It is very evident that the Anglo-Saxon or Caucasion race of people is slowly dying out. In Countries where thi s race of people primarily reside the birthrate is 1.5 babies per female or lower. In order for the population to stay even it needs to be a minimum of 2.1 children born for every woman. The prediction is that both the Anglos in Canada and the European Countries will have ceded the majority to non Caucasion peoples by the middle of the century. The USA will take a little longer depending on the influx of both legal and illegal immigrants over the next ten years but nevertheless it will fall in line by the end of the century. There are many reasons for the decline in the Anglo American and European races but most if not all are directly related to "Social Engineering" and "Special Interest Groups". To start and review this phenomenum one must look at the beginning of the 20th century and the Industrial Revolution. From this point onward we saw a continuous expansion of wealth in the western world and regardless of the bumps and temporary slowdowns of financial depressions and recessions the standard of living improved continuously up to and including the current day. With the prosperity came freedoms not seen or heard of before and everyone wanted their fair share of the pie so groups such as the Suffragets, the ACLU, labor unions and many many more organized to fight for their particular cause. The suffragets for instance formed to seek rights for women which was a just and righteous cause but later became the Women's Liberation movement that demonized men while at the same time ridiculing women that wanted to be family caregivers and raise their children. They also fought successfully for a woman's right to abort a baby for any reason. Now whether you agree with this right or not you have to admit that losing potentially 40 million babies to abortion over the past 40 years has negatively affected the white population in the western world. Labor unions who were originally fighting for basic workers rights grew into large political organizations concerned more with power and wealth. They, along with other leftists have pushed for more entitlement and socialist type programs which are cover terms for the "redistribution of wealth". In order to support this philosophy everyone had to pay more and more taxes which drives up the cost of living for everyone. So in the 60's and 70's it became apparent that women no longer had a choice between staying home and raising a family because two incomes were required to 1) be able to enjoy all of the products coming available in the new age of technology and 2) to cover the high cost of taxation. Mix in some planned parenthood and voila' we have the reduction in childbirth by healthy families to 1 or 2 children because they just can't afford more. Sure there are other factors involved but none with more impact than those I have noted. The United States was the last beacon of hope but with Obama trashing the concept of self reliance and inividual rights and conforming America into a large "Collective" it appears they are heading along the designated path with the others. I worry for my grandchildren and their children because if I'm right we will have not left them as great a Country as our fathers left us.
Margaret Thatcher on Socilaism........There is nothing wrong with socialism until you run out of other people's money.

After watching this amazing woman since she came onto the political scene a couple of years ago I have developed some opinions of which I will now share. She is not an intellectual as defined by the political elite around the world. She verifies this fact everytime she tries to be like one of them and usually fails. Knowing all kinds of facts and figures of which most are insignificant, is not the talent that should define the President of the USA, or for that matter any strong leader. The main stream media are going to try and crucify her ( and have done so) regardless of what gaffes she makes or doesn't make. Her strength is in her passion for Conservative values and the belief in the USA Constitution and everything it stands for in the lives of every American citizen. Because of these things she is a magnet for the "everyday" American who thinks as she does about a small Government with less intrusion into their lives. People can understand her positions because they are straight forward and simplistic without any political spin or beltway jargon and this makes her a dangerous foe of the elitists in Washington. Ronald Reagan faced this same sort of animosity from the left when he ran for the top office as they painted him out to be some "dumb" actor stumbling outside of his comfort zone. He faced these attacks with several skills that Palin must attain if she is going to be succesful. First she must recognize the fact that this will happen and understand that being humble and not taking yourself too seriously strengthens your profile with the folks that count, not the other way around. Concentrate more on how to communicate what you believe rather than what you know. This doesn't mean you don't have to be intelligent it just means that people will never know who you are unless you can clearly define yourself through words. Last and probably the most difficult is to possess a quick wit and an ability to think quickly on your feet, as they say. This comes with practice, experience and an ability to be comfortable with who you are. If you feel inferior to your opponent this will become apparent to everyone in short time and this is not the place to be when running for office. If she can garner these three skills and retain her core beliefs she will become a force to be reckoned with over the next 3 years and possibly a candidate for the "Comander in Chief's" job in 2012. Somewhere between now and the next 12 months she will have to decide because the process is long and arduous and will require a lot of energy and fortitude to make it to the finish line. Among the talents that make good candidates in this techo-age is the ability to look good and she does have this one sewn up. Personally I hope she gets her ducks in a row and makes a run for the top. I'd love to see her set a few of these Liberal elitists on their rear end.

Before I get into a lot of trouble let me say that I know many many teachers and some are very good friends so please don't take my following comments personally. Let me start by stating a few facts; first, teachers in the public sector are members of a union. I realize they don't have a choice but never the less they have to live and act according to a collective mentality. Second teachers work 10 months out of 12 every year. Third they are government employees who work for the people that pay the taxes that pay their salary. I want you to remember these facts as I point out some things that I believe are negatively affecting the education of our children. First of all anytime the teachers union want more benefits, higher wages and less work they hold our children's education as ransom (strike) in order to secure these things. The union makes it almost impossible to remove ineffective teachers from the job because their focus is on their members not on the kids. The union dictates that teacher evaluations are unfair and therefore will fight to the death to keep the taxpayers from finding out if the people who teach their children are qualified to do so. This honoured profession has become another collective union group and they operate no differently than the auto employees union, the truckers union or any other brotherhood of employees. Their purpose in life has nothing to do with improving children's education and all to do with extractiing more and more from their employers (taxpayers). Large unions are a part of the socialist system of government and in the private sector there is a balance between the reasonable sharing of thebusiness's success in good times and taking less in hard times. In fact when they press to hard they sometimes become a major reason why businesses fail vis a vis GM, Chrysler etc. But what balance do the teachers unions face? In fact what balance do any public sector unions face when the press their demands regardless of the current economic situation. There are none and added to that they are bargaining with people that have nothing to lose...(politicians). So on one side you have unions that can use your children as a ransom to achieve their goals and on the other side you have politicians that put up a good front but the reality is, they won't lose anything if they cave in to the union's demands. Who always loses is the taxpayer and their children. Seems a little unfair to me that these two groups, who are immune from any negative impact have the ability to continously gouge the ordinary citizens by dipping into the that deep black hole that is known as government funding (tax revenue). Realistically the unions aren't going away but at least the government should take away the right to strike and this would even the playing field a little. The private sector creates the wealth in any Country but today who in the hell wants to work in the private sector with all of the uncertainty and the fact that the public sector earns 20% more in wages on average. Diminishing private sector , growing public sector.....you tell me is this sustainable? I think not. Unfortunately no politician wants to take them on because the big unions, the Liberal Media and the socialist members in the government will attack them mercilessly. What is really sad, is that they attack people on a personal level rather than arguing the issues. This the favorite tactic of anyone on the left when they can't argue with logic and common sense they go for the throat and demonize the person who is debating them. Anyway I got that off my chest so its off to the scotch and soda.

In simple terms Capitalism is about individualism whereby most other systems are about groups, collectives, large government control etc. It is about allowing people to attain success in an environment that provides the opportunity for everyone to make their own choices on how they want to live their lives. Some government intervention is necessary within Capitalism to perform tasks that facilitate the ability of people to live and co-habit in a society. The enforcement of"common sense" rules and laws, the protection of the state, and the care of those in society that truly (mentally or physically) can't look after themselves. Beyond that it is up to the individual to forge his/her future. Entrepeneurs can start businesses and these can grow into Corporations that bring wealth to everyone. It is not only the owners that gain but it is every person that works in the organization and usually thousands that just interact with the business. The degree of wealth is determined by many things, ingenuity, risk taking, intelligence, and hard work. Where a person ends up on this scale is determined any one or all of these things. For instance ask yourself why the CEO of General Motors is in his position and you are in yours. Somewhere during your life you made choices and these most certainly effected your outcome. Perhaps you decided to drop out of school and go work in a factory which is fine if it is the choice you made. But to denegrate the CEO because he makes two million a year and you make $50,000 is wrong. He stayed in school went to college and earned a MBA and then worked his way up in management to achieve his status. That doesn't mean he is more intelligent than you it just means he chose education and a different path for his career. Maybe you are part of a union which is a collective and you have turned over your individual decision making to this body. How much you make and how much leeway you have is now predicated on what a group decides for you.I'll get back to this but for now lets jump back in history and look at the USA who embraced Capitalism in its purest sense decades ago. They have grown into the richest Nation in the world and with that comes the highest standard of living in the world. If you compare poverty in the USA to poverty in any third world Country the differences are striking. If you are under the poverty line according to the USA standard, you will still have a car, a roof over your head, emergency medical care, a TV, food for your table etc etc. Furthermore I would venture a guess that those in this category made their own choices to get there and are probably continuing to make them today. The folks in third world poverty do not even have food and water much less anything else so this reflects the plight of the poor in a non- Capitalistic Society. The point is that punishing Corporations or entrepeneurs because they are successful does nothing but hurt everyone in the food chain. Also everytime the Government takes over some part of the free market economy it negatively affects the Capitalist model which in turn has a negative domino effect on the economic system. In Europe and Canada these Countries chose to stray from the Capitalist model and move towards socialism, which they could, because they were thriving through trade with the USA and its burgeoning market. Essentially people signed up for a type of "union" which requires you to pay dues (taxes) and decisions are made for you. Now the USA is being pounded by debt and a large Government monster that is growing by the minute under the left wing ideology and these other Countries have to sit by and wring their hands because they do not have a true Capitalist system as a base from which they can rebuild their own economies. They have to rely on the USA and I believe in the end the American people will choose to remain within the Capitalist system. If not hold on.

Anyone who is interested in learning a little bit about socialist economics should keep abreast of what is happening in Greece. This Country like many in Europe have lived well beyond their means by allowing their government to spend monies they didn't have and then borrow to meet their financial obligations. Their bloated government payrolls and the extravagant entitlement programs have driven them to the edge of bankruptcy. As part of the European Economic Union they are now obliged to lower their debt levels or face the collapse of their economy. No one will lend them any money if they don't take immediate actions to address the problems. In order to do this they now have to cut government jobs and reduce spending in all levels of government which is upsetting people all over the Country. The folks want the Government to stand by the commitments they made to them that 1) their jobs were untouchable and 2) their benefits would never end. There are riots in the street as well as many other examples of civil unrest because of the results spurred on by the Socialist style management of the Country's economy. High taxes and the redistribution of wealth has driven the businesses and entrepreneurs out of the Country and with them go much of the revenue that supported the government largesse. In the year 2000 they dumped a lot of their debt through a deal with one of the large Wall St banks that helped their current situation but also put them in a position where many of their revenue streams (such as speeding ticket revenue, highway tolls etc.) would be paid to the Wall St bank long into the future. The problem of course with letting Greece default is the fact that the EEU holds much of the debt paper and if Greece goes down the domino effect will begin. Think now about the USA and Canada who are also living beyond their means and the similarities between Greece and them. Canada, of course, is much smaller than the USA but the same rules apply in that if these deficits continue we will all face the same result. China has begun to sell off some of its USA debt holdings which is a sign that they are beginning to question the financial management of the Obama White House. Trillions of dollars of debt is an unsustainable amount for the USA and yet they continue to spend like drunken sailors. At some point the economy will have to suffer and it appears that California will be the first to reap the results of their financial mismanagement. Let's hope the unions and the folks that drove them into this position don't turn on the government and riot just as the Greek people are doing. We must swallow and accept some cuts and hard times if we in the Americas are to get our house in order. My advice is to get your personal fiscal house in order, your root cellar filled and then hunker down and get ready to live through some tough times. It must get worse before it gets better , BUT it will get better if we stick with sound conservative fiscal policies.

Both of these skills require a person to have many of the same attributes such as the ability to communicate ideas clearly, the ability to sell these same ideas to other people and the ability to shepherd these ideas into actionable tasks. However there are many areas where the roles differ and sometimes people get confused as to why political leaders don't always follow the actions of Corporate leaders when confronting issues or implementing policies. You see Corporate leaders have one large advantage over political leaders and that is the fact that they have the power to terminate a person's employment whereas a politician cannot. At the most they can influence your job positively or negatively but rarely can they apply capital punishment to those that don't fall in line. Therefore a political leader has to be able to influence the emotions of his audience and to garner their trust if he/ she is to be successful with their agenda. To get your attention and your vote they must stimulate your passion by raising issues nearest and dearest to your heart. For instance to most people the issue of security for them and their families is always uppermost in their minds so attacking crime and punishment or the lack thereof is always a winner in politics. Taxation in all its forms has always been a negative aspect in our society regardless of your political persuasion so this subject can always raise the hair on someone's neck. Once the politician has tapped the emotions they must now garner trust. A past history with examples of "doing what you say you will do" is a powerful tool that will help convince people to get on your side. If you don't have that then kissing babies, trotting out your family for photo ops and general schmoozing will help get people comfortable with you and your political ideology. Back to the Corporate leader who will find it helpful to garner trust but not a necessary thing required to push through his/her agenda. Both of them can mislead people with vague statements, exaggerations and downright lies to facilitate their agenda so they are Bobbsey twins in this area for sure. So let's look at the results side of the board whereby both leaders have successfully pushed their agendas into actions using their own techniques and now must view the fruit of their labors. The Corporate Leader must be successful or he will face a boot out of his job for failing to satisfy his shareholders. So even though he started with more power and an easier route to implementing his policies and programs he faces capital punishment if he fails. The politician on the other hand finds herself in a very different position if she fails. She may have lied or mislead people to get herself elected and her programs implemented but what is to be done? The job is secure until the next election and by then most will have forgotten the untruths and the failure. In fact with good political spin doctors today they can turn failure into victory through the media (particularly if you are Liberal) and voila' you are ready for another run for the golden ring. So if you are searching for truth and integrity in leadership let me tell you it is very very rare. The last leader in my opinion that held these values was Ronald Reagan. He was truly a unique man and a honest politician ( which is almost an oxymoron) that has not been matched for the years before or since. Sarah Palin has the base talent to be another Reagan but the question remains, does she have the strength and confidence that are required to withstand the pressures that come with "principled" political leadership? It would definitely be something to see.

The elite Liberal brain trust truly believe that the masses of people, ie regular Janes & Joes, in the middle class are incapable of taking care of themselves. The hard line Union bosses and Socialists also have no doubt that their followers are stupid and must be protected from themselves. I can give you example after example of laws and rules that are passed to prevent we minions from making decisions that are not seen as proper by the almighty Liberals that sit in Government. For instance the pension laws and the Life Income Retirement Account are set up to prevent individuals from accessing their own money regardless of their choice in the matter. If your retirement money is in a pension fund you have access only to the predetermined payment calculated when you retired. You cannot get your hands on any more of it regardless of the situation. In fact after you and your spouse die your family will see nothing of the money that is left as it goes directly back into the fund. With the LIRA the Government had much the same rules until recently when it changed and now allows the owners of the money to remove up to 50% of the lump sum in the fund. It also (after tax) allows your family to receive the balance on your demise. These rules were put in place to keep people from their own money in case they may blow it on vacations, and travel after their retirement thus eliminating their nest egg. They assume nobody has the commonsense to manage their own finances during this time of life not considering of course you have managed to get yourself to this point without bankrupting your family. This is an arrogant and condescending attitude but it is the Liberal mindset. Look at our Food Protection Agency that was set up to inspect and insure that the food mass distributed across the Country was safe to consume. Considering some of the food poisoning catastrophes over the past several years they haven’t done a stellar job but they don’t stop there. Now these gurus want to tell us what we can and can’t eat. Based on the latest scientific craze about this particular food or that trans fat they want to enact laws banning these goods.Providing information to the Public isn’t good enough because once again they feel we are incapable of making good decisions for ourselves. Therefore these same people that told us no to eat butter years ago are actually banning foods.
The last example is Health Care where Liberals feel that the problem with Health Care in the USA is the spiralling cost which prohibits lower income people from attaining insurance. So rather than attacking the cost through the free market system by lifting the State by State ban on insurance Companies and allow them to compete across the Country they choose to control the system because they can make better decisions for the regular folk and drive costs down that way. Or to look at “tort reform” and discontinue these “lottery type” malpractice suit awards which have driven Doctor's insurance costs out into space. No no, mustn’t upset the lawyers.
All of the above are just a few of the ways these “well meaning people" want to run our lives but I for one am sick of “the pat on the head and the tsk tsk you don’t understand, this is for your own good” demeaning type answers. Maybe most people don’t mind being led around by the hand but look out because these people are not your friends, you see you are not smart enough.

Let me say that I sympathize with the terrible situation in Haiti and I believe we, around the world need to do whatever is necessary to help them through this catastrophic period. After saying that however, where do the politicians get the right to arbitrarily decide to send millions to Haiti beyond what our Government has set aside for foreign aid. This statement was made during the fundraising event for the embattled island the other night “The Government will match any funds that are raised for Haiti through this charitable venture.” It turned out to be around 9 million dollars and my question is “What gives you the right?” to do this. People are giving out of the goodness of their hearts which is what charity is all about. The world’s governments are also providing financial help as well assistance “on the ground” and these acts are a cultural norm in the western nations (primarily USA and Canada). So why does some politician who feels charitable or who wants to score points feel they have the right to dish out taxpayer money on their own accord. Did they ever think that maybe just, maybe some citizens of Canada don’t want to give any more money away? Did it ever occur to these elitist snobs that what they want to do may not coincide with what other taxpayers would like to do? And yet people do not seem to care about these reckless spenders who throw our money around like planting grass seed. Now this morning just after dedicating millions and millions of dollars to Haiti I read a column in the newspaper that suggest that we need to raise taxes in order to balance the books. This is the only solution in his mind that makes any sense. WHAT ABOUT CUTTING SPENDING!!!!!! I believe there is so much wasteful spending in every level of Government that if we were to eliminate just 50% of this waste we could balance the books in one year. The problem of course is that there are too many sacred cows in the current welfare state system and if any of their funding was cut the loud and constant squealing noise would scare the politicians to death. As we move closer and closer toward the Nanny State in both the USA and Canada (who is much farther down the road) the balance between those that pay tax and those that don’t is shifting toward 50%-50%. Once those that receive from the Government become the majority we will be lost because we will never be able to elect any fiscal conservatives to bring our finances under control. Based on the recent elections in Massachusetts it appears that the Americans are waking up to this fact and don’t like what they see happening to their Country. I wish we could get Canadians as fired up on this subject but at the moment there is no leader to carry the standard into battle. I keep looking but the only candidates appear to be in the west so it may take a awhile to bring their message here. Ahh Mr. Harper we had such dreams.............................

The recent elections in Massachusetts once again brought out the infamous left “destruction by lies” tactics as they tried to demean the right wing candidate Scott Brown. One of the lies had to do with a Bill he voted for which allows a hospital which, may not prefer to complete an abortion to transfer a patient wanting an abortion to another hospital that will as long as everyone including the patient concurs. Seems simple enough but the attack ad that was put up by the loons on the left read as follows, “ Brown voted to for a bill that would turn away 15 year rape victims from hospital doors”. A stretch to say the least but with even a hint of a connection they build a lie to smear someone. Unfortunately these negative ads (lies) do work if given enough time but in this case it was too little too late. Another good example of the Left and their love of the “LIE” is the recent “fessing” up of John Edwards who finally agreed to accept the title of father for the little girl he begat with a campaign consultant while he was running for VP during the 2004 presidential elections. These people truly believe that the ends justify the means so lying, to them is just another tool in their bag of tricks. The entire left wing platoon in the White House chose to continually lie throughout the campaign about how they, if elected, would govern from the center and usher in a new era of “transparency” in Government. Once in power they dropped all pretences and moved to the far left by spending their way into an oblivion of debt, exercising socialistic control over GM and the Banks through large financial injections of cash and finally the passing of the so-called stimulus package that hasn’t really accomplished anything at all. They have rammed a Health Care Bill, which nobody wants, through Congress by way of secret partisan sessions. No one truly understands what’s in the Bill because the development of it has not been transparent as was promised.
It doesn’t seem to matter whether it is in their private lives or professional lives these folks have no sense of honour. In fact they usually look on this transgression as a strength as opposed to a weakness because the development of a good sustainable lie requires intellect and to most of these elitists being seen as “smart” is more important than being honourable. Years ago before our society shifted so far to the left a man’s honour and integrity were of utmost importance and any attempt to demean or damage these would be met with serious consequences. Today, honour and integrity are tossed out the window in pursuit of power and personal gain. Sadly, the only place where these old traditions and attributes can be found in the political spectrum are far right of center.

Over the past year or more I have been alerting people to the dangers of big government and the slow process of change that is taking us towards Socialism and maybe on to Communism,who knows? So to you naysayers (not mentioning any names “B”) here’s some facts that clearly illustrate what I am talking about. Over 30 years ago I would always tell my sons that the “Private Sector” was the place to get a job and plan a career. Working for the Government was not a very secure job and the pay was not as much as in the Private Sector. Every time the recession cycle came around the government had to tighten its belt and layoff’s generally occurred. The upside was that you didn’t have to work very hard and the benefits were good, not great, but good. Even people just out of high school who chose not to go to University or College had the opportunity to get general labour jobs in the market that paid very well. If you were fortunate to land a position at one of the “Manufacturing Plants” in Ontario you would be able to maintain a reasonable lifestyle while raising a few kids. Then it started to change as Liberal Government after Liberal Government both Federally and Provincially began to spend more and more money to bring in larger entitlement plans as well as projects that weren’t necessary. Of course in order to pay for these giveaways and boondoggles taxes had to be raised on everyone through many different ways. Sales taxes, Value added taxes, health taxes, employment taxes, and gas taxes and on and on were introduced in order to pay for the indulgent and high spending politician’s programs and pet projects. As the everyday “Joe” lost more and more of his paycheque, guess who had to go to work to supplement the family income?Boom a wave of women hit the job market and guess what, jobs became more difficult to get and when there are more people than jobs the hiring folks are in the driver’s seat. Next came the assault on industry as tons of red tape and taxes were hoisted onto business driving down their revenue and profit. Because of the low value of the Canadian dollar the Canadian manufacturing sector managed to survive for awhile by exporting more to the States (thanks to NAFTA). Once the dollar began to rise then this edge was lost and Company after Company either failed or moved out of the Country. Thousands upon thousands of jobs were lost and never replaced. The average of 3% or 4% unemployed rose to the new norm of 8%. Now here we are today and I am telling my sons, “ stay in the Public Sector because these are the jobs that are secure, well paid and have enormous benefits." You will make on average $20,000 more per year than the average Joe in the Private sector and you won’t have to worry about being laid off because now during a recession the Government just keeps on spending and hiring. It reminds me of the USSR in the late 80’s when I went there on business. At the manufacturing plant I visited the parking lot had many BMW’s and Volvo’s that were driven by the Boss’s and the Communist Government overseers. Right next to these were some Lada’s and then mostly horse and wagons that were used by the employees. If we don’t get common sense Government leadership or the people don’t revolt I submit our workplaces will look the same. Check the stats in both the USA and Canada and you will see the same trend. Unfortunately for Canada we have too many sheep and not enough bulls so it will more difficult to stem the tide, but not impossible.