Tuesday, October 29, 2013

SAR #13302



A number of American politicians believe Atlas Shrugged is real, and that they're John Galt.

First Things: General Keith Alexander, sworn to uphold the Constitution as a military officer and head of the National Security Agency which intercepts all of our electronic communications in order too protect and defend us and the Constitution, says that we must find a way to stop reporters from reporting leaks in the press. 
 
Slip Sliding: Pending home sales (i.e. contracts to buy an existing home) fell 5.6% in September, m/m, the first time in 29 months that pending sales haven't increased y/y and is the biggest drop in 40 months,

Side Note: The Fed's Flow of Funds report shows that over $1.3 trillion in mortgage debt has been vaporized, mostly through foreclosures and short sales, by the collapse of the housing bubble. That makes a fair hole in the economy.

Entrails: NYSE margin debt has reached record highs. Some see this as a bearish signal that unwarranted exuberance has set in, others see it as a bullis vote of confidence in future gains. You pays borrow your money and takes your choice.

Safety First: Since the slaughter of 20 children at Newton elementary, over 28,000 more Americans have died from guns – 90 a day. Proud, ain't we, of our freedoms?

Joke's On Us: The only way to “rein in” NSA's unconstitutional arrogance is to defund the Beast. Too bad that – like Hoover in the days of old – the NSA holds markers on most of those who theoretically supervise it. 
 
Strange Bedfellows: Israel and the Saudis have stumbled into an alliance opposing the current US-Iran rapprochement, sharing religious, political and economic animus; the enemy of my enemy...

Reminder: Nearly 45,000 Americans will die this year because they do not have health insurance and cannot afford medical care. The marketplace is not a solution for those who have no money to enter the market.

Running Totals: Since April, over 5,000 Iraqis have died in what is in essence a religious war between Sunni and Shia.

Paying The Price: In 2016 alone—the 24 states embracing Obamacare and expanding their Medicaid programs will receive $30.3 billion in additional federal dollars, while those not expanding will forego $35.0 billion they could have had to spend on their citizens.

Keeping Score: "The Republicans are winning, and have been for the past three years, if not the past thirty. They’re just too blinkered by fantasies of total victory to see it."

Sophomoric Enlightenment: In an article asking "Are Rising Energy Costs Responsible for Widespread Economic Recession?" the author breathlessly concludes it's "something no one would have thought of—high oil prices that take a slice out of the economy, without anything to show in return." Or 'the more it costs to get the oil, the less you make burning it.' Now that wasn't hard, was it?

If You Have To Ask: The WSJ wants to know "Whose side is your broker on?" Ask yourself this: what does your broker really do for a living, from whence does his income come? At the end of the day he takes money from you. How he maximizes that income is the real story.

The Parting Shot:
 One in every crowd.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

the total of all fire-arms homicides are around 10,000 per year

of the 10,000 deaths, that number includes self defense and the lawful police use of a fire arm

(the number does not include suicides, but it is worth noting that more people die from "improper use" of prescription medications than die from using heroine and cocaine)

knives and other sharp edged weapons were used almost half as often as all fire arms in the commission of violent crimes.

more people are killed with fists and baseball bats an other blunt force weapons than with rifles in the united states http://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/gun-violence/

now its true that i do support universal background checks for all purchases and transfers of fire arms....no exceptions

but those who would argue that it is best to end or curtail the second amendment because of the terribly tragic use of guns to kill innocent people just might want to think this over

the seond amendment was specifically set forth so that the people would have the means to resist a tyranical government like existed in nazi germany or stalinist russia.

i am a liberal democrat who participates in the polictical process and i believe in the system, however badly broken and damaged it is these days

i do not advocate nor romanticize violence nor survivalism and pray to God just people will compromise, work together and sort things out...i do not believe current events even remotely justify violence as a response

all that said, ie most imprudent to give up on the right of the people to keep and bear arms at a time when the 4th, 5th 6th and 8th amendments have already been eviscerated

go ahead, read what those amendments say and ask yourself, is there torture, are there warrantless searches, secret trials and secret courts and people deprived o counsel and induced, tricked or forced to testify against themselves?

more and more we are living in a police state that would make the stasi envious

though i am not jewish i was raised for a time in a jewish home, and a more liberal, loving, generous an professionally successful family you would be hard pressed to find

but they knew why there is a second amendment as both parents had family caught behind the barbed wire and the iron curtain, and as such they were ardent supporters of the second amendment.

we can and should make policy to stem firearm violence, but the idea that this is some outdated or archaic right that can, and should be tossed away is very misguided

while we are all broken hearted at the awful numbers of such very tragic deaths due to gun violence some other numbers are worth considering for perspective,,, and i admit accidental deaths, deaths from drunk driving and all the rest are not the same nor a justification for no action...we should work together to stem gun violence, but i for one believe we should hold tight to the entire bill of rights

the CDC does not report deaths due to medical malpractice by doctors which is over 93,000 per year and malpractice in hospitals which is nearly 200,000 per year

and drunk and drugged driving death statistics dwarf fire arms homicides.

here are some urls with statistics to support the numbers cited above

best wishes
mock turtle

http://www.justice.org/cps/rde/justice/hs.xsl/8677.htm

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/09/20/224507654/how-many-die-from-medical-mistakes-in-u-s-hospitals

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/lcod.htm

http://www.justice.org/cps/rde/justice/hs.xsl/8677.htm

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/09/20/224507654/how-many-die-from-medical-mistakes-in-u-s-hospitals

TulsaTime said...

Sorry MT, but the 2nd Amendment was written to overcome the lack of a standing army. After that was seen as something government could not do without, nobody thought it was worth the trouble to take #2 out.

This is nowhere close to standard interpretation, but it is the only aspect that makes any sense of the 2nd. Militia does not hold up to regular troops, and Washington knew it from personal experience. The 'anti-tyrant' spin that is put on 2nd these days is laughable. There are no 'revolutions' that have sourced arms from citizens. Even the 'patriots' had to hit up france for weapons. Revolt has to take a slice off the military. I wonder what they will do for comms?

Classof65 said...

I first read Ayn Rand when I was twelve. Since that time I have read and re-read "The Fountainhead" and "Atlas Shrugged" many times.

It is humorous that today's politicians see themselves as John Galt, especially since Rand treated politicians as obstacles in the way of those who were truly creative and productive in our society. She saw politicians as a necessary evil who could be paid to bend laws and regulations whenever necessary and referred to them with contempt.

Legislators produce nothing. They are definitely NOT comparable to John Galt. How they can confuse themselves by thinking they are is simply self-delusion and misinterpretation of Rand's message.

I am not now nor was I ever a proponent of Rand's theories regarding social structure. I cannot name a single CEO of a large U.S. corporation who developed a new product or process in the past decade or so and built the company from nothing except Bill Gates and Steve Jobs and others of their ilk. Neither of them ever contemplated pulling their products from the market as a protest against government regulations (safety or antimonopoly regulations).

A country that listens and records all communications made by its citizens is just a few steps away from communist Russia. Everyone should re-read "1984" by Orwell. In fact, it should be a prerequisite for would-be Senators and Representatives and they should have to pass a test on it prior to elections. We are supposedly "the land of the free" but that phrase does not apply anymore since we are all being subject to knock-less, warrant-less searches of our persons and our domiciles, listening to our communications, opening of our mail, invasion of our privacy -- when we have committed no crime.

This must stop!

OkieLawyer said...

I cannot name a single CEO of a large U.S. corporation who developed a new product or process in the past decade or so and built the company from nothing except Bill Gates and Steve Jobs and others of their ilk.

Elon Musk?

Anonymous said...

tulsa time

you said any notion that the second amendment was about stemming tyrany was "laughable"

here are some quotes from people who would call you out on that count



"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

thomas jefferson


"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."

Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-188

The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them."

-- Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story of the John Marshall Court

as for the potential success of indigenous people successfully resisting an army

i would refer you to vietnam,where we killed between 1 and three million people depending upon whos accounting you choose to accept, and still we were repulsed

best wishes
mock turtle

Charles Kingsley Michaelson, III said...

But, mt, your quotes are all from the good old olden days, except for citing VietNam, where the 'insurgents' were well armed by two of the largest nations on earth, while we - the losers - were armed by corporate profiteers.

And even that was 50 years ago, before the modern killing machines were perfected and disguised as SWAT teams...

I'd like to pretend we had some hope of a successful rebellion, but my tea leaves have left.

ckm

Anonymous said...

CKM

true, the vietcong received much in the way of guns and ammunition from russia

but think of it, we ruled the sea, we ruled the sky...unchallenged,... and even bombed the hell out of north vietnam and the ho chi minh trail and still the persistence and willingness of the vietnamese regulars and the rag tag local forces to sacrifice their blood, were enough to stem the tide
i dont want to argue battle tactics ...mostly because its ugly an chills me to think the unthinkable

but i would make two points...

1
many years later the russians got their vietnam, in afghanistan...and that place is starting to look, for us, much the same as it did for them. an likewise for those who check the alternative news media, iraq is a failure, a mess, and is coming apart

point two...i refuse to believe that the united states arm nor the civilian police forces will in a united way take up arms against the american people if, God forbid , a stalin or a hitler came to power, and arm citizens resisted...and btw, the civilian population is very well armed.

but let me be clear...im not alking about anything like present nor past administrations. i want to be absolutely clear...we are no ware in the kind of situation where armed resistance would or could ever be justified...im talking about if...if...the kind of tyranny we say take place in cambodia (the killing fields) or in some of the latin american countries wee death squads roamed the streets summarily killing civilians, un armed civilian, with government approval and support...im talking about the most notorious tyrants of history...it is then that we would wish we had not disarmed ourselves

who know what the world will look like 50 years from now

im all in favor of reasonable laws to keep guns out of the hands of people who are crazy, assaultive, and commit criminal acts...but...

i am strongly in favor of background checks and allowing law abiding citizens to be armed...i wish yo God we lived in a world where that wads not necessary...i hate violence and i hate guns.

best wishes
mock turtle