My Beauty Best Teacher

On this blog and around the internet, 'The People" is one of the most frequent justifications that are provided by liberals and Democrats for taxing the rich, forcing people to join a healthcare plan, stopping a mining company from mining for minerals on land that it purchased, and generally controlling people's choices and taking away their property.

So just who exactly are 'The People' who benefit when those who are successful are forced to pay higher tax rates when their investments do well or who gain when oil companies are not allowed to safely drill for oil?

I'm sure they don't mean that humanoid extraterrestrials who have paranormal powers will benefit- that would just be silly. (Zenna Henderson?)

What these liberals and Democrats usually mean when they cite 'The People' is that the so-called national community will benefit when the state gains the power to take away peoples property and choices, and that for the good of the people we need to return back to the land through green living and urban farming, lead more self-sufficient lives, and fight back against Big Business which is grinding us under its crushing foot of industrialization. Liberals and Democrats believe that 'The People' will benefit from an enlightened government that helps to progress society, and if this means that the principles of the free market or even popular elections are broken, than so be it- the People are more important than these concepts.

To liberals and Democrats, 'The People' mean the proletariat and traditional middle classes- union workers- who will benefit from a more government that is more progressive and friendly to workers.

As someone famous once said, when liberals talk about 'The People', they are talking about the basic ideas of a national government based on building social safety nets for 'The People' because 'The People' are the national government of progressive socialism.

The way that liberals throw around 'The People' is not new- in fact, the concept was pretty well established by the early 1900's. The German's called the concept of 'The People' the Völkisch movement, and it was one of the motivating factors behind Adolf Hilter and his fascist Nazi national socialist progressive party, which attempted to co-opt private industry for the good of 'The People' in order to provide national socialized healthcare, make people eat healthier food, make industries produce goods for the good of the state, and support the workers with strong union rights in a Big Business-Big Union-Big Government partnership.

What is old is new again, and we have been down this path before, so just be careful that you know what you mean when you start throwing around the term 'The People' in the future.

One vivid moment that occurred last week at the Birmingham Healthcare Rally (My Report from the Birmingham Healthcare Rally) was a confrontation that I had with a supporter of Obamacare. She had a sign that said "Healthcare for the People." I asked her who 'the people' were, and she began sign about 'the people,' and how 'the people' were taken advantage of by corporations, and how 'the people' had hope only in a government of change, etc. I tried to talk about each of these points with her, but in my frustration I only was able to get out 'I am a person.'

Thinking back on this event, it really speaks to a larger debate in our society, between those people who are working on behalf of 'the people'- some mythological group of middle-class multicultural liberals- and those who are working on behalf of 'person's'- individuals who are real people who have different ideas and beliefs. To liberals and supporters of Obamacare, a person now means nothing- 'the people' instead matter, and this way of thinking is not new.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau believed that the people were the main force in society, not individual person's. Rousseau believed that each person must give up totally all of their rights to the 'the community as a whole' in order to be more free- in other words, individuals no longer matter and what matters instead is the people. You give up your right to choose your own healthcare decisions, you give up your right to choose how you power your home, you give up your god-given right to make your own decisions on smoking, and instead, 'the people' make these decisions for you, and you are somehow then more free.

When I was confronting this lady, I was confronting someone out of the French Revolution- this lady singing to me the loud songs of fraternity and equality could very well have been ready to guillotine me for my loud protests of liberty and property. My confrontation with her was playing out a long debate between those who fight for persons and those who fight for the people. Sadly, those who fight for the people and who sing songs of equality and fraternity and wave their flags for collectivization and government control are usually the same type of people who were in control of France during the reign of terror.... and they currently run our government today.

Several months ago I wrote in a post called Rick Snyder- Do Not Support that I didn't think people should support Rick Snyder in his race to be Governor of the state of Michigan because "he supports using human embryos to create stem cells for medical research, he promotes gay marriage, and that he supports race and gender preferences," because he donates his money to "socially progressive moderate candidates and John Dingell," and because he "is inexperienced." Click on the post above to see my sources.

I stand by those comments, but now have new reasons why I think people should not support Rick Synder for Governor of Michigan- because he paid college students to come to the Mackinac Policy Conference and then blackmailed them into voting for him in the straw poll.

The Detroit News reports today that Republican gubernatorial hopefuls Rick Snyder took first place in an exclusive Detroit News and WJR News/Talk 760 AM poll conducted this weekend at the Republican leadership conference on Mackinac Island. Out of 1244 votes cast, Snyder received 386, and his margin of victory over current Attorney General Mike Cox was 86 and over Oakland County Sheriff Micheal Bouchard was 88. That margin of victory was likely earned due to his underhanded and shady dealings with his paid help at the island.

This story is an exclusive and you won't read about it anywhere else on the web, but I heard the same story separately, unprompted, from over a dozen of Synder's own supporters on the Island, and then on the boat ride back to Mackinac City another dozen supporters verified the story when I asked them about it. And here is the story.

Synder paid his supporters to come up to Mackinac Island to support him and make it seem as if there was a groundswell of support for him in this state. Whereas most of the supporters for Cox, Bouchard, or even Congressman Pete Hoekstra were volunteers, Synder's were almost all paid supporters, who walked around the island trying to encourage people to vote for him in the straw poll. There was some sort of point system as well, where the more stuff they passed out the more points these young people would earn for some sort of prizes. This is bad, but is not the worse part.

But the worse part about Synder's behavior this weekend that was revealed to me was that Synder blackmailed his paid supporters into voting for him in the straw poll, threatening to kick them out of the street and out of their hotel rooms unless they voted for him.

Before these college and high school kids could get their room key after they had traveled up to Mackinac Island, they needed to show one of Synder's people a stamped and certified ballot that showed that they had voted for Synder. After these young people proved that they had voted for Synder in the straw poll, they would be allowed to have a room key and stay on the island. If they did not vote for him, they would be forced to purchase their own rooms at very high prices or sleep outside.

This was an organized underhand effort to win the straw poll through underhanded methods, and this type of behavior is deplorable, especially for a guy that is pretending to not be a typical politician and pretends to be above the usual partisan politics. This sort of behavior is underhanded, and was very demeaning and disrespectful to these young people who were just trying to earn a dollar.

These kids were disgusted with Michigan Governor-hopeful Rick Synder, and I am too- he should be ashamed of his behavior and how he treated these young people, and voters should not support his candidacy for office.

UPDATE: Although many people are trying to make me out to be some sort of slanderous extremist for my above post, I would just like to remind readers that I didn't go looking for this story- it found me. I'm just reporting what I was told separately by over a dozen Synder people. That's not to say though that my post totally captures Synder's behavior at the Mackinac Conference. In light of that, I would like to record some comments from Synder people who emailed me.

Apparently, the Rick for Michigan campaign did not pay its supporters to be there. The campaign covered the $100 registration for the conference and the $200/night hotel expenses, nothing more, nothing less. I'm not sure, but some of the other campaigns may also have done the same for their volunteers.

Synder's people did not treat everyone the same way with the voting. Some of his people received their hotel keys before they voted. They told us that we had to vote for Rick, but there were no threats to throw them out of the street if they voted the wrong way. The campaign relied on the honor system.

According to Synder's people, the point system that I described as being "bad" is actually an impressive use of technology. His website has more about it, and it does sound like an innovative way to use technology to track people and evaluate the performance of employees- but these were 'volunteers' and tracking people like sheep makes me a little leery of what view he has for the people of our great state.

UPDATE II: Via Red State comes this little interesting bit of information from The Oakland Press:

The following memo reached (Tim Skubick's) desk in which the Snyder folks look like their learned how to play politics in Chicago's Cook County which is notorious for questionable activity. In it Snyder supporters are advised that "you are in no way required to vote for any candidate, disclose or show your ballot to anyone."All nice and proper, with no gripes yet.

But read on: "However, in order to remain eligible for Rick for Michigan receptions, ferry's (to and from the island) and hotel room, you must show your ballot to Rick's official representative at the ballot box…." And just to make sure none of the volunteers for Ricky didn't miss the point, they were asked to sign a document that was blunt: "I have read and understand that by staying in a Rick for Michigan sponsored hotel room and traveling on a Rick for Michigan ferry is contingent upon voting for Rick Snyder in the straw poll."

All of you Synder people to wrote hate mail to me saying I made up the story and that Synder would never use people in such a manner- apology accepted.

UPDATE III: Although I did not support Snyder in the primary and feel he is not a solid conservative Republican, he will make a considerably better Governor than Granholm and a way way way better Governor than the communist angry special-interest controlled Virg 'Job Killer' Bernero. So, consider everything I have said in the correct light- as bad as Rick is, Virg is a thousand times worse.

As our nation and our party moves forward, we are going to need to identify those kinds of people who have vision and passion and those kinds of people who steal that vision and passion, and back the first kind, even if they don't have the right name, the money, the pedigree, or the backing of the national party. Here are four types of leaders to keep an eye on:

1. People who fuel our passion. These are the role models and leaders whose writing, thinking, and speaking expands and deepens our passion and purpose in life. Someone has observed that what we are tomorrow will be a result of the people we meet and the books that we read today.
2. People who catch our passion. These people are the teachable and the moldable; they are the people who are hungry and their hungry to make their lives count. They want to grow and to learn. They will take what we give and pass it along to others, multiplying our investment many times over.
3. People who enjoy our passion. Most people we know fall into this category. On the one hand, they don’t take a great deal from us, but then neither do they add a great deal. It’s easy to spend a lot of time with these “nice people.” They are fun and easy to be with.
4. People who drain our passion. This is where the major energy leaks can occur. These are the needy people, the people that struggle, or the people who demand hours and hours of our energy, but don’t often seem to profit from it. Yet, they keep returning with the same problems and want more of us. They are often the squeaky wheels that get the most, if not all, of the oil of our passion.

As our nation and party moves forward, we need more leaders who fuel our passion. There are a lot of leaders out there who catch the passion of others and run with it, and they aren't bad candidates, but our party needs to encourage and support those people out there who inspire us and fill us with passion for liberty, rule of law, and conservative principles.

A a recent article that Charles Moore wrote, I think he put his finger on exactly what is going on today- the success and advance of the twin threats of fear and doubt. Moore, who is a British journalist and former editor of The Daily Telegraph, in an article about Margaret Thatcher, wrote that after the long boom and success of capitalism and free market economics that "the worm of doubt entered the system":

You borrowed all the money needed for the price of a house. This made you, in your mind, though not in full fact, an owner. Because the value of the house was rising, it also made you, again in your mind, richer. The bank, which actually owned the house, found clever ways of mixing and selling on the loans it had granted so that it, too, felt richer. Governments, happy at rising revenues, thought it was their business to make sure that when the symptoms of high risk began to present themselves, they were suppressed.... (then) the roof fell in... (and now) when people now hear words like globalization or capitalism... they feel slightly sick.

Free market economics and capitalism did not lead our nation to failure- rather, during its wild success at making millions around the world more prosperous over the past centuries, communism and socialism and fascism latched on to it, sucking from its prosperity to feed its sick aims like parasites, and over time, many smart people began to become confused and unable to see the parasites from the concepts that they latched on.

Where free markets and capitalism created wealth and encouraged personal responsibility, governments and elites put in place rules and regulations which weakened the foundations of the system, subsidized risky behavior such as sub-prime mortgages and leveraging investments, and gave out handouts to favored industries and distorted the market by doing so. When banks, businesses, and corporations operated in a free market of capitalism, they could succeed or fail based on their own efforts and innovation; but in the new markets, which were no longer capitalistic or free, government subsidies and spending and lobbying and regulation and rules determined whether or not a business, corporation, or bank was successful or failed. And although this was no longer capitalism or free markets, but rather markets once free now twisted to the aims of elites and socialists and communists and fascists, many smart people became critical of the markets or capitalism because of the failures of the government bureaucrats who were twisting and corrupting the system.

And then the parasites of leftism began to weaken and kill the free market and capitalism, and the people cried out 'capitalism and free markets are failing us'- when it wasn't the free markets and capitalism that failed, but rather the people who failed the system.

They were led to this failure by fear and doubt- they did not believe in the hand of the God and the freedom of individuals and life, liberty, and the protection of private property.

The people (or The People, as leftists call them) feared that although they were becoming prosperous and their lives were rapidly improving, they were somehow falling behind others who were advancing more rapidly. Rather than looking at why they were successful in the free market capitalism- because of their hard work, innovation, and yes, luck- they instead demanded government policies to hold back others and help out themselves, corrupting the very system that had brought them so far. They doubted that if people were free and made free decisions, they would make 'the right decisions'- that is, the decisions that they would make if they controlled the other people and had power over them (their definition of 'right decisions').

Rather than just letting go and trusting that the unseen hand of God, trusting to the thousands and millions of individual decisions, and working to ensure that private property rights are strengthened and respected, they doubted that this giant experiment of capitalism and a free market would work, and feared that they would somehow fall behind others in material wealth if they didn't vote for and support people who promised to corrupt the system and abuse the system and circumvent the system. Many people trusted and believed in the power of men to control other men and redistribute property to other men, and in so doing rejected free markets and capitalism.

Fear and doubt came to the people's mind every time there was a recession, or even during periods when great wealth was created but wasn't immediately distributed evenly. The people reacted to the Great Depression by doubting that the free market would correct (as it had done in the 1920's and dozens of times before in the 1800's) and feared that he return to prosperity wouldn't come fast enough- and so they worked to destroy the system, corrupt the system, and make the market less free- and the results were a slight recession during into a decade long destruction of wealth.

And today, government policies and regulations and taxes and laws which corrupted the free market and corroded private property rights have let the worm of doubt creep once more into the people's minds, and in their fear that maybe they won't get to loot the dying Republic of its wealth they vote for Democrats who promise to manage the downfall and distribute the ever-decreasing wealth in the system to their supporters and voters and friends.

To return to success and advance again as a nation in wealth and happiness, we must reject doubt of the free market system and capitalism and trust the people- we need to trust and believe again that the thousands of decisions of free people will create more wealth and make more people happy, and reject those who suggest that having a smaller number of elites make those decisions for us is better. We need to let go of our fear that if we don't control the market and the system that you'll lose out, and instead work hard, innovate, save your money, and invest wisely.

UPDATE 12/7/11: President Obama delivered a major speech today on the economy, in which he expressed his doubt that the capitalist system could continue to provide wealth and prosperity for many and work to make society more equal, and from this place of fear he instead wants to trust himself and his fellow men to run a better system that will somehow do a better job of creating wealth and distributing it than having free people make free decisions.

Via memeorandum, in his Remarks by the President on the Economy in Osawatomie, Kansas, we read the following fear and doubt from US President Barack Obama, one-term Democrat. These are selections from the speech- (you can read the whole thing yourself here if you want):

My grandparents served during World War II. He was a soldier in Patton’s Army; she was a worker on a bomber assembly line. And together, they shared the optimism of a nation that triumphed over the Great Depression and over fascism. They believed in an America where hard work paid off, and responsibility was rewarded, and anyone could make it if they tried -- no matter who you were, no matter where you came from, no matter how you started out.

And these values gave rise to the largest middle class and the strongest economy that the world has ever known. It was here in America that the most productive workers, the most innovative companies turned out the best products on Earth. And you know what? Every American shared in that pride and in that success -- from those in the executive suites to those in middle management to those on the factory floor.

In this passage, Obama communicates to us that his parents believed in capitalism and free markets and personal responsibility and liberty and protection of property. And furthermore, Obama knows that this system worked. But yet, he has this nagging doubt and fear...

But for most Americans, the basic bargain that made this country great has eroded. Long before the recession hit, hard work stopped paying off for too many people. Fewer and fewer of the folks who contributed to the success of our economy actually benefited from that success. Those at the very top grew wealthier from their incomes and their investments -- wealthier than ever before. But everybody else struggled with costs that were growing and paychecks that weren’t -- and too many families found themselves racking up more and more debt just to keep up.

He doesn't BELIEVE in capitalism. He has no faith in people, freedom, liberty, and rights. It's clear he doesn't have any hope that people will make the 'right decisions' (the decisions he would make) and he wants to therefore control other people. He continues:

But Roosevelt also knew that the free market has never been a free license to take whatever you can from whomever you can. (Applause.) He understood the free market only works when there are rules of the road that ensure competition is fair and open and honest. And so he busted up monopolies, forcing those companies to compete for consumers with better services and better prices. And today, they still must. He fought to make sure businesses couldn’t profit by exploiting children or selling food or medicine that wasn’t safe. And today, they still can’t.

We simply cannot return to this brand of “you’re on your own” economics if we’re serious about rebuilding the middle class in this country.

And it is around here that we get to the heart of the matter- in the last quarter of his speech, after ripping on capitalism and freedom for 3/4's of the speech, that we finally here what he wants to do...

So what does that mean for restoring middle-class security in today’s economy? Well, it starts by making sure that everyone in America gets a fair shot at success. The truth is we’ll never be able to compete with other countries when it comes to who’s best at letting their businesses pay the lowest wages, who’s best at busting unions, who’s best at letting companies pollute as much as they want.

We need to remember that we can only do that together. It starts by making education a national mission -- a national mission. (Applause.) Government and businesses, parents and citizens. We need to remember that we can only do that together. It starts by making education a national mission -- a national mission. (Applause.) Government and businesses, parents and citizens. They should be rebuilding our roads and our bridges, laying down faster railroads and broadband, modernizing our schools. Of course, those productive investments cost money. They’re not free. And so we’ve also paid for these investments by asking everybody to do their fair share. And so we have to set priorities. If we want a strong middle class, then our tax code must reflect our values. We have to make choices.

So, in summary, here is Obama's alternative to free markets and capitalism- give him more power. Give him the power and authority to tell employers what to pay their employees, give him the power and authority to combine big government with big business and big labor (ie, fascism), give him and his cronies the power to give money to favored constituent groups to fund pet projects of vanity (palaces, statues, etc), and the power to demand that all of these decisions are paid for by someone else who does not want to pay for it- to use the power of guns to the head to make people give up cash to Obama and his people to feed their wrong ideas about the power of men to control others for their benefit.

Obama is wrong. He needs to be defeated- not just politically, but his ideas and beliefs need to be rejected by all good people and good citizens and patriots and he and his policies need to be forever rejected in decent society. We must instead look to capitalism and freedom and liberty and property protection to our future, and not look backward to the sort of tyranny that Obama is proposing.

This blog is about my attempts to increase protection of private property from tyrannical and unjust takings by government, my attempts to increase protection of liberty and freedom and its practices from the tyrannical and unjust actions by government, and my attempts to protect life and celebrate the joys of being alive.

You see, I love people. Even though there are bad people out there and people that do bad things, I still believe deep in my heart that people are a blessing from God, made in his image and thus in a small way a glory to him, and that every person that is born is someone that should be treasured and loved as one of God's creations. As a teacher, I fully believe in the spirit of 'no child left behind' because I believe that every student should receive a great education no matter what their background. In high school I was part of the Free Tibet movement because I thought that the actions of the Chinese government against the culture and people of Tibet were wrong. Believing that the best way to prevent destructive wars and mass-murder dictators is through a strong military, I've been a big supporter of the military. I've weighed in from time to time on abortion. And I've celebrated the practices of living by putting up pictures of beautiful women and writing about fun movies or great books. Life is something that me, and many conservatives like me, value and support and love.

On the other hand, there are those people out there who don't celebrate and love life. They are supportive of the ending of unborn lives. They supported the Soviet Union and China in their economic and social policies, even though many millions of people died because of those policies. They are against using military force to remove evil mass-murder killing dictators in Iraq and Afghanistan. And these people feel that adding more people to the United States is not a good thing.

Froma Harop may indeed be such a person who does not love life, liberty, and property. She could be characterized by many as a 'liberal' based on the sort of editorials that she writes in the Detroit News- editorials like "Dems need better pitch to tax the rich" and "Obama, Democrats saved the nation" and "(Health) Insurance requirement is fair" are clearly liberal. Liberals don't love life, liberty, and property- they love government and control and power. Froma Harop, who supports the national government taking property rights away from individuals through unjust tax policies or insurance mandates, who does not like liberty based on support she has for czars and regulations over our lives, not surprisingly also is not a big fan of people. In her editorial today called Fewer people good for us all, she writes:

...For Americans concerned with a loss of open space and thickening congestion, a 10 percent growth rate should seem darn high....

...I don't know many Americans, or noncitizen immigrants for that matter, who think that 100 million more people would make the United States a better place. If the U.S. population is slowing, let's celebrate — and hope it slows some more....

I would imagine that Harop, like Obama, believes that children are a mistake, and that the world be a lot better place if there were fewer people in it. Perhaps we spew too much carbon monoxide out of our mouths and are ruining the environment so we should all be killed; perhaps it is because we all are prosperous and doing things and that bothers Harop because she wants us all poor and controlled; perhaps it is because by adding all of these people, these treasures from God, we have demonstrated that our nation indeed is a great place because of its conservative traditions; but for whatever reason, rather than celebrate life and the expansion of it in America, liberals like Harop reveal their disdain for life, liberty, and property.

No wonder liberals don't like the reading of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, documents which celebrate and enshrine the ideas that the role of government is to protect life, liberty, and property, and not to redistribute income, provide healthcare, tell me what I can and can not eat, protect the 'right to abort a child', or do all the other things that liberals would have the government do. They don't like reading these documents because unlike me and fellow conservatives like me, perhaps they don't love life as much as they sometimes pretend they do, as demonstrated by columns like the one by Froma Harop in today's Detroit News.

Liberals, including those who have seized control of the modern-day Democratic Party, often talk fondly about China and its economic model. But what they fail to recognize about the economic model employed by China is  that it is inherently unsustainable because of its current methods of energy generation. Oh, I know many watermelons (people who pretend to care about the environment just to advance their statist communist desires) like to talk about China's wind power, nuclear power, solar power, or hydro-electric power, but in reality, the majority of China's energy production comes from coal.

Energy production from coal production does not have to be environmentally damaging or harmful to those who work in the industry. In nations like the United States, where there are clear property rights and freedom of labor, workers are treated better, the environment is better protected, and businesses are free to produce as much coal safely as possible in order to maximize profits. For example, there are only about 30 people killed per year in coal mining in the United States, and the United States has embraced clean coal technology which does a much better job of controlling emissions. The United States has made the difficult transition from energy generation to sustainable energy generation, and only needs to continue and expand its efforts in oil drilling, coal mining, and nuclear technology in order to become the cleanest and safest energy producer in the world.

Sadly, environmentalists in America have a different agenda. In their noble desire to make the world a better place, they are putting in place policies in America which force it and other nations to obtain energy from nations around the world that are producing energy in destructive, deadly ways. Rather than encouraging the expansion of safe, natural, and efficient methods of energy generation such as oil, coal, and nuclear, they are forcing America and nations that could be buying energy from America to turn to nations like China for energy generation and resources. And the end result of these environmentalists policies is a world that is less safe, less secure, and were more people die.

China currently generates around two thirds of its electricity from coal-fired power stations, and is the process of dramatically expanding its coal-fired capacity in recent years with the introduction of 562 new coal-fired plants- in fact, an average of two new plants were being opened every week. China uses this coal-production to satisfy its own energy needs and also export energy to other nations.

To sustain it economic growth and growing energy needs through coal power, China is paying a heavy price. Thousands of people die every year in coal pits, premature deaths due to indoor air pollution is at 420,000 per year, deaths due to outdoor air pollution is estimated at around 300,000 deaths per year, and rural populations in particular are suffering from a range of diseases related to coal production, including arsenic poisoning, skeletal fluorosis (over 10 million people afflicted in China), esophageal and lung cancers, and selenium poisoning. A report by the World Bank in cooperation with the Chinese government found that about 750,000 people die prematurely in China each year from air pollution.

China's economic model, which people like the head of the SEIU say should be the future of the United States, is unsustainable and killing its own people. It's model emphasizes state control of people and businesses and the de-humanizing of both. It is a model which stands in marked contrast to the economic model of the historical United States, a model which emphasizes little state control, more liberty given to people to make free economic choices, and strong individual and business property rights, and is a model that embraces the humanity of life. We can see the difference in the two models when we look at China's coal mining industry and electric power generation, and see the difference in the contrasting visions.

Elections have consequences- in the coming elections for US President, Senator, Representative, or even at the local level, ask yourself whether the candidate you support has a vision of the future that pushes for more state control over people's lives or less state control. Those who push for more state control will boast of the economic growth in nations like China- while ignoring the enormous cost in terms of human life and damage to the environment. Those who push for less state control over people's lives will point to the United States, which in contrast to those with state control have much better records on life, liberty, and wealth creation- although not perfect, because man is not perfect.

And for readers of my blog around the world, this applies to you as well- although China's economy is growing, there is a real cost to humanity for their growth, and in the end its statist economy will collapse like the Soviet Union's did. Only economic models that give more power to people and more freedom to individuals and more rights to businesses and corporations and individuals are successful in creating wealth in a sustainable manner while protecting life and liberty. You have a real choice to make in your nation too- state control for short term unequally distributed wealth, or less state control for longer term more equal distribution of life, liberty, and property.

For those who are interested in reading more about China and its coal production methods and coal-powered economy, I suggest you check out an article called China’s Dark Power.

Today the Oakland County Board of Commissioners debated a resolution that would state that the County is opposed to the healthcare reform bills currently supported by the Democrats in Congress. As is my habit, I was at the meeting, and was surprised to find the meeting packed- apparently the Democrats organized a large turnout, and the Republicans responded with their own late email asking people to come in. You could tell who the the Democrats were- they all wore the same sticker (Health Care Reform Now or something).

Before the Resolution was voted on, the floor was opened up for public comment, and 30-40 people came in front of auditorium and spoke for 3 minutes each. There were maybe 100 people in the audience, so a good percentage of the people there got to comment on the issue. In the name of journalism, I'm going to record some of the comments below, but for those of you who do not regularly attend meetings and who don't follow the political scene that closely, this might be a good chance for you to hear what sorts of comments are made by both sides.

One generality that I want to point to is that almost every speaker who supports Obamacare and spoke out against the resolution began their speech with comments about how America sucks, how our healthcare system is one of the worse ones in the world, and that the reason it is so bad is because evil insurance companies are involved in a grand conspiracy to cheat people out of their wealth. Almost every single supporter of Obamacare repeated this mantra in their speech, as if by saying these things would make them true.

Another comment I enjoyed from a supporter of Obamacare was (and I quote) "Republicans need to stop taking marching orders from fat loud-mouthed drug addicts." Apparently being 'fat' is something to attack someone personally about, and so are struggles with drug addictions. This kind of sensitivity and compassion is what you can soon expect from liberal government bureaucrats who are going to be making your healthcare decisions.

Another supporter of Obamacare said "Obama won the Presidential election overwhelmingly and he campaigned for exactly the type of plan that he is pushing for now so no one in this room has the right to oppose any of his policies." For fun, count how many wrong assumptions are in that statement. Also, I have seen this guy around- a couple years ago he was loudly speaking out against President Bush and the War on Terror in Iraq. Hypocrisy, liberal is thy name.

One women plaintively expressed the following comment "How can people even think about being against free healthcare for everyone- I don't even understand how you could oppose that." This is the depth of logic and reasoning that marks the left in our nation, a group that voters let take over on multiple levels of government.

Another gentlemen expressed the following sentiment "Insurance companies are full of evil people and the government needs to go after them with the full force of the state and drive them all out of business." I'm still quoting actual comments from people who support Obamacare.

After one guy stood up and gave a speech against Obamacare, there was shouting and cries of "you lie". People sat quietly through speeches in support of Obamacare (with only an occasional quiet laugh or chuckle at the foolish statements these people uttered) but almost every single person who spoke against Obamacare was yelled at, swore at, and shouted down. Free speech for liberals is only for those who say what they want. At one point the police even came in the chamber to keep order because a liberal wanted to physically fight everyone who disagreed with him- a bully just like his hero Obama.

Logical fallacies were present in almost every liberal proponent of Obamacare- one girl said "There is nothing right now stopping the free market solving the healthcare problem- the free market had its chance and failed and now the government needs to step in." There is no free market in healthcare- there is a direct correlation between increasing government involvement in healthcare and the rising cost. Healthcare is very far from 'free market' and thus it is a problem- the more government you inject into an issue the worse it gets, and that's not an argument in favor of more government, that is an argument against government in the first place.

After someone stood up and gave a great speech about America being founded on the ideas of freedom and liberty, several speakers stood up to reject those ideas and said that "America was founded on equality and altruism, not freedom and liberty"- these people who support Obamacare obviously have little knowledge of the history of our nation. Or perhaps they are mixing up the French Revolution with ours and support the ideas that led to terror and dictatorship in France as opposed to the ideas that led to greatness and law in our nation.

Some people wondered why the Oakland County Board of Commissioners took up a resolution such as this anyway- after all, what contribution can a county board make to this debate. The problem with this very important debate on healthcare is that it is not being debated in the open- it is being done behind closed doors by elites who wish to hide their actions from the light of day. And people on both sides, for and against Obamacare, want to speak on the issue, want to exercise their rights, want to petition their government, want to gather and assemble and battle it out in the forum of ideas, and this is being denied to them by the Democrats who seek to rule us. That is why the Oakland County Board discussed this issue- to give people a forum and a voice and an outlet to their thoughts, feelings, and frustrations.

The Resolution by the Oakland County Board of Commissioners stating its opposition to the Democrats healthcare plans passed by a majority vote.

The sign of the Occupy Wall Street protester shouts 'False Gods of Wall Street', but in other signs and in interviews and conversations, these protesters loudly shout that their real gods are people who run governments. They believe in government policy- see sign after sign encouraging more spending, more government programs, more government control of the economy and people, and sign after honoring and supporting 'the People'. The 'P' in 'People' is always capitalized, because they are not talking about supporting the people who go to work every day, pay their taxes, pay on their debts, and try to make a better world for their children- no, these Occupy protesters support the People, who believe that Men are Gods and that if Men were given power to control other Men, the world would be a better place.

President Grover Cleveland was a Democrat, and yet even he knew that though the people support the Government, the Government should not support chosen people. Recently I was reading the message that he sent to Congress after he vetoed a relief bill, and I was struck by his deep understanding of government and its proper role in our country.

The proper or correct role of government, he knew, was not to support chosen groups or individuals- federal aid to support chosen individuals or groups encourages the expectation of paternal care on the part of the Government- it changes the relationship that you have with the state from one where you are in charge of the state to one where the state is in charge of you. Further, having the government step in and provide goods and services to those people or groups it chooses to support weakens the overall sturdiness of our national character- rather than people striving to improve and be better, they sit and wait for the government to rescue them. Lastly, having the government step in and provide benefits, money, and support for chosen groups dissuades those kind and good people among us who would give charity and help out, weakening further the bonds of common brotherhood in our nation.

President Cleveland was a wise man- he knew that if the government stepped into to help out anyone who needed charity, society would be less off and not better off than it is. Providing healthcare to the poor, extending unemployment benefits, paying for college, running readings programs for Spanish-speaking citizens, and providing jobs to people is not the proper role of government. I understand the desire that people have to want to help- but using the power of the state in the end creates a worse society. And it isn't just that people are taxed so much that they can no longer give to charity- it is that they are told by the government that the government is taking care of it, so they no longer should help out and be kind to their fellow man.

No one, not even the most rabid conservatives, are doubting that times are tough right now. No one is arguing that things are good. This isn't about conservatives being greedy, or racist, or evil- it is about the proper role of government in society, and creating a happier, more prosperous, more free society.

Our Founding Fathers knew this, and President Cleveland knew this as well- that the Constitution was put together with much thought and care by decent men and that it is not the power and duty of the Government to be extend to relief to individuals who are suffering. This is something that is properly related to the public service or benefit. We should steadily resist as a nation any tendency to disregard the limited mission of this power and duty. And it is important that we teach people why we are resisting this tendency- not out of any bad will, but out of understanding, trust, faith, and kindness.

I believe in America still. The friendliness and charity of our countrymen can always be relied upon to relieve their fellow-citizens in misfortune. This has been repeatedly demonstrated in our times- after hurricanes or terrorist attacks, the American people have stepped up and done more and better than our government could to help people. We need to once again unleash the American people and let them achieve their full measure- and resist the tendency to have government step in and do this instead of them.

Friedrich von Hayek wrote in The Road to Serfdom that (via wikipedia's entry, which serves my purposes here) centralized planning is inherently undemocratic, because it requires "that the will of a small minority be imposed upon the people." The power of these minorities to act by taking money or property in pursuit of centralized goals destroys the Rule of Law and individual freedoms, making the individual "more than ever become a mere means, to be used by the authority in the service of such abstractions as the 'social welfare' or the 'good of the community'" In both socialism and nazism he saw "the increasing veneration (of) the state, the admiration of power, and of bigness for bigness' sake, the enthusiasm for "organization" of everything (we now call it "planning") and that inability to leave anything to the simple power of organic growth."

President Obama increasingly uses the state to plan out society, acting in an increasingly autocratic way, imposing his will and the will of his small minority of elites on the people who is supposed to be serving. In his own words he states this as his goal- he says “I refuse to take ‘No’ for an answer” as he claimed new powers for himself in making recess appointments while Congress was not in recess; he has already explained that “where Congress is not willing to act, we’re going to go ahead and do it ourselves,”; the co-chair of Barack Obama's Transition Team, Valerie Jarrett, even said that "Obama would be ready to rule on day one." President Obama sees his role in our political system as our ruler; and if he is the ruler that makes us his serfs and slaves.

And it is not just his words which indict him as an autocratic tyrant who wishes to make us his serfs- it is his policies as well. Increasingly he is centralizing the distribution of wealth under his personal authority- turning TARP into a slush fund from which he can bail out favored industries; using stimulus funds to reward favored industries and give loans to his pet projects; and spending through the general budgets massive amounts of funds that are poorly tracked and accounted for. And his policies almost always involve transferring wealth from those who he personally does not like- the rich, oil companies, health care companies, banks, people who live in suburbs- to those people who he favors, by means of policies such as higher tax rates, more progressive tax rates, higher license and permit fees, increasingly regulation, pressure through the media, or cap and trade schemes.

President and his supporters in the media and in various blogs de-humanize people and their lives, arguing that the time they spend laboring in corporations makes them lesser, that the corporations and companies that they invest their time and effort in are 'not people', and that those people in the heartland of America are lesser people as well- racist, uneducated, unenlightened, and clinging to their guns and false religion.

Liberals and progressives cannot refute this argument- their solution to every problem facing society is 'more government', as if government can do only right and never wrong through its actions and inactions. The solution for Obama and Democrats is always to do more- to control people more, to take away more of their wealth and property, and to restrict their actions more. Their supporters in Occupy Wall Street rail against bailouts while Democrats and President Obama bails out banks, auto companies, green industry, and any other failing enterprises, unwilling to let the market act in creating more efficiency of resources and effort. He pushes for bigger and bigger industries, centralized under increasingly smaller cartels- like health-care exchanges or regulations like Dodd-Frank.

Troll through liberal and progressive blogs, and you will see this is the case- they argue for more control of your life, liberty, and property by smaller and smaller numbers of people who act in increasingly autocratic and undemocratic ways.

Throughout history, there have been two groups largely battling it out for control of society- those people who believe that they are better than you and should make decisions regarding your property and life and choices, and those people who believe that they are no better than anyone else and shouldn't make decisions for others regarding their property, life, and choices. Today, the Democratic Party is the party of control, judgement, elites, and Masters, and the Republican Party isn't- oh, I'll give you that it isn't the opposite, but it sure is a heck of lot better than the Democratic Party. And so your choice in 2012 becomes more clear- vote Democrat for Masters and Serfs, or Republican to block this vision.

Read The New Authoritarianism to see how this inspired my own take, and be sure to order and read your very own copy of the Road to Serfdom.

One measure of success for Democrats is the number of people that they have helped save from starvation and poverty. It is a worthy measure of whether a policy is successful or not, and Obama, Peters, and all the other Democrats often campaign about how hard they have worked to expand the 'safety net' and 'feed the starving masses.' In their speeches they talk about how they are setting a goal for themselves of getting as many people who need help into the right government programs. And on their watch, under the Democratic Congress and a Democratic President, they have been successful in destroying an economy and driving record numbers of people to accept the forced charity of the governments dependence programs.

Democrats have been successful in ruining the private economy, of killing jobs with high taxes and regulation, of drying up private charities through taxes and regulations, of bankrupting businesses with regulations and taxes, and of setting up legal and regulatory barriers so that that private individuals are increasingly unable to help others. Barack Obama has done his job- under his watch and guidance, more and more people are forced to swallow their pride and accept the forced charity that is government welfare. Gary Peters has done his job well- money has been taken from businesses and individuals who worked hard for it, some of those businesses and individuals are unable to pay that money and go out of business or into bankruptcy, the money that is collected is cycled through several government agents who are well paid and have great benefits and retirement funds, some of that money is transferred to people and businesses who have friends in government and use those political connections to take some of that money, and then what little of that money is left given those people who need it. Success! And under Obama and the Democrats, that number has gotten bigger and bigger!

More than 50 million Americans are on Medicaid, the federal-state program aimed principally at the poor, a survey of state data by USA TODAY shows. That's up at least 17% since December 2007, the month that Democrats enlarged their majorities in the House and Senate and captured the Presidency. One out of every six people in the United States have been driven to beg for aid from the government, creating a mass of dependent wards of the state who are stuck on the dole but reliably deliver votes to those people who promise more benefits with less obligations and time limits. The remaining five out of every six people in the US are forced to work increasingly harder to provide for themselves and for the other who are not working.

Even worse is that last year Obama and Democrats in Congress like Gary Peters passed Obamacare, which is scheduled to add a minimum of 16 million new people to Medicaid, starting in 2014. This massive expansion in taxpayer funded welfare is sure to drive increasing numbers into bankruptcy and job losses, driving the numbers on welfare up even higher, all thanks to the success of Democrats policies.

More than 40 million people get food stamps, an increase of nearly 50% since the election of Obama in December of 2007, according to government data through May. The program has grown steadily for three years, ever since the Democrats captured Congress in 2006, as Democrats policies have increasing taken their toll on Americans and driven more to beg government agents for food.

Close to 10 million receive unemployment insurance, nearly four times the number from 2007. Benefits have been extended by Congress eight times beyond the basic 26-week program, enabling the long-term unemployed to get up to 99 weeks of benefits.

One last success for Obama and the Democrats- more than 4.4 million people are on welfare, an 18% increase during the recession.

(Source data comes from USA Today's Record number in government anti-poverty programs)

It was one of the most moving events of the conference. Perhaps in my life. Or it could have been. My great seat didn't matter.

As soon as the talented South African storyteller entered the stage, it was all over. The cell phone mob rushed the stage. Jostling to raise their arms above each other and film the moment - ruining it for the other 1000+ people in the tent. Someone got some decent film, maybe.. On a low Rez camera that they may have shown someone who could barely appreciate it with shoddy garbled sound from being too close to the speakers.

Or maybe someone live streamed letting others see it (and likely breaking every copyright rule while at it.) Doubtful with the poor cell service in South Africa.

You know I believe cell phones have their uses but if you sense a rant coming on, that is because it is.

People at an event should take priority over virtual participants
We paid the money. We took the trip. We waited in line for tickets to the conference.

When you rush the stage with cell phones held high you are cheating and you are rude.

You are cheating us out of our experience.

You are rude because you are saying that your film shoot is more important than everyone behind you who is blocked from seeing ANYTHING. Your filming is less important than those who are there.

Even if you are a blogger with thousands of readers you are not more important than the people there.

I took the picture above and I am a blogger with thousands of readers and my hiney was in the seat.

The problem was that the event HAD cameras and you were even blocking those. You were rude. You were stealing. You were likely even stealing from the performers who could no longer see us -the audience but only the arms with the cell phones held high. They also have artistic rights to their music as did their client to this performance.

These are the things we need to start talking about. NOW. ENOUGH!!!!

Time To Talk Manners

I love cell phones. They are good for certain things but when I couldn't see the first pirates of the carribean movie because of the blinking blue tooth headset on the guy in front of me, I realized that we have to learn the POLITE way to integrate these tools into society

There are the kinds of things we talk about in our Digiteen project at school.

Like the wreck I had where a woman hit me when she ran the light. I had two witnesses both of whom had a foggy recollection because their cell phone conversations were more important than watching what was happening at the busy intersection.

Who is running who!?

Our devices are to improve our lives.

Don't blame it on the marketers. You don't have to answer every phone call, every tweet, and pay attention to people who aren't there.

Show me a nice restaurant and it is one where people don't sit there talking about Aunt Martha's hemmeroids or how Joe is messing up the business deal with his ineptitude. Take those conversations outside. Let the rest of us talk with our kids about their week or whisper sweet nothings in our boyfriend's ear.

Now you can sit in a restaurant and see kids gathered around an iPad watching tangled on their portable speaker system while the adults yell over the din and everyone 5 tables over is included in the racket.

Yes, good manners are important. I don't care if rug rats and the Simpsons and Tosh have made it seemingly ok to talk about bodily functions that made us blush in mixed company 10 years a go but I don't want to hear it at a restaurant.

The Bible talks about a time when people lose their ability to blush. God forbid we ever get to that point.

Everything is not ok and it is definitely not all good. I am making a call to bloggers and teachers out there to start having conversations about what is good for public behavior and not. Otherwise we sink to the lowest common denominator. People who don't care about others.

As for me:

• If I am in public, I will go outside to have a phone conversation.
  
• My ringer will be on silent in public.
  
• I will pay attention to my family and ignore texts unless there is a life threatening situation.
  
• I will not jump up to film a live event unless it is something I have arranged.
  
• If I am running a live event people will want to film, I will have it filmed and make it available for those who want to share.
  
• I will avoid blinking lights and bright devices in places that will impair the viewing of others.
  
• I will work hard to treat others as I want to be treated.
  
• I will be forgiving when others are rude but perhaps let the manager know after they have left so the manager can realize his clients would like peaceful places to dine and watch movies.
  
• I will be a respectful, polite advocate for good manners knowing that the very word "good manners" will make many people who have a "to each his own" attitude angry. These people don't realize that each of us make up society.
  

Bottom line. Over one thousand people in a tent deserved to see that performance of a lifetime more than 20 people had a right to film it. If giving 20 people the "right" takes away the enjoyment of 980 others at the event, I have a problem with that.

It is time to talk Tech and it needs to start with those who use it most.




Posted using BlogPress from Vicki's iPad

Look at this group- is this an angry mob of hateful racist people, as some liberals liken these groups to be? No- this is America- waving flags, loving liberty and freedom, and opposing Obama's government takeover of healthcare.
I've got more pictures- I will update a little later showing you some of the for and against posters, and also record some of my thoughts and impressions, as I frequently engaged supporters of Obamacare in debate and discussion. Enjoy for now!

UPDATE I: As some of you might have picked up on from my earlier posts about going to protests, I enjoy talking to supporters of Obamacare. My hope is that through discussion and conversation, I can introduce doubt into their belief system and put that little bug of freedom and liberty in their brains and hearts. Some people who support Obama are too far gone to even try- one guy told me to go back to torturing innocent people and invading law-abiding countries- I assume that he was referring to the enhanced interrogation techniques of terrorists and the War on Iraq, but regardless, he is too far gone down the path for me to talk to.

One of the frequent arguments that liberals trotted out was that healthcare was a right. I've already blogged about my thoughts on this, and tried to bring them up to Obamacare supporters- that healthcare is not a right. Several told me that my ideas about rights were outdated and no longer correct- that rights come from government and are the same thing as entitlements. That they believe this makes me sad.

Another argument that was frequently advanced (and the good thing about liberals is that they are all working off of the same playbook and always fall back on the same talking points) was that people accept fire departments, and police, and schools, and libraries, so why not give the government the power over healthcare too? I responded by saying that those were given to local and state government, not national government, and they said that didn't matter, that the federal government now runs everything, as it should- they openly laughed at the principle of federalism. I asked where does it stop then- what do we not give to the government? The supporters of Obamacare said 'somewhere', but I got the feeling that they would be willing to give the government the power over every aspect of your life.

See, this is not a debate about healthcare- this is a debate about the very nature of government- when pressed, liberals fall back on their belief system in government control, and the details no longer matter any more.

UPDATE II: Here are some pictures of some of the posters of those who oppose Obamacare. Notice how almost all are homemade, and they each advance a different and unique argument against national socialized control of healthcare.

The poster in this picture says "Give me Liberty, Not Debt":

The poster in this picture says "Congress is the problem":

This gentleman's sign says "Question Boldly, Demand Answers"- always good advice when the government is trying to nationalized 1/4 of the economy- it's surprising that people were shouting at him and one guy in all black even gave him the finger:


UPDATE III: Anyone who was at this event noticed right away that it was heavily astroturfed by liberal Democrats supporting Obamacare. There were two varieties of posters that they carried. The first that I will show you a picture of was paid for by Health Care for America NOW! This interest group looks like a group that the President of the United States is actively supporting (at least its website claims this), and kind of looks like a Moveon.org/George-Sorus funded clone. Here is the sign they provided for this event- there were about 50 like this- it says "Standing Together for Health Insurance Reform":

The other major variety of sign that was found at this healthcare rally is seen below. There were over 30 of these signs that I counted, and they were all carried by a group standing near the front of the line to get in. They all were on the same posterboard material, the same handwriting in the same colors, and all parroting similar messages. I asked one of the people carrying the sign where he got it- he said he made it himself. I asked if he made all the rest- he said that each one was made my the individual carrying it. I didn't call him a liar then because I wanted to be polite, but I'll say it now- he was an astroturfing liar, as you can see by this picture. No signs were allowed in the townhall, and so here is the pile of them outside. The slogans on these signs say "Equal Care 4 All," "Rich Grannies for Healthcare Reform Now," "Hate Kills and Care Cures," "Republicans Lie," etc.:

Thanks to the Detroit News, I figured out who produced all of these signs. According to the article in the newspaper, these signs were produced by a lady named Karen MacKenzie. According to Open Secrets, she lives in Northville, which is not part of Peter's district. Tsk-tsk- the invite said 'constituents only', Ms. MacKenzie. Oh, I also notice that she is married to an activist judge in Oakland County who is chair of the local Sierra Club. This information was pulled off later versions of the Detroit News story.

Also, speaking about the MSM, they got it all wrong as always. The Detroit News says "about 200 who weren't allowed into the full auditorium milled around outside during the forum"- as you can see from the video and pictures, there was well over 200 people- I estimate that about 800 people didn't get in, and 3 hours after they didn't get in, there was still over 200 people outside. And they weren't 'milling around' any more than our patriot forefathers 'milled around' during their civic protests. Thank you MSM for slighting and miscounting all of those who showed up for this event but couldn't get in.

UPDATE IV: Welcome readers of Pundit & Pundette, Gateway Pundit, Right Michigan, Motor City Times, Vox Popoli, The Other Club, Critical Narrative, and The Blog Prof. This post is simply a journalism-style post- be sure to enjoy while you are here my other posts on education, the environment, and other political issues.

UPDATE V: Here is another picture of an Obamacare supporter. I've talked to this lady previously- see my post The People vs a Person for more on that encounter, but this time I simply took a picture of her with her sign. It reads "Dems Won, GOP Lost, Healthcare NOW." When I asked her what her sign meant, she said that once the Democrats won control of Congress and the President, it gave them the authority to pass any laws that they wanted, without regard to the Constitution or minority rights. I informed her that 'we won and now can do whatever we want to you' is the justification for dictators and bad guys- she said she didn't care, that's the logic she wanted to use. Understand this- the loudest liberal supporters of Obamacare on the front lines of this debate are not really even hiding their support for a fascist dictatorship. Are you hiding your opposition to it? Here is the sign:

It is kind of like the time my husband and I drove up on a horrible motor cycle accident that must have happened milliseconds before. The man had flipped over his bike and slid several feet on his face. I didn't want to look but I did and will never forget it. That is how I feel about the book Ghost in the Wires: My Adventures as the World's Most Wanted Hacker, legendary hacker Kevin Mitnick's personal memoir.

As a huge fan of Leo LaPorte's old show the Screensavers, I knew who Kevin Mitnick was but really had no idea how much effect he had on my own life or what he had really done.


[Video. Kevin Mitnick uses a computer for the first time after his sentence of being unable to use a computer expires on the Screensavers with Steve Wozniak and Leo Laporte]

Cyber-enemy #1: Arrested February 1995
I missed his arrest in 1995 because I had just had my first child and was on maternity leave but I had been working for telephone companies since 1991 for one of Kevin's targets: GTE, then, the nations second largest phone company. But now, I understand a lot.

Mysteries Explained
Kevin Mitnick's book explained so many of the things that the "engineers wouldn't tell us" that I am glad I read it. I am only beginning to put things together of what must have been shaking the telecommunications business to the core and still does, but I wasn't at a high enough level to really know about in detail.

Questions like:

• Why were telephone CO (central offices) so secure? (We weren't allowed to tour them.)
• Why weren't more features on switches enabled and used? (call waiting/ caller id)
• Then, when I worked on the cell phone side: how did people clone the ESN's (electronic serial numbers) and why was fraud so ridiculously high? How did that work? When I went on trips, why were such subjects taboo among engineers and not even talked about over dinner?
• As market manager of a major city, I wasn't allowed into the company cell sites. I had a valid reason at one point but engineering and operations were very separate to the point of it being odd. Why?
• When we asked questions about fraud why did the engineers go silent?
• Why did that smart guy who could write in binary get hired and why did he work late into the night? The engineers said he had "special skills" but wouldn't explain them. Why did the engineers have secret meetings and not tell those of us in marketing and sales even what they were about? What was going on?

Kind of like when your Momma and Daddy are sharing that secret language about something important but not really letting you in on what it is. Why?

It makes sense now.

COULDN'T PUT IT DOWN
Like the motor cycle accident, I couldn't look away.I really wanted to.

I feel like good people are being hurt with this book.
Now that I have said that, I know that Kevin himself says he is glad he is no longer breaking the law, but my biggest problem is that he seems to still be doing harm.

Much of Kevin's ability to steal the source code of the prominent operating systems of the 80's and 90's comes from his uncanny ability to "social engineer" or gain people's trust through deceit to get them to tell him passwords and share whole files. He shares the real names and phone numbers of many of these "nice" people in the book.


People Behind the Pain
I think the thing that bothers me the most, though was when I tweeted about reading the book, a close friend who has been at a major software giant for a very long time dm'd me on Twitter.

"Read the book, but don't make Mitnick out to be a hero. I owned a computer hacked by him in the 80's."

I wanted the back story and reached out. He worked for DEC programming the operating system (OS) when Kevin stole a copy of their code.

In the book, Kevin asserts that his hacking didn't cost the companies any money. He is wrong. According to my friend, DEC's development calendar was delayed over a month while the 70-person OS team audited every line of code of DEC's operating system.

"Just because a hacker says he just copied the code because he could, doesn't mean we could afford to believe him. We had to audit every line of code because as a company we had to make sure that our product was safe."

As a person hired to find and help fix security breaches, Mitnick should know that breaches, even if a person doesn't do something, cost money. Hacking cost companies money. I feel like he marginalizes the harm he caused.

I don't buy that people who hack in this way really help make us safer or provide benefits of any kind. (Note: There are many "white hat hackers" who do us a service through protecting us. I am talking here about the hacking described in this book before he began his security business.)


Mitnick's mutiny- a last revenge.
Kevin was truly sorry for the pain he caused his Mom and Grandma. Early in the book he mentions that he has an uncanny memory.

He names names and phone numbers in this book of the "nice" and gullible people who gave them their passwords and data files. The "nice" government officials that he conned into giving out social security numbers, addresses, phone numbers, tax records, and all kinds of personal information relating to his targets including how he hacked voice mails. (Sound familiar?) This was in the 1980's until 1995: just a few years, later these people are still around.

What is social engineering?
Social engineering is another word for conning or lying. Period.

The thought of good people losing their jobs because they were duped and now those good people having the whole world know they were duped because Kevin used their names in his book...that makes me feel like he is still doing harm. Some may not even know it until the book comes out.

What good comes from your reading this book?
So, in this book, he embarrasses people and companies by relaying phone numbers, names, and exposing security flaws for major companies like Pac Bell, GTE, DEC, OKI, Nokia, Microsoft, the IRS, the Department of Motor Vehicles, government agencies of all kinds and more?

Why should I read this book, Vicki?

If we need something to make us more paranoid, this is it. If you are in charge of an IT department or security, you need to understand what Kevin did and that every Mitnick-wannabe will probably be trying this in the future.

I will never view any phone conversation the same ever again. I will never even view any open wifi connection the same again. One of the top tweeters, Ashton Kutcher had his wifi device hacked and fake tweets posted to his account, for goodness sakes.

You know, we know that hackers are there, but this book makes them real. It makes me paranoid. Maybe that is a good thing.

What do I feel?
I really don't know what to do with this book. I see the man who just had his nose rubbed off by the pavement looking out at me with blood pouring out of the hole where his nose used to be.

This is probably the first disgusting thing like that you've ever seen me write. But it is the only way to tell you what I feel.

I know that because this book inhaled me and I read it in 4 days that other people will look too, but I am horribly in pain for those Kevin has double hacked by putting their naivety on display. I am sorry.

I don't know what to think except that we all need to wise up and teach our students to have secure passwords that they don't write down and they never share with each other.

It is time to grow up and realize that bad people are out there and just because a nice guy calls on the phone doesn't mean we need to be helpful. I just don't know how I like living in a suspicious world but I guess that is where we are.

I just wish Kevin Mitnick would rethink the harm he could do to nice people. I guess us nice people are dumb and he is so smart that we dumb nice people deserve to be humiliated but I just don't buy it. I don't think the names and phone numbers were really necessary.

Nothing nice to look at. I don't even like the fact I am reviewing it in some ways. I feel sick.

Why didn't someone engage his talent in a positive way?
I have to also be upset by the school system that didn't give him access, the people more interested in "catching him" than giving Kevin a positive way to use his talent. In another conversation, I learned how a computer science teacher found a kid who had started hacking and he put him in charge of school security. Now he runs security for a major university.

Sure, Kevin bears responsibility for his action, but I think that it is our job as educators to help talented people like Kevin use their talents in positive ways.

So, as I fly to Microsoft headquarters to one of Mitnick's former hideouts and finish up this post on my iPad (ok, I know the irony, it is ok.) I have time to think over this before I hit publish.

I keep seeing the guy on his face in the street.

It is going to be an important and much discussed book in all IT circles, an unpleasant journey but one that is going to attract interest no matter what we do.


UPDATE:
I feel like if I don't write about it someone else will and perhaps deify Mitnick's story. Maybe he will read this post and comment he did change some names and numbers, but here it is. The ugly truth about a book I wish was fiction but if it was, I'd accuse the author of writing sci-fi.

With friends like Kevin Poulson (another former hacker) , Steve Wozniak (author of the foreword of this book) and Leo Laporte, a lot of buzz will circulate about this book whether my 2 cents goes in or not and I bet movies and headlines will hit as people begin to doubt the security procedures of the tech companies who dominate our lives.

- Posted using BlogPress from Vicki's iPad

Many people in our nation are unemployed as a result of the liberal policies of Obama and Bush, of Democrats and liberal Republicans, who didn't respect private property rights, who created barriers and limits to our freedom and liberty, and who failed to embrace and love human life in all of its glory. These liberal policies manifested itself in high taxes, cumbersome regulations disguised as 'safety' or 'environmental', new entitlements, increased federal control over disaster relief and education and energy production, increases in barriers to production and investment, and the giving away of taxpayer money that the government doesn't even have to those who haven't earned it.

Unemployment is difficult, and it doesn't look like the situation is going to get a whole lot better, especially if Obama and the Democrats don't extend the Bush tax cuts. In order for jobs to be created though, you have to allow people to make free choices, and what is happening right now with unemployment benefits is not right. The government is using money taken from my children and from my grandchildren (ie, debt) to pay people to sit home and not work. It isn't paying these people enough to really pay the bills or buy any new products (so it isn't 'stimulus payments') and these unemployment benefits can only be earned when people aren't working, so they aren't producing anything for our society. At some point, unemployment benefits must be scaled back or cut off, or else unemployment will simply turn into yet another entitlement program, paid for by debt, acting as a drag on our economy and preventing jobs from being created.

Tough choices have to be made at some point by unemployed- to either get retrained, to switch careers, to retire early at a reduced standard of living, to get a job at a retail chain or fast food joint, or to take a risk on themselves and go into business as an entrepreneur. Of course unemployment is a safety net that people do pay into, and thus should be there for those to cushion their fall and buy them time to recover and readjust, but unemployment should not be a long-term solution, or else it will be come a long-term problem.

That being said, our elected leaders (mainly Democrats in Congress and the Presidency but also some Republicans) are unable to make the tough decisions that need to made regarding unemployment. There are increased calls to extend these benefits, indefinitely I imagine, by many in the media. Via RealClearPolitics, Robert Reich (whose book The Work of Nations: Preparing Ourselves for 21st Century Capitalism was required reading in two of my University classes) is one of these types of people who are unable to make the hard decisions to get American back to work, and writes in the San Francisco Chronicle "Extend benefits for jobless, not tax cuts for rich":

Yet Republicans and some Blue Dog Democrats in Congress say we can't afford another extension of jobless benefits. The deficit is too big.But wait. These are the same members of Congress who say we should extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. Extending the Bush tax cuts for the people at the top would cost more than extending unemployment benefits for struggling families without a breadwinner. These families need the money. The rich don't.

This Reich is the same person who advises Democrats on economic policy, and he thinks that in the zero-sum game of wealth creation, it is better to take money from jobs creators (ie, the wealthy, those people who worked hard for their money, who invest in businesses, who buy products, and who run businesses) and transfer that money (through government bureaucrats, who take a large cut for themselves) to those who are unemployed, so that they can continue to not produce anything and drain wealth from society. Reich is proud of the 'tough decision' that he is making and thinks that it is 'really brave' for politicians to take money by force and give it to someone else for doing nothing (being unemployed) and then take credit for it. Reich ends his editorial by saying:

Quick action is needed. About 800,000 unemployed workers will run out of benefits this week. Two million more will stop receiving benefits by the end of December. Millions more after that. The choice couldn't be clearer.

The choice is clear- make the tough decision Congress and do something different than creating another entitlement program. Perhaps it is some sort of reduced unemployment program, designed to transition people off government dependence to independence and freedom, or perhaps it is some sort of unemployment program that rewards people for getting back to work in any way rather than bribing them to stay in government-induced dependent poverty, but the choice is clear- do not just simply make the easy call and extend benefits, but instead make the tough call and move people closer to freedom while increasing protection of private property.