Ok, so it’s not really a baby iMac. That’s just what I call it. It’s actually an iMac G4 PowerPC, sometimes called “the flower pot” or “the lamp”. Compared to my Intel iMac with 24″ screen, the G4 with 17″ screen, looks like a baby. A late 2009 UPS delivery of the 24″ iMac brought the first non-Windows computer into our home.

The following spring, I took no small amount of pleasure in surprising my daughter on her 17th birthday with a drive to a local computer store to pick up her “new” 20″ Intel iMac.

We still have several Windows computers around here and, prior to acquiring the “baby” iMac G4, we’d only dealt with Intel Macs. And the foray into the world of the Mac PowerPCs happened very much on a fluke.

Having had some good luck at the State of Nebraska surplus auction a couple of years back, when the notice appeared in the newspaper for a sale last May, we decided to check the offerings. My husband occasionally satisfies his natural hunter’s instinct through auctions. A successful “kill” is defined as follows: an item needed or wanted by someone in our family is acquired at an almost absurdly low price. Prior “trophies” acquired at the State surplus auction two years before included a much needed desk for my office for $5 (very sturdy, solid wood and some would say, handsome in a retro-sort-of-way). Since the family’s wish list (the prey) had recently grown to include office organizers, bookshelves, and computer miscellany, my husband geared up for his next expedition by taking us all to the pre-auction viewing, so we could supply him with a list.

In addition to staking out a comfortable office chair for my 13 year old, several boxes of metal office organizers for my daughter, a couple of solid wooden bookshelves, and a couple of flat panel monitors to replace titanic-sized CRTs, I noted two 8′ tables full of adorable little Apple computers – about which I knew nothing.

When I prepared the next day’s “target” list for my husband, I included in my list “WHITE APPLE COMPUTER” with the notation “NO MORE THAN $40!”. Why I settled on a $40 ceiling was simply due to that being an outer limit on what I’d waste should the the unit never work. And that’s atypically high amount – $10 to $20 is usually it for me. But – it was adorable and I thought it would look really cute in my kitchen. And it was an Apple. I realize for a lot of women its shoes and jewelry – in that department I never lose my head. But I was not completely over the moon – I had determined there probably was no operating system, perhaps not even a hard drive, and that I’d likely have to upgrade some of its parts.  If I could have that adorable little computer in my kitchen for $100 or less in reasonable working order, I’d be a happy camper.

When my husband came home, he’d made quite a haul. Having spent little more than $200, he’d gotten everything everyone had put on the list with the exception of perennially-elusive bookends (surprisingly hard to find second-hand). Included among the many items was one of those cute white computers with two cute little round things with cords sort of round around the metal arm, which turned out to be speakers.

The total paid for the little iMac with speakers = $25.  Whether or not that sum would ultimately turn out to be qualify as an “absurdly low price” remained to be seen.

I enlisted my 13 year old’s help in doing a preliminary investigation of the unit. Was there ANY information on it anywhere that would tell me anything about it? Turns out, the original specifications are embossed on the bottom of the base:

700 Mhz, 128mb RAM, 40gb HD

From there, a little Googling turned up a fantastically helpful and bookmark-worthy website, EveryMac.com:

The website really seems to live up to its name; they really do have every mac from what I could tell. Just check out the iMac page; the list runs from the May 6, 1998 G3/233 Bondi and runs through “Core i3″ 3.1 21.5-Inch (Late 2011) model. And it’s not just that there is a list of all the models, there’s a whole lot more. The standard specifications are easy to obtain right from the full listing with the toggle arrows on the left hand side, as shown in the snap, below, which features the basic specs for the “cute little Apple” that had found it’s way onto my kitchen counter one Saturday afternoon:

Every Mac's Listings - Example of drop down list featuring iMac G4/700 (Flat Panel)

Of course the information about my newly acquired iMac listed in brief using the drop down arrow already told me more about the system than I knew three minutes’ prior. The completeness of the lists and the detailed information they contain make the site worth bookmarking.

I referred to the complete specs listing several times during the process of transforming that “cute little Apple” into a functioning iMac G4 PowerPC with wireless internet. Of course, since I was already on the site, I wanted to see what I could see about the two Intel iMacs which had already been residents in our house.  It seems to me there is more information about them on EveryMac.com than the “About this Mac” page on my system. Maybe it’s just the format of the listing. Either way, it’s just plain helpful.

For the G4, there were a number of things that I really needed to know in order to get it working, and to determine, first of all, whether $25 was wasted or was an investment in a cute kitchen computer I’d envisioned or if it would be a funky, high-tech flowerpot-style picture frame doubling as a hefty paperweight?

Thanks to the EveryMac listing, I found out a number of important things right away. First of all, I confirmed that it is indeed a PowerPC and not an Intel Mac. I already vaguely realized this on my own, since I’d already learned that Intel Macs were first made available in 2006 and the “flower pot” models at the auction were likely older than that. The critical question for me was whether or not I’d be able to install an operating system on the machine that was remotely useful for my desired uses.

The most important thing included in the introductory text was that my particular G4 had originally shipped with the first version of Mac OS X.

EveryMac Introduction to Complete Specifications for the iMac G4/700

This seemed promising. As a bonus, this particular iMac could have “Classic” installed. I don’t think I’ve ever seen that operating system, but, If I’d ever have the inclination, at least taking a peak at the pre-Mac OS X system would be possible. I’ve read snippets here and there that there are some very well-liked programs for the earlier systems that won’t run on the Intel machines.

So, if the machine came standard with Mac OS X, my next question was, what were the machine’s outer-limit, but truly functioning capabilities? And what would maximum require? The Every Mac complete specs told me that as well. The system could be upgraded to the final version of Mac OS X Tiger, which was 10.4.11. Being relatively new to Macs – having started with Snow Leopard- all that really meant to me was that Tiger must be a cat – or few ago.

Of course any experienced Mac user reading this just fell on the floor laughing at my ignorance. Sorry, Mac geeks, but when acquiring a Mac at Snow Leopard level – especially the way I did, purchased by others to provide equipment for a project in a 48 hour decision turn around – and you’ve been on Windows since 3.11, your understanding of Apple’s cat nomenclature is necessarily nonexistent.

I’d seen Jaguar, Panther, and Tiger a number of times, in addition of course, to Leopard and Snow Leopard. All I knew for sure is that one of my friends had a 2008 Macbook Pro which had slipped with Leopard and  my 24″ iMac had shipped with Snow Leopard. That Leopard to Snow Leopard progression made obvious sense. Beyond that, I’m not enough of a feline or Apple expert to discern the logic in the OS X progression. I had to do a little detective work to nail down whether Tiger was older than Jaguar or vice versa, etc.

I found the Wikipedia article on Mac OS X included a chart of each version, complete with dates. The article helped me to solidify the naming and numbering convention for the Mac operating systems. The Roman numeral “X” is for the overall number in the version number, the second number is for the particular version or upgrade, which is where the different cat names comes in, and the updates to a particular version are noted by a third number.

So, the G4 iMac came with 10.1.2; that’s “10″ for Mac OS X, the “1″ for Cheetah, and the “2″ for the second update to Cheetah. EveryMac.com’s information notes that the G4 is capable of running 10.4.11, the “4″ is for Tiger, and “11″ is the eleventh and final upgrade to Tiger.

The next question I needed to answer was: Would a 700mhz PowerPC function reasonably, with a few upgrades, with the last updated version of Tiger – 10.4.11? I’ll answer that question in my next installment.

Meanwhile, as I noted at the outset, the rather spontaneous decision to acquire a cute little iMac from a surplus auction has taught me a lot about Macs in general. Primarily that I’ve still got a lot of learning to do. Learning about the “cat nomenclature” and versions makes clear that my knowledge still lags behind the current technology a great deal. My Intel iMac – shipped with that Snow Leopard operating system – presently 10.6.8 {Mac OS X (10) Snow Leopard (6), 8th update}, is now out of date. The newest Mac OS – Lion (10.7) – had already been released when I acquired the G4 iMac. And I see now that yet another version, Mountain Lion (10.8) is currently scheduled for release this fall. Considering that it still seems I learn new things about my Mac on a weekly basis, I wonder if I am even too ignorant to decide about an operating system upgrade. Regardless of when I do upgrade, at least the cost is not an issue. Lion is only $29.99, as was, reportedly, Snow Leopard. I am definitely ignorant about a lot of things as compared to my understanding of Windows systems, but I’m not so ignorant that I don’t know that the cost of upgrading the Mac is significantly lower than for the cost of Windows; the upgrade versions are not recommended. Current cost (on Amazon.com) of Windows Vista: $99, Windows 7: $99 – $189.

I admit, I’ve got a lot of learning to do about Macs, but besides knowing that the difference in upgrade costs is advantageous, I also know it is just one of many reasons why the learning is worthwhile.

To be continued…

The post On a Fluke: A Cute Little iMac (G4 PowerPC) appeared first on Facts Are Stubborn Things.

*sigh*

In about six weeks, two of my three children will be college students.

*gulp*

It’s just absurd to find oneself become a living example of a cliche, but I’ve realized I have. Picture a woman who begins crying while staring at the pair of animal print flats on her feet. That would be me. Yeah, it’s embarrassing and I can’t even cite the traditional excuses women have at their disposal.

Pregnant women do occasionally cry for what seems like no reason whatsoever, but that one’s mostly a myth. Post-partum women also cry. It’s mostly not clinical depression, however, that’s another myth. For most, it’s perfectly understandable. It’s women who find themselves still in their pjs at one o’clock in the afternoon, who smell like spit up, who do the crying. If it’s your first baby, that’s reason enough. Moms in later rounds cry, too. But with additional babies, it’s not only because they don’t smell lilly fresh and are dog-tired. It’s because they find themselves comforting a crying eight week old while carefully chasing a two year old headed towards the bathroom with a set of car keys. While smelling like spit up. So tired they can hardly see. In their pjs. At three o’clock in the afternoon. This scenario would provoke tears in any woman of sense.

But I’m not pregnant, post-partum, or chasing a key-flushing toddler while holding a screaming baby (yes, he did beat me there).

I guess I'll have to buy these

No, I’m one of those other cliches. One that I’ve not heard about much. The one about the weepy mother who is sad to see one of her kids go. Animal print shoes can bring a mother to tears because the shoes are shared. And its not because the shoes are really cute (although they are). The realization comes that the shoes leaving means they are going with a certain pair of feet, come the end of August.

Again, *sigh*.

I will deal with the emotional “mommy response” on the whole thing. I’ve been doing it for over twenty years with each new phase, because that’s what the child needs now.

Then I can move onto a whole other set of worries about college. As a frugal Constitutional Christian, (a phrase chosen as a substitute for worn out terms like conservative) I’m driven crazy by the absurd costs, progressive indoctrination, and commune-styling living forced upon my child with bonus meal plan and text book side rackets. It’s all a bunch of nonsense, considering the point of the whole endeavor is supposed to be to obtain an education in a particular field in preparation for a career.

Considering the “mommy” thing and the college-drives-me-crazy-thing, I shouldn’t have laughed so hard I had another kind of tears in my eyes when I accidentally stumbled upon IowaHawk’s article entitled, “So You Have a College Diploma”.  Check it out. If you’re reading this and you have kids in college, or are about to, I particularly urge you to have a read. The good Lord knows we folks all need a good laugh.

Click to read "So You Have a College Diploma"

Speaking of laughter as a diversion, I found IowaHawk’s article by accident when going to the site to retrieve a link for a GiN article written by Linda about the “debt ceiling” debate, entitled, ironically “Debt Ceiling: I Laugh Because I Must Not Cry — That is All!” Check that out, too, if you have a mind (click the image below, to read the full article). I think it’s well done:

Click to read "Debt Ceiling: I Laugh Because I Must Not Cry -- That is All!

The post This Should NOT Make Me Laugh appeared first on Facts Are Stubborn Things.

Hello? Need some Stimulus money? (Photo from Philadelphia Fox 8 - click to read article)

I just could NOT resist the opportunity to report that a seemingly endless pile of money being given away by Washington, D.C. is now being marketed to people. Directly. By telemarketers.

Can you hear the cash register sounds? Cha-ching, cha-ching. For better sound effects, I’ve included the video of the Pink Floyd song, “Money”, below. Anyway, I should have asked, can you hear the telephone ringing, followed by the cash register noises?

Reportedly, telemarketers are calling people offering “Federal Government Stimulus money” to make peoples’ homes more energy efficient. Many thanks to my friend, Sandie Crosnoe, for reading me the Facebook thread she found last night (and for taking the snaps of it), which was posted by Jen Hall, reporting such a call.

I’ve embedded the Facebook thread, below, for everyone’s reading pleasure:

Jen deserves the praise she received. Perhaps her effort at least caused the telemarketer to scratch her head…for a second.

When Sandie read Jen’s report aloud and I heard, “Well, it’s from Obama…”, I had to contain my laughter. Randy Hilton, the final commenter in the thread, had the very same thought. If the money is “from Obama”, it must have come from that stash.

For those who missed it, what Randy and I recalled was the 2009 cash giveaway in the Detroit, Michigan, which garnered attention from some media (mostly on the right, of course), primarily because a Detroit radio host captured a couple of interviews with some of the “give-ees”. I have included the YouTube clip of his audio, here:

Obviously, the federal government is not literally calling people to give them money. This is actually worse. What Jen unfortunately experienced is bona fide corporatism in action. A company is marketing its product, which has been chosen as a winner in the winners-and-losers-lottery one sees in corporatist systems. Corporatism was an important element in Mussolini’s development of fascism, which we all know was soon adopted by Adolf Hitler.

But forget Mussolini and Hitler for a second. Did you ever think you’d live to see a day in America when people are receiving calls offering government money as a selling technique? Once again, bravo to Jen.

Note on Jen Hall…Jen is the sister-in-law of David Hall, the keeper of the traveling Liberty Bell. Check out his website, by clicking here.

The post Obama’s Stash: Telemarketers Calling to Give it Away appeared first on Facts Are Stubborn Things.

There are people who do a lot of forwarding of the email messages they receive, many of which have been forwarded to them. Too many remind me of the old-fashioned chain mail letters that used to circulate before the advent of personal computer usage. Unlike the sending of a chain mail letter, which required more effort and expense (going out to make copies somewhere, envelopes, and postage), it is just so very easy to hit “forward”. So, rather than seeing one of these chain mail letters showing up in the mail infrequently, email inboxes can fill with a multitude of the stuff if one has friends who are politically interested and/or involved. Outside of the chain-mail like character, this email forwarding reminds a great deal of the party game “telephone”.  Since the messages are forwarded, re-forwarded, and re-re-forwarded, and so on, sometimes things get lost in translation. Who knows what is going to come out the other end?

Since I don’t see any decrease in the volume of these kinds of messages, I decided to start writing about them. In my first round, I covered the general problem and admitted, likely, this whole exercise will only serve as an outlet by which I can personally vent. So be it…*sigh*. Maybe, just maybe, though something I put forward will have a tiny impact. In reviewing what I wrote on the first round, it occurs to me that there were several basic points it might be helpful to highlight.

Problems with the forwarding phenomenon for those interested in having some impact on important issues:

• It creates a lot of noise. All of these forwards piling up in peoples’ email boxes mean IF there are any really good pieces of information sitting there, they are less likely to be seen, read, and/or acted upon.

• Substantive, effective information and solid recommendations for actions that can be taken are the exception, not the rule.

• Too many of the messages have no real basis in fact, or at best, have a grain of truth running through them that is often obscured by the “Chicken Little” style in which they’re written. While I have not done a scientific, statistical analysis, my experience tells me fewer than half include links to the original information source or any supporting documentation.

• The majority of forwarded messages I see are nationally focused; federal government problems, politicians, etc. rule the information, not state or local, which is where people are more likely to have success. How much can we do to impact Washington, D.C.? Meanwhile, “back at the ranch” your state and local officials are selling state sovereignty down the river to suck up federal funds as fast as they can, implementing the health care law, and doing everything they can to avoid making necessary cuts to state budgets drowning in red ink.

Now to my biggest pet peeve…

Nearly-panic stricken urgings to “sign” some petition.

Such petition appeals, in my opinion, are problematic for a lot of reasons. I have included just one of many examples of petition appeal emails that has been forwarded to me. The example I’ve provided is the email in its entirety, outside of necessary editing to remove the name of the entity and any links. I did the editing not because any “innocents” need protecting, but because I’m not going to give the organization sending it any particular attention…they don’t deserve it.

The email was sent to all of the “members” of an online site which is comprised of many different sub-groups, both geographically and issue-based.

“The House will vote on repealing ObamaCare in less than a week. We want to present 100,000 “Repeal ObamaCare” petitions to Speaker Boehner before the scheduled House vote. Go here to sign and see below for more information:

[This bit was followed by a link to the petition, which I have removed]

The results from our CITIZEN MANDATE were startling…

Ninety-seven percent of  [the group membership] listed Repealing ObamaCare as an important issue. Even more telling was the fact that repealing ObamaCare was far and away the single most important issue to [all of the members] — more than twice as important as any other issue!”

In fact, when you completed your Citizen Mandate, you told us that “Repealing ObamaCare” was one of your important issues…

Now with the House preparing to vote on the “Repealing the Job-Killing Healh Care Law Act” on January 12, [the group] has launched a “Repeal ObamaCare” petition to give citizens an opportunity to voice their opinion on the repeal effort.

In fact, when you completed your Citizen Mandate, you told us that “Repealing ObamaCare” was your single most important issue…

We have less than one week to gather and deliver Repeal ObamaCare petitions. Take a moment right now to be part of this delivery by clicking below and using our exclusive QUICK SIGN feature to add your name to our “Repeal ObamaCare” petition:

[another link to the petition...removed]

In addition to demanding a Repeal of ObamaCare, this petition also calls on Congress to Defund all aspects of the ObamaCare  legislation until it is purged from our laws.

Obama can’t fund his socialist health care plan if he doesn’t have the money!

That’s why this delivery is so important!

[our] members have spoken on the issue. You have said that Repealing ObamaCare is your #1 issue. Now we want to send Congress a strong, unwavering message on your behalf.

But we have less than a week to make it happen! Because time is SO LIMITED, we are counting on you to sound the alarm and rally your friends and family to join with you.

Forward this message DIRECTLY to 30-40 conservative friends and family urging them to sign our petition in time to be included in our upcoming delivery on January 11.

Have them click here to sign our petition:

[yet another link to the petition...removed]

We want to overwhelm Speaker Boehner, and other members of Congress as they prepare to cast their votes. We want them to understand clearly that the American people don’t want the federal government involved in their healthcare decisions!

We also want our petitions to serve as a reminder to every member of Congress that the repealing of ObamaCare is a MANDATE from the American people!

But as is so often the case, we are dependent on your actions over these next several days.

Don’t delay. Take a moment to sign our petition by using our QUICK SIGN feature by clicking below:

[and amazingly, yet another link to the petition...removed]

Then use the remaining time to alert and rally your friends!

This is an important first step in the restoration of our nation. Thank you for letting your voice be heard.

Your friends at [name of entity removed]

P.S. Again, after signing our petition, forward this message to 30-40 friends alerting them to our petition delivery to Speaker Boehner’s office the day before the January 12, House vote to repeal ObamaCare. Encourage them to be a part of this important vote by clicking here now:

[yes, believe it or not...another link...removed]“

end of message…

________________________

Wow! Where DO I start?

Substance of the issue…

• Did the Speaker of the House, John Boehner, seem “weak-kneed” regarding whether or not there would be a vote on repealing the health care law? The “membership” is CLEARLY on board, Speaker Boehner and company, clearly on record regarding taking the action noted. Is this a necessary effort or just an opportunistic way to get some attention by members AND most importantly, get them to forward the thing to non-members so the group can get their contact information?
• Is this the only way to “stop Obamacare”? Is it even a viable way to stop implementation of the health care law at this time? I support the idea of the House vote – the political point did need to get made. BUT, did the House vote stand any chance of resulting in actual repeal? NO. Does the petition encourage any action regarding the set up of insurance exchanges in your home state? Vast expansion of your home state’s Medicaid program (a huge element of “Obamacare”)? Grant monies requested by your state’s Governor to implement the law? Address the medical records technology and “comparative effectiveness council” in the February 2009 Stimulus bill which affects ALL Americans? (Click HERE for more.)

Insulting the intelligence of the reader…oh, let me count the ways…

• Just how many times does one need the link to be presented? There is less repetition in a kindergarten class memorizing nursery rhymes. Why? Clearly, the group / organization wants to get signers, even if they bail out from their reading early on.
• THE GROUP / ORGANIZATION is NECESSARY…you, the reader, needs to interact with this group…THEY are going to deliver this petition ON YOUR BEHALF.  Would you have a voice WITHOUT THEM? If the point is truly to encourage people to in turn, encourage Speaker Boehner to carry on with the vote…why not just give his contact information and request that people contact him themselves?

Food for thought on petition drives:

More than shades of populism…

Should the passion of any given moment drive the decisions of elected representatives?

Isn’t momentary public passion an element of democracy?

Is democracy a good thing?

Are we a democracy or a representative republic?

Should opinion polls and petitions be important factors in public policy decisions or should the electoral process, fact gathering, and deliberation?

(Jonah Goldberg wrote an article in 2006 about populism that gets right to the point in paragraph one. Important note…Goldberg needs a refresher on what the Founders thought about democracy.)

Effectiveness:

• Is there evidence that this sort of populism has done much to affect the what happens in our government? I’ll get to a good example of such a petition drive effort that did accomplish a number of things, none of which were associated with affecting public policy, momentarily.
• Consider the no to yes call ratios going into Congress during the fall of 2008 associated with the bailout bill. I’ve heard a minimum of 9 to 1 against. Did that stop the people in Washington from carrying out their bailout? NO.
• Nebraskans inundated Senator Ben Nelson with calls, emails, letters, and ad campaigns urging him to vote against cloture on the health care law. Public opinion polls conducted within the State clearly indicated his constituents did not support the bill. Did it stop him from voting to allow the bill to go to the Senate floor for a vote?
• Do we really want to have government that means whoever can pull off the most phone calls, emails, or letters (not to mention TV, radio, mailers, and newspapers ads) wins the issue of the day? Should elected officials be so easily swayed? Should we have to hover over our representatives to this extent? Or should we be considering many more factors before we vote for them?
• What are the most appropriate circumstances under which making contact with elected officials makes sense? Ideally, it is an elected officials’ constituents giving feedback to the person representing them that is most appropriate.

When contact is appropriate…

What do you think is more effective? Individual emails, letters, and phone calls from constituents written in their own words and sent directly to an elected official, or a petition collected by a single online entity, with unverifiable information as to the participants? (Regarding online groups;  do group members have anonymous usernames?)

Entities can be easily pigeon-holed in an instant. Large number of individuals taking time to make contact in their own words are much more difficult to dismiss.

The largest effort I can recall in the past couple of years is a perfect example of “petition populism”…

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich conducted a full-court press for his American Solutions “Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less” petition drive in 2008. In fact, the effort is ongoing, and yes, the entity is continuing to disseminate information about oil prices and drilling. To date, American Solutions has collected 1.5 million+ plus petition signatures. In late summer 2008, Gingrich did present the original petition, in some form, to members of Congress.

Question: Did that petition drive change anything whatsoever about American oil drilling policy?

Answer: No.

Here’s what it did accomplish…

Gingrich managed to collect approximately 1.2 million Americans’ information. That number has risen by about 300,000 since. That’s a HUGE contact database. It might be really handy for something like a presidential campaign.

I have questions…

• Just what information collected was given to Congress? Who has it now…anyone?
• Where else might the information be sent?
• Does American Solutions rent or sell its list to other groups, organizations, or individuals as a means by which to generate revenue?

Petition drives… UNLESS they are limited to putting a bond issue, constitutional amendment, law, or candidate on a ballot…

• Are nothing more than list building marketing tools
• Provide a potential revenue stream (through renting or selling of the list)
• Encourage people to give their information away indiscriminately
• Potentially provide opposition with a list of people who oppose them
• Condition people to believe they are doing something effective about an issue when history proves otherwise
• Allow groups and organizations to claim large numbers of “members”, increasing their own influence and profile
• Fill people’s email boxes with junk
• Encourage populism and small “d” democracy, not republican government

Image found on Michael Hyland’s Tumblr.

The post Political Emails: Sign this Petition! It Will Save the Country! appeared first on Facts Are Stubborn Things.

After two years of running a group and receiving the same kinds of messages over and over and over again, it appears addressing the issue would at minimum, provide me with the opportunity to vent. What I need to vent about, specifically are messages that are absurd, conspiratorial absent any supporting facts, that are ridiculously partisan, and those that actually result in blunting substantive efforts to bring about the very thing the majority of these people signaled in some way or other, that they actually want.

I’m going to be pulling out some of the messages I’ve received and address them, one by one. Perhaps, the exercise will provide more than an outlet for my venting. If nothing else, I’ll have provided myself with some handy cut and paste responses. But maybe, just maybe, one of my dissections of one of these messages will constitute something helpful enough to others that it is truly forward-worthy. Note that I am setting a very high standard for myself here, I don’t hit that forward button very often.

What a convenient segue: the “noise” emails I’m referencing are almost always the results of forwarding. Quite often, the same people who are addicted to the “forward” button in their email program send several such gems per day.

Of course, among the many forwards I receive, I’m used to receiving my share of cute pet and baby pictures with clever sayings (some are political, some not). If there is a cute pet or baby email that has circulated online, I’ve likely seen it twice. Don’t get me wrong, cute pets are fun and I adore cute babies. When I have a bit of spare time, however, I’d rather pet one of my real-live dogs or talk with one of my teenagers (and remember what they looked like as cute babies).

Pet and kid pics aside, I have actually been disturbed by the fact that way too many Americans really will believe almost anything they see on their computer screen, and often follow directions included, if it is speaking to their biases, preconceived notions, general philosophy or coming from someone who says they’re on the same team.

Of course 98% of the email I receive comes from people who are opposed to big government, however they might define it. Beyond that, a good many of these folks have purposefully attended some kind of conference, seminar, or study group about the Constitution and/or limited government and follow news on at least a semi-regular basis.

I now cease to be surprised regarding what is sent, however, and I’m just left wondering what, if anything can be done about it. I think of the time people are putting into reading and sending this stuff and wonder how it might be put to better use.

I have received the email, below, twice in the past few weeks. I would label this one “How to contradict your own stated philosophy and totally obscure your own point”. Honestly, on this one, I’ve wondered if some big-government liberal type put this one together and sent it to a bunch of tea partiers to see how many would take the bait…

“We’re BROKE AMERICAN’S!!

We’re “broke” & can’t help our own Seniors, Veterans, Orphans,Homeless etc………..

In the last months we have provided aid to Haiti , Chile , and Turkey .

Our retired seniors living on a ‘fixed income’ receive no aid or get any breaks while our government and religious organizations pour Hundreds of Millions of $$$$$’s and Tons of Food into Foreign Countries!

We have hundreds of adoptable children who are shoved aside to make room for the adoption of foreign orphans.

USA, a country where we have homeless without shelter, children going to bed hungry, elderly going without ‘needed’ meds, and mentally ill without treatment – etc,etc…

YET……………….

They give money to 150 nations in the world and to the United Nations.

Imagine if the *GOVERNMENT* gave ‘us’ the same support they give to other countries.

Sad isn’t it?

99% of people won’t have the guts to forward this.

I Just Did”

Wow! Where DO I start?

We’re BROKE AMERICAN’S!!

Ok – fair enough. With a $14 trillion stated deficit and 100+ trillion in unfunded obligations, this is indeed, accurate. (I am trying to ignore the typo that persisted through multiple forwards. I said I was trying.)

We’re “broke” & can’t help our own Seniors, Veterans, Orphans,Homeless etc………..

Excuse me?

We don’t help our Seniors?

It’s called Social Security and Medicare, including prescription drug coverage. That $100+ trillion in unfunded obligations includes these programs. Are they good programs? No. Would a lot of seniors have more money now if they had invested in their own retirement? Yes.

Veterans

We could do a much better job with their medical care. And they don’t get paid nearly enough for what they do, particularly if they serve in combat. But, besides that, there are many benefits provided. Some of them, like the mortgage benefit, can literally last a lifetime.  There are also a lot of programs aimed at doing things for soldiers and families through many, many private groups.

Orphans

I thought there was a shortage of adoptable babies. Yes, we do have a lot of children in foster care, which is a real can of worms that I’m not going to get into right now. I don’t see a lot of orphans roaming the streets of America, however.

Homeless

Why do we have homeless? While I don’t agree with a good amount of the spin in this Wikipedia article, it does provide some good background regarding the history of homelessness in America. There was a marked uptick in the number of homeless people following policy changes regarding how mentally ill individuals were handled and treated, and of course, there is a correlation between substance abuse and homelessness. Aren’t there myriad efforts to help the homeless, both public and private? (Here’s just one example from my local newspaper.)

In the last months we have provided aid to Haiti , Chile , and Turkey .

I have a sneaking suspicion, this might be the actual point of the email, but it is oh-so-difficult-to-determine. If it is, WHERE IS the supporting information?

Our retired seniors living on a ‘fixed income’ receive no aid or get any breaks while our government and religious organizations pour Hundreds of Millions of $$$$$’s and Tons of Food into Foreign Countries!

Again…seniors? No aid? Breaks?…ever heard of senior discounts? Again, if too much foreign aid by government is the point, why tear down religious organizations for doing it? Don’t we want to promote PRIVATE charity? Is the point of this email about how government spends its money or how money is spent in general? I can’t quite figure this out, either.

We have hundreds of adoptable children who are shoved aside to make room for the adoption of foreign orphans.

Actually, I believe there are many thousands of adoptable children, but there are not as many infants as parents who wish to adopt them.  It turns out that the number of foreign adoptions has drastically dropped due to an international agreement in 2008. The largest number of adoptable children are in the foster care system, and is that not caused by a variety of social factors? Is the lack of adoption of these children caused by the failure of government intervention? It’s a challenge to adopt older children, so is it any wonder they are harder to place?

USA, a country where we have homeless without shelter, children going to bed hungry, elderly going without ‘needed’ meds, and mentally ill without treatment – etc,etc…

Is it lack of government programs that has caused ANY of these problems? Lack of concern?

ARE the mentally ill going without treatment?

WHERE are the statistics to back up any of this?

Hungry children? Ever heard of the reduced-price and free breakfast and lunch programs delivered at the schools (not to mention that some schools now serve dinner)? In addition to school lunches, there is food stamps and WIC. Beyond that, there is a program that sends backpacks of food home on weekends that run by local food banks and from what I can discover, is funded locally with private dollars. There is even a video about this program.

YET……………….

They give money to 150 nations in the world and to the United Nations.

Too much foreign aid and membership in the United Nations has been poor policy, it’s true. But once again, was THIS email the way to make the point?

Imagine if the *GOVERNMENT* gave ‘us’ the same support they give to other countries.

I don’t want the government to give “us” anything; through some of the information I’ve provided, it seems fairly clear that we don’t have to “imagine” government giving to “us” at all. It’s giving, giving, giving, and giving. And that brings me to another point; the government does not just “give”. In order to give, it has to take from someone else. All of this giving, however is not  government’s job. For a refresher, please see Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution.

Sad isn’t it?

Yes, but not for the reason the author or forwarder thinks.

99% of people won’t have the guts to forward this.

This is not a question of guts, it’s a question of good sense.

I Just Did”

Yes! I’m well aware…otherwise…how could I have received it?

On the next round, I’m going to tackle my all-time favorite…the petition appeal along the lines of… “Go sign this petition now! The country depends upon it!”

The post Political Emails: WHY Do People Forward This Stuff? appeared first on Facts Are Stubborn Things.

Fred Thompson, former Tennessee Senator, sleepy Presidential candidate, and actor has been hawking government subsidized mortgages.

Hello? Has Mr. Thompson heard of the whole Fannie / Freddie / Ginnie / CRA thing? The meltdown, the bailout…?

Apparently Fred was half-asleep then, too.

The post Fred Thompson Hawking Subsidized Mortgages? Huh? appeared first on Facts Are Stubborn Things.

Click to read TowDog's piece and view "Tourism" videos

The “tourism” videos are a riot (warning: a bit ‘o language in there) – especially if you’ve ever been to certain parts of Detroit. It’s funny alright, but, there’s more to this story. Cleveland has become a mistake over time because…(drumroll, please)…of government.

The whole reminded me of a recent episode of John Stossel’s show about Cleveland, entitled “Mistake By the Lake”:

One of Stossel’s guests, Drew Carey, discusses a project he did with Reason TV, which you can look at in  more detail by clicking on the snapshot below:

The post Cleveland: Mistake By The Lake – At Least It Is Not Detroit! appeared first on Facts Are Stubborn Things.

Updated April 22, 2011: Unfortunately, Mr. Harris decided to leave the Republican Party. While frustration with the party is understandable, the move to the Libertarian Party is not. I had no idea that Mr. Harris would ever embrace a Libertarian platform; it doesn’t line up with what we discussed or what I thought I knew about him. I was clearly mistaken.

Tuesday is IT in Oklahoma’s Fourth Congressional District. There are two candidates on the primary ballot – Progressive incumbent Tom Cole and Constitutional stalwart RJ Harris. The choice is clear.

Tom Cole is the epitome of all that is wrong in politics and government today. His entire career has been spent in academia and politics. That explains much about Cole’s troubling connections, funding sources, and voting recording. In addition to voting to fund Planned Parenthood, for the TARP bill, and participating in the record spending Congress (up to that point) while Bush was still in office, Cole wrote a direct appeal to the Obama Administration’s Secretary of Transportation in support of the NASCO highway. Such an appeal is a direct endorsement of the Stimulus Bill and open borders. Cole appears to get a lot of funding from outside of Oklahoma and is heavily tied to the Progressive and globalist Aspen Institute. Inside Oklahoma, he has the very helpful support of establishment party officials, particularly in his home county of Cleveland. Finally, his Wikipedia page, updated July 22, 2010, includes a report that his wife recently filed for divorce due to infidelity.

In contrast, RJ Harris is a long time member of the National Guard with two (very soon to be three) active tours of duty, is a devoted husband of eighteen years and father of five. Having personally experienced the effects of an economic downturn and market changes on a business, RJ put his skills as an air traffic controller to work for the FAA and ultimately decided to pursue a career as an attorney. He returned to his home state and received his bachelor’s degree from the University of Oklahoma and is working towards the completion of a law degree while still serving in the National Guard as an air traffic control Chief.

I first spoke with RJ in March 2009, when he agree to appear on my radio show. I was immediately impressed with his ability to articulate core principles and provoke thought in a discussion of them. I was also struck by his firm conviction. I was glad to have RJ as a guest on the show on several occasions during that spring and summer.

When contemplating potential interview subjects for the documentary, A New America, RJ was at the top my list. I knew he would provide an articulate answer to any question on core principles I posed. I wasn’t wrong – we ran out of tape interviewing him and while editing, if we wanted a point to be made clearly in Ronald Reagan fashion, we’d go to RJ’s footage.

I have come to know RJ better since that time and even walked through a couple of high stress situations with him. In one instance there are few people who could have kept their cool (I barely did myself), but RJ remained focused, level-headed, and solution oriented. Although he was in the midst of the stress and I was a distance away, in the middle of all, he called to make sure I knew the situation was under control to alleviate my concerns.

Besides going out of his way in his concern for others, I have noticed that RJ always does the right thing. There are few people who have such character and honor in today’s world. In a republic, character is paramount in the people we elect to represent us. Under stress, they must keep their heads and do what is right, even when it is difficult.

Too many people dismiss the importance of Congress members’ votes on the TARP bill or too easily forgotten. It is precisely the kind of high stress situation during which only level-headed, clear thinking men of honor and principle will do the right thing. Members of Congress were called to the White House and told by the Secretary of the Treasury and others that America hung on the edge of total financial collapse, that failure to take drastic measures would likely result in chaos and could ultimately lead to the implementation of martial law.

Who among the Congress withstood that pressure? Who among them stepped out in front of the news cameras stationed outside and reported the high pressure tactics and raised their objections to the barely-veiled threats? Who among them recognized that the system they were being told was on the verge of collapse was the one constructed by government in the first place so even more government tinkering was idiotic?

I believe that RJ has the kind of character, ability to reason under pressure, and courage of conviction that put him on the short list – alone if necessary – in doing what is right. Until we elect more men like him to Congress, we will only continue down the road we’re now moving at warp speed.

Visit RJ Harris website: http://www.rjharris2010.com

The post RJ Harris appeared first on Facts Are Stubborn Things.

But it is quiet – nearly silent. And it’s among us. The enemy within. People who say they are “on our side”.

If we really want to do something about reversing our rapidly increasing speed in the wrong direction then we literally have to take notice of that elephant in the room. Pun most definitely intended.

The elephant in the room is comprised of the following:

1. Republican incumbents who are….

• Progressive (a-ok with big government as long as it’s the “R”s who are in charge, believe they know best, like redistributing wealth, are cool with global governance, are for carbon tax, think government should provide health care, believes government creates jobs, etc.)
• Morally repulsive – YES, CHARACTER COUNTS
• Only concerned about keeping their jobs

2. Party powerful and their establishment friends…

• GOP members at whatever level whose primary concern is to keep “R”s in office, regardless of their voting record or character
• Little minions of the party who do the bidding of party officials in hopes of “earning their dues” for their own future aspirations
• Supporting astroturf organizations

3. Active supporters of the above, whatever their ridiculous reasoning or motivation…

To clarify what I mean on #3, I can only cite a couple of personal examples. I had a member of Grassroots in Nebraska leave the group and start up her own because she wanted me to quit saying negative things about the Republican party. She went on to very actively assist an astroturf organization and the county GOP here into literally strong arming GiN into doing a joint tea party on Tax Day this year with the GOP. A very related yet separate example is another member of the group showing up to a meeting about how to deal with the hijacking of the event for the express purpose of reading me the riot act and issuing me an ultimatum. The GOP could have its tea party right on the same spot if they wanted and I should be quiet. If I didn’t pipe down about what the GOP was doing AND give way to them holding their event in GiN’s place, he couldn’t be involved any further in GiN.

Is there any question about whose side those two people were on?

Embedded in my examples of active supporters of the party powerful and protectors of the Progressive, establishment elected officials who need to be ousted are also examples of the thuggery and reprehensible conduct of all.

The sad part is, I am no longer surprised by this anymore. By the time the calendar rolled around to March 2010, I was not even surprised the county party, the astroturf, or the female former member were engaging in their thuggish behavior.  (I was a bit surprised at the fellow who showed up at the meeting – but I should not have been.)

This conduct is old hat. I could cite you dozens of recent examples from right here within Nebraska, several from my past involvement with the party in South Dakota, and many as reported to me by people in several other states.

For now, though, I will only reference one.

And it’s far more important than a Tea Party.

In Oklahoma’s 4th Congressional District, a County GOP chair and Vice-Chair, with the help of at least one other individual, are determined to protect incumbents and to obstruct challengers directly from their positions as party officials. Behind the scenes, from positions of attempted anonymity, they pervert information and sell it as truth.

For a sampling of out in the open activities of the Vice-Chair in particular read these posts by Axxiom:

Cleveland County GOP Vice-Chair Tells RJ Harris He is Banned

Why Is Tessa Breder Cleveland County GOP Vice-Chair So Slot Slinging Happy

Vice-Chair Breder and Chairman Bobby Cleveland are not satisfied with using their positions directly, including control of party resources and information to protect incumbents like Congressman Tom Cole. It is well known by many in the county area that Cleveland and Breder are the master minds behind the anonymously authored blog Okie Pundit.

I will not link to their site – they will NOT get help driving traffic directly from me.

To summarize briefly, “Okie Pundit”‘s full time job is to smear challenger candidates and cheerlead 24/7 for incumbent Republican politicians.

Smears include clever hit jobs like this:

And perversions of facts such as characterizing of candidate RJ Harris’ name change from Barnes back to his birth name Harris when he discovered it had been changed as a small child. Cleveland, Breder, et al have tried to connect RJ’s difficult family circumstance with which the name change was associated with the closure and failure of his businesses several years ago. The hit squad that is the Cleveland County GOP do more than imply Harris changed his name to evade paying taxes.

To avoid linking, I have embedded an image of the about page for the site here – the most interesting statement is:

Okiepundit.com is a conservative blog written by several long-time Oklahomans.  If you don’t like our anonymity, then you don’t need to read us.  (The last sentence applies primarily to the politicians who throw fits when we’re critical of them).

I know I have no need to read Okie Pundit. I know when I go there, I’m going to get all pro-incumbent politician drivel and hit pieces on all the challengers, straight down the line. The only purpose for even giving the light of day to the name of their lie-filled website is to point out who is behind it.

And more importantly, display the thuggery of party officials who will stop at literally nothing to protect incumbents who are no longer fit to hold office. Tom Cole, for instance, has voted to fund Planned Parenthood, for the TARP (bailout), voted to increase spending at record rates when Bush was still in office, appealed for support to the Obama Administration on the NASCO project that is an open-borders neon sign, and has many questionable connections and funding sources. Among them is the very creepy Aspen Institute, a very progressive, globalist think tank based in Colorado. Further, Cole’s Wikipedia page, updated July 22, 2o1o, notes his wife recently filed for divorce due to infidelity.

Is Tom Cole worth protecting? If you lived in Oklahoma, who would get your vote? The establishment, Progressive Republican, or the long-term member of the military with two tours of active duty (on the cusp of being three) who can clearly articulate all of the principles of the Constitution, has been faithfully married to his wife of 20 years, and is pursuing a law degree?

All of these examples of thuggery should bother far more people than they do. They should inspire more questions than they do.

Should anyone take an anonymous website with an obvious axe to grind remotely seriously?

When ARE we all going to turn our backs on all of these people and express the proper scorn when others have no problem with this conduct?

Will it be when hell freezes over?

Dear Lord above, I pray it will be much sooner than that.

The post Real Lies and Lying Liars Who Are Killing This Country appeared first on Facts Are Stubborn Things.

Visit Nathan's website: click here

I met Nathan Dahm a year ago at the Freedom 21 Conference in Oklahoma City while conducting interviews for A New America. My friend, Sandra Crosnoe, spoke very highly of him. She was hoping at that time that he would run for the U.S. Congressional seat in District 1. Upon meeting Nathan, I found him to be a polite, well-spoken fellow. But – shame on me – I missed out that round on being appropriately impressed.

I say “shame on me” because I’ve thought for quite some time now that it would do our politics a world of good if candidates and politicians were different. The dog and pony show, smooth-talking, and slick willy speech-givers are quite clearly not serving us well. Early in our history, candidates didn’t campaign on their own behalf. It was considered unseemly. Because we are a republic, people were elected more on reputation they had, on their character, and by way of the recommendations others gave on their behalf. We’re of course, a far cry from that environment today. George Washington or Thomas Jefferson were to run for office today, for instance, they’d lose. And lose big.

One of Nathan’s most admirable qualities is humility. Although Nathan possesses the quiet humility that I have imagined is like that of Washington or Jefferson, he is also an excellent public speaker. His depth of knowledge of history is quite evident through his thorough recall when making a point. Core principles are clearly part of his thinking process – I’ve witnessed his ability to cite writings of Founders in explaining a position with ease – absent notes.

I’ve watched Nathan over the course of a year and had the opportunity to work with him periodically, along with others, to discuss courses of action regarding campaigns and grassroots efforts. I’ve observed how he has conducted his campaign, how he treats other people, and how we works with others. Nathan is a gentleman.

It is ironic to me that I only recently found out Nathan is a homeschool graduate. That explains much about Nathan to this homeschool mother of three. Depth of knowledge, quiet strength, articulate thought, written word, and speech. Quite recently, there was an absurd attack on Nathan’s homeschool education by avid supporters of the incumbent John Sullivan, whom Nathan is challenging.

Tragically, these establishment types have bought into the Progressive model for our society and bizarrely prefer politicians who are a product of the education system that is either directly controlled or strong-armed by the State. It should not be surprising. These same people prefer their representative in Congress be one that voted for TARP (aka Bailout) and the largest increase in government’s size in our history  - until vastly expanded upon by the present ruling party. The same OK GOP party establishment enforcers who prefer indoctrination over education don’t seem to mind that John Sullivan suddenly “got religion” after Bush left office.

Despite the efforts of the status quo crowd, Nathan’s support has consistently grown over time. He has picked up endorsements by a wide array of well-respected organizations such as Oklahoma Conservative Political Action Committee, Tulsa Area Republican Assembly, Republican Liberty Caucus of Oklahoma, American Council on Health Care Reform, grassroots activist groups such as R3publicans and OKforTEA, and newspapers such as the Tulsa Beacon.

Nathan is ready to serve the people of OK CD01. All that remains to be seen is how many voters are awake, aware, and have realized what kind of men they should send to Congress.

Visit Nathan Dahm’s http://www.nathandahm.com

Wondering why a Nebraskan is talking about the OK Primary? Read this.

The post Nathan Dahm Will Serve OK CD01 Well appeared first on Facts Are Stubborn Things.