THE DOCTOR IS IN
________________
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how's the world treating you?
Police Chiefs from around the country met with Attorney General Eric Holder to blast the merits of the Arizona Immigration Law SB1070. The meeting was really one sided because most of the Chief's meeting with Holder already oppose the Arizona law.
Many of the cities that were represented in this meeting are sanctuary cities which allow and condone illegal immigration. The Chief's from Arizona cities Phoenix and Tucson clearly have an ax to grind. Even though there are approximately 450,000 illegal aliens living in Arizona illegally and fifty (50) percent of all illegal aliens living in the United States actually enter the country through Arizona these police chiefs still want to pander to politics and the Hispanic community for votes. That's really sad! It looks like these two Arizona Chief's of Police who live at "immigration ground zero" want to shirk their duties and maintain a status qo situation allowing thousands of illegal aliens to slink into the state every day, instead of wanting to enforce laws that are already on the Federal books and now will be Arizona law.
Like the saying goes, "if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, IT MUST BE A DUCK." And,to me, it looks like the misguided actions by these Chief's of Police along with their implied threats of not enforcing Arizona law in the state and cities where they serve as law enforcement officers is completely unwarranted. These lawmen swore to uphold the laws of the land. I would remind them that they receive their pay checks from American citizens. These lawmen who are crying the blues about the Arizona immigration law are quacking louder than the Aflac duck.
These Chief's of Police offer very lame reasons for not wanting to enforce immigration laws: Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck said, the law will likely discourage witnesses and victims of crimes from cooperating with police. "This bill bill breaks the trust with our communities." What a crock! The only trust being broken is by the Los Angeles Police Department not enforcing laws already on the books and breaking the trust of all the "LEGAL" citizens residing in the city of Los Angeles.
That old beaten up phrase that the illegal alien will not cooperate with police is a sham. I submit that if an illegal alien or their spouse and/or children become a victim of a crime that" illegal alien" like any other person in the city will want justice and the perpetrator apprehended and punished. So, yes that illegal alien will cooperate with the police. They have been cooperating with law enforcement for decades while living in this country illegally. The only difference in Los Angeles is that the Chief wants to continue a sanctuary city status and doesn't want to upset the apple cart for political reasons. Chief Beck doesn't want to take the extra step to verify proper identification.To me, that's laziness. It appears Chief Charlie Beck wants to continue to run a lax police department. This chief should be more worried about earning trust with the legal citizens of the City of Los Angeles,the state of California and the nation.
Phoenix Police Chief Jack Harris: He said, "It doesn't fix the immigration problem. It only diverts our scarce resources." What a joke. I would say to Chief Harris, "Yes" it does fix the immigration problem, especially in Arizona. Chief,if you allow your police officers to do their job, rather than you bemoaning that it may cause a little more work for you and implement and enforce the new Arizona law it will allow illegal aliens to be detained and deported or leave the state. I don't agree with that old tired argument that it will divert scarce resources. Each and every police department in the country is "always" short on resources and it's not only police departments but all kinds of departments, but they continue to do their job and make due. They do not make excuses or snivel. They make do with what they have to work with. Divert? Chief, when you have a probable cause stop or are investigating a crime and asking the person to identify themselves , how long does it take to ask "any" individual, "where were you born?" or "do you have any document that states you are in the United States legally?" What? 30 seconds, one minute? Bad argument chief. Just do your job and stop blaming it on short resources.
Kudos to Sheriff Paul Babeu, from Pinal County, Arizona. His statements is what law enforcement is all about: He said that his law enforcement colleagues should be "preparing to implement the law," rather than meeting with Eric Holder." I totally agree with Sheriff Babeu and his perspective on the immigration issue.
Remember, the biased Attorney General, Eric Holder, who admitted nationwide that he DID NOT read the Arizona law before he began to bad mouth it is just trying to justify a way to repeal the Arizona law before other states introduce a similar bill, which by the way is happening as we speak. There are at least five (5)other states attempting to pass an immigration bill like Arizona's and the list is growing. Hooray! I hope it happens because the Feds have consistently failed to do the job of securing the Southern border.
In response to the immigration problem President Obama reluctantly said he will send a token number of National Guard troops to the border. The number he is going to send is 1200 troops, which would not even begin to quell the illegal flow of illegal aliens that illegally cross into the state of Arizona each and every day.
Like Senators McCain and Kyle I say we need 50000, to 6000 National Guard troops at a minimum. I think that those numbers are required just to begin to stem the illegal alien flow until the entire Southern Border is SECURE.
It should be noted that all of the recent polls across the country indicate the majority of citizens agree with the current Arizona law and when asked, those same citizens said they want such a law in their own state. The majority of people across this country have no problem with any race, color, national origin or creed when it come to those people entering the United States legally. It's the "illegal alien" I, and the majority of people have a problem with.
Anyone wanting to immigrate to the United States should stand in line, do the proper paper work, receive the proper and legal papers and /or cards or certificates, take the proper and required examinations and then, and only then, I and probably all the rest of the Americans will welcome them with open arms. There are tens of thousands of people from around the world that take the proper legal steps to immigrate to this country and they eventually succeed.
As I said in previous articles: build the "physical" fence barrier the full length of the Southern border with only narrowed and guarded check points to identify who is entering and exiting the United States. Use the Military to assist Customs (ICE)in the act of securing the border.
A message to president Obama and Attorney General Holder: All recent polls across the nation reflect that 69% of all Americans agree with the new Arizona law. And, the number is growing every day. I find this administrations position and president Obama's actions on the excellent crafted Arizona law very discouraging and disappointing. I'm disappointed and ashamed when our president allows the president of Mexico to criticize Arizona and the whole of the United States only because the people of Arizona and the rest of America want to enforce the laws that already exist. I'm even more ashamed and disappointed when I observe president Obama , a symbol of the United States, agreeing with Mexico's president while embracing his radical ideas while heaping additional criticism of his own on America.
Our elected representatives, especially those currently in office, have chose to forget who they actually represent. The administration and other government officials choose to wear blinders when it comes to actual representation for all Americans.
These politicians who were sent to Washington by the American people only look to rake in contribution dollars from special interests so that they can hold on to their political seat while ignoring the will of the people and let all legal citizens pick up the bill with the financial, social services and political burden that is caused by allowing illegal aliens to remain in the USA.
Why should we citizens have to put up with the illegal alien that commits a crime to enter this country? We should not have to accept anyone that slaps us in the face by ignoring our laws and tramples on our legal system and expect us citizens of the USA to condone their criminal act. My advice to those who want to immigrate to the USA- - Do it legally and I predict that there will never be a problem. -And, that's my opinion. People, draw your own conclusions. You decide.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
The Oil Disaster Is Really 11 Counts of Homicide-Where's The Arrests?
THE DOCTOR IS IN
_________________
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
Just a follow up on my articles on the Gulf oil disaster.In my early articles on this matter I referred to the BP fiasco as an oil spill most of the time, but I have to clearly upgrade this situation as a disaster and a catastrophe. This environmental disaster no way resembles an oil spill.
Right now we have the Obama administration still relying on British Petroleum for the solution. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar states that BP is cooperating with the administration and says "If we find that they are not doing what they are supposed to do, we'll push them out of the way appropriately ." Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano also took a milk toast, soft, mushy approach to the disaster and said: "We continue to hold British Petroleum responsible...but we are on them, watching them ." Wow! BP is being watched. Big deal. Still, the Coast Guards Admiral said that their organization cannot handle the task of stopping the leak, The head honcho of that service said the Coast Guard is not equipped for a catastrophe like this nor do they have the knowledge or expertise to handle it and he wants BP to continue to be in charge saying they have the people and experience to stop the oil gusher. Once again, BP is the fox in the hen house while the administration is running around like a chicken with its head cut off. Like I stated previously,- Cut BP loose. Do not depend on them. Give the government the task of solving this disaster using our Navy and NASA and private sources and institutions that are adept dealing with oceanographic situations.
Big oil suggests that they want to use more cement to close the massive oil discharge beneath the sea but it is a proven and recorded fact that Halliburton (Dick Cheney's baby) who is doing most all of these cement jobs has failed miserably in servicing and/or protecting oil wells around the world. They do not have the where with all to cement the wells and still politicians, groups and supporters of big oil let them continue to do the cement work.
Folks, this disaster should never be referred to as a spill. Call it what it is. It is a HOMICIDE resulting in a devastating environmental disaster.
I have worked in law enforcement for years and dealt with most every type of crime you can imagine and I think that this obscene corporate negligence and the homicides should have been addressed from day one of the explosion by our administration and the justice department.
If this disaster was investigated as a crime (homicide) from the start it would be shown in a different light by know. If the investigators were turned loose, just the act of following and gathering information as to the homicides would have shown who did what and when, and who knew what and when. The interviews that should have been conducted by homicide investigators would have brought to light the facts as they may have occurred. The criminal homicide investigation would clarify any responsibility as the investigation progressed.
I have said before, where are the subpoenas? The justice department and the administration want to look at this matter as an "accident" when they should have initiated a homicide investigation to begin with.
This inaction on the part of the administration only reinforces the view that they are not really interested in resolving these homicides. If they fail to address this situation as a homicide it will be much more difficult to get to the true and clear facts of responsibility. It may takes years before all of the facts come out but if the deaths were investigated as a homicide the big picture would become much clearer, much faster.
Many of these oil companies, their CEO's and employees will cover and duck. They will have sufficient time to possibly shred and dispose of valuable documents and muddy the oil slick legal waters with a cover up so as to avoid any possibility of prosecution.
If I were in charge you can bet that there would have been subpoenas issued for the CEO's, oil executives, supervisors and employees as soon as those eleven oil workers were killed. There would not have been any political theater being played out as is being done now.
I say that Obama and his administration is a a day late and a dollar short. As I wrote in previous articles, the government should have been in charge of this disaster from the get go. I wonder how long Obama and his White House will allow British Petroleum to be in charge. Obama allowing BP to continue to call the shots is like a snake eating it's own tail.
British Petroleum is still taking meager measures to stop the oil. These are the bad guys that with the blessing of our lawmakers got us into this mess. They are destroying our environment and ecosystem each and every second of the day.
Everyone knows the old saying: "Don't fool with Mother Nature." However, our money grabbing politicians lusting for contributions closed their eyes, held their nose and gave a blank check to Mega oil to do whatever the oil companies wanted to do to our nature and environment. My view is that "if we destroy mother nature, we destroy ourselves. With that said, it is happening and happening now.
I would suggest that the administration and its justice department get off their duff, issue the proper subpoenas to all involved in these homicides and turn the homicide investigators loose so they can document the facts and actions of all the individuals responsible. The justice department should arrest and jail the perpetrators even while the oil disaster is being addressed. I would say that a two track solution could be accomplished at the same time. That being, seal the well and arrest the suspects for homicide.- And, that's my opinion. People, draw your own conclusions. 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?
Just a follow up on my articles on the Gulf oil disaster.In my early articles on this matter I referred to the BP fiasco as an oil spill most of the time, but I have to clearly upgrade this situation as a disaster and a catastrophe. This environmental disaster no way resembles an oil spill.
Right now we have the Obama administration still relying on British Petroleum for the solution. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar states that BP is cooperating with the administration and says "If we find that they are not doing what they are supposed to do, we'll push them out of the way appropriately ." Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano also took a milk toast, soft, mushy approach to the disaster and said: "We continue to hold British Petroleum responsible...but we are on them, watching them ." Wow! BP is being watched. Big deal. Still, the Coast Guards Admiral said that their organization cannot handle the task of stopping the leak, The head honcho of that service said the Coast Guard is not equipped for a catastrophe like this nor do they have the knowledge or expertise to handle it and he wants BP to continue to be in charge saying they have the people and experience to stop the oil gusher. Once again, BP is the fox in the hen house while the administration is running around like a chicken with its head cut off. Like I stated previously,- Cut BP loose. Do not depend on them. Give the government the task of solving this disaster using our Navy and NASA and private sources and institutions that are adept dealing with oceanographic situations.
Big oil suggests that they want to use more cement to close the massive oil discharge beneath the sea but it is a proven and recorded fact that Halliburton (Dick Cheney's baby) who is doing most all of these cement jobs has failed miserably in servicing and/or protecting oil wells around the world. They do not have the where with all to cement the wells and still politicians, groups and supporters of big oil let them continue to do the cement work.
Folks, this disaster should never be referred to as a spill. Call it what it is. It is a HOMICIDE resulting in a devastating environmental disaster.
I have worked in law enforcement for years and dealt with most every type of crime you can imagine and I think that this obscene corporate negligence and the homicides should have been addressed from day one of the explosion by our administration and the justice department.
If this disaster was investigated as a crime (homicide) from the start it would be shown in a different light by know. If the investigators were turned loose, just the act of following and gathering information as to the homicides would have shown who did what and when, and who knew what and when. The interviews that should have been conducted by homicide investigators would have brought to light the facts as they may have occurred. The criminal homicide investigation would clarify any responsibility as the investigation progressed.
I have said before, where are the subpoenas? The justice department and the administration want to look at this matter as an "accident" when they should have initiated a homicide investigation to begin with.
This inaction on the part of the administration only reinforces the view that they are not really interested in resolving these homicides. If they fail to address this situation as a homicide it will be much more difficult to get to the true and clear facts of responsibility. It may takes years before all of the facts come out but if the deaths were investigated as a homicide the big picture would become much clearer, much faster.
Many of these oil companies, their CEO's and employees will cover and duck. They will have sufficient time to possibly shred and dispose of valuable documents and muddy the oil slick legal waters with a cover up so as to avoid any possibility of prosecution.
If I were in charge you can bet that there would have been subpoenas issued for the CEO's, oil executives, supervisors and employees as soon as those eleven oil workers were killed. There would not have been any political theater being played out as is being done now.
I say that Obama and his administration is a a day late and a dollar short. As I wrote in previous articles, the government should have been in charge of this disaster from the get go. I wonder how long Obama and his White House will allow British Petroleum to be in charge. Obama allowing BP to continue to call the shots is like a snake eating it's own tail.
British Petroleum is still taking meager measures to stop the oil. These are the bad guys that with the blessing of our lawmakers got us into this mess. They are destroying our environment and ecosystem each and every second of the day.
Everyone knows the old saying: "Don't fool with Mother Nature." However, our money grabbing politicians lusting for contributions closed their eyes, held their nose and gave a blank check to Mega oil to do whatever the oil companies wanted to do to our nature and environment. My view is that "if we destroy mother nature, we destroy ourselves. With that said, it is happening and happening now.
I would suggest that the administration and its justice department get off their duff, issue the proper subpoenas to all involved in these homicides and turn the homicide investigators loose so they can document the facts and actions of all the individuals responsible. The justice department should arrest and jail the perpetrators even while the oil disaster is being addressed. I would say that a two track solution could be accomplished at the same time. That being, seal the well and arrest the suspects for homicide.- And, that's my opinion. People, draw your own conclusions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
________________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Monday, May 24, 2010
Soda Pop and Food Tax :Govertment Say We're Sinning Again
THE DOCTOR IS IN
_________________
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how the the world treating you?
Here we go again. The Washington lawmakers are salivating at the idea of taxing soft drinks, juices, teas and other sweet tasting beverages. They also are considering expanding the tax to candies and other sweet products.
I hate to say I told you so but I did, years ago. When the nannies in California and New York began raising taxes on cigarettes I told my readers and patients and anyone who wanted to listen that" what goes around comes around." So for all of you who thought it was okay to punitively tax and ban the cigarette smoker from the social scene it looks like it is your turn now.
The first move by government will be to raise taxes on your bottle sodas, teas, juices, etc., then the second phase will be to ban the products from schools, parks, sport facilities and their game areas and the ban may even encroach on your favorite eating places. This is the format that all of the nannies used to control a persons smoking behavior and now it will eventually happen to the people that thought it okay to restrict and ban products that people CHOSE to ingest in their own bodies. Like the saying says, -"be careful what you wish for."
These nanny states and the wanna be goodie two shoes tell you that they are looking out after your health and that they are going to take care of you. They tell you that they know what is best for you and that you should not doubt them.
New York, New Jersey and a host of other states now see another tax jackpot gleaming in their eyes . And yes,once again, the excuse and reason they say they are taxing your colas, juices,teas, sweet flavored waters and all of those other sweet tasting products is because they want to prevent you from acquiring diabetes, heart problems and other health issues. These wanna be doctors, who are nothing but tax collecting politicians arrogantly argue that since they raised prices and taxed cigarettes to new heights, people stopped smoking, and if it worked for smoking it will work for candy, juices,teas, soft drinks and other tasty items.
Now for all those people that said it was okay for the government to tax cigarettes: I would wonder how you feel now when the government steps into"your" household and tell you that if you and your family drink soft drinks, bottled teas and fruit juice and enjoy other sweet items it is going to cost you, big time.
The government is going to tax you under the guise of "it's for your own good." Do you really believe that? How far can these nanny groups and government beat that dead horse?
I submit that drinking coffee can cause you health problems? Eating bacon, ham and sausage can cause health problems? Eating any type of processed foods can cause health problems? Eating butter can cause you health problems? Fast food, ice cream or puddings (whoops, those are sweet ones) , sorry,the tax will cover those too.
I could go on and on about what can cause a health problem in an individual but I am telling you that just about anything you ingest into your body can cause a health problem. So, where will it stop. The government saddled us taxpayers with an income tax, then state and county taxes, cigarette taxes and now they want to initiate a body tax on all of us saying what we choose to put into our body should be taxed.
But hey! The government is going to tell you what's good for you. Right? Example, the feds and a number of activist groups have already pressured many schools and soft drink companies across the nation to remove soft drinks, candy and chips from the schools.I don't agree with those actions but it appears the people refuse to fight these moves.
Do you really believe that one soda or one candy bar or a small single bag of chips is the reason a person puts on weight? Sure, if the child or adult eats a dozen candy bars or drinks a dozen cans of soda at one sitting they are going to "get fat." But an occasional snack like a candy bar,chips , or soda is not the root cause.
I would suggest the schools revise their lunch programs to include the proper nutritious food combination rather than blame the child's weight increase on the occasional candy bar, chips, or soda that may be eaten during a break at school. Further,the schools should provide a proper "physical education" plan at each school and make it mandatory that each student take part in the physical education class. There is nothing like a small amount of exercise, fresh air, sunshine, and walking and/or swimming to maintain a healthy, physically fit body. I would guess it is easier for these activist groups and the Feds to point the finger and play a blame game and say that the can of soda is the problem while at the same time they are cutting out physical eduction from their curriculum saying they do not have the money to support the program.
What would be more important to you for your child? Would you rather have the child be required to get exercise and play time and have their physical fitness improved or have the school save money by cutting out such a program? It is easier for the legislators to blame soft drink manufacturers and blame the student for drinking an occasional soda or eating an occasional candy bar instead of addressing the real problem.
Not every child, college student or adult drinks dozens of cans of soda a day nor do they eat dozens of candy bars or bags of chips a day. For that child in school who is gaining weight I would say that it is the parents job to oversee their diet, exercise and health care. Why place penalties on the soft drink manufacturer and all of the other students in the school who does eat and exercise in moderation and does in fact enjoy an occasional soft drink, chips or candy bar?
Using the governments logic: Why not tell each politician in Washington that all alcoholic beverages will be removed from all restaurants and bars in and about the Capitol where they congregate because a small percentage of the lawmakers are abusing alcohol and acting unbecoming, and/or receiving DUI's, and most of all, it is bad for their health and they should be looked out after. Do you think they would go for that? They would be the first group of people to squeal to high heaven, "you can't do that." But in reality, that is what they are actually doing to the rest of us when they regulate what people put in their bodies.
I suggest that each and every person's health care should be looked at individually. What foods and drinks one puts into their body may affect one person differently than it does another. No two people are the same.
Each person's metabolism is different and handles food and drink intake differently "but" these government bureaucrats will take punitive action against you for no other reason that dinging more taxes out of you and using the excuse that 'IT'S GOOD FOR YOU."
The government says that they want to stop you from getting diabetes, heart disease, strokes, obesity, cancer,and a list of other ailments etc., but the scientific and medical community cannot say with a "medical certainty" what specific product and/or item actually may have caused the disease to rear its ugly head.
Was it the high cholesterol that cause a person to have a heart attack? Was it stress on the job that was the sole cause of that heart attack? Was it anxiety that the person felt because of financial problems in the marriage that was the sole cause of that heart attack? Or,was it the poor air quality in the city,the town or state where the person lives or was it the pollution from the automobile exhaust being spewed into the air each day? No doctor can say with medical certainty which of those separate things actually caused the person to suffer heart disease.
Another example, the doctor cannot say with" medical certainty" that smoking cigarettes and/or second hand smoke was the sole cause of anyone acquiring cancer or any other disease for that matter.
Just the few examples mentioned here in this article could be a combination of things that may include but not limited to: a person being obese, suffering diabetes, heart problems, cancer, and most any other disease.
Besides any environmental pollution, a persons food and diet and their nutritional habits and their lifestyle choices along with pesticides, chemical additives in such things as plastic water bottles and containers, cosmetics, their intake of alcohol and their ingestion of medications will all contribute to any one persons health and well being.
The list could go on, and on. There are literally thousands of products like foods, chemicals and environmental factors being used around the world that can contribute any and all illnesses a person can imagine.
What will be next and taxed? Is the government going to raise taxes on all cosmetics, soaps and other hygiene products used by everyone? They'll tell you it's for your own good. Are they going to tax everyone for driving a motor vehicle, a boat, a recreational vehicle? Are these tax hungry nannies going to raise taxes on bottled water or anything in a plastic container? They will tell you its for health reasons. Raise taxes on household products used everyday in your kitchen or bathroom? Are they going to raise taxes on your air conditioning units in your house or business because of the chemical pollution caused by the unit?
Believe it or not some lawmakers and legislators across the country have already tried to put a tax on some of the items just mentioned in the paragraph above and you can bet they will continue their misguided attempts.
People, the lawmakers can use any excuse to raise taxes on us taxpayers but their rationalization for the taxes stink. The lame argument they continually make for the tax doesn't track. This argument "it's for your own good." or, another favorite argument is "It's for the kids," are worn out phrases. They are old and tired.
Every time lawmakers, groups, and organizations who usually have an agenda for their own benefit pass an initiative or a law they usually tell the public it's only a suggestion or it's only voluntary or it will only be a temporary fix.
When the lawmakers offer those reasons I would be suspect. Why? Those taxes, laws,rules and regulations that were said to be voluntary or temporary always wind up to be a mandate.
The government clearly ignores and selectively forgets the constitution and they trample on Americans "freedom of choice."
For example:(Smoking), if there were restaurants, bars and taverns across the country that clearly posted signs indicating that they were or were not a "friendly smoking" establishment any prudent person could make an informed choice as to which place they wanted to patronize. Nonsmokers could and would go to nonsmoking establishments and smokers would go into the smoking establishments. Result: {CHOICE), the person made their own decision. Everyone would be happy and satisfied. They would have their own place to go to.
For example: (Alcohol) Each person and/or group can make up their own mind whether they want to go into an establishment such as a restaurant that serves alcohol.Result: {CHOICE), the person makes their own decision. Nonalcoholics can use restaurant that do not serve alcohol.
For example: (Fast Food) Each and every person can make the decision whether they want to drive into the drive-in for that hamburger, fried chicken, taco, etc. Result: (CHOICE), the person chooses to either go into or walk away from the establishment.
The same goes for a person eating a piece of pie, cake, ice cream, candy bar, chips, etc.,-- Result: (CHOICE). It is that persons right and clearly their "freedom of choice" to either eat that piece of pie, and whether the pie should be regular, fat free, or ala mode and making a choice without being told they have to drink a diet soda, or they can't have a milkshake unless they choose the non-fat shake which will be offered at a cheaper price.
Side Note: These tax crazy lawmakers always claim that they can raise "sin taxes" which are defined by them as tobacco, (cigarettes and cigars)and alcohol, but if you notice, these lawmakers keep alcohol off limits and have chosen to only pick on the smoking public.
Lawmakers refuse to raise taxes on beer, wine and hard booze. Why? That's easy. Many of our politicians really love their alcohol. Many may be closet alcoholics while still others are treated in rehab for their alcohol abuse. Another reason is that people across the country would raise hell.
Raising taxes on any type of alcohol is like social security's third rail in politics for the lawmaker. So, what do they do? They are going to include soft drinks, juices, teas bottled waters and sweets into the web of "sin taxes." They want to deprive every man, woman and child of the right and "free choice" to drink and eat what they want.
I would say that what a family eats either at home or out in public, is a decision that should be made by the parents of the family. It is their choice. The parents can educate their children on what should be eaten and what foods should be restricted or avoided. From my point of view, it's a family matter. The government should stay out of the business of dictating what I and my family choose to put in our body and without adding additional taxes or punitive penalties if we chose to eat or drink something the government said was "bad" for us.
There are people around the world that will always acquire diabetes, heart problems, strokes,obesity, etc., and many of those people will suffer those diseases for reasons that cannot explained.
People will live and they will all die. I have always told my patients and friends, relatives and associates that: "I believe and have always believed that a person begins to die from the moment of birth." Folks, we all are on deaths path from the moment we are born. We can't get around that fact.
I would suggest that these lawmakers who pretend that they want to "look out for our best interests" leave the train at the next station. We, the people can look out for ourselves as long as we have choices.
If a person becomes obese because they eat a full whole 12 inch pie at one sitting instead of one slice of that pie that person can make the choice and decision to stop the bad behavior and/or seek help to assist them in doing so. If a woman wants to get an abortion for reasons only known to her, that's her choice and she should be able to seek advice and assistance to help her come to her own decision. Again,"freedom of choice."
I would like to say that under the shallow and lame benign rationale of " it's best for you," or "I know best" or "protecting us" our government know-it-alls that say they represent us are very quickly usurping all rights we have as it applies to our own bodies. It's insanity. These looney tunes are the one's running our country? As the saying goes, I think it's time for the inmates to take back the asylum. Stand up folks, and say enough is enough. - And, that's my opinion. People, draw your own conclusions. 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 the the world treating you?
Here we go again. The Washington lawmakers are salivating at the idea of taxing soft drinks, juices, teas and other sweet tasting beverages. They also are considering expanding the tax to candies and other sweet products.
I hate to say I told you so but I did, years ago. When the nannies in California and New York began raising taxes on cigarettes I told my readers and patients and anyone who wanted to listen that" what goes around comes around." So for all of you who thought it was okay to punitively tax and ban the cigarette smoker from the social scene it looks like it is your turn now.
The first move by government will be to raise taxes on your bottle sodas, teas, juices, etc., then the second phase will be to ban the products from schools, parks, sport facilities and their game areas and the ban may even encroach on your favorite eating places. This is the format that all of the nannies used to control a persons smoking behavior and now it will eventually happen to the people that thought it okay to restrict and ban products that people CHOSE to ingest in their own bodies. Like the saying says, -"be careful what you wish for."
These nanny states and the wanna be goodie two shoes tell you that they are looking out after your health and that they are going to take care of you. They tell you that they know what is best for you and that you should not doubt them.
New York, New Jersey and a host of other states now see another tax jackpot gleaming in their eyes . And yes,once again, the excuse and reason they say they are taxing your colas, juices,teas, sweet flavored waters and all of those other sweet tasting products is because they want to prevent you from acquiring diabetes, heart problems and other health issues. These wanna be doctors, who are nothing but tax collecting politicians arrogantly argue that since they raised prices and taxed cigarettes to new heights, people stopped smoking, and if it worked for smoking it will work for candy, juices,teas, soft drinks and other tasty items.
Now for all those people that said it was okay for the government to tax cigarettes: I would wonder how you feel now when the government steps into"your" household and tell you that if you and your family drink soft drinks, bottled teas and fruit juice and enjoy other sweet items it is going to cost you, big time.
The government is going to tax you under the guise of "it's for your own good." Do you really believe that? How far can these nanny groups and government beat that dead horse?
I submit that drinking coffee can cause you health problems? Eating bacon, ham and sausage can cause health problems? Eating any type of processed foods can cause health problems? Eating butter can cause you health problems? Fast food, ice cream or puddings (whoops, those are sweet ones) , sorry,the tax will cover those too.
I could go on and on about what can cause a health problem in an individual but I am telling you that just about anything you ingest into your body can cause a health problem. So, where will it stop. The government saddled us taxpayers with an income tax, then state and county taxes, cigarette taxes and now they want to initiate a body tax on all of us saying what we choose to put into our body should be taxed.
But hey! The government is going to tell you what's good for you. Right? Example, the feds and a number of activist groups have already pressured many schools and soft drink companies across the nation to remove soft drinks, candy and chips from the schools.I don't agree with those actions but it appears the people refuse to fight these moves.
Do you really believe that one soda or one candy bar or a small single bag of chips is the reason a person puts on weight? Sure, if the child or adult eats a dozen candy bars or drinks a dozen cans of soda at one sitting they are going to "get fat." But an occasional snack like a candy bar,chips , or soda is not the root cause.
I would suggest the schools revise their lunch programs to include the proper nutritious food combination rather than blame the child's weight increase on the occasional candy bar, chips, or soda that may be eaten during a break at school. Further,the schools should provide a proper "physical education" plan at each school and make it mandatory that each student take part in the physical education class. There is nothing like a small amount of exercise, fresh air, sunshine, and walking and/or swimming to maintain a healthy, physically fit body. I would guess it is easier for these activist groups and the Feds to point the finger and play a blame game and say that the can of soda is the problem while at the same time they are cutting out physical eduction from their curriculum saying they do not have the money to support the program.
What would be more important to you for your child? Would you rather have the child be required to get exercise and play time and have their physical fitness improved or have the school save money by cutting out such a program? It is easier for the legislators to blame soft drink manufacturers and blame the student for drinking an occasional soda or eating an occasional candy bar instead of addressing the real problem.
Not every child, college student or adult drinks dozens of cans of soda a day nor do they eat dozens of candy bars or bags of chips a day. For that child in school who is gaining weight I would say that it is the parents job to oversee their diet, exercise and health care. Why place penalties on the soft drink manufacturer and all of the other students in the school who does eat and exercise in moderation and does in fact enjoy an occasional soft drink, chips or candy bar?
Using the governments logic: Why not tell each politician in Washington that all alcoholic beverages will be removed from all restaurants and bars in and about the Capitol where they congregate because a small percentage of the lawmakers are abusing alcohol and acting unbecoming, and/or receiving DUI's, and most of all, it is bad for their health and they should be looked out after. Do you think they would go for that? They would be the first group of people to squeal to high heaven, "you can't do that." But in reality, that is what they are actually doing to the rest of us when they regulate what people put in their bodies.
I suggest that each and every person's health care should be looked at individually. What foods and drinks one puts into their body may affect one person differently than it does another. No two people are the same.
Each person's metabolism is different and handles food and drink intake differently "but" these government bureaucrats will take punitive action against you for no other reason that dinging more taxes out of you and using the excuse that 'IT'S GOOD FOR YOU."
The government says that they want to stop you from getting diabetes, heart disease, strokes, obesity, cancer,and a list of other ailments etc., but the scientific and medical community cannot say with a "medical certainty" what specific product and/or item actually may have caused the disease to rear its ugly head.
Was it the high cholesterol that cause a person to have a heart attack? Was it stress on the job that was the sole cause of that heart attack? Was it anxiety that the person felt because of financial problems in the marriage that was the sole cause of that heart attack? Or,was it the poor air quality in the city,the town or state where the person lives or was it the pollution from the automobile exhaust being spewed into the air each day? No doctor can say with medical certainty which of those separate things actually caused the person to suffer heart disease.
Another example, the doctor cannot say with" medical certainty" that smoking cigarettes and/or second hand smoke was the sole cause of anyone acquiring cancer or any other disease for that matter.
Just the few examples mentioned here in this article could be a combination of things that may include but not limited to: a person being obese, suffering diabetes, heart problems, cancer, and most any other disease.
Besides any environmental pollution, a persons food and diet and their nutritional habits and their lifestyle choices along with pesticides, chemical additives in such things as plastic water bottles and containers, cosmetics, their intake of alcohol and their ingestion of medications will all contribute to any one persons health and well being.
The list could go on, and on. There are literally thousands of products like foods, chemicals and environmental factors being used around the world that can contribute any and all illnesses a person can imagine.
What will be next and taxed? Is the government going to raise taxes on all cosmetics, soaps and other hygiene products used by everyone? They'll tell you it's for your own good. Are they going to tax everyone for driving a motor vehicle, a boat, a recreational vehicle? Are these tax hungry nannies going to raise taxes on bottled water or anything in a plastic container? They will tell you its for health reasons. Raise taxes on household products used everyday in your kitchen or bathroom? Are they going to raise taxes on your air conditioning units in your house or business because of the chemical pollution caused by the unit?
Believe it or not some lawmakers and legislators across the country have already tried to put a tax on some of the items just mentioned in the paragraph above and you can bet they will continue their misguided attempts.
People, the lawmakers can use any excuse to raise taxes on us taxpayers but their rationalization for the taxes stink. The lame argument they continually make for the tax doesn't track. This argument "it's for your own good." or, another favorite argument is "It's for the kids," are worn out phrases. They are old and tired.
Every time lawmakers, groups, and organizations who usually have an agenda for their own benefit pass an initiative or a law they usually tell the public it's only a suggestion or it's only voluntary or it will only be a temporary fix.
When the lawmakers offer those reasons I would be suspect. Why? Those taxes, laws,rules and regulations that were said to be voluntary or temporary always wind up to be a mandate.
The government clearly ignores and selectively forgets the constitution and they trample on Americans "freedom of choice."
For example:(Smoking), if there were restaurants, bars and taverns across the country that clearly posted signs indicating that they were or were not a "friendly smoking" establishment any prudent person could make an informed choice as to which place they wanted to patronize. Nonsmokers could and would go to nonsmoking establishments and smokers would go into the smoking establishments. Result: {CHOICE), the person made their own decision. Everyone would be happy and satisfied. They would have their own place to go to.
For example: (Alcohol) Each person and/or group can make up their own mind whether they want to go into an establishment such as a restaurant that serves alcohol.Result: {CHOICE), the person makes their own decision. Nonalcoholics can use restaurant that do not serve alcohol.
For example: (Fast Food) Each and every person can make the decision whether they want to drive into the drive-in for that hamburger, fried chicken, taco, etc. Result: (CHOICE), the person chooses to either go into or walk away from the establishment.
The same goes for a person eating a piece of pie, cake, ice cream, candy bar, chips, etc.,-- Result: (CHOICE). It is that persons right and clearly their "freedom of choice" to either eat that piece of pie, and whether the pie should be regular, fat free, or ala mode and making a choice without being told they have to drink a diet soda, or they can't have a milkshake unless they choose the non-fat shake which will be offered at a cheaper price.
Side Note: These tax crazy lawmakers always claim that they can raise "sin taxes" which are defined by them as tobacco, (cigarettes and cigars)and alcohol, but if you notice, these lawmakers keep alcohol off limits and have chosen to only pick on the smoking public.
Lawmakers refuse to raise taxes on beer, wine and hard booze. Why? That's easy. Many of our politicians really love their alcohol. Many may be closet alcoholics while still others are treated in rehab for their alcohol abuse. Another reason is that people across the country would raise hell.
Raising taxes on any type of alcohol is like social security's third rail in politics for the lawmaker. So, what do they do? They are going to include soft drinks, juices, teas bottled waters and sweets into the web of "sin taxes." They want to deprive every man, woman and child of the right and "free choice" to drink and eat what they want.
I would say that what a family eats either at home or out in public, is a decision that should be made by the parents of the family. It is their choice. The parents can educate their children on what should be eaten and what foods should be restricted or avoided. From my point of view, it's a family matter. The government should stay out of the business of dictating what I and my family choose to put in our body and without adding additional taxes or punitive penalties if we chose to eat or drink something the government said was "bad" for us.
There are people around the world that will always acquire diabetes, heart problems, strokes,obesity, etc., and many of those people will suffer those diseases for reasons that cannot explained.
People will live and they will all die. I have always told my patients and friends, relatives and associates that: "I believe and have always believed that a person begins to die from the moment of birth." Folks, we all are on deaths path from the moment we are born. We can't get around that fact.
I would suggest that these lawmakers who pretend that they want to "look out for our best interests" leave the train at the next station. We, the people can look out for ourselves as long as we have choices.
If a person becomes obese because they eat a full whole 12 inch pie at one sitting instead of one slice of that pie that person can make the choice and decision to stop the bad behavior and/or seek help to assist them in doing so. If a woman wants to get an abortion for reasons only known to her, that's her choice and she should be able to seek advice and assistance to help her come to her own decision. Again,"freedom of choice."
I would like to say that under the shallow and lame benign rationale of " it's best for you," or "I know best" or "protecting us" our government know-it-alls that say they represent us are very quickly usurping all rights we have as it applies to our own bodies. It's insanity. These looney tunes are the one's running our country? As the saying goes, I think it's time for the inmates to take back the asylum. Stand up folks, and say enough is enough. - And, that's my opinion. People, draw your own conclusions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_______________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Sunday, May 23, 2010
Get Rid Of Long Term Politicians And Their COLA's And Set Term Limits.
THE DOCTOR IS IN
________________
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
Recently we had Democratic Senator Dodd jump to the defense of Blumenthal, the man that lied about his military record and the guy who claimed he served in Vietnam when he "did not."
Blumenthal is running in Connecticut for the office of Senator. Now, I see his character, credibility and veracity seriously in question.
Senator Dodd is retiring after holding the Senatorial seat since 1975. Folks, that's a long, long time to hold on to a position. Some of these politicians have been in Congress for 35 and 45 years. I think that is too long for any one person to hold a political seat. Another man comes to mind. The recently defeated Arlen Specter, from Pennsylvania tried everything to hold on to his seat. Hey, the guys 80 years old and has been serving Pennsylvania for 30 years. If he had held his seat this time he would be 86 years old when his new term would expire.
I don't know about you but I think that we Americans deserve more that this kind of good ol' boy politics. As it stands today the incumbent, with their large contribution war chests beat down any newcomer that wants to serve the nation.
These well connected political incumbents have their political connections, their large contributions and self serving groups use slash and burn politics to devastate their opponent.
I believe that there are many good people out there across this country that want to serve and hate the current system of partisanship,gridlock and "got ya" politics. This situation has been festering in both parties for decades but is becomes worse every year.
Standing on the sidelines looking in I can see that there is no give and no collaboration by either of the two warring parties. Neither the Republican or the Democratic party can say they work together. I say that it is time for a change, a big change.
First, I would suggest that the people in this nation stand united and vote out all of the incumbents. They have been there too long. I suspect that these incumbents that have been holding down their political seat for 35, 40, and 45 years is more of the problem that the solution. Those old incumbents tend to blackmail, intimidate and pressure the new members to go along or lose their seat at the next election. I would suggest that actions like that are not politics but instead borders on the criminal.
I submit that we, the people ,deserve much better governing that we are receiving from these fat cats, who feel they are privileged to do anything they wish and ignore the wishes of the majority of the people in the country. As it stands now, most of these Democrats and Republicans only interest is that of building up their contributions and getting what is best for themselves and their families. These lack-luster politicians "chase the money". They go to the trough of big oil, big banks, big corporations and other deep pocket avenues while always promising access and favors in return for the large contributions. The race and chase for the money by our political leaders never end.
Many of these lawmakers in Washington have committed a myriad of crimes over the years and many have been convicted and sent to prison. Others have their hands slapped and are protected by their party bosses for the sake of holding on to a seat.
Besides getting rid of all incumbents the people of this nation should insist on term limits. There is a good argument for it but as it stands now these entrenched politicians refuse to even consider such a move. They use their large money machines to fight off all efforts but I say the time is right and it can be done if we citizens stand together.
I would submit that if all of the Congress people had a term limit of only two terms there would be no time for them to be sucked into the abyss of easy money and power and the sleazy ways of being corrupted as is happening now.
With new intelligent, motivated people, who want to serve and make a difference hoping to improve this nation and actually knowing they cannot hold on to that seat for 35,or 45 years but for only two terms would give that man or woman incentive to work for the good of the people and country and display to the people the accomplishments they made during their two terms of service.
With only a two term representative there would be no chances of the sleaze and corruption that is now politics as usual rubbing off in that short amount of time and there would be no fat, lazy, incompetent six or seven term politician using threats and intimidation to get their way.
Granted, there will be some lawmakers sent to Washington for the two years and they may bend the rules or try to get all they can get for themselves and their families but the public can have some comfort knowing that the "wanna be" bad guy or gal will be out of Washington after serving their two term stretch.
Side note: These lawmakers should not receive a "lifetime" pension for only serving two terms. It could be adjusted accordingly. This idea of Congress people giving themselves all of these fat, obscene benefits like an automatic pay raise each and every year "unless they themselves vote it down " is unwarranted. Currently their pay is $174,000.00 a year. That's a lot. To their credit they did vote down their automatic pay raise for 2010. If they did not, they would have received an increase of and additional $1600.00 a year.
These old long term politicians slyly slid that annual benefit perk into law under the cloak of darkness back in 1989 when it decided to provide itself with annual raises called: "cost-of-living adjustments." This slick, sneaky maneuver guaranteed the politicians a salary increase every year, whether they actually deserved it or not. Nice perk, huh?
I would say that allowing any employee to vote on their own pay raise would really cause any employer to scream out in agony but as it stands now these lawmakers are doing just that, as does the public employee unions across this country.
However, if this obscene law cannot be repealed and removed from the books it should be drastically revised. It would be the lesser of the many evils that these lawmakers have perpetrated on us taxpayers to enrich themselves. It could be revised so as to require that each lawmaker publicly vote on their own pay raise and that in turn would at least hold them accountable to us taxpayers and voters.
Nobody outside the Washington beltway, except the greedy public employees and their powerful union members get an automatic raise each and every year. Middle class Mr. and Mrs. America working on Main street doesn't have such a benefit, so why should our millionaire and billionaire lawmakers deserve this perk. My answer, they "shouldn't."
So, to summarize: We do not need lawmakers in Washington serving 35, 40, or 45 years and playing politics for the sole purpose of getting what they can for themselves and their family. We really need term limits in Washington. -And, that's my opinion.People,draw your own conclusions. 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?
Recently we had Democratic Senator Dodd jump to the defense of Blumenthal, the man that lied about his military record and the guy who claimed he served in Vietnam when he "did not."
Blumenthal is running in Connecticut for the office of Senator. Now, I see his character, credibility and veracity seriously in question.
Senator Dodd is retiring after holding the Senatorial seat since 1975. Folks, that's a long, long time to hold on to a position. Some of these politicians have been in Congress for 35 and 45 years. I think that is too long for any one person to hold a political seat. Another man comes to mind. The recently defeated Arlen Specter, from Pennsylvania tried everything to hold on to his seat. Hey, the guys 80 years old and has been serving Pennsylvania for 30 years. If he had held his seat this time he would be 86 years old when his new term would expire.
I don't know about you but I think that we Americans deserve more that this kind of good ol' boy politics. As it stands today the incumbent, with their large contribution war chests beat down any newcomer that wants to serve the nation.
These well connected political incumbents have their political connections, their large contributions and self serving groups use slash and burn politics to devastate their opponent.
I believe that there are many good people out there across this country that want to serve and hate the current system of partisanship,gridlock and "got ya" politics. This situation has been festering in both parties for decades but is becomes worse every year.
Standing on the sidelines looking in I can see that there is no give and no collaboration by either of the two warring parties. Neither the Republican or the Democratic party can say they work together. I say that it is time for a change, a big change.
First, I would suggest that the people in this nation stand united and vote out all of the incumbents. They have been there too long. I suspect that these incumbents that have been holding down their political seat for 35, 40, and 45 years is more of the problem that the solution. Those old incumbents tend to blackmail, intimidate and pressure the new members to go along or lose their seat at the next election. I would suggest that actions like that are not politics but instead borders on the criminal.
I submit that we, the people ,deserve much better governing that we are receiving from these fat cats, who feel they are privileged to do anything they wish and ignore the wishes of the majority of the people in the country. As it stands now, most of these Democrats and Republicans only interest is that of building up their contributions and getting what is best for themselves and their families. These lack-luster politicians "chase the money". They go to the trough of big oil, big banks, big corporations and other deep pocket avenues while always promising access and favors in return for the large contributions. The race and chase for the money by our political leaders never end.
Many of these lawmakers in Washington have committed a myriad of crimes over the years and many have been convicted and sent to prison. Others have their hands slapped and are protected by their party bosses for the sake of holding on to a seat.
Besides getting rid of all incumbents the people of this nation should insist on term limits. There is a good argument for it but as it stands now these entrenched politicians refuse to even consider such a move. They use their large money machines to fight off all efforts but I say the time is right and it can be done if we citizens stand together.
I would submit that if all of the Congress people had a term limit of only two terms there would be no time for them to be sucked into the abyss of easy money and power and the sleazy ways of being corrupted as is happening now.
With new intelligent, motivated people, who want to serve and make a difference hoping to improve this nation and actually knowing they cannot hold on to that seat for 35,or 45 years but for only two terms would give that man or woman incentive to work for the good of the people and country and display to the people the accomplishments they made during their two terms of service.
With only a two term representative there would be no chances of the sleaze and corruption that is now politics as usual rubbing off in that short amount of time and there would be no fat, lazy, incompetent six or seven term politician using threats and intimidation to get their way.
Granted, there will be some lawmakers sent to Washington for the two years and they may bend the rules or try to get all they can get for themselves and their families but the public can have some comfort knowing that the "wanna be" bad guy or gal will be out of Washington after serving their two term stretch.
Side note: These lawmakers should not receive a "lifetime" pension for only serving two terms. It could be adjusted accordingly. This idea of Congress people giving themselves all of these fat, obscene benefits like an automatic pay raise each and every year "unless they themselves vote it down " is unwarranted. Currently their pay is $174,000.00 a year. That's a lot. To their credit they did vote down their automatic pay raise for 2010. If they did not, they would have received an increase of and additional $1600.00 a year.
These old long term politicians slyly slid that annual benefit perk into law under the cloak of darkness back in 1989 when it decided to provide itself with annual raises called: "cost-of-living adjustments." This slick, sneaky maneuver guaranteed the politicians a salary increase every year, whether they actually deserved it or not. Nice perk, huh?
I would say that allowing any employee to vote on their own pay raise would really cause any employer to scream out in agony but as it stands now these lawmakers are doing just that, as does the public employee unions across this country.
However, if this obscene law cannot be repealed and removed from the books it should be drastically revised. It would be the lesser of the many evils that these lawmakers have perpetrated on us taxpayers to enrich themselves. It could be revised so as to require that each lawmaker publicly vote on their own pay raise and that in turn would at least hold them accountable to us taxpayers and voters.
Nobody outside the Washington beltway, except the greedy public employees and their powerful union members get an automatic raise each and every year. Middle class Mr. and Mrs. America working on Main street doesn't have such a benefit, so why should our millionaire and billionaire lawmakers deserve this perk. My answer, they "shouldn't."
So, to summarize: We do not need lawmakers in Washington serving 35, 40, or 45 years and playing politics for the sole purpose of getting what they can for themselves and their family. We really need term limits in Washington. -And, that's my opinion.People,draw your own conclusions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_______________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Saturday, May 22, 2010
Temporary Tax? Do You Really Believe That?
THE DOCTOR IS IN
_________________
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
The big fad that is being adopted by many states is something called "A temporary tax." City, county and state governments are raising taxes for a specific period of time and they are telling the voter and taxpayer that the tax is only temporary and will be eliminated after a specific time frame. For example, Arizona just approved a 1 percent sales tax hike and promised to it will last only three years. Cities like Mobile, Alabama, and states like Kansas are also jumping on the bandwagon saying that these "temporary" taxes are to avoid layoffs of police and fireman. Other states and cities say it is for education. What a joke!
I suggest that these cities and states do layoff some of these police,firemen and teachers. They surely have no qualms about laying off other city, county and state employees. Why should a policeman, fireman or teacher get special treatment? They should be treated like any person working in the private sector. When a person gets laid off or fired from their job in the private sector the remaining employees have to pick up the slack and work a little harder. The same can and should apply to these public sector employees.
Many of these public sector workers are making three and four time the wages that someone in the private sector makes. That inequity should not be allowed to happen. In addition these public sector workers are building up tremendous retirement and pension packages that the average John and Jane Doe will never even be able to come close to, let alone enjoy.
Currently across the United States the public employee powerful unions browbeat the politician and lawmakers into large cost of living increases, bonuses, merit pay, free medical care, large and early retirements and super generous pensions and all of this is given to these public employees in exchange for their votes and backing of the lawmakers. The politicians are giving away the store to the public employees on the backs of the hard working people in the private sector.
There are a number of city, county and state governments that are teetering on the verge of bankruptcy only because of the outrageous demands made by these public employees but no lawmaker wants to layoff any of these people or take a chance of offending the public employee unions.
If you truly believe that these "temporary" taxes are going to be temporary, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I want to sell you. Remember the Federal Income tax? That income tax was put on the American peoples back in the 1930's and it too was supposed to be a "TEMPORARY TAX." Yeah, right!
I submit that these so-called temporary taxes and levies never go away. Once they are introduced and go into effect they are here to stay. My view is that once the lawmakers get a "temporary" tax and get their hands on that money they do not want to let it go and will use excuse after excuse to avoid letting the "temporary" tax expire.
Right now there are some states that imposed a "temporary" tax early on in the recession and some of those tax deadlines are about to expire. I would bet that Maryland, New Jersey, New York and North Carolina who enacted such a "temporary" tax fix will not allow the deadlines to expire. We'll see!
Do you really think that your state legislature and those greedy lawmakers will say: "Hey, we don't need any more money," so let's let that temporary tax expire? I'll take odds on that bet. Why? Because those public employee unions have a stranglehold on those legislators. The public employees want the little guy to continue to subsidize their over generous retirement and pay for their health plan for the rest of their lives.
I don't know about you but, yes- I also would like to retire early like these public sector workers. Personally, I don't want to work for a long time to pay for" others" to retire early and enjoy free health, fat pensions and obscene retirement benefits while I have to pay for my families health care and have no retirement or pension.
A "temporary" tax? I doubt that.-And, that's my opinion. People, draw your own conclusions. 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 big fad that is being adopted by many states is something called "A temporary tax." City, county and state governments are raising taxes for a specific period of time and they are telling the voter and taxpayer that the tax is only temporary and will be eliminated after a specific time frame. For example, Arizona just approved a 1 percent sales tax hike and promised to it will last only three years. Cities like Mobile, Alabama, and states like Kansas are also jumping on the bandwagon saying that these "temporary" taxes are to avoid layoffs of police and fireman. Other states and cities say it is for education. What a joke!
I suggest that these cities and states do layoff some of these police,firemen and teachers. They surely have no qualms about laying off other city, county and state employees. Why should a policeman, fireman or teacher get special treatment? They should be treated like any person working in the private sector. When a person gets laid off or fired from their job in the private sector the remaining employees have to pick up the slack and work a little harder. The same can and should apply to these public sector employees.
Many of these public sector workers are making three and four time the wages that someone in the private sector makes. That inequity should not be allowed to happen. In addition these public sector workers are building up tremendous retirement and pension packages that the average John and Jane Doe will never even be able to come close to, let alone enjoy.
Currently across the United States the public employee powerful unions browbeat the politician and lawmakers into large cost of living increases, bonuses, merit pay, free medical care, large and early retirements and super generous pensions and all of this is given to these public employees in exchange for their votes and backing of the lawmakers. The politicians are giving away the store to the public employees on the backs of the hard working people in the private sector.
There are a number of city, county and state governments that are teetering on the verge of bankruptcy only because of the outrageous demands made by these public employees but no lawmaker wants to layoff any of these people or take a chance of offending the public employee unions.
If you truly believe that these "temporary" taxes are going to be temporary, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I want to sell you. Remember the Federal Income tax? That income tax was put on the American peoples back in the 1930's and it too was supposed to be a "TEMPORARY TAX." Yeah, right!
I submit that these so-called temporary taxes and levies never go away. Once they are introduced and go into effect they are here to stay. My view is that once the lawmakers get a "temporary" tax and get their hands on that money they do not want to let it go and will use excuse after excuse to avoid letting the "temporary" tax expire.
Right now there are some states that imposed a "temporary" tax early on in the recession and some of those tax deadlines are about to expire. I would bet that Maryland, New Jersey, New York and North Carolina who enacted such a "temporary" tax fix will not allow the deadlines to expire. We'll see!
Do you really think that your state legislature and those greedy lawmakers will say: "Hey, we don't need any more money," so let's let that temporary tax expire? I'll take odds on that bet. Why? Because those public employee unions have a stranglehold on those legislators. The public employees want the little guy to continue to subsidize their over generous retirement and pay for their health plan for the rest of their lives.
I don't know about you but, yes- I also would like to retire early like these public sector workers. Personally, I don't want to work for a long time to pay for" others" to retire early and enjoy free health, fat pensions and obscene retirement benefits while I have to pay for my families health care and have no retirement or pension.
A "temporary" tax? I doubt that.-And, that's my opinion. People, draw your own conclusions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_______________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Friday, May 21, 2010
Obama Bad Mouths America Again: On Immigration
THE DOCTOR IS IN
_________________
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
When it comes to the immigration issue President Obama is forfeiting quite a bit of his goodwill, trust and credibility with the American people. It seems to me that he's ashamed of Americans, particularly the American citizen. It wasn't too long ago when he flew across the world and make apologies for possible sins that the Americans committed abroad. Now, he stands on a stage with Mexican president Felipe Calderon and slams and slams away at all Arizona residents for supporting a state law that makes it illegal to be in the USA illegally.He condemned Arizona' s crackdown on illegal aliens. Obama showed strong solidarity with Mr. Calderon.
The Mexican president was treated to a majestic welcome on the South Lawn and 200 people were invited to the event where president Obama showed and voiced strong USA support for Calderon's government.
The Mexican President was smiling and showed approval that President Obama chose to scold and belittle the politicians and residents of Arizona and the citizens of the United States. Instead of criticizing those "illegal aliens" who crawl and slither into our country and place a very large burden on our American schools, social system and health care he chose to cozy up to Calderon.
Calderon says that he disagrees very strongly with the Arizona immigration law. He said "it is a law that not only ignores a reality that cannot be erased by decree but also introduces a terrible idea using racial profiling as a basis for law enforcement." And believe it or not all of the Democrats in the audience rose with loud cheers of agreement. In this case, I agree with Senator McCain and other lawmakers when they say that: "it was unfortunate and disappointing that the president of Mexico chose to criticize the state of Arizona by weighing in on a U.S. domestic policy issue during a trip that was meant to reaffirm relationships between our two countries.
Even in light of the majority of the polls showing that most Americans and even those of Mexican heritage (who came here legally) support the Arizona law President Obama intends to have his Justice Department intimidate the state of Arizona and it residents who want nothing more than to have our immigration laws enforced.
Obama and Calderon pledged to create a safer border. Oh yeah, where have you heard that before? Most every time representatives of the two countries meet they say the same thing. First thing out of their mouth is: "We need safer borders." But it's been all talk and no action and that has been the operating procedure since President Reagan gave amnesty to millions of "illegal aliens" decades ago.
I submit that if you believe that President Obama is really interested or serious about stemming the massive flow of illegal aliens invading our sovereign borders, you're wrong!
There are a number of his political advocates and supporters who embrace the illegal border invasion. What has the Mexican government ever did to stop the illegal alien from illegally entering the USA? Nothing! In fact, the Mexican Foreign Ministry actually handed out booklets and maps showing all" illegal aliens" how to get by once they had illegally entered our country. They were given instruction on how to abuse and use our welfare system, our hospitals and schools.
It really would have been a breath of fresh air if Obama would have publicly told Mr. Calderon that the American people doesn't have to apologize to anyone or any country for seeking to secure a secure southern border. He also should have told Calderon that there will be no apologizes for being concerned about the outrageous costs of illegal alien immigration that is being brought down on our institutions and services in the USA.
In winding up his cozy, fuzzy talks with Mr. Calderon Obama should have presented a bill and/or statement asking Mexico, (an oil rich) nation to reimburse the American taxpayers for those costs--with payment on demand and immediate.
In addition to Obama's bowing and catering to Calderon he had the audacity to stand before an audience not too long ago and actually make jokes about the Arizona immigration law. His joke went something like this: Senator McCain couldn't make it tonight because he said he is or is not a maverick and we all know what happens in Arizona "Adios Amigo." Here is a man that is supposed to look out for the best interests of the United States and is joking and slamming the state of Arizona and agreeing that"illegal aliens" entering this country is okay. Shame on him!
I personally do not appreciate having our president invite another president from another country here and lecture us United States citizens. President Obama was standing next to Calderon on the lawn of our Whiter House and continually nodding in agreement with every word and statement this incompetent Mexican president said.
It's somewhat surprising that president Obama, the Attorney General of the United States and a number of people in the White House and administration choose to bad mouth the Arizona immigration law yet when asked point blank if he, president Obama has read the law, his answer was "no," and that same response was elicited from the Attorney General of the United States as well as other lawmakers. To me, that really tells me something about how the president and lawmakers go about their every day duties in Washington. They appear to only cherry pick what laws they want to abide by depending on the amount of votes from specific groups and demographics. The president and most of these people are attorneys yet rather than read the law they have already taken a prejudiced stand on an issue. What does that tell you about governing?
Let me elaborate on some information both about the United States and Mexico.
1. Mexico's immigration laws are much, much more severe and punitive that any of the United States law. The law enforcement in Mexico (local, state and federal) have the authority to ascertain the immigration status of "anyone" those police officer may come in contact with.
2. If "anyone" is found to be in Mexico illegally, you are deported as quickly as possible. The kicker, if anyone is found to be have been caught illegally in Mexico for the second time you can will in all likelihood receive a ten year prison sentence.
3. If a person wants to immigrate to Mexico to live (for the sake of me, I don't know why) that person has to prove they have enough money to live on so the person will not be a burden to Mexico's society. Side note: Burden on Mexico's society and system? Are they kidding? Look what Mexico's illegal aliens are doing to our system and society here in the USA.
4. In Mexico, if you sign a document with a name other than your own, you will be sent to prison.
5. You cannot work in Mexico with papers, no exceptions, no excuses.
The above is just a few of the rules you would have to abide by if you went to Mexico. There are many other immigration rules and regulations in Mexico that clearly show their immigration laws are much more stricter than ours here in the USA.
Now, a word about papers that are a requirement in Mexico and that can be asked for at anytime by Mexican law enforcement. I know this specifically because in the past I have traveled to Mexico and I can attest to the local, state and federal police and Mexican military stopping my person and friends and demanding that we show our papers. I and my friends and relatives complied and we didn't bitch about it either.
In regards to our federal immigration law and how it applies to documents the law reads:
[ Every alien, eighteen years of age and over shall at all times carry with him and have in his personal possession any certificate of alien registration receipt card issued to him.]--
People, that is the language already in our own federal immigration law but when a state like Arizona only wants to enforce the law that is already in existence, president Obama and his minions (without actually reading the Arizona law) take a stand that asking for documents is a bad thing.
Obama smiling and nodding, like a little bobble head, agreed with Mexico's president Calderon and allowed this man to try to dictate USA domestic policy.
Hell, it wasn't too many months ago that president Obama went on his "Apologize and Blame America tirade." Now, he's playing blame games again and continues to belittle the state of Arizona and the rest of the country.Why? For a corrupt government that we continue to shore up with billions of dollars each year?
The Mexican government whose two major exports are drugs and it's poor, uneducated, impoverished citizens has the nerve to lecture the United States and its citizens while our president stands by agreeing wholeheartedly. Calderon sends his illegal aliens into the United States of which 10 percent of all Mexican citizens live in the USA illegally.These illegal aliens at the bequest of Calderon send back to Mexico billions of dollars that keeps Mexico from going under and collapsing.
It wasn't to many decades ago that we forgave Mexico's debt to the United States worth billions of dollars. Mexico begged and pleaded with the USA for decades asking for more and more money. Mexico built up a massive debt and promised to repay any loans and our squeamish politicians didn't even put any strings on the massive amounts of money we were giving to Mexico even though Mexico is one of the most oil rich countries in the world. Result? Mexico reneged on the debt and we taxpayers took the hit as our lawmakers decided to forgive the debt to Mexico. I think that we have been propping up Mexico for much too long now. What do you think?
To rub salt in the wound of all Americans regarding the Arizona immigration law president Obama met with the Director of Homeland Security and made a decision not to have ICE pick up and process any illegal aliens that are arrested in Arizona. With this selfish move by the administration and Homeland Security I can only conclude that this refusal to have ICE pick up and process illegal aliens a under SB1070 is vindictive and an act of spite leading to Obama's desire to enact amnesty for illegal aliens. It looks like that the United States goal is to erase the border between the USA and Mexico and that is a bad idea.
Mr.President, Mr. Attorney General and White House administrators and to all lawmakers (mostly Democrats in this case) I would suggest before you add your two cents to any issue that all of you at least read the law and/or issue before opening your mouth for or against it. Do not deny and acknowledge that the Feds already have a documents and "show me your papers" law on the books. Maybe you should read that too. I submit that Arizona is doing nothing more that enforcing the laws that currently exist, laws that the administration has chose to ignore in favor of voting blocs. Amnesty, like prohibition, doesn't work. It has been tried by a past president and it failed miserably through lies and deception on the part of our lawmakers.- And, that's my opinion. People, draw your own conclusions. 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?
When it comes to the immigration issue President Obama is forfeiting quite a bit of his goodwill, trust and credibility with the American people. It seems to me that he's ashamed of Americans, particularly the American citizen. It wasn't too long ago when he flew across the world and make apologies for possible sins that the Americans committed abroad. Now, he stands on a stage with Mexican president Felipe Calderon and slams and slams away at all Arizona residents for supporting a state law that makes it illegal to be in the USA illegally.He condemned Arizona' s crackdown on illegal aliens. Obama showed strong solidarity with Mr. Calderon.
The Mexican president was treated to a majestic welcome on the South Lawn and 200 people were invited to the event where president Obama showed and voiced strong USA support for Calderon's government.
The Mexican President was smiling and showed approval that President Obama chose to scold and belittle the politicians and residents of Arizona and the citizens of the United States. Instead of criticizing those "illegal aliens" who crawl and slither into our country and place a very large burden on our American schools, social system and health care he chose to cozy up to Calderon.
Calderon says that he disagrees very strongly with the Arizona immigration law. He said "it is a law that not only ignores a reality that cannot be erased by decree but also introduces a terrible idea using racial profiling as a basis for law enforcement." And believe it or not all of the Democrats in the audience rose with loud cheers of agreement. In this case, I agree with Senator McCain and other lawmakers when they say that: "it was unfortunate and disappointing that the president of Mexico chose to criticize the state of Arizona by weighing in on a U.S. domestic policy issue during a trip that was meant to reaffirm relationships between our two countries.
Even in light of the majority of the polls showing that most Americans and even those of Mexican heritage (who came here legally) support the Arizona law President Obama intends to have his Justice Department intimidate the state of Arizona and it residents who want nothing more than to have our immigration laws enforced.
Obama and Calderon pledged to create a safer border. Oh yeah, where have you heard that before? Most every time representatives of the two countries meet they say the same thing. First thing out of their mouth is: "We need safer borders." But it's been all talk and no action and that has been the operating procedure since President Reagan gave amnesty to millions of "illegal aliens" decades ago.
I submit that if you believe that President Obama is really interested or serious about stemming the massive flow of illegal aliens invading our sovereign borders, you're wrong!
There are a number of his political advocates and supporters who embrace the illegal border invasion. What has the Mexican government ever did to stop the illegal alien from illegally entering the USA? Nothing! In fact, the Mexican Foreign Ministry actually handed out booklets and maps showing all" illegal aliens" how to get by once they had illegally entered our country. They were given instruction on how to abuse and use our welfare system, our hospitals and schools.
It really would have been a breath of fresh air if Obama would have publicly told Mr. Calderon that the American people doesn't have to apologize to anyone or any country for seeking to secure a secure southern border. He also should have told Calderon that there will be no apologizes for being concerned about the outrageous costs of illegal alien immigration that is being brought down on our institutions and services in the USA.
In winding up his cozy, fuzzy talks with Mr. Calderon Obama should have presented a bill and/or statement asking Mexico, (an oil rich) nation to reimburse the American taxpayers for those costs--with payment on demand and immediate.
In addition to Obama's bowing and catering to Calderon he had the audacity to stand before an audience not too long ago and actually make jokes about the Arizona immigration law. His joke went something like this: Senator McCain couldn't make it tonight because he said he is or is not a maverick and we all know what happens in Arizona "Adios Amigo." Here is a man that is supposed to look out for the best interests of the United States and is joking and slamming the state of Arizona and agreeing that"illegal aliens" entering this country is okay. Shame on him!
I personally do not appreciate having our president invite another president from another country here and lecture us United States citizens. President Obama was standing next to Calderon on the lawn of our Whiter House and continually nodding in agreement with every word and statement this incompetent Mexican president said.
It's somewhat surprising that president Obama, the Attorney General of the United States and a number of people in the White House and administration choose to bad mouth the Arizona immigration law yet when asked point blank if he, president Obama has read the law, his answer was "no," and that same response was elicited from the Attorney General of the United States as well as other lawmakers. To me, that really tells me something about how the president and lawmakers go about their every day duties in Washington. They appear to only cherry pick what laws they want to abide by depending on the amount of votes from specific groups and demographics. The president and most of these people are attorneys yet rather than read the law they have already taken a prejudiced stand on an issue. What does that tell you about governing?
Let me elaborate on some information both about the United States and Mexico.
1. Mexico's immigration laws are much, much more severe and punitive that any of the United States law. The law enforcement in Mexico (local, state and federal) have the authority to ascertain the immigration status of "anyone" those police officer may come in contact with.
2. If "anyone" is found to be in Mexico illegally, you are deported as quickly as possible. The kicker, if anyone is found to be have been caught illegally in Mexico for the second time you can will in all likelihood receive a ten year prison sentence.
3. If a person wants to immigrate to Mexico to live (for the sake of me, I don't know why) that person has to prove they have enough money to live on so the person will not be a burden to Mexico's society. Side note: Burden on Mexico's society and system? Are they kidding? Look what Mexico's illegal aliens are doing to our system and society here in the USA.
4. In Mexico, if you sign a document with a name other than your own, you will be sent to prison.
5. You cannot work in Mexico with papers, no exceptions, no excuses.
The above is just a few of the rules you would have to abide by if you went to Mexico. There are many other immigration rules and regulations in Mexico that clearly show their immigration laws are much more stricter than ours here in the USA.
Now, a word about papers that are a requirement in Mexico and that can be asked for at anytime by Mexican law enforcement. I know this specifically because in the past I have traveled to Mexico and I can attest to the local, state and federal police and Mexican military stopping my person and friends and demanding that we show our papers. I and my friends and relatives complied and we didn't bitch about it either.
In regards to our federal immigration law and how it applies to documents the law reads:
[ Every alien, eighteen years of age and over shall at all times carry with him and have in his personal possession any certificate of alien registration receipt card issued to him.]--
People, that is the language already in our own federal immigration law but when a state like Arizona only wants to enforce the law that is already in existence, president Obama and his minions (without actually reading the Arizona law) take a stand that asking for documents is a bad thing.
Obama smiling and nodding, like a little bobble head, agreed with Mexico's president Calderon and allowed this man to try to dictate USA domestic policy.
Hell, it wasn't too many months ago that president Obama went on his "Apologize and Blame America tirade." Now, he's playing blame games again and continues to belittle the state of Arizona and the rest of the country.Why? For a corrupt government that we continue to shore up with billions of dollars each year?
The Mexican government whose two major exports are drugs and it's poor, uneducated, impoverished citizens has the nerve to lecture the United States and its citizens while our president stands by agreeing wholeheartedly. Calderon sends his illegal aliens into the United States of which 10 percent of all Mexican citizens live in the USA illegally.These illegal aliens at the bequest of Calderon send back to Mexico billions of dollars that keeps Mexico from going under and collapsing.
It wasn't to many decades ago that we forgave Mexico's debt to the United States worth billions of dollars. Mexico begged and pleaded with the USA for decades asking for more and more money. Mexico built up a massive debt and promised to repay any loans and our squeamish politicians didn't even put any strings on the massive amounts of money we were giving to Mexico even though Mexico is one of the most oil rich countries in the world. Result? Mexico reneged on the debt and we taxpayers took the hit as our lawmakers decided to forgive the debt to Mexico. I think that we have been propping up Mexico for much too long now. What do you think?
To rub salt in the wound of all Americans regarding the Arizona immigration law president Obama met with the Director of Homeland Security and made a decision not to have ICE pick up and process any illegal aliens that are arrested in Arizona. With this selfish move by the administration and Homeland Security I can only conclude that this refusal to have ICE pick up and process illegal aliens a under SB1070 is vindictive and an act of spite leading to Obama's desire to enact amnesty for illegal aliens. It looks like that the United States goal is to erase the border between the USA and Mexico and that is a bad idea.
Mr.President, Mr. Attorney General and White House administrators and to all lawmakers (mostly Democrats in this case) I would suggest before you add your two cents to any issue that all of you at least read the law and/or issue before opening your mouth for or against it. Do not deny and acknowledge that the Feds already have a documents and "show me your papers" law on the books. Maybe you should read that too. I submit that Arizona is doing nothing more that enforcing the laws that currently exist, laws that the administration has chose to ignore in favor of voting blocs. Amnesty, like prohibition, doesn't work. It has been tried by a past president and it failed miserably through lies and deception on the part of our lawmakers.- And, that's my opinion. People, draw your own conclusions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
______________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Republican Party and Their Sex Problems
THE DOCTOR IS IN
_________________
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how is the world treating you?
Republicans can be a bunch of hypocrites. They have been proving that over and over again. Republicans have been earning the name (The party of "NO") and rightly so. They have refused to work across the aisle with Democrats since day one of President Obama's presidency . But now these hypocrites extend that party of "no" to their family values and Christian platform. It appears that they also say "no" when it comes to upholding sacred vows.
Many Republican's have fallen by the wayside and many have been protected by their party when they commit adultery, attend sex orgy shows, hire prostitutes, etc., and now, Rep. Mark Souder, (R-Ind) has proven that those that protest too much against some behavior, mores' and morals and lifestyle get caught with their pants down.
Power corrupts and many politicians feel they have the power to commit sex crimes as well as other crimes even though they yell from the mountain top that they are true and faithful and honest. They say that they abhor anyone that commits said crimes , but?
Souder told the Republican Leadership that he will resign from Congress because of the extramarital affair with one of his staffers. I say, good riddance. But the Republican should go further and clean house of the other Republicans that have talked out of both sides of their mouth and lied and committed adultery. Why do they circle the wagons and give some sexual offending adulterers a "pass" and take no action against them but force other creepy offenders to resign?
Look at Ensign, look at Vitter, those creeps did the same thing as Souder and maybe even more bad things but their colleagues make excuses for them and protect them. Republicans, what's your story? Politicians committing adultery or some other form of sexual illegal misbehavior should be gone, no exceptions.- And, that's my opinion. People, draw your own conclusions. 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?
Republicans can be a bunch of hypocrites. They have been proving that over and over again. Republicans have been earning the name (The party of "NO") and rightly so. They have refused to work across the aisle with Democrats since day one of President Obama's presidency . But now these hypocrites extend that party of "no" to their family values and Christian platform. It appears that they also say "no" when it comes to upholding sacred vows.
Many Republican's have fallen by the wayside and many have been protected by their party when they commit adultery, attend sex orgy shows, hire prostitutes, etc., and now, Rep. Mark Souder, (R-Ind) has proven that those that protest too much against some behavior, mores' and morals and lifestyle get caught with their pants down.
Power corrupts and many politicians feel they have the power to commit sex crimes as well as other crimes even though they yell from the mountain top that they are true and faithful and honest. They say that they abhor anyone that commits said crimes , but?
Souder told the Republican Leadership that he will resign from Congress because of the extramarital affair with one of his staffers. I say, good riddance. But the Republican should go further and clean house of the other Republicans that have talked out of both sides of their mouth and lied and committed adultery. Why do they circle the wagons and give some sexual offending adulterers a "pass" and take no action against them but force other creepy offenders to resign?
Look at Ensign, look at Vitter, those creeps did the same thing as Souder and maybe even more bad things but their colleagues make excuses for them and protect them. Republicans, what's your story? Politicians committing adultery or some other form of sexual illegal misbehavior should be gone, no exceptions.- And, that's my opinion. People, draw your own conclusions. 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)