Wise Jargon Blog

A short description about your blog

The issue of illegal immigration, having festered for the last decade, is now coming to a boil.  Beginning in the early 2000s, as Americans have been forced to deal with the crushing costs of our social entitlement programs, we have sought to limit illegal immigration as a way of reducing the welfare costs associated with many such immigrants.  More recently, the issue of immigration has been linked to the drug cartels of Central America and the threat of terrorist infiltration.

Thus, we must ask the question:  Are illegal immigrants coming because they want to join and become a part of the American experience, or are they coming to destroy the American way of life?

In a post 9/11 world, we cannot afford to give those who wish us harm easy access to our society.  Indeed, nearly 100 years ago, Theodore Roosevelt struck a similar chord when he said:

In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.

Theodore Roosevelt, January 3, 1919

America is the one country on the face of the planet where people of all nations wish to come.  Those who are willing to wait in line, and follow the rules, really want to be here.  They come not only to better themselves, but our nation as well.  Those who come illegally, aided by a network of groups who have their own agendas for helping them get here, are less likely to pledge allegiance to the United States of America.  At best, it results in a fracturing of community and culture, not the building and nurturing of American culture. At worst, it provides cover for those who wish to do our nation harm as they invade, undermine and destroy our nation in a post 9/11 world.

          Teddy Roosevelt calls to us today, admonishing our leaders to be loyal to the American people.  In 2012, we are looking for a President with a vision for 2020 who agrees with President Roosevelt’s statement that “There can be no divided allegiance here.  Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all.”

         

The Three Pillars of a 2020 Vision for Immigration Policy


 

The American Dream is on life support. It has been mugged and beaten by the mentality that says anything you do that I don’t like, I will sue you for. It has been crushed by a government bureaucracy that passes rule after rule, expecting small businesses as well as large to comply, or suffer the consequences. A 2010 report by the Small Business Administration titled The Impact of Regulatory Costs on Small Firms found that; “As of 2008, small businesses face an annual regulatory cost of $10,585 per employee, which is 36 percent higher than the regulatory cost facing large firms (defined as firms with 500 or more employees).”[1]

Such costs are killing the economic engine that creates small businesses. To understand the mentality behind this increasing burden of regulations, one can turn to the issue of product liability and frivolous law suits. The famous case of Liebeck vs. McDonalds, also known as the “McDonalds Coffee Case,” is the “poster child” for frivolous law suits which, in turn, generate more and more regulations to “protect” us from ourselves.

Introducing the Stella Awards

In 1994, an elderly woman by the name of Stella Liebeck sued McDonalds when she experienced third degree burns as a result of spilling McDonalds coffee on herself. In her case, it was pointed out that at least 700 other people had suffered burns from similar accidents, thereby justifying the notion that McDonalds coffee is hot – and that people needed to be warned of that fact.

Surprisingly, without the benefit of the suit, most people know that coffee can create such burns. When I was in High School, my father once burned himself from spilt coffee brewed by my mother in our home. Yet, he did not sue my mother. Why didn’t he sue my mother, his wife? Because he had the common sense to understand that coffee is hot, and that there are consequences for spilling hot coffee in one’s lap. He did not need to see 700 other people burned by my Mother’s coffee to reach that conclusion.

One consequence of the Liebeck case was the creation of the Stella Award[2], named in honor of the woman who brought the law suit. Some claim that the award is fictional, but its focus strikes a resounding cord in Amercia: That we have lost our ability to apply common sense in everyday matters of life. One man, Phillip K. Howad, even wrote a book titled “The Death of Common Sense” in 1994.

Columnists and pundits around the country have used that metaphor to comment on this issue. In her editorial piece titled “The Death of Common Sense,” columnist Lori Borgman wrote in 1998:[3]

Finally, Common Sense lost his will to live as the Ten Commandments became contraband, churches became businesses, criminals received better treatment than victims, and federal judges stuck their noses in everything from the Boy Scouts to professional sports. Finally, when a woman, too stupid to realize that a steaming cup of coffee was hot, was awarded a huge settlement, Common Sense threw in the towel.

The McDonalds Coffee Case and the Stella Awards provide a compelling story that most Americans can understand. It is the idea that “common sense and logic will not be tolerated anymore,” and that government laws and regulations have tied us in knots.

I am reminded of the story of Alexander the Great and the Gordian Knot. For over one hundred years, a knot tied by a king of Phrygia named Gordius was left on display by the temple of Zeus in the town of Gordium. An oracle foretold that whomever untied the knot would rule all of Asia. In 333 B.C. Alexander the Great came to the town, drawn by the legend of the knot which had defied many who had attempted to untie it over the years. Frustrated by the knot, Alexander drew his sword and crying, "What does it matter how I loose it?" and severed the famous knot.[4]

While most Americans do not know the details of why and how the increasing regulatory burden is crushing America, they recognize its effects. They understand that the notion of “Common Sense” has been abandoned and replaced by a “Nanny State” mentality. They want a President with 2020 vision who will seize this “Alexander the Great” moment and sever the Gordian Knot of regulatory red tape that is squeezing the life out of this nation.


 

Modern America is consumed by a 24/7 news cycle, where the talking heads focus on one-sentence sound bites. Questions which end in the request to “please answer yes or no” pass for sophisticated journalistic inquiry. In such a system, we cannot hope to identify, let alone solve, problems. One side appeals to “Reaganomics”, the other to “Obamanomics,” yet neither side seeks to educate the public about Economics. Thus, in the current environment, elements of our society can use class warfare arguments to deflect scrutiny away from the serious, systematic issues that face our nation’s economy. Those who seek to solve the problem are called cruel and heartless, and the “Point/Counterpoint” media fosters a gladiator style theater to cheer on their respective combatants.

          In this environment, the Republican candidate for President of the United States must break through the cacophony of voices on the looming debt crisis. He or she must capture the attention of the American public, and then educate America as to the issues facing us in a way not seen since Ross Perot used charts to talk to the nation. Too many times, political consultants posing as credible media experts refer to economic “facts” which no one checks to hold these talking heads accountable.

To move forward to resolve the debt crisis, the Republican presidential candidate needs to educate the American People on the importance of private enterprise. We need a President who understands the truth of this principle. In 2012, those seeking the Presidency of the United States should heed the words of President John F. Kennedy – a Democrat - who said in his April, 1962 speech to the US Chamber of Commerce:[1]

If American business does not earn sufficient revenues to earn a fair profit, this Government cannot earn sufficient revenues to cover its outlays. If American business does not prosper and expand, this Government cannot make good its pledges of economic growth. Our foreign policies call for an increase in the sale of American goods abroad, but it is business, not Government, who must actually produce and sell these goods. (Emphasis added).

 


Budget Wars: Lemmings Face a Debt Cliff

Posted by: David Lantz in MyBlog

Tagged in: Untagged 

David Lantz

Before I get to the facts about the debt ceiling, we have this report from our embedded reporter, John Stewart, as he accompanies the President of the Lemmings aboard his flag ship, The Death Spiral.  Our reporter indicates the President wants to lead his faithful lemmings off the cliff in an effort to “Win The Future”.

Lemmings off the cliff

Link: http://youtu.be/5SOZ0kfUqS


 

Restoring Faith, Family and the American Work Ethic

 

A funny thing happened while we were busy erecting the wall of separation between church and state.  So many vines and weeds grew up around the wall, that it not only caused the wall to crumble, it caused America to crumble.

 

The warning signs have been out there for over forty years.  In his 1987 book, “The Closing of the American Mind,” Allan Bloom called attention to the decline in moral values, stating the American mind had become closed to the concept of right and wrong.  Pointing to what he called the most important phenomena of our time, he said that “There is now an entirely new language of good and evil.”   He dubbed this new language “value relativism:”

 

Value relativism can be a great release from the perpetual tyranny of good and evil, with their cargo of shame and guilt, and the endless efforts that the pursuit of the one and the avoidance of the other enjoin … One need not feel bad about or uncomfortable with oneself when just a little value adjustment is necessary.[1]

 

          The very same year that Bloom’s book was published, Time Magazine’s May 25, 1987 cover story was titled “What Ever Happened to Ethics?”  In that article “pitch” on the magazine cover, Time stated:  “Assaulted by sleaze, scandals and hypocrisy, America searches for its moral bearings.”  

         

The juxtaposition of these two thoughts – one, that value relativism was doing away with the concepts of good and evil, right and wrong, and the second, that moral and ethical behavior seemed a thing of the past – was striking.  For a host of reasons, from court decisions like Engle vs. Vitale, in which prayer in school was outlawed, to government policies that have weakened the family, America has gone from a society based on Christian principles to a society based on secular principles, and now, a society whose principles are increasingly anti-Christian.  Some see this as a good thing, but let us ask three simple questions: 

 

A.    If you do not believe in a divine moral law ordained by a Creator, how can you possibly expect people to be ethical, let alone teach ethics?

 

Without coercion, you can’t.

 

B.    And, if you can’t expect people to be ethical out of their own volition, how can you expect them to show up for work on time, put in a full day’s work for a full day’s pay, and view a job well done as a calling to which they naturally aspire, rather than see their jobs as tasks they grudgingly do to avoid threats and penalties?

 

Again, the answer is, you can’t.

 

C.    Finally, what is the logical outcome over a sustained period of time in which these two trends grow and take hold in the behavior of the American People? 

 

 

The answer is, you will have a society in which fewer and fewer people see the value in working hard for the sake of working hard, being willing to create jobs that employ others – and a society in which more and more people who have come to see the coercion of people as a means to get the results one wants.  This growing class of people will, in turn, expect – nay, demand – that someone (i.e. “the rich”) be forced to take care of them.

 

And at that point, America will ask the same question posed in Psalm 11:3:  If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?

 


Introduction

In a book titled Generations: The History of America’s Future, Published in 1991 by William Strauss and Neil Howe, the authors looked at 13 generations of Americans as they attempted to envision the sort of crisis their analysis of history predicted America would confront by the year 2020. Writing in 1991, however, Strauss and Howe did make this now prescient statement:
One rather safe prediction experts often make about elderly Boomers is that they will collide with underfunded federal pension and health-care systems, starting in the mid-2010s. … Boomers will force a dramatic turn in the politics of Social Security. In the 2010s, they will lay the terms of an entirely new intergenerational “deal,” snapping the chain of ever-rising benefits that G.I.s insisted would never end. Boom leaders will thoroughly recast – and probably rename – Social Security and Medicare. … Affluent Boomers will receive little economic recompense from a lifetime of payroll taxes paid to support others. Yet in a turnabout from the G.I. entitlement ethic, Boomers will derive self-esteem from knowing they are not receiving rewards from the community.
Borrowing a metaphor from a short story written by Nathanial Hawthorne in the early 1800s titled “The Gray Champion,” William Strauss and Neil Howe likened the Boomer generation to this mythical guardian of American liberties. The authors of Generations: The History of America’s Future did not envision just one Gray Champion, but rather a generation that produces many such leaders. They conclude their conversation about the prospect of such future Gray Champions (individuals who would arise out of the Baby Boom generation and whom, I believe, the Tea Party movement now embodies) this way:
Let us hope that the old Boomers will look within themselves and find something richer than apocalypse. If they see (and assert) themselves as beacons of civilization, younger Americans may well look up to them as G.I.s did to the great Missionary leaders: as elders wise beyond the comprehension of youth. If the Gray Champions among them can seize this historic opportunity, they can guide a unified national community through the gates of history to a better world beyond.
As a member of the Boomer generation, I see myself as one of these many such Gray Champions. And so, today, I wish to provide some insights to the would-be Republican Nominee for President of the United States who will seek my vote, as well as my active grassroots support.


The Clash of Cultures and the Gray Champion


frontcoversp

pointcounterpointsmall

book-previewsword_03

studyguidebotssmall
botssmall
findingcommunitysmall
buyingtechnologysmall