He was fun.

I reach once again to my pal, Bender, from Futurama. This is, of course, about Senator Scott Brown. Many have already been howling about his vote for the "Jobs" bill, and rightly so.

Rush said that this is just Realpolitik and that Senator Brown will "vote the right way" when the important votes come up.

I must respectfully disagree with the standard bearer of the conservative movement. Rush says that this is a senator from a very blue state and that there are just certain votes he has to cast in order to stay relevant. Again, I must disagree. He was elected by a frustrated electorate that is sick of pork and payoffs. Sick to death of politics and Realpolitik.

I said that I was withholding judgement on Senator Brown in an earlier post since he had not passed my RINO sniff test. The light is flashing and the buzzer just went off. I believe that he may vote conservative on only the bills that are core to the conservative movement, and even then, only those bills that the silent majority gets loud about. He certainly looks like he has grown, already, to enjoy the limelight and the publicity. Grinning when people shout out to him, "Brown for President".

Sorry, Senator Brown. Once you sell out your values I simply can not trust you all the way. Going along to get along is what has gotten us to this point. Compromising on a 'little evil' is no different then giving in on a big one.

Say NO, and be proud of it. Things need to be fixed, not greased. Yes, this bill may help the unemployed in your district, but isn't that what the Stimulus bill was all about? How did that work out?

I'm still waiting. I don't know how long I'll have to wait until I can find someone that will not bend for the left.

So as Bender said once, "He was fun." Not.

--Zavost

Descent into Insanity

This is going to be another one of those posts that is going to come at you like a shotgun. I'm surprised at the number of people who actually read this cathartic process of mine. I've been hit with so many questions and topics to expand upon that I have to wonder sometimes if the hand of Saul Alinsky is not trying to collapse my ADHD riddled brain (just kidding about the mental illness thing). So here it goes:

What the hell are we doing? Have we all lost our minds and the ability to think rationally? As a culture, as a people, as a nation, and as a race (Humanity, folks, not just Americans) do we even think beyond the next month? Does anyone read a book anymore? Does anyone even try to learn from the mistakes of others? That is what a wise person does, by the way. Only a fool learns from their own mistakes (then again, I was wise and foolish in equal parts growing up...better then most of my friends growing up).

When did we stop holding our political representatives accountable for amoral, illegal, or questionable ethical behavior? When did we think it was ok to spend both more than we earn and what we are worth, net? When did we think it was ok to live like there is no tomorrow and hand the check down to two or three generations of our children? Why are we not rioting because of this? How can Obama spend what he does (actually, sign off on the spending proposed by Congress) and then claim the mantle of fiscal responsibility and not projectile vomit?

I guess it is because you have to have a sense of morals and principles. Guilt. I look at guilt as a mental expression or analogue to physical pain. It is an internal string that vibrates when you stray from the path of the moral and the virtuous. Our culture, our religion, our parents, our intellect and our friends modify that string while we are growing up. I also believe that we are born with that string pre-installed by the divine spark (go ahead and smirk, I don't mind). Unless you have a bona fide mental disorder or a physical disorder of the brain, we all have an innate sense of right and wrong. I also believe that all humans are born inherently "good". Like a nerve, though, over stimulation or inattentiveness to that pain will deaden that nerve. The stimulus is there, but there is no more electrical impulse, just as if the string vibrations are ignored for long enough, then you will no longer be hampered with that sense of guilt. God/Jesus, whomever you believe to be divine is incapable of turning away from you. We are their expressions in this world. It is always us that turns away from them. There are no exceptions.

So where is this insanity coming from? Humans evolved in groups and understood early on that we stand a better chance at survival if we band together into groups. Over time, those groups became extended families, then clans, then extended ethnic groups. Eventually, clumps of people came together to form political units of various complexities. The affect on the individual was that we came to rely on others' specialized training. We came to rely on other's in general. The vast majority of people are followers, not leaders. This means that leaders can get away with a lot before enough of the followers rebel. The rise of the modern Nations State, say with Louis XIV, set us on the path that we are on today. At the root of it all, how do billions of people live together in an increasingly complex economic and technological world?

Free market capitalism and Marxism are opposing views of how wealth and labor are distributed within a body of individuals. Federalism and Communism are opposing views of politics and how the individuals within that body are able to express themselves and determine how much control is given to the governing body.

The vast majority of people do not have the time, inclination, interest, or care to learn about that stuff in depth. They revert to their pre-industrial roots and assume several things: 1) the people in the suits know what they are doing, 2) they have my best interests as their intentions, 3) my life will go on as it always has without unwanted interference, 4) it will all work out for the better in the end.

The universe does not care what we think or assume. Wishing it to be so does not make it so.

The foulest evil has grown in the soil of great intentions since the beginning of our race. The individual will always try to make the best decisions for themselves. The individual that leads the family unit will always try to create the best future for their family. See where I'm going here? A clan will square off with another clan for space, resources, or privilege. Happens all the time. The further away from the individual that a decision is made, the less likely that decision will benefit the individual. The higher up the scale you go, the more those decisions are made for the group and not the individual.

The individual can look at what the Federal Government is going and call it crazy, but no one will listen to them. The suits all feel that they understand Economics and Finance better than the little guy. Of course they do. The Common Man who earns $50,000 per year knows that you can not borrow $50,000 the first year, and $30,000 every year after that for ten years and still be able to pay the interest on that debt. Never mind the original loan amount. How is this good for the Federal Treasury? Nations are different from people, and a certain amount of debt does spur growth, since a country does not EARN profits, but taxes the available surplus cash of their people, but that is another blog and distracts from the point I'm trying to make.

The entire world seems to have gone insane. Through pride and jealousy, the European Monetary Union worked for 60 years to create a common currency. In 1999 the framework was agreed upon and in 2002 the Euro came into existence. The Europeans were proud that their currency had a base value that appreciated greater than the US dollar. Forget for a moment that they have no unified military and a military infrastructure that has less firepower and manpower than our big city police departments. The traditionally western parts of Europe are Social Democracies, where the governments are nanny states and the people have very little power or electoral voice.

When the Euro was adopted, the French and German leaders each told their people that the lesser European nations will find stability in the Euro and be free from the gyrations of their 'inferior' currencies. The European Central Bank, and the policies coming out of Brussels will provide a stable platform for Europe to come together economically and politically. Sort like a Socialized Union of European States. The reality has been one where the Greeks, the Portuguese, the Italians and others used the enhanced value of the Euro to go on spending binges, doubling their national debts every four years or so, despite all the rules coming out of Brussels. Now the Euro is unravelling. The Greeks discovered that by adopting the Euro, they gave up the traditional benefits of an 'inferior' currency. In the 1980's, if the Greek economy faltered, then the value of its currency fell as well. This made Greece more attractive for foreign investment. This would then correct the larger economic picture for that country. Capital would flow, much like warm and cold air in a system. Without these self-correcting mechanisms, they simply become an impoverished sector in a larger European Nation, beholding to the benevolence and the whims of others outside the borders of Greece.

Our Federal policies place us increasingly under the thumb of China. If you owe money to someone, you are beholden to that person. Works the same for countries.

Does any of this cross the minds of our elected leaders? Obviously not. Are there differences between the Republican Party and the Democrat Party? Yes, but only one of degrees. The overall direction is opposite that of the intent of our Founders. The Tea Party movement is great, but as I knew would happen, they are being infiltrated and co-opted by the progressive elements of both parties, each trying to tap into its energy. The self-destruction of Ms. Medina in Texas is a good example of this. Vigilance will be required if the movement it to survive.

Things are going to get much, much worse before they get better. We will have to reset our government and our economy. Our debts will have to be discharged or ignored if we are to survive. This mean ruining our honor and our integrity as a nation and a people. At double-digit, cumulative GDP growth, it will take us 75 years of continuous growth to pay off the debt that Obama-Reid-Pelosi have racked up in this budget and the next several. Insanity.

There is not enough money in the world. The entire Planetary GDP can not pay off the debt we have racked up. Doesn't anyone see this? Does anyone care? The world will care when a future administration simply says, nope, we are writing off all this debt and obligations. Try suing us or invading us, we dare you.

It may have to come to that. Insanity indeed.

--Zavost

Virtual Congress

I think it is about time for our Congress to adopt a Virtual Office, a Virtual Senate, and a Virtual House of Representatives.

In the pre-Progressive era of the United States, Senators were appointed to the U.S. Congress by their respective state legislatures. This was done to ensure that the needs of the States were better represented at the Federal level. The Framers did not want direct election for the Senators. They were to reflect the current leadership at the State level, sort of like a proxy for the Governor of that State. They would be someone who would slow down the hot-heads in the House of Representatives and tamp down on Populist movements.

There is a reason why the House of Representatives elects its members in two-year terms. They were intended to reflect the current culture of the people. How is this possible today when there are representatives who have served in the House and Senate since before I was even born! Does some hippie that was stoned off his butt in 1968 reflect the current culture of my country or State? I think the easy answer to that is, "NO".

Our Framers were brilliant. I am impressed over and over again as I read more, mature more and become better able to understand all of this in a broader context.

Those who served in government in the first century of this country were grateful to get out of the Federal City. They could feel the warping influence of that city and were relieved when they could get back with their constituents. Letter after letter from John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and George Washington indicated that they felt that Federal service was both a duty and an obligation. They also felt that once one had served a term or two, it was time to go back to your life and your career. Government service was never, ever, intended to be a full time job.

It was felt that the corrupting atmosphere of the Capitol and the parasites that fed there, would eventually pierce any moral shielding if they remained there too long. The whole absolute power corrupting absolutely thing; which incidentally fits nicely with the Framer's intent that the Federal Government obtained its powers from the States (and the People). Federal power was granted from the bottom up, not the top down (10th Amendment). The Framers had the concept of the old Roman citizen farmer that served when needed and then returned their energies back to a productive use. Even the Romans (and Greeks) knew that government was a necessary evil, a fire that could not be held onto too long lest it consume the holder.

With all that said, lets explore the idea of a Virtual Congress. Let us take advantage of this high-tech society that we have created over the last 60 years. As usual, it was the free-market that lead the way in the innovation of the 'Virtual Office'. Businesses that needed to maximize their capital did not wish to pay huge sums of money (resources) in a building, either in rent, leasing, or purchasing. That money could better be spent strengthening their position in the market. Through the 1970's and into the 00's, the Internet (obviously, I'm also talking about pre-Internet times) and the associated technologies (fax machines and cell phones) allowed business leaders and managers to decouple from the brick and mortar portion of their enterprises. In the 80's and 90's, people could work from home more and more; it became a real choice for people with non-traditional employment needs.

Today, there are extremely sophisticated suites that permit very large virtual meetings to take place. Internet-based web solutions allow dozens, even hundreds of people, to be plugged into a Virtual congress (small 'c' intentional). You can look into a person's eyes from 10,000 miles away. You can study body language and even have a side-monitor going that will permit facial recognition software elaborate on a person's likely emotional state, if needed. Virtual staffs and sub-contracted administrative personnel can assist the representatives for pennies on the dollar due to economies of scale and specialized training related to both their positions and the technology suite being utilized (think "renting the talent").

Why must our representatives travel to a single location any longer? I believe that it would cost far less to purchase and maintain premium 535 movie theater-sized virtual chambers, with a fraction of the staff and over-head (that is another blog) then what we pay to concentrate it all in D.C.

There are many, many game changers involved in this. For starters, think about how special interests gain access to our representatives. There are truly massive operations in D.C., entire buildings if not blocks given over to special interest groups. Their only purpose is to gain access and the attention of your representative. Those are centralized operations. Now imaging that they have to recreate 55+ (yes, I'm including some territories, protectorates, and D.C. itself) offices, staff, and point-men to go after individuals that are both spread all over the nation, but surrounded by the very interests that elected them to that post in the first place.

Keeping the representative at home allows them to be better connected to their constituents and allows them to remain grounded in their values (no more hiding in D.C. to escape town hall meetings). I believe that this one point alone is sufficient enough for the investment in the technology. The Capitol building can remain for formal occasions; such as when a new session starts or ends, the election of a new President and such. The Supreme Court can remain where it as as can the President and the executive administration.

Once upon a time, Federal service was a duty and an obligation. Today it has become a powerful means to whatever ends you desire.

I feel that we should go back to the Framer's intent for how a Senator is selected and I feel that the Congress should be set up in both their home States and their districts via these Virtual Theaters. Think about it. I'm sure that everyone out there can come up with many more positives to this than I have thought out. I'm sure it is not perfect, but then again, nothing really is.

-Zavost

Goodbye, NASA

Only Obama could find a way to both increase funding for a program and then eliminate its primary reason for existing.

The FY10 NASA budget increases funding from $17.3b to $18.69b. In this fiscal year or early in the next, the Space Shuttle fleet will be retired. Effective immediately, the Constellation program, and the programs associated with it, are cancelled (Projects Ares, Orion, and Altair). This effectively neuters our manned flight program. The money that was slated for the Shuttle and the Constellation will be shunted towards keeping the International Space Station (ISS) functional until about 2020, to which I have to now ask, "why"? What is the point if not to create a toe hold in space?

According to their budget notes, funds will be shunted into Government investment in private commercial space enterprises, Climate Research, Aeronautics, and increased use of Robotic Exploration.

The stench of politics is so heavy around this I can barely breathe.

First off, lets start with how long it takes to get infrastructure in place for an Apollo program a Space Shuttle program, or even a Constellation program. When the Mercury astronauts were dipping their big toe into the cosmic ocean, planning for the Gemini and Apollo missions were already in the works. Gemini was on the chalk board, shifting its missions around the discoveries made in Mercury. Apollo was at least on the back of an envelope. What NASA learned in Mercury told them how big the Saturn V rocket would need to be, for instance.

When Gemini was in full swing, Apollo was already a working project. Veterans of Mercury and Gemini, along with new talent, were pouring into the new program. By the time JFK gave his famous speech, NASA was already well down the road to deliver on his promise (bet you don't read that in the history books).

When Apollo was underway, there were a variety of programs that were in the concept phase. The future post-Apollo course was uncertain. When the plug was pulled, the Apollo-Soyuz program was born to use up most of the left-over resources in parallel with the Skylab project.

All of that took time, even in a political environment that almost allowed NASA to write its own budget. Mercury was started in 1959 and we still lost both the race to space and the race to orbit. Yuri Gagarin orbited in 1961, two years after Mercury was announced. Gemini and Apollo were founded at virtually the same time (1961). It was not until 1964 that the Apollo Logistics Office was founded to coordinate all the equipment that was needed to get us to the moon. That didn't happen until July, 1969; eight years after Apollo was started!

Remember, that was done when the political and public will lined up. Apollo sputtered to an end when they ran out of things to do and the public grew bored with what had become almost routine space flight. NASA knew that the next step was to build orbiting stations that could fabricate things (like small factories, smelters, and construction yards) that would then take us back to the moon and beyond. That was going to be far, far more expensive then shots to the moon and low Earth orbit.

The Space Shuttle has been heavily criticized as unneeded and unwarranted. Some said that the shuttle program pulled money and talent away from Apollo at a time when Apollo should have been expanded to develop heavier lift vehicles. The supporters of the Apollo program, argued, perhaps justifiably, that the modern day Constellation Program should have been developed in a straight line, since much of the technology already existed to create bigger and more powerful systems patterned on the Saturn V booster.

The point is Apollo had completed what it was designed to do. The next step was the creation of orbital facilities that would would service, not just craft outbound for the moon, but sub-orbital craft such as Scram-jets (again, you don't hear much about them anymore). To do this, a re-usable craft was needed that could be converted to carry a large amount of cargo AND passengers. You can fit a lot of people into a shuttle, especially if you pack them in the way Northwestern airlines does. Pound for pound, dollar for dollar, it would be far less expensive to shuttle people into orbit on the Space Shuttle then it would have been launching three people at a time on a Saturn V booster (the six used in the moon missions cost $45 billion in 2005 dollars).

I've studied the Constellation program, along with the Ares, Orion, and Altair projects and found them to be insufficient (yes, yes, I know, who am I and why does my opinion count). It is more efficient to use reusable craft to ferry from the surface to orbit and back again. It simply is, think about it.

Just as the shuttle brought up the components for the ISS, doubling the fleet of shuttles could build orbital factories and other needed infrastructure. Asteroids could be captured and returned into orbit for smelting. Think about this. If the environmentalists don't want us mining for iron or copper on Earth, then lets do it in orbit. I know I'm talking about things that will take decades to realize, but it is all very possible. Space has unlimited supplies of everything we could possibly want.

Instead of the United States wading out into the cosmic ocean and setting up platforms for others to climb upon, we have instead relegated ourselves to buying a $51million ticket on a Russian platform that was developed back in the early 1960's!

The voyages to the new world were first funded by governments. Specifically Spain, Portugal, and England. Eventually, commercial enterprises were established, first collectively among the bigger merchants and nobles and then solo ventures by adventurers and those looking for a business score in the exotic corners of the world.

Space will be exactly the same way. Governments will bear the expenses and open up the frontier. Adventurous, risk-taking corporations will create their own programs, likely with the intent to build an orbital factory and develop a low-cost, effective method for capturing near-Earth asteroids. Laboratories and Pharmacies want to develop new materials and medicines for consumption. It will be the corporations that will make space flight cheaper and more accessible to the rest of humanity. The longer that goes on, the cheaper it will become.

I just want to scream out loud about what NASA is doing today. It has been hijacked by political correctness and is led by those that just want a budget, any budget to keep their jobs. The child-like joy and wonder of space that was fanned in me by my mother in Christmas 1980 with the book Cosmos is almost dead. With the time it takes to develop these technologies, others will leap way ahead (not to mention the crushing debt that looms like the Sword of Damocles). Even if we get a President that gives space the attention it deserves.

On a more philosophical level, we must eventually grow up and leave the nest. In a universe that is over 14 billion light years across and trillions of light years in volume, there is only one planet that has humans on it. No where else can one of us be found. All it takes is a large asteroid, comet, or plague and we will go the way of the dinosaurs. We can only make it as a species if we grow and leave this world.

You would think that the Greens would look to the day when the Earth can become one, large, park. Off-limits to permanent residents. A place to visit and remember. They would get what they want, a world without humans messing it up. The only thing is, they don't want us to leave the Earth, since we would just become a plague among the stars, they want us die. Collective mass suicide is the only thing that will make them happy.

We must reverse the short-sighted policies of this President.

I know I must end this soon, but I can't help but to put this into some perspective. The FY10 NASA budget is $18.69b, with some funds coming from stimulus spending (debt). Some of the funds are coming from killing off the aforementioned programs. That money will be spent on climate research (don't we have others working on that?), robots (they are tools, not explorers), and airplane related issues (again, we got that covered already).

The cost to service just the INTEREST on the national debt is $187 Billion. Just the interest. Just this fiscal year. Yep. The entire 14 year Apollo program cost $145 Billion (in 2008 dollars). Think on that. The entire Space Shuttle program, since the project inception in the 1970's (first flight in 1981) has been $145 Billion. How many jobs were/are attached to those programs? How much good has come from that money?

Both programs ran for over a decade and cost less than a SINGLE year's worth of our expenses just to pay the INTEREST on our national debt.

Remember Porkulus, or Stimulus II, I should say? That was $787 billion worth of spending and $180 billion in pork spending with a two year spending window. Almost a trillion dollars just to piss away with no jobs and no new business. For the love of god and humanity, plow that money into the Space industry. The jobs that will come from this as it ripples through will be significant. As it is now, the cancelled projects will put tens of thousands of people out of work. Perhaps hundreds of thousands.

Way to go, Obama.

Demand Integrity

Why are politicians allowed to lie to us? Why do we put up with it?

Right off the top of my head, I'm seeing Barak Obama explain that perhaps someone, somehow, must have slipped in provisions into the health care bill that might, perhaps, not allow you to keep the doctor and health plan you wanted. That after being on TV time and time again saying that people who say otherwise are simply fear mongers that should be ignored. Oops, turns out they were right. Sorry. No promise to strip those provisions out, just a lame, "oops".

Then there is Pelosi [ADHD moment: someone must really council her that there is only so much plastic surgery one can have before you start to look like the animated work of a mortician] who stands in front of a camera and essentially tells people that politicians say things just to get elected. To paraphrase her, "a lot of things get said on the campaign trail." Translation: we say what we think you want to hear (and then under her breath, I'm sure I heard it, or perhaps she wanted to said it, "stupid").

Bill Clinton feels the need to legalistically parse the word, "is". Give me a break.

How these people can get up in the morning and look at themselves in the mirror is beyond me. Whatever happened to your word being your bond? It seems like the days are gone when a man can shake the hand of another and know that something will be taken care of or carried through. No contract or lawyer required.

When Clinton was in office, my co-workers would talk about how slick and clever he was, that he could be caught cold and yet still squirm his way out. They never really considered that this is the President of the United States of America. The same position held by the likes of Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Lincoln and Reagan. The man sullies their honor by occupying the station.

Leadership descends from Character. A person is shaped by their upbringing, moulded by what they see and hear around them as they mature. They draw lessons, both good and bad from those more mature around them on a daily basis. Some they reject since they have seen what happens when one sees the results of such behavior, and others emulate, seeing that you can get away with quite a lot in our society today.

I want a president who will do the right thing, regardless of politics or party. A president who says what they mean and mean what they say. When I see Obama stutter and stammer off 'prompter trying to explain to people that he can't quite figure out how someone may have slipped something unseen in a 2,500 page bill I just want to cringe. Then, after telling us that there may indeed now be provisions that he promised would not be in there; he makes no move to remove those things in order to honor the many, many promises that he made to the American public. No character, no honor, no morals, and therefore no trust.

The other day, Pelosi said that Health Care will get passed no matter what. If the gate is closed she will go over the wall. If the wall is too high, she will pole vault it, if she can not do that she will air drop into the yard. This is madness of an unimagined scale. This 'wall' that she speaks of is the will of the American people. A huge majority of people do not want this "reform". Do you understand this? The will of the American people is to be ignored.

She is a representative from California. She is supposed to represent the people from her district. Her role is not to decide what is best for the rest of the country. It is immoral for her to stand there and tell us that our will is irrelevant. That our wishes are ill-informed and unimportant.

Politicians of integrity would recognize the majority resistance to this bill and make an attempt to better explain what this is for and why. They would do this until enough people felt that the bill was a move in the right direction. Instead, they plow forward, sure and arrogant in their righteousness. The reality is that this health care reform has nothing to do with health care and everything about control.

Our Founders warned us about integrity. They felt that our government would rot and collapse if, 1) god were removed from our culture, and 2) people could no longer trust one another. Our constitution could function only in a religious society. It was written that way. It assumed a basic level of morals from its citizenry.

All over Washington D.C. there are images of Moses and many, many other religious motifs. They are so common that they have all blended in with the back ground, almost completely unnoticed. It is a shame that people don't actually stop and look at what they represent any longer. The Founders also knew that once you started playing games with the rules and interpret them any way you wish then you simply legalize criminal behavior on the part of the government.

When 60 out of 100 Senators are lawyers and 158 out of 435 representatives are lawyers, then you get laws written by and for lawyers. Written in ever increasingly obscure script that can only be interpreted by other lawyers. A quick scan of the Internet shows me that there is one lawyer for every 262 citizens. To compare, there is one doctor for every 375 citizens. The legal profession is vastly over-represented as a ratio of the population. No wonder the medical profession is under assault. Congress is supposed to reflect the will of the people, not the will of the Bar.

Do lawyers lack integrity? I think that as a general rule they must have that part of their personality suppressed or removed. How can a defense lawyer represent a man that admits to them that they committed the crime for which they are accused? Any lawyer that attempts to get their client off via a 'loop hole' is automatically suspect. Their client should stand or fall based on the facts of the case. Any law that needs to be "interpreted" is a law that is not written clearly enough.

Any Congressman that passes a law and then exempts either the Congress as a body or any other group of citizens automatically fails the integrity test. A law must bind everyone high and low or that law becomes, at best, meaningless, at its worst, a weapon.

Character, Integrity, Honesty. Everything descends from those qualities. No one is perfect, and we all slip from time to time. If we are man enough to admit our mistakes and mature enough to seek help when we need it then things will always work themselves out.

If my daughter makes a mistake, she fails a quiz or loses points for homework. When I make a mistake, someone may not get paid on time, or I will lay off people who would otherwise not have been let go (had a better person been calling the shots). All of those are localized events that everyone can learn from. When a politician makes a mistake (intentional or otherwise), the effects are felt for generations and affect hundreds of millions of people (in America's case, billions around the world). Those 535 formal representatives of the American people treat their positions without the proper respect or basic understandings of their responsibilities to the generations alive today and those yet to be born.

Educate yourself and vote the bums out and replace them with people of integrity or all we will do is rotate one loser out and rotate another one in.

--Zavost