Sunday, December 14, 2003

Radio and TV ads: I've noticed that many ads have one thing in common. In a lame attempt to be funny, they use the smart person-dumb person comparison. The dumb one says/does something incredubly, unbelievably stupid. The smart one shows the dumb one the "way," using the product/service being promoted.

This'd all be ok, if not very smart, clever or original, except for one thing: the dumb one is always, ALWAYS a white male. The smart one is usually a woman (his wife), sometimes a kid (his son or daughter), or sometimes it might be a man (his friend) of another race). The entire idea is to get us used to the idea that white men are weak and stupid.

Years ago, up until maybe as recently as fifteen or twenty years ago, they were doing the same thing to women. We all remember the house-bound wives, the sexy, but ditzy girl friends and the simple-minded office girl. Well, I'm sure that wasn't any fun for the woman who wanted to be taken seriously as an attorney, a doctor or a business executive. As I started paying attention to it, I didn't care for it then and I don't care for this turnabout either.

Like it or not, and for reasons unrelated to such superficialities as race and gender, but rather to the way things were as mankind emerged from the Dark Ages of mysticism and feudalism. Men were in charge during those times, and momentum kept it that way for centuries. Mysticism and feudalism were (partially) conquered first and best in Western Europe. Thus, it was Western Europeans who first learned to use their minds to understand reality and to learn to use it.

Men of other races and backgrounds have followed and, at times, led. Women finally got their start, mainly in the twentieth century. They're catching up fast, and rightly so.

None of this makes white men stupid. We're the same as we've always been.

No conspiracy here, but there seems to be a mindset that wants to undo the Age of Reason and return humanity to a new Dark Age. I reject it.

My personal plan is to keep track of those firms who produce and use those kinds of ads and not patronize them.

Col. Hogan

Friday, December 12, 2003

I'm gonna get around to some of the objectivist and libertarian stuff soon, but an interesting thing happened today. I've observed the phenomenon before but a particular event brought it into sharp focus today.

I went over to the Ice Palace in Westminster for a little skate. There weren't very many people skating, mostly kids.

The thing that hit me was that there was a little kid, fully decked out in his pint-sized Detroit Red Wings hockey outfit (sans hockey stick). He was skating very well for a tyke (about five years old). The odd thing: his father, probably just a bit under 30 years of age, was off the ice, often standing in the open doorway shouting instructions to the lad.

My question: why the hell is this dolt standing in the doorway, why isn't he in skates, on the ice, playing with his son? Why is this boy out there by himself while Dad is shivering on the sidelines?

When Jim, my elder son, was about that age, we started skating. I'd skated some as a kid, but I was never very interested nor very good at it. We went to a LA Kings game and somehow we translated that into going skating ourselves. It never occurred to me to put skates on Jim and shove him out on the ice. We both put skates on and learned (relearned, in my case) it together.
We skated regularly for a couple of years and got pretty good. Jim tried hockey, and decided he didn't really like it. I tried it, and decided that I did. Jim just skated in public sessions after that--I think he still does, but not regularly. I played amateur hockey for nearly fifteen years, and skate public sessions pretty regularly to this day.

To the father of that young boy: what the hell is wrong with you? You're missing a great opportunity. Get some skates on and get yourself on the ice--with your son!

Col. Hogan

Monday, December 08, 2003

I sure would like to find more time to write this stuff down.

Col. Hogan

Thursday, November 27, 2003

The GOP came into the majority largely in response to Democrat excesses in 1994. They did it under the leadership of Gingrich, as you may recall, by means of a message of rolling back the size and scope of gov't. Recall the media frenzy over the Contract With America, a mostly pretty good start. Gingrich pressured a vote on his several points in the forst 100 days of that Congress.

One of the best points of this push was to require the feds to fund federal mandates, which I thought would be an excellent beginning. Alas, that one was voted on but didn't pass.

The Dems answer to this arrogance on the part of the upstart GOP majority was to start destroying the reputations of as many prominent Repubs as they could. Unfortunately, Newt has a somewhat checkered past regarding his personal life. As this was exposed by the ever moral Dems, Newt showed his true Repub characteristic: his lack of a spine, and resigned.

The extortion treatment has been tried a few more times against uppity Repubs, with the usual success when attempted against craven cowards.

The same tactic was tried a couple of times by the GOP against Dems, but the Dems are more brazen, plus they have the News Media on their side.

Subsequently, in the wake of this constant threat by the Dems, the GOP, after narrowly getting GW Bush elected, tacked. Now, they're attempting to out Dem the Dems: Take all the traditional Dem positions and get them through with the slim majority they now enjoy in both Houses.

The result so far: we have virtually all of the programs Bill Kkklinton wanted to create, now created passed and signed by the Repubs. Add to that the many restrictions on freedom of movement and deed enacted in the wake of the Islamic attacks, and Voila! we have the beginnings of the USSA (Union of the Soviet States of America).

Most of the very few Repubs who might stand against this usurpation, being the spineless politicians they are, succumbed to the democrat-inspired extortion tactics used by GOP party leaders and opted for socialism to keep their cushy jobs.

Alas! All this just to keep a majority! I'd be willing to bet that had they stayed with the message that brought the GOP into the majority in the first place, both the GOP and all Americans would be better off and more free right now.

Col. Hogan

Monday, November 24, 2003

To continue yesterday's lesson.....

It wasn't always easy to pay the doctor's bill along with all the regular ones, but we could. I reckon we were late at times, and maybe paid the bill off over a few months (when we four kids got mumps one after the other), but the doctor was patient (a pun, he he!) as he undoubtably had to be with many of his customers.

Why can't it be like that today?

We can blame it on new technology, except we've had new technology more or less continuously since the days of bleedings and leechings. We could blame it on hard times, but 'most all of us were better off, even during the Great Depression, than they were during the Renaissance.

I think we have to hang this one on gov't.

Col. Hogan

Sunday, November 23, 2003

Return with me now, to those thrilling days of yesteryear....

I guess you'd have to be at least fifty years of age to remember when gov't had almost nothing to do with health care. There was the employer-supplied major medical insurance, but I don't know if there was any gov't involvement in that--maybe.

As for the normal, day-to-day health needs, it was all out of pocket. Oddly, and impossibly to today's mindset, we could afford it. It wasn't always easy, but we could.

My dad worked for the railroad. He started out as a telegraph operator, then followed the improvements in technology over the years to the fellow who radioed orders to the trainmen. Not an overly lucrative kind of work. I guess we were middle-class. Mom didn't work until my youngest brother was entering his teens. She started working then, mainly to give herself a little spending money to buy a few things she wanted outside the family budget.

When any of us got sick, of course first Mom tried to care for us. Actually, that worked out fine more often than not. If we had to see a doctor, we went. The doctor did his stuff, then sent us a bill. We paid the bill. That was it. No copays. No forms. No approvals. No big book of participating "care-givers." --As if a physician's task is to "give care!" --Like a cow's job is to "give milk." This New-Age lingo makes me ill. -- Our doctor knew us. He liked us--at least, he seemed to. He was happy to see us and to do what it took to make us feel better.

Col. Hogan

Friday, November 21, 2003

The Nazis are poised to vote on the first steps toward nationalizing the medical drug industry. Once again, this usurpation is being pushed by, not Gephart, Pelosi, et al, but the Bush gang. The Republicans!

In order to show that they're not the same ol' evil Republicans of the past, they're obviously trying to out-Democrat the Democrats and push the US further toward socialist dictatorship with themselves in office instead of the Dems.

Well, we'll aparently be starting out with free-- or cheap-- drugs for all seniors on medicare. We'll see where it goes from there.

Col. Hogan

Thursday, November 20, 2003

This is my first post. it'll have to be short, 'cause I'm tired. Getting my blog going took just about all my remaining energy for today.

Col. Hogan