. The measure passed the Senate along partisan lines but was vetoed by President Bush

. But McCain voted for a later version of the supplemental that ultimately passed into law and actually included slightly more funding for veterans’ benefits.

Analysis

The AFL-CIO attack ad against John McCain starting airing today and is the first ad the labor federation has run in the 2008 presidential campaign. It will run in Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin for the next three weeks, according to a report in the Washington Post.We find the ad, narrated by Vietnam Veteran Jim Wasser, to be unduly harsh on McCain’s voting record on veterans’ health benefits.

AFL-CIO Ad: “Not Now”

Vietnam Veteran Jim Wasser: Every vet respects John McCain’s war record. It’s his record in the Senate that I have a problem with. He wants us to keep spending ten billion dollars a month in Iraq, just like Bush. That’s money we could use to build schools and roads and create jobs we need here at home. He even took Bush’s side against increasing health care benefits for veterans. People should let John McCain know his agenda’s not what we need. Not now.

McCain’s Votes

The ad says that McCain “took Bush’s side against increasing health care benefits for veterans.” But he actually voted to increase veterans’ health care benefits, though not by as much as Democrats proposed.

The AFL-CIO, in documentation it provided to FactCheck.org, cites four specific votes as support for this allegation. Three of them were against Democratic amendments  to the annual budget bill in 2004, 2005 and 2006. And all of them failed along party lines in a Republican-controlled Senate. But in each case, McCain later supported different amendments to increase veterans’ health benefits, either on the same day or the following day.

Specifically, in 2004 McCain voted against an increase of $1.8 billion, but an increase of $1.2 billion passed by unanimous consent. In 2005 he voted against an increase of $2.8 billion, then voted for a $410 million increase. And in 2006, he voted against a $1.5 billion increase, then voted for an $823 million increase.

There was no dissent for the 2004 amendment, and the 2006 amendment passed unanimously. In 2005, the alternative spending increase passed with a healthy 96-to-4 bipartisan stamp of approval. Also, it’s worth mentioning that the president does not express an opinion on every amendment offered in the Senate. So it is not accurate to say McCain “took Bush’s side” on these votes.

The union group also cites a fourth vote, a March 2007 vote by McCain against a war spending supplemental that passed the Senate but was vetoed by the president. The bill did include $1.77 billion in additional funding for veterans’ health care benefits. However, McCain voted for an alternative version of the supplemental that was quickly introduced, passed and signed into law. And it actually included slightly more money for veterans’ health benefits, $1.79 billion.

$10 Billion a Month?

The ad also says that McCain “wants us to keep spending ten billion dollars a month in Iraq, just like Bush.” It is true that the U.S. is spending $10 billion or more per month in Iraq, according to most estimates. And McCain has certainly resisted any “retreat” from Iraq, and he has even said U.S. troops could remain for decades. But strictly speaking, McCain has never said that he wants to spend $10 billion per month in Iraq. Quite the contrary.

In fact, McCain says he’s counting on reduced spending for military operations to help him balance the federal budget. In his “Jobs for America” plan released July 9, the McCain campaign said:

McCain campaign: The McCain administration would reserve all savings from victory in the Iraq and Afghanistan operations in the fight against Islamic extremists for reducing the deficit. Since all their costs were financed with deficit spending, all their savings must go to deficit reduction.

We can’t predict whether McCain, or for that matter, Obama, will actually be able to cut spending in Iraq. But it’s simply wrong to say McCain “wants” to continue spending at the current level, when he’s said he wants to reduce it.

-by Justin Bank

Sources

Cillizza, Chris, “AFL-CIO Goes After McCain in Battleground States,” Washington Post. 9 July 2008.108th Congress,

U.S. Senate, 2nd Session Roll Call Vote No. 40.109th Congress,

U.S. Senate, 1st Session Roll Call Vote No. 55. 109th Congress, U.S. Senate, 1st Session Roll Call Vote No. 54.

109th Congress, U.S. Senate, 2nd Session, Roll Call Vote No. 41. 109th Congress, U.S. Senate, 2nd Session, Roll Call Vote No. 40.110th Congress,

U.S. Senate, 1st Session, Roll Call Vote No. 126.

110th Congress, U.S. Senate, 1st Session, Roll Call Vote No. 181.

Public Law 110-28: U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans’ Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007.

Related Articles

A False Accusation About Energy

An RNC ad claims Obama has “no new solutions” to the energy problem, when he actually proposes $150 billion worth.

Errors en Español

A Spanish-language McCain radio ad gets nearly all its facts wrong.

Obama’s Work Claim

His new ad says he “worked his way” through college and law school. His campaign says he had two summer jobs.

Obama Polishes His Resume

His first ad of the post-primary season puffs up his legislative accomplishments.

Greensboro’s Finest Association Speaks Out on Eve of Release of Consultant’s Report.

 

******************************************************************************************************

I just read the e-mail Joe Guarino http://guarino.typepad.com received from to quote Joes “I presume to be Eddie Summers) of the Greensboro Police Officers Association.” And entitled: GPD Officers’ Association Speaks Out on Eve of Release of Consultant’s Report. Joe invites comments and I must say I was dismayed and rather sickened after reading the letter. So follows my reaction and comment:

Wow! Talk about vindictive defensiveness and Eddie Summer’s Letter to All is a prime example. If this is the thinking of the majority of the membership of his organization we needn’t look far to discover the source of the problems the GPD has been and is having.

He  goes far out of his way to attack David Wray. I found this pathetic, unprofessional and plain old sour grapes.

He also claims more man power would solve all GPD’s problems. The Buracker on the other hand puts more man power about fourth on the list of must do’s. The B Report instead highly recommends looking closely at how the current man power is being used and when.  It also points out that more police officers are needed but this was secondary to the way they are currently beeing assigned and used.

The B Report shows in no uncertain terms with its graphs just how poorly the officers are assigned duty with an over load of experienced and upper level 0fficers scheduled for week days and with week ends off. Wray tried to FAIRLY alleviate this problem by going to a rotating shift which has been used by 24 hour operational companies and medical facilities and police departments for many decades to solve the problem of balancing the supervisory level officers and the experience and rookie officers on every shift while at the same time making sure no one person is stuck forever in a less desirable shifts and no one is favored with weekdays and week ends off.

Wray was also working on the promotions problem that got out of hand so much with the previous chief’s. The B Report places this problem at the very top. In fact during the report to City Council the Psychologist and Consultant accompanying Mr. Buracker stated emphatically that in all his years studying police departments he has never seen a system of promotion as bad as Greensboro’s GPD has been using. He went on to say that in fact Greensboro GPD had no promotional standards at all. Funny Officer Summers (if this is the letter writer) has no comments at all on this topic. 

I repeat: Wow! (etc.)  and Yuck!  BB

 

 

Thoughts after listening to the Buracker report on the GPD

************************************************************************************************************

I personally did not expect a stinging indictment of the current City Manager,   or Police Chief, or  any naming of names concerning that 1% of the GPD that has caused all the problems, or  any conclusions regarding the Wray case.  This is not what a consultant does.  As Buracker said “the past administration is past history”  and his firms concern is the present and the future.  And all considered I felt the report was good  as given (I have not yet finished reading it but am also impressed with what I have read.  These people know their stuff and did an in depth study.  For those of you who want the indictments you need only read between the lines a bit and they are certainly there loud and clear in every area that needs corrections.  These are the very areas where problems that have upset most of us occurred.   However it was not the consultants place to judge individuals, only systems or groups, if you prefer.  That said I will repeat here a comment from Joe Guarino’’s blog that very much needs repeating and understanding by all of us and all of the City Council if they are ever to begin to crawl out of the mess the GPD is in as well as all of the city government of Greensboro.  If they do this they will fire Mitch Johnson and do a nationwide search for a specialized city manager trained and educated for the position.  BB

Repeat comment:
“Did the GPD get accredited during Wray’s Admin.?
Did the crime statistics shown show a decline during Wray’s Admin? Did Wray not change the officers’ schedules to provide for better coverage and put experienced officers on patrol with rookie officers…only to have the officers complain he was being unfair…senior officers preferred to work 9-5 and off weekends? Did not Buracker’s report show over staffing Mon-Fri, 8:30-4:30 and severe under-staffing Sat-Sun? Did not Wray request more police officers? Did not Wray, also, question off-duty employment and the need to control abuse of it? Did not Buracker indicate to Rakestraw that the time limit for paid administrative leave should be established by the Chief, or the City Manager, or even the City Council if necessary? I thought it was a good report…in fact, it could have been written by David Wray. But, it wasn’t, so now the City Council has an objective, outside opinion to use as a tool to resolve some of the problems in the GPD. Of course, it won’t be easy as the N&R quoted Assist.Chief Harold Scott, commander of the patrol bureau as saying, “No matter what his chart said, we can address community issues with the overlap we have,”…
My response to that is, as a citizen, I would like to have more than 14 to 18 officers on patrol on weekends covering the entire city and I would like them to have help to keep them safe as well.

Posted by: Andy | July 08, 2008 at 01:41 PM

Church vs State: A debate with myself

********************************************************************************************************

There is a difference in being a Christian nation and having a state mandated religion. The United States is a Christian nation because the majority of its citizens practice the Christian faith, however there has never been a state mandated religion. All who reside within our borders are free to worship God in their own way. Ostensibly all religious beliefs and practices are honored and protected by law.

Christ demanded his followers love thy neighbor as thy love thyself and do unto others as you would have others do unto you. Our Founding Father remembered this injunction. They remembered also the countries they came from had mandated state religions and people were persecuted for believing and practicing another way of worshiping God. They remembered that this country was first populated by people leaving their homes to come to a wilderness for the freedom to practice their beliefs. They also remembered that these groups which came for religious freedom failed to extend that same freedom to others who wished to come and settle near them. This is why it was felt a specific law be written into our Constitution mandating there never be a state sponsored religion in the United States.

It wasn’t until almost two centuries later our federal government felt the need to specify in no uncertain terms that an individual could not be persecuted for his religion, his race or gender. This need came about with the Civil Rights movement and the need to give Blacks a law to invoke in instances of racial discrimination. At this time the feminist movement was also beginning as women were rebelling against the male dominated attitudes which had always been the way of society making women more or less chattel of men, so Congress tried to make an all encompassing law against any sort of discrimination.

It was this “need to be non-discriminating towards all” which led our nation to mandating that God must be hidden away and only brought out on Sunday mornings when we attend the church of our choice. I have for a long time now realized the mistake that was made when we the vast majority gave in to the tiny minority of non-religious atheist and more liberal thinkers in their demands to take God out of our daily lives. A mistake that changed the character of our nation and the attitudes of it’s people. Ours has become a Godless society and I have watched this come about from the time the first strictures against religious displays were enacted into law.

We removed all public displays of religion such as prayers in the schools, removing even the Pledge of Allegiance to our Flag from our schools because of the words “under God”, removing such harmless things as Nativity scenes in public parks and not allowing the display of the Ten Commandments, which were laws the Old Testament tells us were given to Moses by God Himself. In fact the Ten Commandments are not only accepted by over half the world’s population by Christians, Jews and Muslims, but they have been the basis for all civil laws of the nations. But because they are made known to us in The Old Testament they are to be removed from public view.

There is much to be learned from a display that signifies the belief an all knowing God is watching over us at all times. Such displays reminds the good not to be tempted by evil, and puts some restrains on the bad behavior. The greatest harm came about because when God’s influence was removed from our daily lives and public areas we left the door open for any and all influences both good and bad; mainly bad came in unfortunately.

For some time there it seemed to become a witch hunt and more liberal thinking people argued that any public policy is disqualifying if it has a basis in a religious stricture thus making it an imposition of religion on others. It seemed that logic had no sway in minds at that time. This careful watch against any show of religious belief is still with us and from time to time some one person or group makes a big noise against some policy. Most laws and policies and even political movements, in fact the very law against all and any type of discrimination is based on religious teachings or interpretations. It can be logically argued that the abolition of slavery, civil rights laws, opposition to the death penalty, and many others are all an imposition of religion on others!

The cleansing of religious displays up to this a point has been lead by liberal thinking individuals demanding all policies be given the “religious sniff test”. The most recent opposition however is now coming from the religious amongst us in an ironic turn around. Embryonic stem cell research is promising the discovery of cures for all sorts of terrible afflictions from Alzheimer’s to nerve re-growth allowing the paralyzed to move again to cell rejuvenation enabling the replacement of organs. But due to some people’s religious belief in the soul’s entering the physical at conception this research and possible miracle cure is seen as violating the separation of church and state.

Saner heads seem not able to prevail in this argument from whatever source and can not convince others that imposing religion means the mandating of religious practice. It does not mean the mandating of social policy that some people may have come to support for religious reasons.

And still the debate goes on and on into every area of our lives even a half century after we first began bowing in to the demands of the minority at the expense of the vast majority. There always seems to be one more item or idea that “offends” the beliefs or sensibilities of these others who have turned from God’s teachings; or insisting on an interpretation of God’s teaching based on their own thoughts.

The Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts have been attacked for their pledges, the YMCA (Young Men’s Christian Association) and the YWCA have been attacked for their name and their by-laws. And yet no child has been denied the right to join the scouts and no one has been turned away from the Y. All are welcome and if there is something that personally offends an individual that the vast majority of the members believe in and are doing then it should not be for them to change, but for individual to decide whether to tolerate peacefully or go elsewhere.

At first like most people I didn’t think there would be any harm done in removing these things from the public places if it would bring peace. Anything to bring peace! It didn’t change my religious views not to see these things. I miss them yes, but it had no real affect on my religious views as I had religion as a part of my up bringing. It was a part of my daily life.

What I failed to understand at the time was the millions of children and adults who did not have religion and God as a part of their daily life making these public displays the only influence and reminder of God and Godliness and Christian principles they would have. These basically good, but non-religious individuals, were now left with nothing to counter balance the effects of the evil that liberalism unleashed on the public. The movies and music and general degeneration that has now become a large influence in our everyday lives.

In fact, the more degenerate the more revered things seemed to become. The picture of a crucifix in a jar of urine being considered by liberal critics as high art! How low can we go?

And sad, so very sad that we deprived our children of the stability of knowing and having the laws of goodness made a part of their lives. We left them without guidance or standards of beliefs and behavior for their day to day activities and choices. It is perfectly acceptable for our children to listen to the vile lyrics of rap music, but an offense to let them see the rules for behavior given in the Ten Commandments! Children must be taught and shown what is acceptable. Children have to be protected from the base and immoral until they have gained the knowledge to choose for themselves. We adults in our head long search for a religiously non-intrusive society took this guidance away from our most vulnerable.

From the benefit of 20/20 hindsight I see the horrific damage that has been done. Now and perhaps too late I have been stepping forward and condemning actions or speeches or even Letters to the Editor of our local newspaper when they are showing intolerance for a morally right or religious speech, sign, movie, display or what ever. I intend to spend the rest of my life being intolerant of the “intolerant”, the “offended” and the “my way only”.

There should be no conflict with anyone’s beliefs if we are but tolerant of each others. Many work places are offering their Muslim workers time off five times each day to say their prayers to their God as required by their religion. This is as it should be. So why is it against the law for one short time period to say the Lord’s Prayer or recite the Pledge of Allegiance? A Christian Nation that will not allow a state mandated religion should, and must, extend all courtesies to all of our brothers, even our Christian brothers, as Christ admonished us to do. BB