We like to know who is logging on, and we send out an email announcing each new posting with a link to the site. To let us know who you are and/or to be incuded on the email list please send an email to: email@example.com
A Note on Format
Links to other parts of the website can only be made to a page, rather than a specific article or part of article and there may be more than one article on a page. Therefore, when you click on a link to another part of the website there may be more on the page to which you are taken than just the material you are looking for.
There will be an occasional short article on the Home Page and the longer weekly post starts in the right hand column of this page. Navigation to another page on this website may be done in two ways. You can either click on the link contained in the article to take you to a continuation of the article, or you may go to the top of the home page where there are tabs to take you to the remaining pages.
I also have a on Yahoo that I formerly used as my web host. It is rowaypo.com. I may still use that website as a place to put previous articles, but you won’t notice that because you will simply click on the link to that article. However, the name of the old website may appear at the bottom of the page or in the web address bar at the top of the page.
The address to which comments or request to be put on the mailing list shoulld be sent is firstname.lastname@example.org or you may use my personal email address which is email@example.com Later I will probably add an automatic email link that can be used to send emails to the website, but right now I am just trying to get the basics done.
Send any comments or criticism to one of the above email adddresses
LINKS TO OTHER ARTICLES STILL ONLINE
click on the link to the right of the article
#155 The Tangled Web page 3
#154 The Druid Priests... page 6
#153 Were Obama's Lies... page 5
#152 Does It Matter? page 5
#151 Political Correctness page 2
#150 The Mind Of Man page 4
#149 The Tide Is Swelling page4
#148 More About Narcissism page 2
#147 Perils Of The Tea Party page 3
#146 Creeping Narcissism page 6
All articles on this website are copyrighted on the date first placed online. All rights reserved.
No part of any article may be reproduced for redistribution without express permission
September 25, 2013 Appellate Court Acquits Tom Delay in Texas
A Texas appeal court has reversed the guilty verdict against Tom DeLay for money laundering entered a couple of years ago by an Austin, Texas, trial court. However, instead of sending it back to the lower court for a new trial, the appellate court entered a judgment acquitting DeLay of the commission of a crime. There is a significant difference between an acquittal and the usual remedy in such a situation which is simply sending the case back for a new trial. The appellate court’s action was a complete repudiation of the trial court, thus confirming that the prosecution of DeLay was an example of the politicization of the criminal process.
It will be recalled that DeLay, a very powerful Republican who was the Speaker of the House of Representatives in the U.S. Congress, was targeted by a Democratic Houston prosecutor named Earle, for purely political reasons. Earle was well known for indicting his political enemies and that included some who were Democrats. When Earle was unable to get a Houston Grand Jury to indict DeLay, the case was taken to Austin, the hot bed of leftists in Texas, where a left wing Grand Jury entered the indictment against DeLay for money laundering. The alleged crime consisted of DeLay’s sending some of the money in his campaign war chest to Republican legislative candidates in Texas. Some of the money in Delay’s campaign account consisted of entirely legal contributions from corporations. The Texas statute relating to campaign contributions prohibits corporations from contributing to political campaigns but does not apply to federal candidates such as DeLay. The practice DeLay was following was widely recognized as being beyond the reach of the Texas statute relating to political contributions.
The Texas money laundering statute makes it illegal for persons such as drug dealers to run their ill-gotten gains though legal bank accounts to sanitize them. The theory of Earle and his fellow leftists in Austin was that DeLay’s corporate contributors had run their contributions through DeLay’s campaign account to put them beyond the reach of the Texas political contributions act. Their theory was total nonsense. There was no evidence that any part of the money in DeLay’s war chest was intended for Texas political candidates at the time it was contributed to DeLay. Once in DeLay’s war chest it was, of course, mixed with the rest of the money already there. The money sent to Texas by DeLay was not ill-gotten in any sense, and not, therefore, covered by the Texas campaign contributions statute. No illegally obtained money had been laundered
The Texas appellate court recognized the Earle tactic for what it was, a contrived effort to politicize the criminal process by using a law to cover a situation it was never intended to cover. Nothing could be more destructive of our bedrock principle of the rule of law than the prosecution of DeLay in those circumstances. In fact our bill of rights was included in the Constitution as a reaction to the same kind of tactics used in England in the notorious Star Chamber proceedings. There can be no justice, indeed there can be no democracy, when those in power can corruptly use the criminal process to send their political opponents to jail.
The DeLay conviction was covered in a previous posting on this website. The action of the Texas Democrats in this case is just one of many examples of the fact that leftists are guided by only one principle and that is power. When one attempts to make this argument it is usually met with the response known as ‘a pox on both of their houses,’ in which it is asserted that there is no difference between the political tactics of Republicans and Democrats. While extensive research may find an instance where Republicans have been guilty of conduct similar to that of the Democrats in this case, it has to be contrasted with the ‘business as usual’ approach of the Democrats in similar circumstances. Another case that differs but little from the DeLay case, and was going through the courts at about the same time, was that of Scooter Libby who was convicted by DC jury of a crime that was never even committed. Libby’s prison sentence was commuted by President Bush, but that does not erase the conviction in the same way that a pardon would.
March 5, 2014 Additional Proof Of Fraud In the
Climate Change Movement
March 5, 2014 #156 The Perjury Of Harry Reid
Harry Reid’s ridiculous statement, that all of the ‘horror stories’ about the effects of Obamacare being ‘lies,’ reveals more about Harry Reid and the Democratic left than it does about those who were called liars. In fact, Harry Reid didn’t point to a single instance of a ‘horror story’ which was false, and the broad sweep of his claim, in the aftermath of hundreds, maybe even thousands or millions, of very specific claims of individuals being adversely affected by the new health care law, is the first clue to the fact that his is the one who is lying. What he is doing is engaging in the psychological process of projecting onto others the kind of behavior that he would engage in under the same circumstances. In other words, if Harry Reid would lie in order to effectively oppose a political objective of the Republicans, he assumes that the Republicans would lie in order to defeat his political objectives. What his statement proves is not that the Republicans are lying but that he is.
‘Projection’ is a very natural product of narcissism. Those who engage in it assume that everyone in the world acts the same way they do. Furthermore, narcissists have spent so much time in a fantasy world which is peopled by others who worship them and agree with their every thought, that they have little experience observing how real people think and behave. In fact, they regard others as objects rather than individual human beings. As a result they are likely to assume that their own mode of thinking and acting is the way everyone else thinks and acts. Also in the narcissist’s fantasy world, there are no rules. The dreamer has absolute power and is justified in saying or doing anything that is necessary to accomplish the ‘good’ that is always the objective of his/her dreams. It is ‘good’ because it proceeds from him/her. The end justifies the means. However, while the narcissist may attribute their own behavioral modes to their opponents, they do not attribute any good intentions to them. In fact, the opponent is always evil because, otherwise, he/she would agree with the narcissist’s goals and objectives.
The debate about the health care act, from the time of its passage through the present debate about its effects and imperfections, presents a pretty complete picture of the narcissistic approach. When the Bill that became the healthcare law was originally presented, it was justified on the basis that the current health care system was very bad. It was bad, according to its sponsors, because it was denying needed medical procedures to poor people who did not have health insurance. However, when the time came to produce examples of people being denied such treatments, no examples were initially produced. In fact, the health system was working very well, and everyone was getting the most expensive treatments for even the most serious diseases. Doctors and hospitals were being required to treat everyone regardless of ability to pay. The costs of treating those who couldn’t pay were being paid for by a system in which the hospitals billed those who were insured for amounts much greater than the actual cost of such treatment. Thus, the occasional news item about a hospital billing a patient $2000.00 for administering a single aspirin tablet, or $5000.00 for a day’s stay in a double room. The health insurance companies were paying those bills and, thus, subsidizing the treatment of the poor. As the heath care debate proceeded, the leftist media and the Democrats seemed to feel pressure to produce some ‘horror stories’ of people who were denied treatment because they didn’t have insurance, and they apparently searched in vain for examples to feed to their allies in the leftist media. Finally they came up with stories about 2 women who were denied treatment for life threatening conditions because they were unable to pay for it. One was in Illinois, and one was in New York. The press went into its full disaster mode blaring out the stories of those two women with details which included their names and the nature of their medical conditions. The ink wasn’t even dry on the newsprint in which those cases were reported when someone questioned the two women involved and found that both had, in fact, received all the treatment available for their conditions despite their inability to pay. Obamacare was, nevertheless, passed, mostly in secret and without a single Republican vote. The Democrats didn’t even blink an eye at the fact that they had failed to show any real need for it, and had, in fact, lied when they presented the only two examples ever offered to show such a need.
It may be true that the system in place when Obamacare was adopted did not directly provide funding for health care for the poor, or at least not as directly as was true with respect to those who had health insurance or the necessary private funds to pay for their health care needs. However, there was a back door system that did the job. That system consisted of emergency rooms and hospitals that could not deny treatment, fund raisers, charitable assistance of various kinds and, as stated above, the system of subsidization wherein the hospitals recovered most of their costs by overcharging the insurance companies that paid the hospital bills of most people. There were also, ultimately, the bankruptcy courts to excuse any outstanding debts that were not covered by any of those means. While it may have placed an additional burden on the poor to navigate their way through that subterranean system, the poor were, nevertheless provided all the benefits of the best health care system in the world. In fact, the fund raisers and charitable assistance that were a part of that system were bringing out the best in those who came to the aid of their stricken fellow men and women. The poor will always be with us, and the test of our humanity is met when they are given all the help they need to survive.
It is not necessary that we destroy a well-functioning system, the efficiency of which is based upon a recognition of the imperfection of the human race in its (the system’s) requirement that payment be made for services rendered. In a capitalistic system those who are productive receive a wage or profit which represents the value of their contribution to the total of everything produced by the system. The problem is, not everyone is willing or able to be productive and, as a result, those who don’t are poor. If the non-productive are given the same compensation as those who are, there will soon be no one producing the things we need to survive. While it would be inhumane to deny the necessities of life to those who can’t or won’t produce, some means must be found to provide for the poor, but the system must also avoid doing so in a manner that will encourage the productive to drop out of the system. Our health care system was doing an excellent job of meeting those objectives.
The point is the Democrats lied when they, in an apparent recognition of the truth of the foregoing, thought it necessary to produce evidence that the poor were not being provided the assistance they needed. They found no problem in lying in order to achieve their fantasy-based utopian scheme. What they did there is no different than what they plan for our entire economic system in which they seek to destroy a capitalistic system which is just as dependent on the recognition of the imperfection of the human race as the health care system that was a part of that capitalist system. The poor were ultimately better off getting treatment by the best health care system in the world than they ever will be in a compromised health care system in which they may be given free, but lower quality treatment. It is just as true that the poor are better off in their access to the abundance provided by our capitalist system, than they ever will be in the poverty and scarcity that always accompanies the establishment of a utopian socialist system which is, supposedly, being created for their benefit.
To complete the evidence in the perjury case charged against Harry Reid and the narcissistic Democrats in the opening paragraph of this essay, we must now examine their reaction to the cries of pain from those injured by the left’s bungling efforts to implement their version of utopian health care. Despite the promises that those with health insurance and doctors selected by them could keep the same, (another lie told to accomplish the greater good of utopian health care) six million people were promptly deprived of their health insurance plans and many of them of their family physicians. The injured told their stories publicly, and they were stories earnestly told by real people who described real pain and suffering as a result of Obamacare’s effects. What did Harry Reid do? He attributed to those sufferers the same kind of action he was accustomed to engaging in. He claimed they lied. It is the classic example of ‘projection.’ Reid came full circle from his own lies about non-existent suffering of the uninsured, while pushing the adoption of the bill, to claiming those who told real stories of real suffering from the effects of the bill were lying.
Every aspect of our society is under attack during this age of narcissism. As indicated above, our entire economic system is under attack. The attack on the economic system has taken many forms such as the burdening of our businesses with mountains of regulations and the requirement that less qualified people be hired and promoted in order to employ and reward those who are less capable of functioning than others who are being denied access to jobs, education and promotions. It has also taken the form of attacks on our energy system which are based entirely on the greenhouse gas fraud. Only a couple of days ago one of the co-founders of the environmental activist group, Greenpeace, testified before Congress calling the climate change movement a complete hoax and citing statistics which establish the truth of his charge beyond doubt. Our justice system which has always been based on the rule of law is also suffering mightily. Obama is enacting laws despite Constitutional provisions which give the exclusive legislative power to Congress, and Eric Holder, as Attorney General, refuses to enforce duly enacted laws with which he doesn’t agree. Not only is he refusing to enforce such laws at the federal level he is advising his state counterparts to do the same at the state level. The Obama administration is using the power of the national government, as revealed by the recent IRS attack on the Tea Party movement, to silence political opponents. All of these culture-destroying, and nation-destroying, activities, and others, bear the unmistakable markings of the narcissistic left.