THE DOCTOR IS IN _______________
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
The disaster in Japan is devastating. That act of nature quickly brought to the forefront the perilous situation America is in.
In recent days because of Japan's problem we here in the United States are just beginning to suffer. Let me explain.Many food products from Japan is tainted with radiation and cannot be eaten so the seafood prices here in the States will begin to rise. Toyota and other auto companies in Japan said that they are not sending cars to the U.S and if they do there will be a very limited supply. They also said that auto parts that are made in Japan will not be available to car owners here in the USA, except on an emergency demand basis.
Folks, it's not only the auto industry that will cause a hardship on the American consumer. Keep in mind that American firms and corporations chose to outsource jobs and manufacturing over the past few decades so they could save a dime and do the job on the cheap. We are now at the mercy of Japan and other countries for most everything that the United States really needs.
Past jobs in this country that consisted of American manufactured and built electronics, telecommunications, phones, microchips, televisions, etc., were outsourced to Japan which in turn made our country dependent on Japan for those items. As an illustration, lets look at the electronic tablets and phones that come out of Japan. I predict that you will be hard pressed to receive parts and/or repairs on the old model and as to buying a new model . . .what are the chances? I bet the chances are slim to none for a long, long, time.
Japan also makes and supplies much of our military weapon software and hardware and don't forget the airline industry. Japan supplies most major airlines with parts. Basically, in every segment of our economy we are dependent on Japan as well as other countries like China, India, Taiwan, South Korea, Indonesia, etc., for our goods. That is a shame. In this century the United States doesn't produce or manufacture anything of real value anymore. The "Made in the U.S.A." slogan is dead and gone, all in the name of corporations wanting to improve their bottom line and satisfy their stockholders.
I remember the time when Wal-Mart advertised and bragged that they would only sell items made in the USA. That was one of the main reasons millions of Americans began shopping at Wal-Mart but, that promise didn't last long. It wasn't long until most or all of the items in the Wal-Mart's were labeled "Made in China, Taiwan, etc.--so much for looking out for America and it's workers, right?
We have only our politicians and large corporations to blame. The lawmakers allowed the large corporations to outsource jobs to save a buck and those same lawmakers accepted contributions and stacks of money from the corporate lobbyists so they could stay in office. The lawmakers sold their soul to the devil.
We have a rust belt throughout the Midwest, we've seen the death of our manufacturing industry in the South and it looks like our electronic silicon empire in the West is becoming obsolete.
Folks, we used to produce everything from the smallest widgets, to furniture, small and large electronics and appliances, carpets, iron and steel, airplanes and yes, automobiles and so, so much more. Our politicians allowed that to all disappear and now the United States has to depend on all of these other countries and third world nations for our survival and national security. That's wrong.
A suggestion - - Congress could change the corporation tax law to accommodate all of the large corporations so they could bring back the outsourced jobs to America. Why should our corporation be levied a 35% tax when other countries offer our American corporations 12 and 15% taxes? Lets get on a level playing field and then when the tax rate in brought in line with other countries Congress can then mandate that all corporations are prohibited from hiding behind tax shelters off shore. I submit, that is a start to put people back to work in this country.
Final point. We have to get back to the time America was building and manufacturing everything we need for our countries survival and national security. - And, that's my opinion. Make your own judgment and decisions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D.,, O.M.D.
________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Lottery Payouts: $319 Mil. Obscene-There Could Have Been 309 Other Millionaires In the U.S.
THE DOCTOR IS IN _______________
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
Lotteries, a chance for someone to beat the odds and live very well for the rest of their life. But, let's get real. There is no one person that needs to receive $319 million dollars to survive. Even if the Mega Millions jackpot, or any other lottery was split between 6, 7, or even 10 people I would suggest that it is still too much money for any one person or group to win. Come on! Use some common sense lottery officials.
Years ago, I wrote the Mega Millions and the Power Ball lottery and suggested that a cap be put on the amount a person can actually win. As suspected they did not respond in any way to my suggestion and inquiry. The lottery officials ignored the correspondence.
I proposed that the large lotteries operating in the United States cap the payout of the initial winning ticket at possibly $10 million dollars. Then, make millionaires out of the rest of the monies that were won in the lottery.
In the case of the recent win in New York, there would be 309 other people across the country that would have been millionaires. People, that is fair.
The plus side of an arrangement like this is that:
1. More people would buy lottery tickets knowing they have a better chance to become a millionaire. I would predict that lottery play would increase by ten fold if a cap was initiated.
2. Those other 309 millionaires across the country would be spending those dollars.
3. All of the money being put back into the economy by the newly made millionaires would clearly stimulate the economy.
4. Some of those newly made millionaires may even start businesses which in turn would benefit the economy.
My argument is that any person in this country can live very comfortable on $10 million dollars. If they can't, they surely do not need to win a lottery. But $319 million for one person or 5, 7, 8, or 10 people is obscene.
I suggest that if state lottery officials refuse to cap the amount of money paid to the initial winning ticket then the federal government and Congress should step in and mandate that a $10 million dollar win is sufficient for any one person or small group and then stipulate that the remainder of the lottery win be paid out in( one million dollar) increments to other winners. - And, that's my opinion. Make your own judgment and decisions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_______________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
Lotteries, a chance for someone to beat the odds and live very well for the rest of their life. But, let's get real. There is no one person that needs to receive $319 million dollars to survive. Even if the Mega Millions jackpot, or any other lottery was split between 6, 7, or even 10 people I would suggest that it is still too much money for any one person or group to win. Come on! Use some common sense lottery officials.
Years ago, I wrote the Mega Millions and the Power Ball lottery and suggested that a cap be put on the amount a person can actually win. As suspected they did not respond in any way to my suggestion and inquiry. The lottery officials ignored the correspondence.
I proposed that the large lotteries operating in the United States cap the payout of the initial winning ticket at possibly $10 million dollars. Then, make millionaires out of the rest of the monies that were won in the lottery.
In the case of the recent win in New York, there would be 309 other people across the country that would have been millionaires. People, that is fair.
The plus side of an arrangement like this is that:
1. More people would buy lottery tickets knowing they have a better chance to become a millionaire. I would predict that lottery play would increase by ten fold if a cap was initiated.
2. Those other 309 millionaires across the country would be spending those dollars.
3. All of the money being put back into the economy by the newly made millionaires would clearly stimulate the economy.
4. Some of those newly made millionaires may even start businesses which in turn would benefit the economy.
My argument is that any person in this country can live very comfortable on $10 million dollars. If they can't, they surely do not need to win a lottery. But $319 million for one person or 5, 7, 8, or 10 people is obscene.
I suggest that if state lottery officials refuse to cap the amount of money paid to the initial winning ticket then the federal government and Congress should step in and mandate that a $10 million dollar win is sufficient for any one person or small group and then stipulate that the remainder of the lottery win be paid out in( one million dollar) increments to other winners. - And, that's my opinion. Make your own judgment and decisions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_______________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Governor Kasich & Ohio Lawmakers-Hooray!
THE DOCTOR IS IN _______________
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
Hooray! Hats off to the state of Ohio, its lawmakers and Governor Kasich's move to get a handle on the over-the-top salary and benefits that the public employee unions are ripping off of the Ohio taxpayer. It's about time.
The law should apply to each and every public employee in the state. No one should be exempt. The cutbacks, salary decreases, loss of benefits and loss of obscene pensions should affect police, firemen, teachers, and every public employee on the states payroll.
It appears the Ohio Fraternal Order of Police are squealing and saying the bill is" fundamentally flawed," Wow! What do you think they're going to say. They don't want to lose any benefits.
These Ohio public employees, like their counterparts in other states have been living large for years enjoying "guaranteed" step increases in their wages, annual cost-of living increases, merit pay, bonus pay, free or near free health care for themselves and their families as well as many other benefits that someone working in the private work force will never ever see.. They don't want to give all of that up but thanks to politicians in Ohio, who have backbone, it looks like these public employees are finally going to live like the rest of the states citizens.
The average worker in Ohio and other states that do not work in the public sector goes to a job knowing what the salary will be for the year, with no expectations of a raise or a guaranteed cost-of-living increase. The private sector workers have no expectation of having a job when they show up for work each day. The private sector worker is not guaranteed free or near free health care. If they do have health care at all they have to pay for all of their and their families care out of the wages they are making on their job. Bottom line-the Mr. , Ms, or Mrs. working day to day (not as a public employee) does not have "GUARANTEES." They can be laid off or even fired. They may not see any vacation after working for years - - -so, where do these greedy public employees get the idea that they can write up contracts with lawmakers and demand all of the freebies and benefits they currently enjoy.
Governor Kasich and all politicians in Ohio - -eliminate all public employee annual cost-of-living increases, take away and eliminate all the current pension structure for public employees and start from scratch and mandate that they, like private sector workers have to depend on a 401(k) retirement plan. Eliminate all free health care for public employees. Make them pay for their own health care like everyone in the private sector does. If they are making a decent salary they can afford to pay for their own health care like the rest of Ohio citizens. Eliminate all merit pay, bonuses and automatic step increases. There is NO ONE in the private sector that is guaranteed that they will receive automatic increases in their salary.
If these public employees are so unhappy and threaten to walk off the job, let them do it. Fire them. Better yet, the state can file for bankruptcy to void any current public employee contracts. Then they can hire new people. If that were the case, I predict that when Ohio ran ads for new employees "without" all of the current freebies there would be thousands of people standing in line for those jobs.
Keep up the good work Governor Kasich and Ohio lawmakers. Don't back down. -And, that's my opinion. Make your own judgment and decisions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_______________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
Hooray! Hats off to the state of Ohio, its lawmakers and Governor Kasich's move to get a handle on the over-the-top salary and benefits that the public employee unions are ripping off of the Ohio taxpayer. It's about time.
The law should apply to each and every public employee in the state. No one should be exempt. The cutbacks, salary decreases, loss of benefits and loss of obscene pensions should affect police, firemen, teachers, and every public employee on the states payroll.
It appears the Ohio Fraternal Order of Police are squealing and saying the bill is" fundamentally flawed," Wow! What do you think they're going to say. They don't want to lose any benefits.
These Ohio public employees, like their counterparts in other states have been living large for years enjoying "guaranteed" step increases in their wages, annual cost-of living increases, merit pay, bonus pay, free or near free health care for themselves and their families as well as many other benefits that someone working in the private work force will never ever see.. They don't want to give all of that up but thanks to politicians in Ohio, who have backbone, it looks like these public employees are finally going to live like the rest of the states citizens.
The average worker in Ohio and other states that do not work in the public sector goes to a job knowing what the salary will be for the year, with no expectations of a raise or a guaranteed cost-of-living increase. The private sector workers have no expectation of having a job when they show up for work each day. The private sector worker is not guaranteed free or near free health care. If they do have health care at all they have to pay for all of their and their families care out of the wages they are making on their job. Bottom line-the Mr. , Ms, or Mrs. working day to day (not as a public employee) does not have "GUARANTEES." They can be laid off or even fired. They may not see any vacation after working for years - - -so, where do these greedy public employees get the idea that they can write up contracts with lawmakers and demand all of the freebies and benefits they currently enjoy.
Governor Kasich and all politicians in Ohio - -eliminate all public employee annual cost-of-living increases, take away and eliminate all the current pension structure for public employees and start from scratch and mandate that they, like private sector workers have to depend on a 401(k) retirement plan. Eliminate all free health care for public employees. Make them pay for their own health care like everyone in the private sector does. If they are making a decent salary they can afford to pay for their own health care like the rest of Ohio citizens. Eliminate all merit pay, bonuses and automatic step increases. There is NO ONE in the private sector that is guaranteed that they will receive automatic increases in their salary.
If these public employees are so unhappy and threaten to walk off the job, let them do it. Fire them. Better yet, the state can file for bankruptcy to void any current public employee contracts. Then they can hire new people. If that were the case, I predict that when Ohio ran ads for new employees "without" all of the current freebies there would be thousands of people standing in line for those jobs.
Keep up the good work Governor Kasich and Ohio lawmakers. Don't back down. -And, that's my opinion. Make your own judgment and decisions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_______________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Senior Citizens Should Receive COLA's Like Lawmakers & Public Employees
THE DOCTOR IS IN
_______________
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
Social Security cost-of-living (COLA) increases have not been seen by the senior citizen for two years now. In fact, 2010 and 2011 - - - zilch. Maybe, just maybe, next year the senior citizens may see one.
The government says that the cost-of-living (COLA's) adjustments are based on Labor Department calculations. When consumer prices go up, payments go up. If they stay stagnant seniors see no increase. The sad part of these small increases such as 1.2 percent is that as soon as it is put into the persons social security check it is immediately taken away by a medicare cost. The 2009 premium levels for medicare costs were: $96.40 a month, it will go to $110.50 a month and then to $115. 40. What a rip off. If the senior citizen gets an increase next year they can expect to see an actual increase in their check that amounts to only $6,$ 8, and $10.00 per month.
Keep in m mind folks that public employees such as policemen, firemen, teachers and lawmakers all over this country have guarantee's written into their contracts wherein they will receive annual cost-of-living raises of three (3%), four(4%), six (6%) and many times up to eight(8%) percent a year no matter how the economy is doing.
Fact is, the Congress people have been receiving up to six(6%) annual cost of living increases each and every year for decades. How do they receive that COLA? Here's how- back in the 1980's they made a secret pact and put it into law which states that Congress will receive these (COLA's) automatically "UNLESS" they themselves vote to decline the COLA for the year. Can you believe it? How would you, Joe and Jane Doe, on Main Street, USA , like to receive an automatic pay raise each year (unless you vote) not to take it. It would be nice, right? Don't hold your breath because it'll never happen for you people- so, for get about it.
These elite lawmakers, public employee members and their unions, who think they are an entitled group of people will continue to pig out at the trough of taxpayer monies through recessions and/or a depression and (like clock work) take their cost-of-living increases come hell or high water. Unwarranted? You bet. Keep in mind these same lawmakers and public employees also receive bonuses and merit pay as well as free or near free health care for themselves and their family for the rest of their life - - all on our dime.
I suggest that all these greedy public employees be mandated by law to enroll and belong in the Social Security program (like the rest of us common folk) and be stripped of all the guaranteed cost-of-living (COLA's), bonuses, merit pay, free or near free health care and obscene pensions that us regular people cannot receive. Nobody gives us free or near free health care for our families for the rest of our lives. If senior citizens cost-of-living is calculated on Labor Department statistics, the same should apply to every other citizen in the United States. Basically, if we seniors get an increase then everyone else will get an increase, if we don't, then no one else can get a COLA either. Parity and equity is the name of the game.
I predict that if "everyone " including Congress and public employees had to depend on Social Security and 401(k) plans for retirement then everyone would be treated equally and senior citizens would in all likelihood see regular annual COLA's. - And, that's my opinion. Make your own judgment and decisions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_______________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
_______________
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
Social Security cost-of-living (COLA) increases have not been seen by the senior citizen for two years now. In fact, 2010 and 2011 - - - zilch. Maybe, just maybe, next year the senior citizens may see one.
The government says that the cost-of-living (COLA's) adjustments are based on Labor Department calculations. When consumer prices go up, payments go up. If they stay stagnant seniors see no increase. The sad part of these small increases such as 1.2 percent is that as soon as it is put into the persons social security check it is immediately taken away by a medicare cost. The 2009 premium levels for medicare costs were: $96.40 a month, it will go to $110.50 a month and then to $115. 40. What a rip off. If the senior citizen gets an increase next year they can expect to see an actual increase in their check that amounts to only $6,$ 8, and $10.00 per month.
Keep in m mind folks that public employees such as policemen, firemen, teachers and lawmakers all over this country have guarantee's written into their contracts wherein they will receive annual cost-of-living raises of three (3%), four(4%), six (6%) and many times up to eight(8%) percent a year no matter how the economy is doing.
Fact is, the Congress people have been receiving up to six(6%) annual cost of living increases each and every year for decades. How do they receive that COLA? Here's how- back in the 1980's they made a secret pact and put it into law which states that Congress will receive these (COLA's) automatically "UNLESS" they themselves vote to decline the COLA for the year. Can you believe it? How would you, Joe and Jane Doe, on Main Street, USA , like to receive an automatic pay raise each year (unless you vote) not to take it. It would be nice, right? Don't hold your breath because it'll never happen for you people- so, for get about it.
These elite lawmakers, public employee members and their unions, who think they are an entitled group of people will continue to pig out at the trough of taxpayer monies through recessions and/or a depression and (like clock work) take their cost-of-living increases come hell or high water. Unwarranted? You bet. Keep in mind these same lawmakers and public employees also receive bonuses and merit pay as well as free or near free health care for themselves and their family for the rest of their life - - all on our dime.
I suggest that all these greedy public employees be mandated by law to enroll and belong in the Social Security program (like the rest of us common folk) and be stripped of all the guaranteed cost-of-living (COLA's), bonuses, merit pay, free or near free health care and obscene pensions that us regular people cannot receive. Nobody gives us free or near free health care for our families for the rest of our lives. If senior citizens cost-of-living is calculated on Labor Department statistics, the same should apply to every other citizen in the United States. Basically, if we seniors get an increase then everyone else will get an increase, if we don't, then no one else can get a COLA either. Parity and equity is the name of the game.
I predict that if "everyone " including Congress and public employees had to depend on Social Security and 401(k) plans for retirement then everyone would be treated equally and senior citizens would in all likelihood see regular annual COLA's. - And, that's my opinion. Make your own judgment and decisions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_______________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Saturday, March 26, 2011
Take the Award and Cap Limits Off of Medical Malpractice
THE DOCTOR IS IN
_______________
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
A Judge in Los Angeles issued a temporary ruling allowing visitation of a disabled patient with her 4-year-old triplets. Hooray! Now 34 year-old Abbie Dorn will be granted visits with her children. This woman was so badly brain damaged by "medical errors" during childbirth that she can no longer walk, talk, or eat.
Can you imagine a woman going to doctors and a hospital for delivery of a child and then wind up paralyzed and unable to walk, talk or eat all because of incompetent care. Currently there are 100,000 medical errors made by doctors, hospitals and health care personnel each and every year. And, that figure is climbing even after a decade of health care professionals aware of the problem.
Yet, the doctors, hospitals, nurses and health providers continue to make the same mistakes over and over all the while saying they want limits and caps put on malpractice awards.
What price a person, a body? There are some states that have caps of only $250,000 or $350,000. Those caps were put in place by the medical community scaring people by saying they can't afford to pay for malpractice insurance. They argue that if there were not limits as to how much they could be sued for they would leave the state.
Some states fell for their antics but people like Abbie Dorn are the one's who suffer. What price would you put on your spouse, your mother, your father, even your children? Would $350,000 be sufficient for the damage caused by an incompetent doctor or hospital? Well, it's happening right now in many states and because a person can only sue for such a small amount attorneys are reluctant to take on a medical malpractice case.
My view, if the doctors cannot afford malpractice insurance to cover serious or fatal injuries that they caused to a patient, they shouldn't be practicing. It's my opinion that there should be no cap limit on the amount of monies a person can sue a medical doctor, hospital or health care provider for if they are are proven to have injured the patient. I submit that if the medical profession would police their own and alert the public to their bad colleagues and rid it's ranks of those bad doctors and personnel they would not get sued as often.
As a side note: There is a doctor practicing here in Nevada that had, count them,--(NINE) malpractice cases that occurred in different states and some of the malpractice resulted in the death of the patient. Did other doctors know this guy was a bad apple? Probably. Did they do anything about his quality of care? No. When this man was caught putting his patients in danger here in Nevada the medical board only "suspended" his medical license.
In conclusion-do not buy into the argument that medical doctors cannot afford insurance or that the doctors will flee the state if the people of the state does not vote to put limits of medical malpractice awards. Think of your family before you cast that vote.- And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
_______________
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
A Judge in Los Angeles issued a temporary ruling allowing visitation of a disabled patient with her 4-year-old triplets. Hooray! Now 34 year-old Abbie Dorn will be granted visits with her children. This woman was so badly brain damaged by "medical errors" during childbirth that she can no longer walk, talk, or eat.
Can you imagine a woman going to doctors and a hospital for delivery of a child and then wind up paralyzed and unable to walk, talk or eat all because of incompetent care. Currently there are 100,000 medical errors made by doctors, hospitals and health care personnel each and every year. And, that figure is climbing even after a decade of health care professionals aware of the problem.
Yet, the doctors, hospitals, nurses and health providers continue to make the same mistakes over and over all the while saying they want limits and caps put on malpractice awards.
What price a person, a body? There are some states that have caps of only $250,000 or $350,000. Those caps were put in place by the medical community scaring people by saying they can't afford to pay for malpractice insurance. They argue that if there were not limits as to how much they could be sued for they would leave the state.
Some states fell for their antics but people like Abbie Dorn are the one's who suffer. What price would you put on your spouse, your mother, your father, even your children? Would $350,000 be sufficient for the damage caused by an incompetent doctor or hospital? Well, it's happening right now in many states and because a person can only sue for such a small amount attorneys are reluctant to take on a medical malpractice case.
My view, if the doctors cannot afford malpractice insurance to cover serious or fatal injuries that they caused to a patient, they shouldn't be practicing. It's my opinion that there should be no cap limit on the amount of monies a person can sue a medical doctor, hospital or health care provider for if they are are proven to have injured the patient. I submit that if the medical profession would police their own and alert the public to their bad colleagues and rid it's ranks of those bad doctors and personnel they would not get sued as often.
As a side note: There is a doctor practicing here in Nevada that had, count them,--(NINE) malpractice cases that occurred in different states and some of the malpractice resulted in the death of the patient. Did other doctors know this guy was a bad apple? Probably. Did they do anything about his quality of care? No. When this man was caught putting his patients in danger here in Nevada the medical board only "suspended" his medical license.
In conclusion-do not buy into the argument that medical doctors cannot afford insurance or that the doctors will flee the state if the people of the state does not vote to put limits of medical malpractice awards. Think of your family before you cast that vote.- And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
War in Lybia Escalates Above and Beyond: More rationalization By USA
THE DOCTOR IS IN _______________
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
It is now 03/26/2011 and the United States is still taking the lead in attacks on Libya even after president Obama said he was going to stand down. So much for his word. In addition, it is reported that the U.S. and the so-called coalition is planning to funnel arms to the Libyan rebels.
First, the reasoning for the Libyan attack was to only enforce a no-fly zone. That was ridiculous because Libya only has a very small amount of planes in their military asset inventory. It took almost nothing to have warplanes from a number of nations wipe out Libya's air force in a matter of hours. It was like using snow plow to kill a bug. Now the escalation is to arm the rebels and send in military personnel to train the rebels on how to use the weapons. Can you see how a government(s) can rationalize their views on what they want to accomplish?
Remember we, the United States supported Gadhafi for decades just like we did with Saddam in Iraq. We even supplied Saddam with weapons to use against his people but when the relationship sours the U.S. finds a way to rationalize regime change and then destroy the offending country by mass bombings and missle attacks . You can bet the United States is still playing a very active role in this war on Libya even though the the administration says it is stepping aside.
Tens of millions of dollars are being poured in this fiasco with Obama using the excuse that we are protecting the Libyan people. If that were the case why isn't Obama and his cohorts bombing and using military force against Syria? The government of Syria is presently slaughtering more people there on an every day basis that Gadahfi has done to date. Will Obama use military against the other Arab countries in the region that are now killing their people in the streets?
My view of this inappropriate, unwarranted war in Libya is: [ politics, oil, and to keep the American peoples mind off of all of the domestic problems ] that Obama and the administration fail to address. War is always a good excuse to divert one's attention from other matters. President George Bush did it and now Obama is playing the same ol' song. Anyone for a one term president? - And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_______________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
It is now 03/26/2011 and the United States is still taking the lead in attacks on Libya even after president Obama said he was going to stand down. So much for his word. In addition, it is reported that the U.S. and the so-called coalition is planning to funnel arms to the Libyan rebels.
First, the reasoning for the Libyan attack was to only enforce a no-fly zone. That was ridiculous because Libya only has a very small amount of planes in their military asset inventory. It took almost nothing to have warplanes from a number of nations wipe out Libya's air force in a matter of hours. It was like using snow plow to kill a bug. Now the escalation is to arm the rebels and send in military personnel to train the rebels on how to use the weapons. Can you see how a government(s) can rationalize their views on what they want to accomplish?
Remember we, the United States supported Gadhafi for decades just like we did with Saddam in Iraq. We even supplied Saddam with weapons to use against his people but when the relationship sours the U.S. finds a way to rationalize regime change and then destroy the offending country by mass bombings and missle attacks . You can bet the United States is still playing a very active role in this war on Libya even though the the administration says it is stepping aside.
Tens of millions of dollars are being poured in this fiasco with Obama using the excuse that we are protecting the Libyan people. If that were the case why isn't Obama and his cohorts bombing and using military force against Syria? The government of Syria is presently slaughtering more people there on an every day basis that Gadahfi has done to date. Will Obama use military against the other Arab countries in the region that are now killing their people in the streets?
My view of this inappropriate, unwarranted war in Libya is: [ politics, oil, and to keep the American peoples mind off of all of the domestic problems ] that Obama and the administration fail to address. War is always a good excuse to divert one's attention from other matters. President George Bush did it and now Obama is playing the same ol' song. Anyone for a one term president? - And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_______________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Friday, March 25, 2011
New Jersey Casinos Are Losing Because of the Punitive Smoking Laws
THE DOCTOR IS IN
_______________
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is trying to formulate a plan to revitalize and revive gambling in Atlantic City. Even with Ravel opening in 2012, the casino revenues are down 30 percent. I should also say that outside competition is only going to increase. However, Atlantic City had the advantage of 30 years of gaming and they squandered the advantage by being a nanny-state with losing rules and regulations forcing people to change their behavior.
Here is a message, suggestion and advice to Governor Christie and all the rest of the governors in states like Pennsylvania, Delaware, and New York. If you really want to compete you have to allow people to express their legal social choices as they see fit without the state stomping on their legal social pleasures.
First and foremost governors, the first move that you should undertake is repeal any and all smoking laws in your casinos. It is nice to be political correct and pass laws that sound like your state is going to take care of a person from the cradle to the grave and that the lawmakers ares going to take care of all of a person's health problems and keep them from dying but when it comes to what a person eats, drinks, and what they ingest into their own body (legal items) is that persons business
People with an agenda want to say second hand smoke will kill everyone around it. Come on! Use your common sense. All of the politicians and people over the age of 50 were brought up in smoke filled rooms. Smoking was prevalent in doctors offices, hotels, bars, and most every business and home in every city in the nation. All of those lawmakers and everyone else conducted business with smokers on an everyday basis and lo' and behold--- all of those lawmakers and lawyers, doctors, business people all raised intelligent children in that smoking atmosphere and it did not harm them. And, all of them are living and conducting business as usual.
Millions of tourists from all over the world want to come to the United States and drink, eat smoke and gamble without the strong arm of government regulations telling the what they can or cannot do.
If you really want to prove the point here's what you governors can do: Have one casino on one corner offer gambling, food, alcohol, and smoking. On the corner across the street have another casino off gaming, food, alcohol and have a total nonsmoking environment. I predict that the casino that offers smoking along with their other social pleasures will do more business than the casino that "does not" allow patrons to smoke.
Governors, let people make their own choices as to where they want to socialize. In fact, that is the real reason these groups that have an agenda want a law to umbrella all business rather than let the "free market" dictate profit. These groups are actually afraid that the business that offers smoking along with their attractions and offerings will do much more business than the nonsmoking establishment.
Governors, all there has to be is a sign stating whether the casino, bar, restaurant, etc., is a smoker friendly establishment or a totally nonsmoking business. In that way the patron can make their own decisions and choose what casino or business they prefer to socialize in.
If you truly believe that a whiff of tobacco smoke from one room that is separated by a closed door can kill a person in another room I'll sell you that bridge in Brooklyn. Lawmakers, all the senior citizens living today is a poster child for living in a smoking environment. Common sense people. That's the key. It's no secret that many of these scientific studies and clinical trials are skewed, and journal articles are fabricated for many reasons such as collecting grant monies, payoffs by chemical and pharmaceutical companies and even promote the authors recognition.
Don't blame all the ills of the world on smoking a cigarette or cigar. Just the pollution in our everyday air on any street in the USA carries more of a danger than someone exposed to a whiff of smoke. Medically, it would take a person standing a few inches apart in front of another person blowing smoke directly into their face continually for not days, not weeks and not months but years to have that person even have the chance of contracting a disease such as cancer.
It's similar to the scientists that pump cancer causing ingredients, food, drink, smoke and products into lab rats and mice. The scientists give the mice extraordinary doses of chemicals, sometimes a thousand times more than what an average person could ever ingest in their lifetime and then these same scientists proclaim that they a certain food, drink, chemical, etc., is bad for a human being.
Don't believe all of the self-serving studies that are put out there and look to the past and present as to how something may affect someone or something. What is good for one person may nor be good for everyone. People die of cancer and other devastating diseases everyday and it's not all because someone sittiing next to them smoked a cigarette . On the other hand you have people around the world that have smoked cigarettes and cigars, drank alcohol , gorged themselves on all of the fried foods, sweets, gravies, soft drinks, etc., and live to be in their 80's 90's and even more. You can see this played out every day around the world.
So, bottom line. Do not treat every person in the nation in a cookie cutter mold. Give the people choices and let them make their own decisions as to how they want to handle their health issues.
Let people smoke. Try my suggestion of smoking or nonsmoking businessesand see the proof will be in the pudding. The smoking establishment with out pace the nonsmoking business with more profits and customer count. What are you afraid of?
_______________
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is trying to formulate a plan to revitalize and revive gambling in Atlantic City. Even with Ravel opening in 2012, the casino revenues are down 30 percent. I should also say that outside competition is only going to increase. However, Atlantic City had the advantage of 30 years of gaming and they squandered the advantage by being a nanny-state with losing rules and regulations forcing people to change their behavior.
Here is a message, suggestion and advice to Governor Christie and all the rest of the governors in states like Pennsylvania, Delaware, and New York. If you really want to compete you have to allow people to express their legal social choices as they see fit without the state stomping on their legal social pleasures.
First and foremost governors, the first move that you should undertake is repeal any and all smoking laws in your casinos. It is nice to be political correct and pass laws that sound like your state is going to take care of a person from the cradle to the grave and that the lawmakers ares going to take care of all of a person's health problems and keep them from dying but when it comes to what a person eats, drinks, and what they ingest into their own body (legal items) is that persons business
People with an agenda want to say second hand smoke will kill everyone around it. Come on! Use your common sense. All of the politicians and people over the age of 50 were brought up in smoke filled rooms. Smoking was prevalent in doctors offices, hotels, bars, and most every business and home in every city in the nation. All of those lawmakers and everyone else conducted business with smokers on an everyday basis and lo' and behold--- all of those lawmakers and lawyers, doctors, business people all raised intelligent children in that smoking atmosphere and it did not harm them. And, all of them are living and conducting business as usual.
Millions of tourists from all over the world want to come to the United States and drink, eat smoke and gamble without the strong arm of government regulations telling the what they can or cannot do.
If you really want to prove the point here's what you governors can do: Have one casino on one corner offer gambling, food, alcohol, and smoking. On the corner across the street have another casino off gaming, food, alcohol and have a total nonsmoking environment. I predict that the casino that offers smoking along with their other social pleasures will do more business than the casino that "does not" allow patrons to smoke.
Governors, let people make their own choices as to where they want to socialize. In fact, that is the real reason these groups that have an agenda want a law to umbrella all business rather than let the "free market" dictate profit. These groups are actually afraid that the business that offers smoking along with their attractions and offerings will do much more business than the nonsmoking establishment.
Governors, all there has to be is a sign stating whether the casino, bar, restaurant, etc., is a smoker friendly establishment or a totally nonsmoking business. In that way the patron can make their own decisions and choose what casino or business they prefer to socialize in.
If you truly believe that a whiff of tobacco smoke from one room that is separated by a closed door can kill a person in another room I'll sell you that bridge in Brooklyn. Lawmakers, all the senior citizens living today is a poster child for living in a smoking environment. Common sense people. That's the key. It's no secret that many of these scientific studies and clinical trials are skewed, and journal articles are fabricated for many reasons such as collecting grant monies, payoffs by chemical and pharmaceutical companies and even promote the authors recognition.
Don't blame all the ills of the world on smoking a cigarette or cigar. Just the pollution in our everyday air on any street in the USA carries more of a danger than someone exposed to a whiff of smoke. Medically, it would take a person standing a few inches apart in front of another person blowing smoke directly into their face continually for not days, not weeks and not months but years to have that person even have the chance of contracting a disease such as cancer.
It's similar to the scientists that pump cancer causing ingredients, food, drink, smoke and products into lab rats and mice. The scientists give the mice extraordinary doses of chemicals, sometimes a thousand times more than what an average person could ever ingest in their lifetime and then these same scientists proclaim that they a certain food, drink, chemical, etc., is bad for a human being.
Don't believe all of the self-serving studies that are put out there and look to the past and present as to how something may affect someone or something. What is good for one person may nor be good for everyone. People die of cancer and other devastating diseases everyday and it's not all because someone sittiing next to them smoked a cigarette . On the other hand you have people around the world that have smoked cigarettes and cigars, drank alcohol , gorged themselves on all of the fried foods, sweets, gravies, soft drinks, etc., and live to be in their 80's 90's and even more. You can see this played out every day around the world.
So, bottom line. Do not treat every person in the nation in a cookie cutter mold. Give the people choices and let them make their own decisions as to how they want to handle their health issues.
Let people smoke. Try my suggestion of smoking or nonsmoking businessesand see the proof will be in the pudding. The smoking establishment with out pace the nonsmoking business with more profits and customer count. What are you afraid of?
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Gadhafi Gone? One Of Libya's Own Could Do It
THE DOCTOR IS IN _______________
Obama's wars- Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and now Libya. For an anti-war president it appears Obama loves to play war.
This attack on Libya should never have involved the United States. If other countries in Europe wanted to invade Libya that is their decision. Can't anyone fight a war without United States intelligence, equipment and manpower?
I applaud the Soviet Union, China and Germany for not going along with an attack on another nation without provocation or in response to an attack on their country. The only reason Obama led this unwarranted attack is because he doesn't like Gadhafi and says "Gadhafi has got to go." A second excuse is Gadhafi is killing his people. Obama, many countries in the Middle East is currently killing their people to stop revolutions. What makes Libya different?
President Obama and the administration could have saved us taxpayers billions of dollars in costs of fighting this useless mini-war on Libya while at the same time ridding Libya of Gadhafi for about $2.00 . Let me pose a hypothetical situation:
The CIA and other intelligence agencies from around the world that want this guy gone could pony up a few thousand dollars each from their countries coffers. For discussion sake let's settle on (one million dollars) and these countries could use the one million dollars to buy off one of Gadhafi's close confidants in his inner circle or even a person in his military. Add an additional $2.00 for the cost of a bullet and Gadhafi could be gone in a second. As an incentive, offer the shooter asylum in a neighboring Muslim country. Result:-Gadhafi gone by one of his own.
A United States citizen didn't take him out nor did a citizen from another allied country. It would read in papers around the world as: " Ridding Libya from Gadhafi was done by a Libyan freedom fighter" who in my opinion would probably be hailed as a hero by the Libyan people.
If Gadhafi was taken out by one of his own there would at least be a plan for some sort of regime change. The new leader could possibly be a high ranking Libyan military person and the transition would be a fairly smooth operation which it clearly isn't now..
Right now Obama and his so called coalition doesn't have any sort of plan once Gadhafi is gone. All this attack force is doing is destroying Libya infrastructure, killing civilians and ruining the country, similar to what was done in Iraq and which Obama says we, the United States taxpayer, has to rebuild for the Libyan people.
This hypothetical scenario could be compared to other real instances where the leader and/or high ranking official of another country was targeted. I'm not condoning an assassination squad like the one that was covertly dispatched to Italy a few years ago to kill an official in a hotel or the CIA's attempt to eliminate Castro decades ago or the Bulgarian that was killed by poison on the tip of an umbrella or the writer that was poisoned by radiation. Those were real instances. I'm talking hypothetical.
However, if it did happen by a Libyan for the cost of a bullet we in the United States and other allied countries could save billions of dollars that are now being spent on this stupid attack of Libya. Once again, my view is: let the Libyan people handle their own problems but if one Libyan wanted to be paid for their efforts and endeavors it would clearly make things a lot easier. - And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns,Ph.D., O.M.D.
_______________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Obama's wars- Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and now Libya. For an anti-war president it appears Obama loves to play war.
This attack on Libya should never have involved the United States. If other countries in Europe wanted to invade Libya that is their decision. Can't anyone fight a war without United States intelligence, equipment and manpower?
I applaud the Soviet Union, China and Germany for not going along with an attack on another nation without provocation or in response to an attack on their country. The only reason Obama led this unwarranted attack is because he doesn't like Gadhafi and says "Gadhafi has got to go." A second excuse is Gadhafi is killing his people. Obama, many countries in the Middle East is currently killing their people to stop revolutions. What makes Libya different?
President Obama and the administration could have saved us taxpayers billions of dollars in costs of fighting this useless mini-war on Libya while at the same time ridding Libya of Gadhafi for about $2.00 . Let me pose a hypothetical situation:
The CIA and other intelligence agencies from around the world that want this guy gone could pony up a few thousand dollars each from their countries coffers. For discussion sake let's settle on (one million dollars) and these countries could use the one million dollars to buy off one of Gadhafi's close confidants in his inner circle or even a person in his military. Add an additional $2.00 for the cost of a bullet and Gadhafi could be gone in a second. As an incentive, offer the shooter asylum in a neighboring Muslim country. Result:-Gadhafi gone by one of his own.
A United States citizen didn't take him out nor did a citizen from another allied country. It would read in papers around the world as: " Ridding Libya from Gadhafi was done by a Libyan freedom fighter" who in my opinion would probably be hailed as a hero by the Libyan people.
If Gadhafi was taken out by one of his own there would at least be a plan for some sort of regime change. The new leader could possibly be a high ranking Libyan military person and the transition would be a fairly smooth operation which it clearly isn't now..
Right now Obama and his so called coalition doesn't have any sort of plan once Gadhafi is gone. All this attack force is doing is destroying Libya infrastructure, killing civilians and ruining the country, similar to what was done in Iraq and which Obama says we, the United States taxpayer, has to rebuild for the Libyan people.
This hypothetical scenario could be compared to other real instances where the leader and/or high ranking official of another country was targeted. I'm not condoning an assassination squad like the one that was covertly dispatched to Italy a few years ago to kill an official in a hotel or the CIA's attempt to eliminate Castro decades ago or the Bulgarian that was killed by poison on the tip of an umbrella or the writer that was poisoned by radiation. Those were real instances. I'm talking hypothetical.
However, if it did happen by a Libyan for the cost of a bullet we in the United States and other allied countries could save billions of dollars that are now being spent on this stupid attack of Libya. Once again, my view is: let the Libyan people handle their own problems but if one Libyan wanted to be paid for their efforts and endeavors it would clearly make things a lot easier. - And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns,Ph.D., O.M.D.
_______________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
The U.S. Led the Attack of Libya-Don't Fool Yourself.
THE DOCTOR IS IN
_______________
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
More civilians die in Libya because of the United States led attack on that sovereign country. This African country did not bomb America and they did not send Libyan soldiers to the United States to attack our people or infrastructure. The nation of Libya dd not invade the United States in any way, shape or form. All the Libyan government did was attempt to put down an uprising within their borders, a revolution, for lack of a better word. Yet, Obama, the supposed anti-war president and his lackeys put together a rag-tag coalition in name only too preempt a military action against Libya (just because) Obama says: " Col. Gadahafi has got to go!" Wow! for a man that has no stomach for war he is certainly initiating a number of them. In fact, he is still fighting the Afghan war, and the Iraq war, (that's two) and that is what Obama and the administration claims but I say we now have "FOUR" wars that we are engaged in. Here are the two others wars:
1. Pakistan: a silent, covert war that we have been fighting for a few years now and using drones and American military men and women as well as United States military mercenary contractors without disclosing the full extent of the Pakistan war to the American people.
2. Libya: A United States led assault on that country. So, add them up people- - - FOUR WARS.
It is no secret that people in the Middle East are in a revolutionary mode fighting for some freedoms they demand. It started with Egypt and the fury has spread throughout the region. But I say that unless these people in these different countries fight for their freedoms on their own they will not have any freedoms. It is their fight with with their leaders and their governments. Further, I say it is not our fight, it is the peoples of those countries fight, to win or lose on their own merits.
Is Obama going to bomb Yemen, Bahrain, the Sudan, Indonesia? Where does it stop? If this anti-war president wants to protect the people of Libya from government troops, is he going to take the same military action against the governments just mentioned? Government troops in these countries are firing on their citizens to put down the peoples revolution.
In the past few days the United States just spent billions of dollars of our taxpayer monies to interfere with another countries internal problems. If Obama was really serious about this Libyan conflict he wouldn't have been down in Latin America kicking around a soccer ball with school kids or going out on the town with his family. I maintain that if this Libyan attack was serious he would have been in this country, in the White House, from the get-go and would have went on television and explained his reasoning why America had to initiate an attack on another nation without cause (other than the lame excuse) "Gadhafi's got to go."
Personally, I don't think Obama is presidential material. Did I vote for him? Yes I did. However, next time around--"no way". I'll give someone else a shot at making America better and hopefully someone who takes care of us here at home.
Obama has the tendency to say one thing and then does a 180" at the whim of his adviser's. It appears in his world that promises are made to be broken. I would not like to think that these old and new wars that are continuing at the pleasure of Obama is just a misdirection move to cover up his lack of ability to address our serious domestic problems here at home. But it looks more and more like a slight-of-hand game being played by this administration. It's the old shell game. The posture by lawmakers is "look, we are fighting wars " so" don't worry about what we need here in this country right now."
Those billions of dollars that Obama and the administration are throwing down a deep dark hole fighting his wars could be used to great advantage here at home. With the infusion of those war dollars into our economy our country would immediately show a significant turn-a round. Just think, all of that money currently being spent on ships, planes, equipment and personnel as well as all the taxpayer money being spent on improving infrastructure for other countries could be spent in the USA. It's a win situation for America if Obama would stop these sanitized (wars by video game where no one sees who is being killed) and bring our men and women home.
Oh, by the way - - Obama also said that we Americans are going to have to dump billions of dollars into Libya to help rebuild that country after our bombs destroyed it. How's that sit with you America? - And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_______________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
_______________
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
More civilians die in Libya because of the United States led attack on that sovereign country. This African country did not bomb America and they did not send Libyan soldiers to the United States to attack our people or infrastructure. The nation of Libya dd not invade the United States in any way, shape or form. All the Libyan government did was attempt to put down an uprising within their borders, a revolution, for lack of a better word. Yet, Obama, the supposed anti-war president and his lackeys put together a rag-tag coalition in name only too preempt a military action against Libya (just because) Obama says: " Col. Gadahafi has got to go!" Wow! for a man that has no stomach for war he is certainly initiating a number of them. In fact, he is still fighting the Afghan war, and the Iraq war, (that's two) and that is what Obama and the administration claims but I say we now have "FOUR" wars that we are engaged in. Here are the two others wars:
1. Pakistan: a silent, covert war that we have been fighting for a few years now and using drones and American military men and women as well as United States military mercenary contractors without disclosing the full extent of the Pakistan war to the American people.
2. Libya: A United States led assault on that country. So, add them up people- - - FOUR WARS.
It is no secret that people in the Middle East are in a revolutionary mode fighting for some freedoms they demand. It started with Egypt and the fury has spread throughout the region. But I say that unless these people in these different countries fight for their freedoms on their own they will not have any freedoms. It is their fight with with their leaders and their governments. Further, I say it is not our fight, it is the peoples of those countries fight, to win or lose on their own merits.
Is Obama going to bomb Yemen, Bahrain, the Sudan, Indonesia? Where does it stop? If this anti-war president wants to protect the people of Libya from government troops, is he going to take the same military action against the governments just mentioned? Government troops in these countries are firing on their citizens to put down the peoples revolution.
In the past few days the United States just spent billions of dollars of our taxpayer monies to interfere with another countries internal problems. If Obama was really serious about this Libyan conflict he wouldn't have been down in Latin America kicking around a soccer ball with school kids or going out on the town with his family. I maintain that if this Libyan attack was serious he would have been in this country, in the White House, from the get-go and would have went on television and explained his reasoning why America had to initiate an attack on another nation without cause (other than the lame excuse) "Gadhafi's got to go."
Personally, I don't think Obama is presidential material. Did I vote for him? Yes I did. However, next time around--"no way". I'll give someone else a shot at making America better and hopefully someone who takes care of us here at home.
Obama has the tendency to say one thing and then does a 180" at the whim of his adviser's. It appears in his world that promises are made to be broken. I would not like to think that these old and new wars that are continuing at the pleasure of Obama is just a misdirection move to cover up his lack of ability to address our serious domestic problems here at home. But it looks more and more like a slight-of-hand game being played by this administration. It's the old shell game. The posture by lawmakers is "look, we are fighting wars " so" don't worry about what we need here in this country right now."
Those billions of dollars that Obama and the administration are throwing down a deep dark hole fighting his wars could be used to great advantage here at home. With the infusion of those war dollars into our economy our country would immediately show a significant turn-a round. Just think, all of that money currently being spent on ships, planes, equipment and personnel as well as all the taxpayer money being spent on improving infrastructure for other countries could be spent in the USA. It's a win situation for America if Obama would stop these sanitized (wars by video game where no one sees who is being killed) and bring our men and women home.
Oh, by the way - - Obama also said that we Americans are going to have to dump billions of dollars into Libya to help rebuild that country after our bombs destroyed it. How's that sit with you America? - And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_______________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
50% Increase In Hispanic Population In USA-Census Bureau Report
THE DOCTOR IS IN _______________
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
The Census Bureau just released some disturbing information as far as I'm concerned. They report that the Hispanic population increased a whopping fifty (50) percent in the United States. That's an alarming figure. The Census Bureau stated that they and other federal agencies has been miscalculating and underestimated the figures for the last few years. Could it be an intentional oversight by the various government agencies to under count demographics, especially when it comes to Hispanics and population growth? Politics and elections are a funny animal and when the demographics are skewed this much it makes a person wonder.
They state that Hispanics and Asians grow at the same rate but Hispanics grow three(3) times more quickly than Asians. The Whites population remain the same.
Finally, the report says that in states where Whites once dominated, Hispanics now dominate.
I submit that the fast Hispanic growth in the population here in the United States is mainly caused by the porous borders and lax security and immigration control. Another factor is the lack of willingness of our lawmakers and their failure to have taken quick, concise, action immediately following the amnesty program by President Reagan in the 1980's.
I believe our lawmakers have let us American citizens down over the past few decades. Instead of guarding our borders and enforcing immigration policy and building fences across our Southern border from the east coast to the west coast they chose to close their eyes to the problem and they in turn allowed the the hordes of illegals from around the world, especially from Mexico to invade our country all in the name of votes.
These Washington politicians continue to allow such things that may include but not limited to: allow illegal alien women to have a baby on American soil and grant that baby citizenship with lucrative benefits for the illegal parents. Lawmakers refuse to enforce and mandate the E-verify system to check on an illegal employees working status . Lawmakers allow sanctuary cities within our borders so as to protect the illegal alien from being detained and deported. No wonder the increase in Hispanic population is exploding.
The continued failed policies by our lawmakers in Washington like the ones mentioned here are surely changing America as we know it. I can foresee a third world country for America in the not too distant future all because of our lawmakers failing to act in America's best interests.
Currently our lawmakers are pandering too this Hispanic demographic population and refuse to look out for America. Shame on them. It's these same lawmakers that raise their right hand and swear to protect our borders. What a joke! All they want to do is protect their job, hold their office, gain power and raise money for their own personal gain. - And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_______________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
The Census Bureau just released some disturbing information as far as I'm concerned. They report that the Hispanic population increased a whopping fifty (50) percent in the United States. That's an alarming figure. The Census Bureau stated that they and other federal agencies has been miscalculating and underestimated the figures for the last few years. Could it be an intentional oversight by the various government agencies to under count demographics, especially when it comes to Hispanics and population growth? Politics and elections are a funny animal and when the demographics are skewed this much it makes a person wonder.
They state that Hispanics and Asians grow at the same rate but Hispanics grow three(3) times more quickly than Asians. The Whites population remain the same.
Finally, the report says that in states where Whites once dominated, Hispanics now dominate.
I submit that the fast Hispanic growth in the population here in the United States is mainly caused by the porous borders and lax security and immigration control. Another factor is the lack of willingness of our lawmakers and their failure to have taken quick, concise, action immediately following the amnesty program by President Reagan in the 1980's.
I believe our lawmakers have let us American citizens down over the past few decades. Instead of guarding our borders and enforcing immigration policy and building fences across our Southern border from the east coast to the west coast they chose to close their eyes to the problem and they in turn allowed the the hordes of illegals from around the world, especially from Mexico to invade our country all in the name of votes.
These Washington politicians continue to allow such things that may include but not limited to: allow illegal alien women to have a baby on American soil and grant that baby citizenship with lucrative benefits for the illegal parents. Lawmakers refuse to enforce and mandate the E-verify system to check on an illegal employees working status . Lawmakers allow sanctuary cities within our borders so as to protect the illegal alien from being detained and deported. No wonder the increase in Hispanic population is exploding.
The continued failed policies by our lawmakers in Washington like the ones mentioned here are surely changing America as we know it. I can foresee a third world country for America in the not too distant future all because of our lawmakers failing to act in America's best interests.
Currently our lawmakers are pandering too this Hispanic demographic population and refuse to look out for America. Shame on them. It's these same lawmakers that raise their right hand and swear to protect our borders. What a joke! All they want to do is protect their job, hold their office, gain power and raise money for their own personal gain. - And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_______________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Sunday, March 20, 2011
Libya Can Handle Their Own Revolution Obama: Hand's Off
THE DOCTOR IS IN
_______________
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
President Obama invades Libya. He is using a page from the George Bush play book. That credo is "lets invade other countries without any provocation. The cost of this fiasco alone will run into the billions of dollars. Missles, ships, planes, weapons, the cost of each and every military man and woman, etc,---and, for what? I say stop all of the current military actions we are currently engaged in and bring all of those billions of dollars home here and invest the monies on our soil.
Prior to Obama's decision to invade Libya, which began hours ago and that is already resulting in many civilian deaths I wrote a blog advising that Obama keep his nose out of Libya's internal politics. However, it appears Obama and his administration is set on initiating wars around the world. The cost alone is outrageous. Missles, ships, weapons, military men and women, etc., it will run into the billions again. For What? Stop all of the wars we are currently engaged in and bring those billions of dollars home and invest them here on our soil.
I truly believe that this attack on Libya is unwarranted. We are already fighting three wars. The administration says TWO but I say three because one of the wars has been very covert for years now. Let's count them up: (a) Iraq (b) Afghanistan ( the two that Obama will admit too) and the third is Pakistan. We have been using drones, rockets, and boots on the ground in that country for years. Now, this president wants to get involved in Libya. That will be "four" military actions that the USA is involved in.
Obama and his staff went on the airwaves in the last 48 hours and had their talking heads on the talk shows saying.: "the United States is not leading this attack." They say the French was the one that bombed Libya first. Yes, the French did drop the first bombs but people. . . when it is all said and done it was the United States that put this action together with England and France and had other nations give their blessing. It was our tomahawk missiles that lit up the skies over Libya and buried their warheads into Libyan targets. Today, it was our planes along with the French that bombed and killed civilians . Television pictures out of Libya today attest to that fact. Injured and maimed civilians being treated in a hospital attest to that fact. Our military is providing the majority of intelligence and satellite endeavors and pinpointing the targets inside Libya. On the television news this evening the United States admitted that they are taking the lead in this assault on Libya and "will" form a coalition" later." What a joke.
I would suspect that the United States using Secretary of state Hillary Clinton as the messenger went behind closed doors with officials from the supposed coalition countries and made private deals which may or may not include, but not limited too: payoffs in favors and granting wish lists that those countries desire. The payoff's could be such things as additional foreign aid, military hardware and software, trade advantages, and other goodies.
I predict that in the near future the media will receive and divulge information from various sources within the government that Obama and the administration set up the invasion of Libya and the no-fly zones using a "straw man" scenario telling the French to be the first country to drop the first bomb on Libya so that the United States would not have to face the world and appear as the invader that began this preemptive strike against another sovereign country.
My view and the view of many other Americans which is based on recent polls which were conducted immediately after the military strike on Libya clearly show that we have no business using military action against Libya. Many people stated that the United States is acting like a bully. Others say, we should not force our way of life on countries that have an entirely different idea of how they should live.
Obama and his supporters try to rationalize the attack saying Gaddafi is brutalizing his people but in reality Gaddafi is using force to put down an uprising. However, Obama doesn't like the way the conflict between Libyan citizens and their government has been going so what does Washington do? They say: the people are losing the battle with the government forces so we are going to step in too help them overthrow Gaddafi. That's a hell of a reason to attack another country that did nothing to us here in the United States.
I submit, everyone has to fight their own wars. If the people rise up(in any country) let them fight their own war. If they win, on their own, okay. If they lose, so what? We in the USA shouldn't take sides with different factions in any country just to overthrow what we consider a despot or dictator.
We here in the United States fought our own Civil War, amongst ourselves. Like us, these citizens of other countries should win or lose their fights on their own. After the conflict ends whoever is left standing is the people we deal with. We shouldn't have to impose our feeling and choice as to who should be in charge of any specific country. We should learn from our mistakes because in the past we backed certain people to head up their country and it came back to bite us in the ass.
Christ, before our war in Afghanistan, we were the country that armed and trained most of those Afghan tribes to fight against the Russians. That battle lasted about ten years and the Russians were forced to leave the country. What was the result of our interference? Those same Afghan tribes and Warlords we taught to fight and use weapons are now using that same training against us killing our young men and women. You would think that these arm chair soldiers sitting in Washington would learn from the past but once again it comes down to politics and media television time. The same thing happened in Iraq. The United States actually backed Saddam Hussein for years and even shared CIA intelligence with him and we provided Saddam with weapons. The USA closed their eyes when Hussein gassed many of his people in areas of Iraq. But when a leader falls into disfavor with the United States like Hussein did, it is easy to fabricate intelligence,make up false stories and lie to the American people in order to start a war.
Folks, the United States track record stinks when it comes to trying to install a puppet to run another country. We should only be dealing with the leaders that actually are in charge of the country. Leaders that emerged by winning the country and by settling their own internal conflicts, - - - without outside help.
This charade of saying "we have a coalition" is a crock. The USA picked this fight and I would suspect that Obama wants to continue to start and fight wars around the world just so he can take attention away from our own domestic problems. He continually refuses to face our dire situation here at home which include such things as : economic problems, high unemployment, our infrastructure problems, our starving children, the education break down in the country, the public employees obscene union demands that are bankrupting cities and states, environmental problems, poverty and much, much more.
Obama is doing nothing for us here at home but he is spending our tax dollars like there was no tomorrow. He builds schools, roads, electric grids and enforces secure borders in other countries which cost us taxpayers billions and billions of dollars but he continues to refuse to do those same things here in the United States.
People, mark my words. I predict that Obama, the leader of the pack that is now bombing Libya started this mess and because of his radical actions you will see the flow of oil decrease dramatically or stop. That was not the case before this unwarranted attack on Libya. Following Egypt's uprising no one stopped oil from going through the Suez and oil production was still being met on a daily basis. However, because of this administration wanting to divert attention away from our problems here at home and their beating of the war drums (like Bush) and attacking another country I would not be surprised if Gaddafi set his oil fields on fire to further disrupt the oil market around the world. I have no doubt that Gaddafi would like to be a martyr because that is built into his culture.
Also remember that Obama and all of the other war hawks around the world who bend to whatever the president of the United States wants forgot to have an exit plan and contingent plan for who they are going to deal with, if in fact, they topple Gaddafi from power. The rag-tag groups fighting in their country have no leader. The only reason they are fighting is because they saw Egypt turn around as a result of a revolution in that country. In Libya, the fighters are fragmented. There is no one on the horizon that appears to be a replacement for Gaddafi but maybe that is what this president wants . . . upheaval, more economic hardships on us here at home?
Finally, let's look at it if the situation were reversed. For example, if people here in the United States began to march and protest in the streets and began to show civil disobedience do you really believe that Obama and the government wouldn't call out the troops to put the insurrection down? You bet he would. It's happened in the past. Remember Selma, or the burning South, Kent state, Watts riots, and other places here in this country. But what if the majority of the population called for Obama to leave office and a revolution of different factions were fighting in the streets to have a regime change? What if Obama called out the troops to quell the situation and began firing on or even killing some of the people who wanted him gone and then, all of a sudden, another country decided to take action and fires missiles and drop bombs on a U.S. city - - - do you really think Obama and his ilk would stand for that? I would say he would cry and scream saying it is our problem and an internal problem and that the countries dropping bombs on us should mind their own business. He would call their attack an act of war.
People, Obama and our lawmakers wouldn't like it if another country took action against us and initiated military strikes even if that county did say they were a coalition and using a guise of helping us citizens . So folks, "war is in the eye of the beholder." Military strikes is good enough for Libya because Obama and a few world and domestic leaders don't like the guy but it would be an act of war if some other country took the same stance against Obama. Go figure.
My view remains the same. I stated and wrote before this military strike that it was the wrong thing to do and I hold that position. I further predict that this attack on Libya will come back to haunt the United States and it will produce many repercussions on our economy and our way of life as we know it.- And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_______________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
_______________
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
President Obama invades Libya. He is using a page from the George Bush play book. That credo is "lets invade other countries without any provocation. The cost of this fiasco alone will run into the billions of dollars. Missles, ships, planes, weapons, the cost of each and every military man and woman, etc,---and, for what? I say stop all of the current military actions we are currently engaged in and bring all of those billions of dollars home here and invest the monies on our soil.
Prior to Obama's decision to invade Libya, which began hours ago and that is already resulting in many civilian deaths I wrote a blog advising that Obama keep his nose out of Libya's internal politics. However, it appears Obama and his administration is set on initiating wars around the world. The cost alone is outrageous. Missles, ships, weapons, military men and women, etc., it will run into the billions again. For What? Stop all of the wars we are currently engaged in and bring those billions of dollars home and invest them here on our soil.
I truly believe that this attack on Libya is unwarranted. We are already fighting three wars. The administration says TWO but I say three because one of the wars has been very covert for years now. Let's count them up: (a) Iraq (b) Afghanistan ( the two that Obama will admit too) and the third is Pakistan. We have been using drones, rockets, and boots on the ground in that country for years. Now, this president wants to get involved in Libya. That will be "four" military actions that the USA is involved in.
Obama and his staff went on the airwaves in the last 48 hours and had their talking heads on the talk shows saying.: "the United States is not leading this attack." They say the French was the one that bombed Libya first. Yes, the French did drop the first bombs but people. . . when it is all said and done it was the United States that put this action together with England and France and had other nations give their blessing. It was our tomahawk missiles that lit up the skies over Libya and buried their warheads into Libyan targets. Today, it was our planes along with the French that bombed and killed civilians . Television pictures out of Libya today attest to that fact. Injured and maimed civilians being treated in a hospital attest to that fact. Our military is providing the majority of intelligence and satellite endeavors and pinpointing the targets inside Libya. On the television news this evening the United States admitted that they are taking the lead in this assault on Libya and "will" form a coalition" later." What a joke.
I would suspect that the United States using Secretary of state Hillary Clinton as the messenger went behind closed doors with officials from the supposed coalition countries and made private deals which may or may not include, but not limited too: payoffs in favors and granting wish lists that those countries desire. The payoff's could be such things as additional foreign aid, military hardware and software, trade advantages, and other goodies.
I predict that in the near future the media will receive and divulge information from various sources within the government that Obama and the administration set up the invasion of Libya and the no-fly zones using a "straw man" scenario telling the French to be the first country to drop the first bomb on Libya so that the United States would not have to face the world and appear as the invader that began this preemptive strike against another sovereign country.
My view and the view of many other Americans which is based on recent polls which were conducted immediately after the military strike on Libya clearly show that we have no business using military action against Libya. Many people stated that the United States is acting like a bully. Others say, we should not force our way of life on countries that have an entirely different idea of how they should live.
Obama and his supporters try to rationalize the attack saying Gaddafi is brutalizing his people but in reality Gaddafi is using force to put down an uprising. However, Obama doesn't like the way the conflict between Libyan citizens and their government has been going so what does Washington do? They say: the people are losing the battle with the government forces so we are going to step in too help them overthrow Gaddafi. That's a hell of a reason to attack another country that did nothing to us here in the United States.
I submit, everyone has to fight their own wars. If the people rise up(in any country) let them fight their own war. If they win, on their own, okay. If they lose, so what? We in the USA shouldn't take sides with different factions in any country just to overthrow what we consider a despot or dictator.
We here in the United States fought our own Civil War, amongst ourselves. Like us, these citizens of other countries should win or lose their fights on their own. After the conflict ends whoever is left standing is the people we deal with. We shouldn't have to impose our feeling and choice as to who should be in charge of any specific country. We should learn from our mistakes because in the past we backed certain people to head up their country and it came back to bite us in the ass.
Christ, before our war in Afghanistan, we were the country that armed and trained most of those Afghan tribes to fight against the Russians. That battle lasted about ten years and the Russians were forced to leave the country. What was the result of our interference? Those same Afghan tribes and Warlords we taught to fight and use weapons are now using that same training against us killing our young men and women. You would think that these arm chair soldiers sitting in Washington would learn from the past but once again it comes down to politics and media television time. The same thing happened in Iraq. The United States actually backed Saddam Hussein for years and even shared CIA intelligence with him and we provided Saddam with weapons. The USA closed their eyes when Hussein gassed many of his people in areas of Iraq. But when a leader falls into disfavor with the United States like Hussein did, it is easy to fabricate intelligence,make up false stories and lie to the American people in order to start a war.
Folks, the United States track record stinks when it comes to trying to install a puppet to run another country. We should only be dealing with the leaders that actually are in charge of the country. Leaders that emerged by winning the country and by settling their own internal conflicts, - - - without outside help.
This charade of saying "we have a coalition" is a crock. The USA picked this fight and I would suspect that Obama wants to continue to start and fight wars around the world just so he can take attention away from our own domestic problems. He continually refuses to face our dire situation here at home which include such things as : economic problems, high unemployment, our infrastructure problems, our starving children, the education break down in the country, the public employees obscene union demands that are bankrupting cities and states, environmental problems, poverty and much, much more.
Obama is doing nothing for us here at home but he is spending our tax dollars like there was no tomorrow. He builds schools, roads, electric grids and enforces secure borders in other countries which cost us taxpayers billions and billions of dollars but he continues to refuse to do those same things here in the United States.
People, mark my words. I predict that Obama, the leader of the pack that is now bombing Libya started this mess and because of his radical actions you will see the flow of oil decrease dramatically or stop. That was not the case before this unwarranted attack on Libya. Following Egypt's uprising no one stopped oil from going through the Suez and oil production was still being met on a daily basis. However, because of this administration wanting to divert attention away from our problems here at home and their beating of the war drums (like Bush) and attacking another country I would not be surprised if Gaddafi set his oil fields on fire to further disrupt the oil market around the world. I have no doubt that Gaddafi would like to be a martyr because that is built into his culture.
Also remember that Obama and all of the other war hawks around the world who bend to whatever the president of the United States wants forgot to have an exit plan and contingent plan for who they are going to deal with, if in fact, they topple Gaddafi from power. The rag-tag groups fighting in their country have no leader. The only reason they are fighting is because they saw Egypt turn around as a result of a revolution in that country. In Libya, the fighters are fragmented. There is no one on the horizon that appears to be a replacement for Gaddafi but maybe that is what this president wants . . . upheaval, more economic hardships on us here at home?
Finally, let's look at it if the situation were reversed. For example, if people here in the United States began to march and protest in the streets and began to show civil disobedience do you really believe that Obama and the government wouldn't call out the troops to put the insurrection down? You bet he would. It's happened in the past. Remember Selma, or the burning South, Kent state, Watts riots, and other places here in this country. But what if the majority of the population called for Obama to leave office and a revolution of different factions were fighting in the streets to have a regime change? What if Obama called out the troops to quell the situation and began firing on or even killing some of the people who wanted him gone and then, all of a sudden, another country decided to take action and fires missiles and drop bombs on a U.S. city - - - do you really think Obama and his ilk would stand for that? I would say he would cry and scream saying it is our problem and an internal problem and that the countries dropping bombs on us should mind their own business. He would call their attack an act of war.
People, Obama and our lawmakers wouldn't like it if another country took action against us and initiated military strikes even if that county did say they were a coalition and using a guise of helping us citizens . So folks, "war is in the eye of the beholder." Military strikes is good enough for Libya because Obama and a few world and domestic leaders don't like the guy but it would be an act of war if some other country took the same stance against Obama. Go figure.
My view remains the same. I stated and wrote before this military strike that it was the wrong thing to do and I hold that position. I further predict that this attack on Libya will come back to haunt the United States and it will produce many repercussions on our economy and our way of life as we know it.- And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_______________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Friday, March 11, 2011
Governor Walker Did the Right Thing-But Not Far Enough
THE DOCTOR IS IN ______________
LAS VEGAS - Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
Kudos to Wisconsin governor Walker. His legislation to control spending deserved to pass. Hooray! It's about time a lawmaker took a stand and did what he though best for the people of the state.
My personal view is that it was a sad, horrible day when lawmakers allowed PUBLIC EMPLOYEES to join a union. It never should have happened. In the early 1900's the private sector needed unions to help them with salary and safety issues but this in not 1900 or 1936 anymore. Folks in these modern times we have the EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission), safety and health organizations in large numbers and literally hundreds of governmental agencies that clearly maintain vigilance over corporations, businesses, etc., which protect workers in most every occupation in the country.
I submit that no company, corporation or even a government agency will ever abolish a 40 hour work week. If anything they will go to a 4 day a week and 10 hour a day. None of those just mentioned will ever stop maternity leave or family leave. People will still collect pay for overtime.
Most companies and corporations have to look out for their employees and they do just that. If they didn't provide for their workers the employee would seek employment elsewhere. These companies and corporations and small businesses have to make a profit so you know they are going to try to make their employees happy. These companies have to turn a profit or both the employee and the employer lose out.
I would suggest that the only reason companies outsource jobs overseas is because these UNIONS become greedy when negotiating contracts and request more and more money and benefits. Eventually the corporations, companies and business owners cannot afford to pay the demands and cannot produce a product for a reasonable profit. Then these same union people squeal and cry the blues that a plant is closing or that the company is getting work done overseas.
The biggest offenders are the PUBLIC EMPLOYEE UNIONS, the teachers, the police and firemen. These carved in stone contracts make it nearly impossible to fire a union member. For example, teachers-- you cannot offer a reward or incentive to a good teacher and cannot fire an incompetent teacher. The public employees build these protection clauses into the contract and the lawmakers are "dumb" enough to give them what they want and they pander for the union vote. Politicians say, you put me in office and I'll give you (union members) whatever you write up. It's what I would basically describe as bribery and extortion. The union members receive obscene wages, benefits, and pension/retirement plans that no one working in the private sector will ever see. And, the irony is these lifetime pensions and outrageous benefits are being paid by us taxpayers. Many states cannot sustain these "lottery give-a-way" bonanzas. Many cities and states are presently on the brink of bankruptcy because of excessive demands from policemen, fireman, teachers and other PUBLIC EMPLOYEES and yet every contract renewal negotiation date, the lawmakers continue to bend under the will of these PUBLIC EMPLOYEE UNIONS, and grant them additional benefits in the contract. These lawmakers are paying the PUBLIC EMPLOYEES with our money, not theirs.
Here is some informative information that I read a short while ago: Back in the 1930's president Franklin D. Roosevelt, a giant representing the labor movement in the United states said: " the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service."
I have always said and will continue to say that PUBLIC EMPLOYEE UNIONS should have never been allowed. These unions members now out pace the private sector employee in salaries, benefits, vacation and sick days, bonuses, cost of living increases (COLA's), pensions and retirements (which by the way should only be a 401(k) plan in parity with those working in the private sector.
SIDE NOTE: People in the state of Wisconsin should vote out of office all of those Democrats that illegally ran out of state. I would say they are committing fraud on the Wisconsin taxpayer for not doing their elected job. If these lawmakers oppose a piece of legislation then they should stand up in the state Capitol and vote against the legislation instead of taking taxpayer money as a salary and leaving the state. What a bunch of incompetent lawmakers these cowards are. It appears they will only stay in the state capitol and vote for legislation that they approve of. They act like a group of spoiled brats. In addition to being voted out of office the state should take legal action against these people which could and should result in substantial fines and/or jail time. And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_______________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
LAS VEGAS - Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
Kudos to Wisconsin governor Walker. His legislation to control spending deserved to pass. Hooray! It's about time a lawmaker took a stand and did what he though best for the people of the state.
My personal view is that it was a sad, horrible day when lawmakers allowed PUBLIC EMPLOYEES to join a union. It never should have happened. In the early 1900's the private sector needed unions to help them with salary and safety issues but this in not 1900 or 1936 anymore. Folks in these modern times we have the EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission), safety and health organizations in large numbers and literally hundreds of governmental agencies that clearly maintain vigilance over corporations, businesses, etc., which protect workers in most every occupation in the country.
I submit that no company, corporation or even a government agency will ever abolish a 40 hour work week. If anything they will go to a 4 day a week and 10 hour a day. None of those just mentioned will ever stop maternity leave or family leave. People will still collect pay for overtime.
Most companies and corporations have to look out for their employees and they do just that. If they didn't provide for their workers the employee would seek employment elsewhere. These companies and corporations and small businesses have to make a profit so you know they are going to try to make their employees happy. These companies have to turn a profit or both the employee and the employer lose out.
I would suggest that the only reason companies outsource jobs overseas is because these UNIONS become greedy when negotiating contracts and request more and more money and benefits. Eventually the corporations, companies and business owners cannot afford to pay the demands and cannot produce a product for a reasonable profit. Then these same union people squeal and cry the blues that a plant is closing or that the company is getting work done overseas.
The biggest offenders are the PUBLIC EMPLOYEE UNIONS, the teachers, the police and firemen. These carved in stone contracts make it nearly impossible to fire a union member. For example, teachers-- you cannot offer a reward or incentive to a good teacher and cannot fire an incompetent teacher. The public employees build these protection clauses into the contract and the lawmakers are "dumb" enough to give them what they want and they pander for the union vote. Politicians say, you put me in office and I'll give you (union members) whatever you write up. It's what I would basically describe as bribery and extortion. The union members receive obscene wages, benefits, and pension/retirement plans that no one working in the private sector will ever see. And, the irony is these lifetime pensions and outrageous benefits are being paid by us taxpayers. Many states cannot sustain these "lottery give-a-way" bonanzas. Many cities and states are presently on the brink of bankruptcy because of excessive demands from policemen, fireman, teachers and other PUBLIC EMPLOYEES and yet every contract renewal negotiation date, the lawmakers continue to bend under the will of these PUBLIC EMPLOYEE UNIONS, and grant them additional benefits in the contract. These lawmakers are paying the PUBLIC EMPLOYEES with our money, not theirs.
Here is some informative information that I read a short while ago: Back in the 1930's president Franklin D. Roosevelt, a giant representing the labor movement in the United states said: " the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service."
I have always said and will continue to say that PUBLIC EMPLOYEE UNIONS should have never been allowed. These unions members now out pace the private sector employee in salaries, benefits, vacation and sick days, bonuses, cost of living increases (COLA's), pensions and retirements (which by the way should only be a 401(k) plan in parity with those working in the private sector.
SIDE NOTE: People in the state of Wisconsin should vote out of office all of those Democrats that illegally ran out of state. I would say they are committing fraud on the Wisconsin taxpayer for not doing their elected job. If these lawmakers oppose a piece of legislation then they should stand up in the state Capitol and vote against the legislation instead of taking taxpayer money as a salary and leaving the state. What a bunch of incompetent lawmakers these cowards are. It appears they will only stay in the state capitol and vote for legislation that they approve of. They act like a group of spoiled brats. In addition to being voted out of office the state should take legal action against these people which could and should result in substantial fines and/or jail time. And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_______________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Obama, Keep Your Nose Out of Libya: It's Their Own Civil War
THE DOCTOR IS IN _______________
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
This administration seems to relish in wars and trying to be the policemen of the world. My view is that we should have been out of Afghanistan at least two years ago. Promises by Obama seem to be very hollow. He spouts and preaches "hope" but all of us always "hope" that something will change or be different but that word "hope" by President Obama means nothing. Instead of "hope" he should tell the American people what he is going to do and then act on his words. Action speaks more loudly than :" Let's all have hope." This president missed his calling, he should have been a minister or a preacher and not a president. Many qualities of a president should include such things as being concise, determined, forceful, prudent and a person who can take action and deliver on the actions they say they are going to perform. This president has failing grades on action. He and his speech writers continually beat the drum of "hope", nothing more. And, I voted for this guy. I'm really disappointed.
Prior to being elected president, Obama was opposed to the war in Iraq and he promised to bring all of our troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan. He did neither. Instead, he increased troop levels and escalated the war. He promised us voters he would close Guantanamo but he broke that promise and continues to play politics with that issue.
Obama promised to take care of all of the important domestic issues here in America but he fell down on that promise also. His continues to spend billions of dollars a year trying to rehabilitate Afghanistan , building their roads, schools, electric grids, utilities and teach their children and feed the people in that country while letting our country fall into disrepair. Folks, we have tens of thousands of children and veterans right here in America going to bed each night hungry. Many are homeless and walking America's streets without proper medical care. Our roads and highways are a disaster with century old plumbing beneath out city streets breaking and exploding causing death and destruction. Our electric grids here in the United States are obsolete and we have running blackouts across the nation. Our bridges are collapsing and causing fatalities across the country and our borders are so porous it looks like a piece of Swiss cheese. Yet, this president and his administration can draw up borders in other countries and protect those borders. What a joke.
Obama and his ilk continue to pay billions and billions of dollars to Karzai and his country with the full knowledge that Karzai, his family, friends and associates are corrupt and more crooked that a dogs hind leg. I submit that those billions of our tax dollars being thrown at Karzai could be put to very good use here in the good ol' USA. It's time to spend those dollars on our children, our homeless vets, our roads, bridges and infrastructure.
WARNING! It looks like it's not going to happen anytime soon though. Now, Obama wants to stick his nose into another countries "civil war", that being Libya. People from Lybia are fighting among themselves in an attempt to overthrow Gaddafi but Obama and some senators want to interfere . Obama appears to have a war monger streak. It looks like he wants to perpetuate wars.
Right now we are fighting three (3) wars. Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan and this administration is actually thinking about involving our military in another war. Obama is talking about such things as "no- fly zones" over Libya, covert insurgents and providing military aid and intelligence to people in Libya that want to overthrow Gaddafi.
I say, let the people of Libya fight their own battles. If they want to overthrow their leaders, let them do it on their own. It's their country and the people of Libya should handle this situation on their own. We here in America fought our own "civil war" and we should let Libya earn their own freedoms by fighting for it by themselves.
I truly believe it would be a big mistake to use a "no fly zone" over Libya. Senator Kerry and all the rest of those arm chair generals should stop making television sound bites. The only reason a "no-fly zone would be initiated is to drop tons of bombs on Libya to knock out the countries air defense system and provide cover for our planes and prevent Libya from attacking our ships and bases in the area. It's a no win situation.
So, like Bush did in Iraq, (a preemptive) strike against a sovereign country, Obama is actually contemplating the same situation. I would say that once we interfere in Libya's internal affairs and if we do conduct a military strike against that country in any way, shape or form, the situation will indeed escalate in something much more dangerous.
Mark my words, I predict that if Obama and these wishy-washy senators push for no-fly zones, or advocate taking out Libya's defense system (which requires bombing) you can bet Gaddafi "WILL" cut off any oil supplies and possibly destroy oil fields and that any provocative act by the U.S. will clearly disrupt the flow of oil all through the middle east. That is not happening now so why interrupt the flow of oil UNLESS the United States and it's oil barons and the elite few that control oil prices want to cause such a disruption for reasons of their own. Another result would be that the Libyan people and other factions in the Mideast would rally together with the Libyan population and view Obama and the USA as the "imperial power" that wants to stomp their footprint in each and every country around the world.
Further I predict that once any type of military action is taken against Gaddafi and some of his people, -- the war is on. More people will die, some by American bombs and eventually we will have to plant some of our troops on Libyan soil and like Iraq and Afghanistan, our military men and women will be brought home in body bags.
These war hawks who are sitting in Washington, fat and comfortable, should stop pushing a war on another country when it is clearly not our business whatsoever. So, no-fly zone? That won't stop the blood shed. I would submit that Gaddafi will use ground troops and vehicles like tanks, and military vehicles that can still maim and destroy.
Like Iraq and Afghanistan it appears the president and our senators start and fight wars because of oil. So far, oil has been moving around the world without interruption but you can bet that if these lawmakers (who think they're playing a video game) strike out at Libya there will certainly be an oil interruption. The only reason the price of gasoline has been rising in the USA is because of words like "MAYBE" (the Suez will be blocked) or Gaddafi "MIGHT" not release oil or, the Suez "COULD" be shut down, etc.---
Could've, should've, might is not reality. If the Suez WAS shut down or Gaddafi destroyed his oil fields then say: The cost of gasoline is up due to the FACT that (yada-yada-yada. However, don't squeal until you're hit.
My advice to Obama and these fat cat senators is: . Stop the rhetoric and quit puffing out your chests like a rooster just to get a few seconds of television time. Let Libya fight their own wars and then deal with who ever comes to power instead of using threats of military force and invasion against a country that has not attacked the United States. -And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_______________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
This administration seems to relish in wars and trying to be the policemen of the world. My view is that we should have been out of Afghanistan at least two years ago. Promises by Obama seem to be very hollow. He spouts and preaches "hope" but all of us always "hope" that something will change or be different but that word "hope" by President Obama means nothing. Instead of "hope" he should tell the American people what he is going to do and then act on his words. Action speaks more loudly than :" Let's all have hope." This president missed his calling, he should have been a minister or a preacher and not a president. Many qualities of a president should include such things as being concise, determined, forceful, prudent and a person who can take action and deliver on the actions they say they are going to perform. This president has failing grades on action. He and his speech writers continually beat the drum of "hope", nothing more. And, I voted for this guy. I'm really disappointed.
Prior to being elected president, Obama was opposed to the war in Iraq and he promised to bring all of our troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan. He did neither. Instead, he increased troop levels and escalated the war. He promised us voters he would close Guantanamo but he broke that promise and continues to play politics with that issue.
Obama promised to take care of all of the important domestic issues here in America but he fell down on that promise also. His continues to spend billions of dollars a year trying to rehabilitate Afghanistan , building their roads, schools, electric grids, utilities and teach their children and feed the people in that country while letting our country fall into disrepair. Folks, we have tens of thousands of children and veterans right here in America going to bed each night hungry. Many are homeless and walking America's streets without proper medical care. Our roads and highways are a disaster with century old plumbing beneath out city streets breaking and exploding causing death and destruction. Our electric grids here in the United States are obsolete and we have running blackouts across the nation. Our bridges are collapsing and causing fatalities across the country and our borders are so porous it looks like a piece of Swiss cheese. Yet, this president and his administration can draw up borders in other countries and protect those borders. What a joke.
Obama and his ilk continue to pay billions and billions of dollars to Karzai and his country with the full knowledge that Karzai, his family, friends and associates are corrupt and more crooked that a dogs hind leg. I submit that those billions of our tax dollars being thrown at Karzai could be put to very good use here in the good ol' USA. It's time to spend those dollars on our children, our homeless vets, our roads, bridges and infrastructure.
WARNING! It looks like it's not going to happen anytime soon though. Now, Obama wants to stick his nose into another countries "civil war", that being Libya. People from Lybia are fighting among themselves in an attempt to overthrow Gaddafi but Obama and some senators want to interfere . Obama appears to have a war monger streak. It looks like he wants to perpetuate wars.
Right now we are fighting three (3) wars. Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan and this administration is actually thinking about involving our military in another war. Obama is talking about such things as "no- fly zones" over Libya, covert insurgents and providing military aid and intelligence to people in Libya that want to overthrow Gaddafi.
I say, let the people of Libya fight their own battles. If they want to overthrow their leaders, let them do it on their own. It's their country and the people of Libya should handle this situation on their own. We here in America fought our own "civil war" and we should let Libya earn their own freedoms by fighting for it by themselves.
I truly believe it would be a big mistake to use a "no fly zone" over Libya. Senator Kerry and all the rest of those arm chair generals should stop making television sound bites. The only reason a "no-fly zone would be initiated is to drop tons of bombs on Libya to knock out the countries air defense system and provide cover for our planes and prevent Libya from attacking our ships and bases in the area. It's a no win situation.
So, like Bush did in Iraq, (a preemptive) strike against a sovereign country, Obama is actually contemplating the same situation. I would say that once we interfere in Libya's internal affairs and if we do conduct a military strike against that country in any way, shape or form, the situation will indeed escalate in something much more dangerous.
Mark my words, I predict that if Obama and these wishy-washy senators push for no-fly zones, or advocate taking out Libya's defense system (which requires bombing) you can bet Gaddafi "WILL" cut off any oil supplies and possibly destroy oil fields and that any provocative act by the U.S. will clearly disrupt the flow of oil all through the middle east. That is not happening now so why interrupt the flow of oil UNLESS the United States and it's oil barons and the elite few that control oil prices want to cause such a disruption for reasons of their own. Another result would be that the Libyan people and other factions in the Mideast would rally together with the Libyan population and view Obama and the USA as the "imperial power" that wants to stomp their footprint in each and every country around the world.
Further I predict that once any type of military action is taken against Gaddafi and some of his people, -- the war is on. More people will die, some by American bombs and eventually we will have to plant some of our troops on Libyan soil and like Iraq and Afghanistan, our military men and women will be brought home in body bags.
These war hawks who are sitting in Washington, fat and comfortable, should stop pushing a war on another country when it is clearly not our business whatsoever. So, no-fly zone? That won't stop the blood shed. I would submit that Gaddafi will use ground troops and vehicles like tanks, and military vehicles that can still maim and destroy.
Like Iraq and Afghanistan it appears the president and our senators start and fight wars because of oil. So far, oil has been moving around the world without interruption but you can bet that if these lawmakers (who think they're playing a video game) strike out at Libya there will certainly be an oil interruption. The only reason the price of gasoline has been rising in the USA is because of words like "MAYBE" (the Suez will be blocked) or Gaddafi "MIGHT" not release oil or, the Suez "COULD" be shut down, etc.---
Could've, should've, might is not reality. If the Suez WAS shut down or Gaddafi destroyed his oil fields then say: The cost of gasoline is up due to the FACT that (yada-yada-yada. However, don't squeal until you're hit.
My advice to Obama and these fat cat senators is: . Stop the rhetoric and quit puffing out your chests like a rooster just to get a few seconds of television time. Let Libya fight their own wars and then deal with who ever comes to power instead of using threats of military force and invasion against a country that has not attacked the United States. -And, that's my opinion. Make your own decisions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_______________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)