A Great Philosophy for Living

21 Sep

I caught the following paragraphs in a blog called “Wild Bells”, written by Wayne Abernathy on WordPress.  After describing some wonderful memories from “olden days”, he summarized his outlook on life beautifully.

[Begin Excerpt]

These have stocked my treasury of marvelous memories. I am rich with them. Yet I have more observances to come. To these I look forward.

Here is what I believe about these riches. I can take them out of the treasury each year and seek to recreate them, to work to experience them all over again. If I do, I have but relived and re-experienced what I already have. I add little new to the treasury. Many people celebrate this way. It seems to me a squandered opportunity and probably dangerous. I doubt that the previous charm can be revived, that the wondrous experience of the past can be recaptured. I fear that the joyful and rich memory might even be harmed by the failed effort. Worse, much can be consumed, much exertion expended, and still frustration and misery—for myself and others—may result in the trying.

I believe that a better approach would be to create new magnificent memories. These can build upon the past and work from valuable traditions. The good of the past can be drawn upon to create something greater. The effort is to make a new experience, not vainly recall to life a treasured memory. Not every holiday experience will produce equal joy and beauty, but if allowed to live for its own sake each will add to the fullness of life and the value of our storehouse of life’s treasures. Each will have the chance to be the most marvelous experience yet.

I am not prepared to concede that the best of my life has been lived or that the finest that I can do is recreate only what has happened before. I fancy to live life on the rise. I see no loss in trying.

[End Excerpt]

A small piece of exceptional writing — and philosophy.

Math Is Hard For Leftists – Part 1 Million

13 Aug

Originally posted on cosmoscon:

There is a post on the Leftist blog Crooks and Liars that gives new meaning to the website’s title.

The post provides charts that will supposedly show your “Right-Wing brother” just how wrong he is about his claims that Obama increased government spending and the deficit.

Here are the two charts I’d like to debunk:

crooks and liars 1

crooks and liars 2

Wow, it looks like Obama is a very austere POTUS and all these claims about increased government spending and deficits are just hogwash.

But the author performs a simple trick to make his case – He takes all the government spending in 2009 and attributes it to Bush.

It’s true, the Federal government spending in 2009 was set in 2008 but the author forgets about a little item in early 2009 that didn’t have anything to do with Bush – The 2009 Stimulus.

The 2009 Stimulus added $787 billion to the government outlays and that…

View original 152 more words

Media Lackeys at Work Again in Middle East

17 Jul

Is anyone besides me totallysick of seeing news broadcasts highlighting the death and destruction in Gaza caused by Israeli bombs?  I am so mad I could spit (whatever that really means).  This is the national and international media at its very worst.

Who is it that does not know that the death and destruction stops as soon as Hamas stops firing rockets from Gaza into Israel?  What idiot does not know this?

What idiot does not know that this death and destruction in Gaza is caused, and encouraged, by the victims’ own people?

What idiot does not realize that the Gaza-based terrorists do not care one whit about the lives of their own people?  In fact, they rejoice when new “martyrs” are created and reported on across the world?

All that is necessary for such hideous occurrences to stop is for Hamas to stop shooting rockets from Gaza into Israel.

THIS is the story I want to see emphasized on the news — the story of how this bombing of Gaza can be brought to a close.  Right now.  Today.  Probably within the hour.

God Help Us — Now Obama Wants Gov’t to Rate Colleges — but SO DO AMERICANS? WHAT?

28 Jun

So Rasmussen reveals today, in its “Daily Update” of survey results, that

77% of Likely U.S. Voters who gave yes/no responses agree that a “world-class education is the single most important factor in determining whether our kids can compete for the best jobs and whether America can out-compete countries around the world”, that

69% (probably at least 75% of yes/no respondents) think U.S. PUBLIC SCHOOLS do NOT provide a world-class education, and that

64% (of yes/no respondents) favor a government college rating system.

 

Can we not see the problem here?  A major part of the reason why we are not getting world-class educations through our public schools is because of government intervention – yet – YET – people are willing to continue to think that giving government more control is a big part of the solution.  Can you not just anticipate what the rating system will look like that our government comes up with?  Will it have ANYthing to do with academic prowess?

Institutions of higher education are already rated by – who is it? Forbes? U.S. News and World Report? Others? – and colleges and universities have gamed these rating systems unmercifully, and created some degree of havoc in the school-seeking segment of our society.  And a strong majority of America’s voters think that a government system will be better?  When was a government system ever better in the mid- to long-term?

We deserve what we get.

Hillary Explaining Benghazi Again?

31 May

I write this in response to the “leak” of excerpts from a new book by Hillary, in which she once again defends her role in the Benghazi fiasco.

I find it odd that I haven’t noticed any emphasis on a particular aspect of Mrs. Clinton’s testimony before Congress.  We’ve heard it all, of course – the entire testimony – and we’ve heard/read literally a hundred responses to it, mostly criticizing her for insultingly saying “What difference at this point does it make?”

However, to me, the really damning aspect of this testimony has less to do with that question than with the broader statement, which I quote here:

“Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night and decided they’d go kill some Americans?  What difference at this point does it make?  It is our job . . . .”

My problem is not with the callous-sounding, “What difference . . . .?”

My problem is that, “at this point”, Hillary is STILL trying to deceive the American people by attributing this terrorist action to either “a protest” or “some guys out for a walk”.  This represents a continued and damning cover-up, deceit, and conceit with regard to the exceedingly well-known fact at the time of this testimony that this was, in fact, a terrorist attack.  An unconscionable and insulting “lie”.

In my opinion, this statement alone, this sorry attempted continuation of a gross deceit so long after the event, should have raised an immediate cry for her resignation from both sides of the aisle – and should have destroyed her credibility as a future presidential candidate.

But I don’t hear anyone at all emphasizing this blatant deceit.  What am I missing?  Is this point alone not valuable ammunition for her opponents in the upcoming presidential campaign?

The Answer to Bad Government

30 May

Mona Charen, in a recent column titled “Why VA Service Won’t Improve”, points out the pitfalls of thinking that firing and hiring at the VA will fix the problems there.  Her last sentence is a classic.

The entire column can be found at

http://www.creators.com/opinion/mona-charen/why-va-service-wont-improve.html

 

Excerpts:  [Bolding and caps are added by me]

Here’s a not-so-bold prediction: After the press loses interest in the Veterans Affairs scandal, after the investigations have been completed and one or two officials have resigned, nothing will change.

Is this cynicism? Not really. It comes down to one’s view of how much government can achieve by bureaucratic, top-down management.

The progressive project has limitless faith in the capacity of wise managers to run complex systems for the benefit of all. Untainted by the profit motive, bureaucrats can deliver services equitably and efficiently. Every liberal/progressive program has the effect of taking decision-making away from individuals, communities and local governments, and centralizing it in Washington.

President Barack Obama has doggedly championed this approach.

. . . .

Progressives respond that the IHS is simply underfunded — as they regard every federal program except the military. But even Democratic Sen. Jon Tester of Montana found when he examined problems with the IHS that at least one provider was seeing only one patient per day.

It isn’t management; it’s a matter of incentives. No central authority can make a system like the VA or the IHS or Britain’s National Health Service run efficiently. Competition is the only system that gives the power to consumers to reward good service and punish bad. But progressives cannot shed their faith that MORE government is the answer to BAD government, so this story is sure to be repeated.

[End of excerpts]

I feel that the theory that “MORE government is the answer to BAD government” is responsible for most of the truly serious problems we now face in this country.  Everyone should understand that the government should only provide solutions of last resort.  When faced with a problem, its prime directive should be, “How can this problem be solved in the private sector, with minimal regulation and oversight by the government?”  But I fear that ship has sailed . . . .

The More Things Change, . . . .

28 Mar

“How easily men satisfy themselves that the Constitution is exactly what they wish it to be.”

– Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, 1845

If he could only see us now.  Treading on the Constitution is not a new phenomenon, just one that seems to be gaining momentum.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 80 other followers