VETERANS: Dogs for vets

Saturday, June 15, 2013

Reader S.F. mentioned that a pilot program of matching dogs with vets was specifically vetoed by the U.S. Veteran’s Administration (VA), which made it categorical that dogs would only be provided for a small and traditional list of needs, such a guide dogs for the blind. So of course others did it. An old story with a great new ending: Hounds and Heroes.

# – # – #  

Tell me again about a “grateful nation” and that “compassionate Gooferment”!

# – # – # – # – #   

FUN: Taylor Swift is #1 in something that really counts

Thursday, December 27, 2012

‘Celebs gone good': Taylor Swift named most charitable celebrity of 2012 after $4M donation


PUBLISHED: 22:57 EST, 25 December 2012 | UPDATED: 23:32 EST, 25 December 2012

Read more:


political: am i just being a grinch?

Monday, November 19, 2012

I was listening over the net to NJ101.5 to get info about Seaside Heights.

The Guv’s wife, Mary Pat, was on touting the Guv’s amd Ms Guv’s charity.

Now I’m sure that she’s a very nice lady, but doesn’t anyone see a “structural problem”.

The government is taking over “charity”.

In the old days, “relief societies” were formed. Fraternal organizations abounded. Churches were virogous.

I remember reading how after the Chicago fire folks were helped with loans and such. There was networking and judgement. The able body were shown were work was available. Loans were provided and paid back. The truly devastated were taken in.

So what I see is that cradle to grave, Mommy Government will take care of all your needs. Daddy Government will hand out welfare checks.

Handouts are not a hand up.

Only by affiliation can people be truly moved out of poverty. They walk out of it by their own efforts with help and guidance of good people helping. Not doing for.

Sorry, but I guess I am the modern embodiment of old Ebenezer!


RANT: Charity gets you slack in my thinking

Tuesday, April 17, 2012


*** begin quote ***

Hillary Rosen, please stop talking. Attacking a candidates spouse because she stayed home with her family is wrong. Mrs. Romney seems like a good person regardless of her husbands lack of inability to articulate his true position on any policy issue.

*** end quote ***


*** begin quote ***

‎”Liberal” “Feminists” are nether tolerant, not champions of all women. All we have to do is look to Africa and Asia and see what happens when you don’t value half the population for what they do every day.

I’m not a Romney fan, but anyone, who gives that much to charity, gets a lot of slack. (Personally, Joe Biden’s $381 for a self-proclaimed Catholic just sends me into orbit.) By their works, you shall know them.

*** end quote ***


*** begin quote ***

I agree. They both seem like nice people, good parents and seem to be happy. I may disagree with them politically but as people I respect them and I certainly admire his business acumen. As for Biden, The idea that the Church gets any of his money saddens me. there has to be a better charity to give to then one who practices misogyny and whose titular head lives in the dark ages. Of course that is just IMHO.

*** end quote ***


*** begin quote ***

Hmmm, “Dark Ages”, isn’t that “harsh”. For all the good works that Holy Mother Church does. As far as “misogyny”, I’m just a fat old white guy injineer and don’t do good with them big wurds. When I criticize, I try to remember: “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone”. In Biden’s case, even Jesus got lost his kool and physical with the money changers. When you put yourself forward as an exemplar, you’re fair game for critique. I, otoh <on the other hand> — that was my de-jargon-izer kicking in automagically — don’t pretend to exemplify anything. Except I’m proud of my humility. There’s so much I have to be humble about.

*** end quote ***

# – # – #

Makes a good blog post. Or would you call it filler?

# – # – # – # – #

RANT: Ron Paul is not a progressive; that’s a good thing

Saturday, January 7, 2012

Wednesday, January 04, 2012
Ron Paul is not a progressive

*** begin quote ***

Paul was right on both wars, on the bailout of the banks and continues to be right about the need for transparency at the fed. He is right about gay marriage and he is right on most civil liberties issues and the drug war.

But Ron Paul is not a progressive. Ron Paul is not anti-corporate. He believes that empowering business is the best way to accomplish all good things and that government has no role to play in ensuring a level playing field. It was Paul’s dismissal of a government role in health care that elicited the shout of “let him die” during the Republican debates.

*** end quote ***


*** begin quote ***

Anonymous Anonymous said…

Excellent points by Hank K.    Ron Paul would destroy Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and any social program that helps ordinary folks. He would probably be for assisting the privatization of our public schools. Libertarianism is filth, a despicable bunch of garbage that’s great for the greedy millionaires and greedy billionaires (as opposed to the responsible and altruistic millionaires and billionaires) who don’t want to pay their fair share in taxes. Under libertarianism, if you become disabled and can no longer work, then tough luck or go out in the street and beg for charity. Libertarians say, let the charities take care of the millions who are disabled, elderly or too poor. It’s an idiotic notion to think that charities are even close to being able to help the 50 millions uninsured. Dialysis costs about $150,000 per year and there are many thousands of people in this country with kidney disease or kidney failure. Medications cost thousands per year, there aren’t enough charities on earth to deal with these numbers. I would not vote for Ron Paul even if you put a gun to my head.

*** end quote ***

And, everything today is just working perfectly and at costs we can afford?

Ron Paul hasn’t said anything about destroying everything. He has said that we need real cuts in Gooferment spending. Do you dsagree?

For example, he says the Federal Gooferment should have no role in education. Let the States do it. So we send money to Federal Gooferment to send back to the state Gooferment. There’s a swag that says ½ of any money passing through a Gooferment entity loses ½ its value due to the cost og handling. Sending a dollar to the Feds gets maybe 25¢s back! Eliminate the overhead.

Of course that will totally destroy the education establishment. And, maybe we can have a national and state discusion on “education”. Personally, I authored a paper for Hands Across New Jersey on how to transition “education” from Gooferment to parents over 40 years. (Under the theory that parents are in a better position to educate their children. And cheaper and better. They made the decision to have them; they should provide for them.) I’m frustrated because if HANJ wasn’t subverted by the duopoly, we’d almost be out of the problem.

You bring up charity, charity care, and the cost of medicine. But you ignore the role of Gooferment in driving up the cost of healthcare. Just like it drives up the cost of “education”.


I think that Ron Paul represents the essence of the Taft Republicans. It’s been lost for decades and we have a 15T$ debt, deficits for as far as the eyes can see, unfunded liabilities somewhere between 50T$ and 150T$ depending upon who counts what, and a dismal economic future.
Perhaps, you might consider that Socialism doesn’t work. Didn’t for the Soviet Union. And, won’t for the USA.


“everything is fine. move along citizen. nothing to see here.”


# – # – # – # – #




Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,061 other followers

%d bloggers like this: