Dakota Beacon

With Islam so prevalent in today’s news, this topic warrants scrutiny. The fact is that the Muslim population worldwide is expanding and shifting. It is prudent to familiarize ourselves with the reality of Islam. Consulting resources discussing the Islamic phenomenon would extend our comprehension. Here are a few suggestions. Mark Steyn’s book “America Alone” is very well thought out, insightful and witty. He portrays a demographic reality confronting the West, to wit, an expanding Muslim population in terms of birth rate and migration. Regardless of the reader’s sentiment, Steyn speaks bluntly to this reality. In the contest between Islam and the West, demographics plays a major role. Early in his book Steyn establishes that a country must produce 2.11 live births per adult woman just to sustain its population, to neither shrink nor grow. This is the American birth rate today. Canada has a shrinking birth rate at 1.48. The European birth rate as a whole is 1.38. Russia’s birth rate is declining at 1.14 live births per adult woman. On the other hand, Muslim Pakistan has a birth rate of 5.08 and Saudi Arabia 4.53 children per adult woman. At this rate their overpopulation will migrate to fill the gap of the declining populations of the West. That France has a 30% Muslim population under the age 20, and growing, is symptomatic of the problems to come not only in France but in every other European country with a declining birth rate and a lax immigration policy. Another suggested reading is V. S. Naipaul’s book “Among the Believers: An Islamic Journey.” Naipaul offers a refreshing glance at the root of modern Islamic events. Specifically, he begins immediately after the 1977 revolution in Iran when the Shaw was deposed by radical mullahs. This is travel literature at its best and the reader benefits from Naipaul’s valuable portrayal of Islamic people he encounters from Iran across India to Malaysia. Dispel any notion that he is a “biased Hindu.” If anything, he questions radical ideology rather than doubting the people. He is motivated more as a seeker of truth than as a scholar. As such, he expresses his doubts about certain interpretations of Islam. Another fine travelogue was penned by the eccentric Robert Byron in his book “The Road to Oxiana,” detailing a fascinating 1930s journey through Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan. Departing from Venice in 1933, Byron set out on a journey through Beirut, Jerusalem, Baghdad and Teheran to the land of Oxus. That is the ancient name for the region of the Amu Darya which forms part of the border between Afghanistan and the former Soviet Union. This is a thoroughly captivating record of his experience with Islamic people in a multicultural setting along with his account of architectural treasures and geography inaccessible to most Western travelers. If history holds your interest, another suggested reading portrays history from an Arab perspective. “The Travels of Ibn Battuta” translated and edited by Rev. Samuel Lee is a classic in travel literature. This tale is the equivalent of Marco Polo’s “Travels.” His account is of significant historical value. Sheik Battuta started on a pilgrimage to Mecca from Tangier, Morocco, in 1326 and ended his journey 27 years and 75,000 miles later. During his travels he visited the lands of every Muslim ruler of his time including East Africa, Byzantium, Iraq, southern Russia, India, Ceylon and China. Among his many accounts are descriptions of Muslim seafaring activities, architecture and agriculture. We may not be able to personally visit Islamic lands, but we may still learn of the people, culture and religion through the experiences of others who did traveled there once upon a time. It behooves us to learn of the past to peek at the future. Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

Popular conception holds that the Obama stimulus plan will work. This is the $789 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act that will ultimately cost $3.27 trillion over ten years including $744 billion just to service the debt. The assumption is that money pumped into the economy will “create jobs” thereby “improving the economy.” This simplistic view is touted in easily consumable sound bites. There is, however, another more realistic and definitive understanding of the term “stimulus,” one a bit more insightful and sane. Neither views are mutually exclusive, but the second makes more economic sense. The first goes like this. The government has a responsibility to spend money. It doesn’t matter where or how, just spend it. The government’s role is to stimulate the economy with huge infusions of cash. Lots of it. Borrow it (debt instruments like bonds and notes), beg for it (print money) or steal it (tax citizens). Regardless of the source, just spend it. Bush gave checks to individuals to spend while Obama gives money to states and communities with impunity. Funding includes grants and other distributions for bridges, highways, parks, golf courses, pro-wrestling teams, origami classes -- the list is endless. See the federal government’s “Tracking the Money” official web site at Recovery.gov for details. As of September 2009, $622 million is available to North Dakota for 354 projects. That pittance gives North Dakota a ranking of 51st of all states and territories. More formally, this cash injection is what John Maynard Keynes advocated in his General Theory. Little matter that the money flows round and round giving the illusion of “stimulating the economy” by intending to pass money from hand to hand. However, if businesses and manufacturers are not hiring and banks are not lending, then the cash infusion is not circulating as intended. Add to that the government’s demonization of auto, banking, insurance, medical, pharmaceutical and investment industries and public incentive drops. Which is exactly the situation our economy faces. The “job creation” argument becomes spurious. Most of the jobs created are government jobs in an expanding bureaucracy. The stimulus was to have created 4 million new jobs. In fact, unemployment in the private sector is now 9.8% for people still looking for work. The actual figure is closer to 17% unemployment when including those that have given up job hunting or no longer qualify for unemployment benefits. That number is growing and these people do not pay taxes thus depriving the government of needed revenue. Government expands, but the private sector keeps shrinking. Yet, it’s the private sector that is called upon to pay for the expanded government bureaucracy with what little wealth the private sector is allowed to create. The second option for stimulating the economy goes like this. A growing economy is one that exhibits wealth accumulation through profits. Profits are used to purchase capital assets and expand production to satisfy the needs of new markets. Increased profits pay for new hires and expanded facilities. Adam Smith successfully and lucidly articulated the process 240 years ago. Our capitalist economy is not a zero-sum game. If you eat all of the pizza, I do not have to eat the box. There is more pizza where that came from. Our capitalist economy is flexible, dynamic and expanding if only government curtails interference. Cut taxes to release existing financial resources for use by the private sector rather than by government. The idea is to grow the private sector naturally without government interference. America’s accumulated wealth is far greater today than 200 years ago and the aggregate is not ill gotten gain. China, India, Korea and Japan are following America’s historic model to their great success reinvesting profits to produce new goods and services for expanding markets. By doing so, true jobs are created along with the wealth to sustain them. This, in essence, is how economies grow. This is how China and India eventually adopted a more capitalist society that may soon rival that of the United States. The first example certainly puts money into the economy. It puts a few people to work for awhile but without generating new capital in return. But, what happens when government money runs out and the economy has not expanded? Can the government return to a shrinking tax base expecting still more money? With high unemployment and less revenue coming into the federal coffers, who pays the bills? The second example is tried and true. It is how America became a strong independent world leader able to rescue other nations in hard times while taking care of its own. Fretting about the stimulus might be making a mountain out of a mole hill. Maybe Alfred E. Neuman had it right when he blithely begged the question, “What, me worry?” Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

Capturing oral history from military personnel before they pass on is a noble initiative for veterans’ organizations. Gallant efforts though these are, a complementary perspective would advance these histories by also capturing the stories of the women who served with and supported their warrior husbands behind the scenes. Last month my wife and I again had the honor and privilege of attending the annual convention of the Society of Military Widows in Albuquerque, NM. The SMW plays a commendable role in highlighting the great tradition of service to the nation. Fundamentally, however, the SMW members seek the friendship and conversation of shared experiences of their lives through years of service with others who know what military community life is all about. The SMW organization comprises widows from all services and from all ranks. The only rank they now know is that of “widow.” Life of the military wife spans good times and bad. Tales of the cumulative memories of these military widows could easily fill volumes providing a window on a bygone era. What follows is a story of one of the good times, one of warmth and camaraderie, shared by a lady at our convention banquet table. In 1964, during the height of the Cold War, Pat and her naval officer husband were serving a tour of duty at a tiny military installation in the region of Angus, Scotland. Their base was located on the east side of Scotland near the village of Edzell between Aberdeen and Dundee north of Edinburgh. The first Christmas Pat and her husband were in Scotland the famed Black Watch Regiment invited the American officers and their wives to their Christmas Ball, a formal affair held between Christmas and New Years. Invitations specified the gala would be held between 10:00 p.m. and 4:00 a.m. with dinner after midnight and soup upon departure. The date of the ball finally arrived and the evening progressed gaily with traditional waltzes and foxtrots. Officers and their ladies were dressed in their elegant best. American military wore dress uniforms and the Black Watch their formal regimental kilts of the appropriate tartan. Each of the men wore their military decorations adding a splash of color to their uniforms. The women, of course, were beautifully attired in their exquisite evening gowns. After dinner, the Scots commenced their traditional Scottish country dancing similar to square dancing but without a caller. Each dance was different and had a requisite number of partners and precise steps. Among the pieces the band played were the “Dashing White Sergeant,” the “Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh” and the “Duke of Perth” country dances, each one identified in sequence on dance cards fastened to the ladies’ wrists. Gracious hosts that they were, the Scots invited the Americans to participate offering to coach them through the steps. Whether shy or otherwise inhibited, the Americans politely declined and retired to the safety of a balcony where they could watch the progress of the festivities. Ingenuity, a hallmark of American culture, rose to the occasion. On the bus ride back to their quarters, the American wives took the lead and committed themselves and their husbands to learn Scottish country dancing. Within a week they retained a dance instructor complete with all the necessary music. The instructor was sworn to secrecy. No one in the Scottish community knew of the dance lessons and the instruction continued weekly without fail. On the 4th of July the Americans hosted a patriotic celebration to which the officers and ladies of the Black Watch were invited. Even so, the dance lesson rehearsals by the Americans remained a closely guarded secret. In early December, as expected, the Americans received their invitations to the 1965 Black Watch Christmas Ball. This time the Americans were not at all reticent. The evening progressed with the usual formalities and conviviality. Dinner after midnight was followed by Scottish country dancing. Again, the Scots invited the Americans to participate. Coyly, the Americans declined, but asked for a small space in a corner on the dance floor. The music began and the Scots commenced their country dancing. At first the Scots were not aware of any American activity. Soon, however, they took note, stopped their own dancing and watched in amazement. The Americans danced each dance without missing a beat – literally. It must be understood that the Scots haled from different villages and, consequently, incorporated slight variations in their dance steps resulting in some unsynchronized movements. The Americans, on the other hand, had learned their lessons uniformly and learned them well. Soon, the Scots relinquished the dance floor and it was their turn to retreat to the balcony to observe. The Americans were performing impeccably. Little did the wives know at the time that, as ambassadors of good will, they were cementing relations with good allies. There’s nothing like adopting bits of a host’s culture to fortify friendships. Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

A story of sleaze and corruption involving a taxpayer-funded organization consisting of sex, hookers and government ties at high levels has to be a news director’s dream. Yet, this very scenario was essentially ignored for days after the story broke. The mainstream media, or should I say the old-line media, chose simply not to cover the recent ACORN scandal. There was a time when investigative reporting dominated the news in the grand tradition of “20/20” and “60 Minutes.” Apparently that heyday has passed. In a word, ACORN employees were caught on video tape advising a “pimp” (James O’Keefe, 25) and his “prostitute” (Hannah Giles, 20) on how to launder their earnings and avoid detection. Working under cover, O’Keefe and Giles were advised by Baltimore ACORN employees how to bring underage illegal alien girls into the United States to work as prostitutes from a brothel which ACORN would help finance. Portrayed in the video, all discussions were up front and straight forward. The Baltimore video tape was the first, but by no means the last, incident recorded and the ACORN scandal appears endemic. ACORN offices in three other cities were also willing to help support, organize and arrange loans for houses of prostitution. Film maker O’Keefe taped the identical scenario with the same advice provided by ACORN workers in Washington, New York and San Bernardino. At this writing O’Keefe says that there are more tapes to be released. ACORN employees helping a “pimp” and his “prostitute” should be a huge story, but major news outlets did not see it that way. Instead, MSNBC ran an investigative story on the informercial “ShamWow or Sham?” They also produced razor edge reporting on another product, the Snuggie. No time for the ACORN scandal. CNN broke a different story. They ran with an account about jilted women facing trial for staging a motel tryst that ended with the women gluing the man’s private parts. CBS chose to air an investigative report about a divorcing couple named Jon and Kate Gosselin in lieu of the ACORN scandal. To its credit, ABC mentioned the ACORN scandal, albeit loosely, by announcing that the two Baltimore ACORN employees had been fired. Aside from that, details were sketchy and ABC excoriated O’Keefe and Giles for malfeasance. In spite of the lack of coverage, ACORN’s relationship with federal agencies has been called into question. In all probability ACORN will lose federal funding as well as its 501(c) (3) status. The Census Bureau has severed ties with the group for all work related to the 2010 census. The IRS has also severed their favorable relationship with ACORN. Clearly there was a pattern of improper partisanship and fraudulent activity. ACORN’s reputation is tarnished. In unrelated incidents involving voter fraud, over 30 ACORN officials have been convicted. Investigations continue in seventeen states. Although ACORN has promised to sue O’Keefe, they have yet to make good on their threat. For his part, O’Keefe say, “Bring it on.” There may yet be some truth in the old adage that just because a watchdog has its eyes closed does not mean it’s asleep. On the other hand, the term “main stream media” has probably become a euphemism. Losing viewership and, consequently, advertising revenue, the main stream media has become anything but main stream. Slowly but surely they’re losing their influence. In addition to not covering the ACORN scandal, the old-line media news gave very scant coverage to other recent stories. The Van Jones scandal and the National Endowment for the Arts scandal, until recently, were passé. Both Van Jones, head of the Council on Environmental Quality, otherwise known as the “green jobs czar,’ and Yosi Sergant, head of the NEA, both resigned in disgrace. If you don’t recognize these scandals, you probably take your news from the old-line media. Point made. Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

Labor Day traditionally spells the end of summer and the start of school. Seasons change not by calendar alone, and summer’s end is marked by bird behavior as well.

Politics and policy will always nip at our heals, but other things are more enduring -- and endearing. For example, the peaceful observation of the birds spells a welcome respite to the acrimony around us. The birds are hearty, resilient and not bothered by the “sophistication” of the world that too often plagues mankind. Theirs, however, is the simple life albeit a struggle for survival.

With autumn upon us and school already in session, it’s time for the great migration to commence and birds to head south. Already, the ducks and geese are beginning to congregate. Even the grackles are on the move south and they are not alone.

I encountered a species of bird for the first time recently which was new to me. I had never seen an ovenbird until the other day even though they’re not uncommon in our area. Unfortunately, the little fellow won’t be making the flight south. He had recently expired. As macabre as it sounds, he was in very good shape and evidently had not departed this world too long before I discovered him. At first I did not recognized the markings and had to check them against some of my resource material.

The ovenbird is a member of the warbler family but often acts like a thrush. This ground-walking species characteristically separates itself from all other warblers by its preference for the ground. He’s somewhat small in size, about five inches long, with a distinctive olive back and wings, white underparts and heavy black streaks on the breast. It’s crown has a broad burnt-orange stripe bordered on each side with a dark brown or black stripe.

The ovenbird is common enough. He’s just not common at my feeders which explains why I haven’t seen him. The little guy is an insectivore. Ovenbirds feed on spiders and insects either caught in flight or on the ground. Typically ovenbirds do not forage in live vegetation, but prefer to scrounge around in twigs and leaf litter beneath the trees. In fact, they spend at least as much time on the ground as they do in the air.

Ovenbirds are more often heard than seen. Although my bird had already assumed room temperature, happily I found him in the autumn just in time to coincide with the start of school. His song is a ringing call which increases in volume sounding like tea-cher, TEA-cher, TEA-CHER. With my discovery occurring in the autumn, this coincidence has to be a fitting tribute to the start of the new school year.

The best is held ‘til last. The ovenbird gets its name from the shape of the domed nest resembling an old fashion European baking oven. The domed nest is made principally from woven grass and twigs cemented with clay and containing a side entrance. Nests are built on the ground in deciduous wooded areas. Although the nest is unique, nevertheless it is a target for parasitism by cowbirds.

This relatively tame little critter is a long-range migrater. He spends the winter in northern South America, Central America and the West Indies. However, he breeds in the eastern and north central areas of North America. Although not predominantly a Transatlantic bird, confirmed sightings of the ovenbird in recent years have occurred in Norway, Great Britain and Ireland.

Rustling through my research on the ovenbird, I discovered that poet laureate Robert Frost paid homage to the little guy a poem in 1916 and titled it simply “The Oven Bird” in his collection “Mountain Interval.” Of all the many birds he could have chosen for his poem, the ovenbird was honored by his choice.

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

The Oven Bird

THERE is a singer everyone has heard,

Loud, a mid-summer and a mid-wood bird,

Who makes the solid tree trunks sound again.

He says that leaves are old and that for flowers

Mid-summer is to spring as one to ten.

He says the early petal-fall is past

When pear and cherry bloom went down in showers

On sunny days a moment overcast;

And comes that other fall we name the fall.

He says the highway dust is over all.

The bird would cease and be as other birds

But that he knows in singing not to sing.

The question that he frames in all but words

Is what to make of a diminished thing.

When slowed by an ailment, a person naturally turns to the familiar for solace. That’s what I did last week recovering from a medical procedure. I sought my old “friend,” Robert Service, balladeer par excellence. As chance would have it, I also recently heard a radio program on which Hank Snow recited some of Service’s poetry. I was inspired.

Scotland gave the world Sir Walter Scott, Robert Burns, and Robert Louis Stevenson. She also gave the world a minor poet, the popular bard Robert W. Service.

My father first introduced me to Robert Service with “The Cremation of Sam McGee” and “The Shooting of Dan McGrew.” They were among his favorites along with several lesser known poems and rhymes. Now they’re mine.

Born January 16, 1874, of a Scottish father and English mother, Robert Service became one of the most widely read poets of his day.

Robert was an avid reader. By age 15 he had devoured the works of Browning, Tennyson, Thackeray and Keats. He entered the University of Glasgow where he studied English

Language and Literature. Upon completing his Christmas exams he had placed 4th in a class of 200.

Beginning the New Year term, he wrote an essay critical of Ophelia in William Shakespeare’s “Hamlet.” In it he questioned her “purity.” The instructor, taking exception to his comments, wrote on his paper “...this is perverse and obscene....” Rebuked, Robert challenged the instructor to a fist fight, which never occurred. Disenchanted, Robert left the university never to return.

Robert emigrated to Canada arriving in 1896 with $15 in his pocket and visions of becoming a cowboy in British Columbia but the life of a rancher was less than he expected. He quit after 18 months.

Robert was not averse to hard work. He dedicated himself to physical fitness which suited his spirit of wanderlust and supported his lifestyle. He greatly enjoyed walking and received much of his inspiration during solitary treks in woods and fields.

He spent the next few years drifting up and down the Pacific coast working at various odd jobs. In 1903 he accepted a position with the Canadian Bank of Commerce and took a post in Whitehorse in the Yukon Territory, later transferring to Dawson.

Returning from one of his walks he passed a bar on Main Street in Whitehorse where “A bunch of the boys were whooping it up.” The line stuck and he spent the rest of the night composing “The Shooting of Dan McGrew.” On another occasion he heard the story of a prospector who cremated his partner. In other conversations people always complained of the Yukon cold. One day he spotted the name of Sam McGee from Tennessee on some bank papers. Robert’s muse inspired him to write the famous “Cremation of Sam McGee.”

Much admired in his time, Service wrote of heroes, common folk and rollicking buffoons. In his poems he spoke of miners and prostitutes, loggers and loners, life and death. With these ordinary, rustic themes, he produced ballads, songs and rhymes. In his first book of poetry, “Songs of a Sourdough” (1906) he celebrated the rough and tumble life of the Klondike during the gold rush days of the early 1900s.

With the publication of “Songs of a Sourdough” and “Ballads of a Cheechako” (1908) Robert was well on his way to financial independence. He spent a total of 8 years in the Yukon and left in 1912 to serve as a war correspondent covering the Balkan War. Though these were some of his most momentous and productive years, he never returned to the Yukon.

His time as a war correspondent was followed by a stint as a volunteer ambulance driver for the Americans in World War I. This experience provided him with yet more material for his collection of poetry published as “Rhymes of a Red Cross Man” (1916).

Robert purchased a villa in Brittany following the war. Except for a period during World War II he lived the remainder of his life in France and Monte Carlo writing and traveling.

Robert W. Service passed away on September 11, 1958, and is buried in Lancieux, France. His death preceded by forty-three years to the day the heinous terrorist attack on America. I wonder what he might have written of such aggression?

Those interested in further study of the life of Robert Service should consult his two autobiographical works “Ploughman of the Moon” (1945) and “Harper of Heaven” (1948).

Any time is a good time to read Robert Service. I found my time while recuperating. Some claim that he was the most widely read balladeer of his day. It would be unfortunate if today’s generation missed knowing the poems of Robert Service. For those already familiar with his light verse, September is as good a time as any to say “Thank you, Mr. Service, for gracing our days with your poetry.” Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

Fool me once, shame on you.

Fool me twice, shame on me.

Universal health care doesn’t appear to be the shoo-in it once was, but it may still become reality.

The liberal objective, now and for the last half century, has always been a single payer health care system. Regardless of the rhetoric used by proponents, a single payer system rules out competition. Ergo, a public option, single payer health care system means a government-run system.

In fact, without a government option, there is no reason for a health care reform legislation as currently proposed. Medicare reform, yes. Co-opting the entire private health care system, no.

The current euphemism in congress for a government-run system is “co-op.” As such, this represents little more than the camel’s nose under the tent, so to speak.

If a public health care plan was a Trojan horse for a universal, single-payer health care system, a co-op, in the liberal sense, is a Trojan horse for a government-run public health care system.

Be careful what you wish for and don’t be fooled by the wildly populist words of legislators. Their sense of co-ops and the public’s sense of co-ops are not the same.

The co-op concept has a rich and varied history. We all know farmers established co-ops long ago to market and distribute produce. Workers in some sectors have established co-ops called “credit unions.” Purchasing co-ops provide members with access to a variety of goods and services at reduced prices. In metropolitan areas, co-op members own their apartment buildings. Insurance companies form co-ops called “mutual” insurance companies.

Here are the criteria a true co-op should meet if it is to be part of the health care solution.

--It should be run exclusively by its members.

--It should be funded exclusively by its members and other private sources.

--It should be controlled exclusively by its members.

Health care co-ops cannot and must not have any federal involvement if they are to be truly competitive and working for the individual. They must not:

--Be run by any government in any form, especially the federal government.

--Be funded or subsidized by the government even for “startup funds.”

--Include plans chosen or influenced by any level of government.

Currently, liberal congressional leaders seek some form of government involvement as a compromise under the moniker “co-op.“

If health care co-ops are so good, why don’t they proliferate? What’s to stop them from germinating like other co-ops?

If congress is intent on reforming health care along the lines of co-ops, they could change the tax code to do two things. First, congress could permit mutual insurance companies to be truly non-profit insurance companies.

Second, the tax code could give individuals the same tax breaks for buying insurance through co-ops as they currently give for buying through their employer. That would spur real competition.

Senator Kent Conrad touts the example of Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound (GHCPS) as an example of a health care co-op. Unfortunately, that is not a good example to use. GHCPS policy holders do not have ownership rights. They may apply for membership, but policy holders neither own the “cooperative” nor do they have full membership rights.

Ultimately, every civil program the feds attempt to manage eventually is driven into the ground and out of budget with inevitable cost overruns. Why entrust the government with yet another costly boondoggle to botch?

If a public option is adopted, individuals can expect to be treated no better than a line item in a budget. Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

There is an old saying, “When you’re sent to drain a swamp and you’re standing in water up to your neck with alligators swimming all around -- don’t lose sight of the objective.”

With attention focused on the opposition to health care reform at town hall meetings, the US House has yet to vote on H.R. 3200, the major health care bill. If and when it does so, the bill then goes to the US Senate where passage remains murky. The Senate has no clearly identifiable health care bill but continues crafting one in committees.

Much is made of “fixing” Medicare. Medicare has been a known problem ignored by congress for years. It isn’t necessary to hastily rework the entire health care system with an overarching government replacement to “fix” Medicare.

Even as congressmen and senators get an ear full on the various health care proposals, the Senate will quietly take up H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, when they return from their summer listening tour. This is the House version of Cap and Trade legislation. Once the Senate acts on Cap and Trade, it’s on to the president for signature. Then Cap and Trade is a done deal.

In a way, juggling these bills is much like a political shell game. You focus on the shells and miss the pea.

Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND) is very certain the Senate will not pass a “public option” health care plan. Interestingly, a health care amendment was submitted by his colleague Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) that was adopted with bipartisan support by the Senate Heath Committee. If adopted as part of any final health care bill, the amendment would require all senators, congressmen and their staffs to come under whatever option congress passes and the president signs. This illustrates a very good point. If health care reform is so good for the people, surely it’s good for congress as well.

When I asked Senator Conrad at a town hall meeting if he supported Senator Coburn’s bipartisan amendment his response was that “there would be no public option passed in the Senate.” This was a neat parry, a typical political non-answer. I took it as a “No.” After all, why should the patricians stoop to the level of plebes and live under the same health care they think best for the rest of us?

No public option? Let’s see if a public option resurrects itself under a different name such as a health care co-op. Why don’t I trust these people?

So much for the health care listening tour.

I had another question the opportunity for which never presented itself for the asking. It’s a nit picking Cap and Trade question. Washington’s mantra is chanted over and over, “We must break our dependence on foreign oil.” Fair enough. But, there are the inevitable unintended consequences accompanying the usual government “solution.”

A push is on to substitute hybrid or fully electric cars for cars using the internal combustion engine. Disregard for a moment that our number one and number three suppliers of oil are Canada and Mexico in that order. Venezuela is second with all other countries arrayed after them. Disregard also the need to generate the electric energy to charge the batteries. Think about the composition of the batteries.

An important component of the rechargeable batteries is lithium. A full 50% of the world’s supply of lithium comes from Bolivia, a close friend of Hugo Chavez. Another 25% comes from Chile. Seventy-five percent of the world’s lithium comes from these two countries.

My question is, “Aren’t we depending to an even greater extent for our supply of lithium from overseas than we are currently for oil?” In other words, aren’t we trading a headache for an upset stomach?

Maybe, just maybe, health care and cap and trade legislation have nothing to do with either health or saving the environment. Maybe these and other efforts have more to do with consolidating political power in the hands of a few Washington politicians to the detriment of our freedom.

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

If you want to drill for oil, you hire a petroleum engineer. If you want to drill for money in Washington, you hire a lobbyist. That’s what farm lobbies, industry associations and teachers unions do. Lobbyist facilitate taking tax dollars from some people and giving those dollars to others.

Formerly known as the American Association of Retired Persons, AARP is no different than any other special interest group in its activities.

Although AARP bills itself as non-partisan. Nevertheless, its actions prove otherwise. They have funded advertising and pushed for legislation that consistently argues for a Democrat legislative agenda embracing higher taxes and bigger government.

On Tuesday afternoon, July 28, President Obama participated in a “tele-town hall” meeting at the AARP headquarters in Washington, DC.

The question is, “How well does AARP represent members’ interests?”

Seniors remain skittish about the vote in congress on health care bill H.R. 3200 . Skepticism remains high for several reasons.

Nevertheless, AARP continues active campaigning in favor of “Obamacare” by urging members to lobby their congressmen and senators to support the measure despite the bill’s major flaws.

FLAW 1: Under Obamacare, seniors indeed risk losing their doctor. Administration rhetoric to the contrary, the New York Times on April 2, 2009, reported that 29% of Medicare beneficiaries surveyed who were looking for a primary care doctor had trouble finding one. That’s up 5% from last year. Our nation already faces a significant and growing doctor shortage. Obamacare will compound the problem making it more difficult for seniors to find doctors who accept Medicare.

To exacerbate the problem further, Obama plans to pay for up to a third of his plan by cutting $313 billion in Medicare reimbursements to health care providers thus forcing doctors to see even fewer Medicare patients.

Adding to the pressure, Obamacare’s “public option” could decrease the annual income of hospitals by $36 billion causing the net income of physicians to drop by $33 billion. Such reductions will encourage doctors to retire early and medical students to seek other fields of endeavor.

FLAW 2: Under Obamacare many seniors will lose their coverage. At least 22% of all Medicare patients (10.5 million people) are enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans. In addition to the traditional Medicare benefits, these plans include coordinated care for patients with chronic conditions together with additional hospitalization coverage. President Obama proposes to kill the entire program. If so, seniors could easily face an average $2,000-$4,000 annual cost adjustment increase.

FLAW 3: Under Obamacare, health care will be rationed. Central to Obamacare is a federal health board that will, of necessity, ration health care to cut costs. Supporting Obamacare, Princeton professor Peter Singer wrote in the New York Times, “The task of health care bureaucrats is then to get the best value for the resources they have been allocated.” Congressional conservatives have given every opportunity for Obamacare liberals to disavow government-rationed health care with amendments to remove rationing provisions. Those amendments have been voted down in every instance along partisan lines. Obama plans to pay for expanded coverage for the young and healthy at the expense of the elderly and infirm.

In spite of these profound flaws, AARP continues to support and advocate for Obamacare regardless of members who see things differently from AARP leaders. Which begs the question, “Whose interest does AARP serve -- the elderly or ideologues?”

There is no question that America’s health care system needs improvement. Rather than balancing health care reform on the backs of seniors, more must be done to revise the tax system, implement tort reform, enable true health care competition in the private sector and give families control of their health care dollars.

Obamacare does none of this.

July 24, 2009

Health care legislation, the biggest story in months, gets scant critical examination in the mainstream media. One outlet after another offers the same unremarkable spin in favor of Obama’s health care initiative.

For example, there’s not one peep about tort reform from the MSM. Frivolous law suits with enormous payouts that drive the high cost of doctor’s malpractice insurance is one of the biggest contributors to the high cost of health care.

The rush toward health care reform proceeds unchecked at a dizzying pace. President Bush was criticized for rushing to war with Iraq, but there is no media criticism about Obama’s rush to pass health care legislation.

For all its warts and pimples, we already have the best health care system in the world. WHO ranks the United State 1 out of 191 countries. Americans don’t flock to Canada, Britain or Cuba for health care. But, people do flock to the United States for care.

Frustrated, more people seek information about health care legislation from alternative media. Public objection and outrage grow over H.R. 3200 (America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009). People are learning that the provisions are neither affordable nor offer choices.

Although Obama has praised the Mayo Clinic repeatedly as a model for health care reform, Mayo Clinic has not returned the favor. It’s adamantly opposed to H.R. 3200. Last week clinic officials said “...the proposed legislation misses the opportunity to help create higher quality, more affordable care for patients. In fact, it will do the opposite” because the proposals aren’t “patient-focused or results oriented. The real losers will be the citizens of the United States.”

Easily found on the internet, H.R. 3200 contains the following examples. If anything changes in your current health contract, you will be required to move into a “qualified plan,” one that the government considers in your best interest (pp. 16-17).

Offensive language such as “mentally retarded” is used (p 389).

Seniors will be compelled to submit to end-of-life care counseling once every five years, or more often if ill or in a nursing home (pp. 425-430).

When filing taxes, if you cannot prove you are in a “qualified plan” you will be fined thousands of dollars (pp. 167-168).

July 24, Democrats, rejecting Republican input, pushed through a partisan amendment to H.R. 3200 allowing 12 million illegal aliens free health care. The House Ways and Means Committee passed H.R. 3200 23-18. An amendment offered by Republicans to strip the illegal alien provision was defeated along straight partisan lines 26-15.

Taxpayers’ dollars flow like water. If congress had used $30 billion of the $1 trillion stimulus package (which isn’t working) to insure people without health insurance, the forty million “uninsured” would be covered -- including the illegal aliens.

Chairing his Senate Budget Committee hearing on Thursday, July 16, Kent Conrad asked a pointed question of Congressional Budget Director Doug Elmendorf. “I’m going to really put you on the spot....[D]o you see a successful effort being mounted to bend the long-term cost curve?” Elmendorf answered, “No Mr. Chairman. On the contrary, the legislation (H.R. 3200) significantly expands the federal responsibility for health care costs.” And again, “Over time, accumulating debt would cause substantial harm to the economy.” Elmendorf’s comments earned him an invitation to a personal meeting with President Obama. Separation of powers anyone?

On Saturday, July 25, in a letter to House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, Elmendorf reiterated that “In CBO’s judgment, the probability is high that no savings would be realized [over the 10-year budget window]....”

Peggy Noonan, a Ronald Reagan speech writer and Obama campaign supporter, recently discussed the unspoken public fear with the health care bill. With comprehensive public funding of the same health care for everyone, the overseers in government feel obligated to tell folks how to live and which simple joys in life are allowed and disallowed. As Americans go about their daily routines more and more are feeling less and less free. H.R. 3200 will only intensify that feeling.

Are you listening, Congressman Pomeroy?

With rising public concern, shouldn’t congress take its time and get it right? Shouldn’t Obama at least take as long revising health care as he took to select his puppy for the White House -- six months?

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

 

FIT FOR LIFE Remember how Mom used to harp about a healthy life style? “Go out and play.” “Eat your spinach.” “No more candy.” She taught us to take care of ourselves through healthy choices. Exercise, diet and weight control are front and center as never before. Taking Mom’s intentions to heart, it’s wise to ease back into these healthy habits if we’ve been dormant. Play it safe and check with your doctor first. That said, physical therapists and physicians suggest a comprehensive way of determining fitness along the lines that Mom taught us. It encompasses diet and weight control, flexibility, muscle strength, endurance and cardio-respiratory (CR) efficiency. Of these, CR and weight control are most important. CR is critical for life. It comprises the respiratory system and the cardiovascular system. The lungs take in oxygen and the heart, arteries and vessels carry blood, with oxygen and nutrients, to the body. If the cardiac system fails the result is a heart attack. If the vascular system fails oxygen won’t reach the brain and results in a stroke. That’s basically what the layman needs to know. So how do you strengthen your CR system to work efficiently? Diligently and routinely exercise while monitoring your target heart rate. Swimming, jogging and team sports will do. Walking, however, is cheap, easy and available. Why the infatuation with walking? People hike for health, saunter for serenity and ramble for recreation. That’s the magic of walking. A good aerobic response may be achieved by exercising at your target heart rate for 20 to 30 minutes each day. First, determine your maximum heart rate. Do this by subtracting your age from 220. If you are 60 years old, your maximum heart rate will be 160 beats per minute (bpm). Next, calculate your target heart rate. Your target heart rate is between 60 and 80 percent of your maximum heart rate. Continuing with our example of a 60 year old person, multiply 160 bpm by 0.6 and 0.8 respectively producing two figures: 96 bpm and 128 bpm. Our example target heart rate falls between 96 and 128 bpm. Check your pulse as you exercise with the objective of achieving your target heart rate. Count your heartbeats for 15 seconds then multiply by 4 to determine your beats bpm. You may find another pleasing indicator. Your weight might begin to drop if you maintain a 2200 calorie per day diet. A word to the wise. Restrict alcohol consumption and cease tobacco use. Substance abuse does not make you a better you. Enough said. Why all the hoopla? The new normal is coming and doctoring as usual is about to change. With Medicare reimbursements to doctors on the chopping block and an existing doctor shortage to treat an aging population, can rationed health care be far behind? Details continue to dribble out of the 1017 page health care bill, H.R. 3200, a copy of which may be viewed on the internet at http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.+3200: The legislation may also be tracked at http://www.thepeopledecide.us:80/?bid=240. Peter Singer, professor of bioethics at Princeton University, published in the New York Times Magazine on July 19, 2009, an article titled “Why We Must Ration Health Care.” It is an eloquent case for restricting the health care we would normally expect. Singer’s article may be viewed at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/19/magazine/19healthcare-t.html. I don’t buy the argument that the government can add 40 million uninsured people to the health care system, cut the total cost and not go into debt. A growing nameless, faceless bureaucracy representing Treasury (IRS), Health and Human Services and other federal agencies will set the guidelines for care rendered in doctor-patient decisions. The guidelines will be enforced by the states. Key in the cost control debate will be the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative-Effectiveness Research. That agency will establish additional guidelines for rationing health care on a cost effectiveness basis. Is there such a “crisis” in health care that a $2 to $3 trillion health care bill must be rushed through in a mere couple of weeks? Isn’t it worth reading and understanding our national obligation? Maybe those who are rushing the bill are afraid the public will find out what is in the bill. At this rate, the federal government will be able to control every aspect of our behavior under the guise of health and safety. As a measure of excellence, rest assured no congressman or senator will relinquish their own lucrative health care plan to live with what they are legislating for the rest of us. By the time our kids realize what we’ve done to them, we will have become a nation of indentured servants to our own government. Stay fit, feel fine and enjoy life. No one lives forever, but no one should die by committee. Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

Column: The Passing Scene
By: Dennis M. Patrick
Date: July 10, 2009

I recently consulted one of my many dictionaries with a question in mind. Before I realized it, I was immersed in fascinating details and time flew by.

I’ve always been intrigued with words and word usage. Aside from the very specific purpose of confirming spellings, pronunciations and definitions, what I find alluring are the introductions, forwards and prologs to various dictionaries. The wealth of information buried in those brief blurbs constitute an education in itself.

Who would ever think of reading a dictionary? Of course, the idea is not to sit and read the book from cover to cover. I’m referring to the explanatory material at the beginning. Such information is there for the taking.

Reading the definition of “dictionary” in a dictionary is like looking at your reflection in a mirror while looking at yourself in another mirror. The more you look, the more infinite the gaze.

According to my “Webster’s College Dictionary,” a dictionary is basically a collection of words with information about their meaning, pronunciation, derivation, spelling and inflection. Simple enough.

The English language has an extraordinarily rich history. Unique and distinct people groups made their contributions over the millennia. Consequently, the English language grew in complexity.

The first “modern” English dictionary, “A Dictionary of the English Language,” was published in 1755 by the erudite Samuel Johnson. Although not the first English dictionary, it was the first to bring together words arranged alphabetically with textual references and is the most influential dictionary in the English language. Read the background of the book in James Boswell’s “Life of Johnson.”

Johnson’s dictionary remained dominant for 150 years until the “Oxford English Dictionary” was completed in 1884 after a long and tortured history. It was twenty-three years from the time of conception until printed by the Oxford University Press. The current edition spans over twenty volumes.

In 1807 Noah Webster began compiling “An American Dictionary of the English Language.” It was not until 1828 that his first edition was published. He believed English spelling rules were too complicated and wished to simplify them for American use. He also wished to include uniquely American words like “skunk” and “squash” that did not appear in British dictionaries.

Innumerable categories of dictionaries abound. In particular are the specialized dictionaries for people with singular demands. For example, “20,000 Misspelled Words” contains page after page of word lists for bad spellers.

Whereas anyone might turn quickly to a spelling dictionary, writers might have need of a rhyming dictionary or a dictionary of similes. If prose is the language of reason, poetry is the language of feeling and the expression of emotional experience. Looking for the right word, and a rhyming word at that, sometimes just doesn’t come to mind. That’s where a rhyming dictionary comes in handy. One, two and three syllable rhyming words are organized for the taking.

My copy of “Dictionary of Similes” is a cross between a basic dictionary and a thesaurus, a thesaurus being a book of synonyms and antonyms including related and contrasting words. My similes dictionary list words alphabetically and are tied to specific quotations of famous people illustrating context and helping the writer avoid clashing comparisons. A well-placed simile expresses meaning and adds sparkle.

Bible dictionaries are keyed to words found in various translations of the Bible. Lexicons are even more specialized usually concentrating on Greek, Latin and Hebrew words.

Foreign language dictionaries define and translate words from one language to another.

The categories of dictionaries goes on and on. Political, medical, literary, cultural and legal fields of study, and more, have their own special vernacular.

For fun, Ambrose Bierce produced his satirical book, “The Devil’s Dictionary,” in which he redefines some commonly used words with wit and bite in an off-beat way.

Keep in mind, each of these dictionaries includes a forward, prolog or introduction of some sort to account for the book’s objective and contents.

So it is, during “down time,” I can profitably while away an hour or so. Browsing through dictionaries renders a rich source of satisfaction and enlightenment demonstrating that the smallest spark of curiosity may ignite the lamp of knowledge.

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

This year’s 4th of July celebrations are over, but the reality behind the idea continues.

In Philadelphia, July 1776, time for talk among the colonial delegates to congress had expired. One by one, in keeping with their tradition, each delegate cast a single vote. At issue was the adoption of a 1,337 word document declaring why the English colonies in North America should sever their ties with England. That act in itself made each delegate guilty of treason.

The familiar scene in the minds of many is captured for all time by artist John Trumbull whose 12’ by 18’ oil-on-canvas painting “Declaration of Independence” hangs in the United States Capitol Rotunda. Commissioned in 1817, the painting depicts 47 delegates gathered for the signing. The painting was placed in the rotunda in 1826 and later depicted on the two-dollar bill. However, this scene, as portrayed by Trumbull, never took place.

There was no formal signing of the declaration. The actual signing began on July 2 and continued as delegates arrived from the colonies. In the painting the room is wrong. The placement of the doors is wrong. There were no heavy drapes over the windows. There were no military decorations about the hall.

The power of Trumbull’s painting lies in its symbolism which is exactly what he chose to emphasize. The noble statement of 1776 was committed to paper. It was not the decree of a king, czar or sultan. It was a declaration of political faith, an explanation of colonial actions and a brave intent freely agreed to by an assembly of English citizens. As such, this statement was something entirely new and unique.

The true accuracy of Trumbull’s painting is captured in the faces of the signers. John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin were painted from life. Trumbull took years to sketch another 36 faces from life. He wanted us to know exactly who the signers were. They were once as alive as you and me comprising the smallest of all minorities—the individual.

Some who signed the declaration are not shown. Several who did not sign are represented in the painting. Conspicuously absent is George Washington who had departed a year before to take command of the continental army.

If Trumbull’s painting is high-mindedly symbolic, the fate of the signers was starkly real.

The vote of the Continental Congress was literally a death defying act. In New York harbor a British fleet of 120 war ships stood ready to disembark 10,000 troops. Another 15,000 to 20,000 troops were en route. Their objective was to capture New York and cut off the Continental Army as soon as they received word of congress’s vote. Admiral Richard Lord Howe commanded the British fleet; his brother, Major General Sir William Howe, commanded the British army. The five largest British ships had 234 canon between them, far in excess of all the American rebel guns on shore.

Never had any rebellion within the British empire succeeded. Why should these American belligerents, with no organized military force to speak of and no experienced military leadership, believe they could prevail against the greatest colonial power in the world? No wonder many of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were visibly shaken as they penned their names to the document that declared the thirteen American colonies free and independent of the British crown. If caught, everyone of them would be hanged. Although victorious in the end, most of the signers suffered immensely.

Signatories of the Declaration of Independence who lived anywhere near a British stronghold were targeted. It’s difficult to entertain noble thoughts of patriotism when your wife is being brutally abused on a prison ship as was the case of New York Delegate Francis Lewis, when your children are taken never to be seen again as was the case of New Jersey Delegate John Hart, when your merchant fleet is destroyed as was the case of Pennsylvania Delegate Robert Morris, or when your home and crops are destroyed as was the case of Rhode Island Delegate William Ellery. This is a short list of those who suffered privation in exchange for their defiance. The struggle would continue until the surrender of Major General Charles Cornwallis October 19, 1781.

Could we as a people, or at least a third of us as in the case of the colonists, rise to the occasion as did our forefathers should the need arise? A worthy question.

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

I called Congressman Earl Pomeroy’s office in Washington last Thursday. Usually I would write or e-mail my congressman, but considering the time sensitivity of the issue, I chose to call. The subject was H.R. 2454 euphemistically called the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 otherwise known as Cap and Trade legislation. The House of Representatives had scheduled a vote for sometime Friday. There was no time to waste and I wished to pitch my two-cents worth.

News stories reported that Pomeroy would not support the Cap and Trade legislation. That’s what I wanted to hear and I wished to encourage him.

The receptionist taking my call was pleasant enough when I identified myself as a Stanley resident. I asked to speak to the congressman knowing I had a snowball’s chance in you-know-where of actually talking to him.

The lady on the phone informed he was not available and would I like to leave a message? Yes, I would. My message: Thank you for voting against the Cap and Trade legislation. It takes guts, as a Democrat, to stand in opposition to President Obama and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.

Friday morning’s news indicated that the Democrats had introduced a three-hundred page amendment to H.R. 2454 at three in the morning in an effort to corral the few votes needed to ensure passage. Would Pomeroy switch his vote?

At 8:00 a.m. Friday I called Pomeroy’s office a second time. I was told he had not changed his position and was still voting “No” on the measure. Again, I expressed my appreciation for his courage in standing against the pressure of his party and in support of his North Dakota constituents.

Cap and Trade legislation has been one of President Obama’s initiatives. He believes that America should adopt the Spanish model for “alternative energy.” No matter that Spain’s unemployment rate of 18.1% is directly attributable to government spending on “green energy” jobs. Spanish economists have calculated that every “green job” created is subsidized to the tune of $750k to $800k. Government subsidized jobs created in the wind energy sector cost even more -- $1.4 million per job. (See http://tinyurl.com/d7z9ye). In a word, Spain’s experience is the inefficient political allocation of capital, money that must be raised through taxes. And this is the model Obama wants the United States to follow!

Although H.R. 2454 passed 219-212 on June 26, Pomeroy was correct in his assessment. He believes the emission limitation targets are unrealistic because the technology to meet those targets hasn’t even been invented yet.

Furthermore, over time the so-called “consensus” for manmade global warming in the scientific community around the world has shrunk and the urgency for legislation to control climate change has diminished as well.

In truth, H.R. 2454, also known as the Waxman-Markey climate change legislation, is little more than a thinly disguised energy tax increase. Slated to go into effect in 2012, the legislation would incrementally increase electric bills by 90%, natural gas by 55% and heating oil by 56% by 2035. Job losses over the 2012-2035 timeline would reach 2.5 million. Particularly hard hit sectors would include manufacturing, agriculture, construction, transportation, chemicals, plastics and rubber to name a few.

Now it’s on to the Senate where the fate of the Cap and Trade bill is less certain -- as are the votes of Senators Conrad and Dorgan. It’s understandable that they might wish to reserve judgment until they have read the bill. Of course, not reading bills has not stopped them from voting on major legislation in the past. To their credit, they have refused to support previous carbon emissions bills. Will they continue to stand on principle, or will their votes be bought with enticing amendments?

Protecting Planet Earth from the fiction of manmade climate change becomes surreal. Belief in government’s magical solutions to any presumed problems was identified by the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan as “the leakage of reality from American life.” A rather eloquent, if not biting, observation on life in our time.

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

Consolation most folks seek in the face of tumult and uncertainty. Government-created debt of trillions of dollars. Forced reduction in carbon fuels in the midst of plenty. Federal fibbing on jobless projections while the real data shows numbers approaching double digits. I’m whistling the old English ballad “The World Turned Upside Down.”

Change comes in inconvenient ways. Forced compliance or behavior modification, call it what you will, is in store for those reluctant to change. It will be leveraged by means of pressure through taxation and implemented through federal bureaucracies. The epitome of coercion will determine what we eat, what we drive and what forms of energy we use, what medical treatment we receive, how our kids will be raised and educated. Lifestyles we would never choose voluntarily we will be required to accept. All this is conjured through the false premise that government bureaucracy knows best.

It’s highly improbable anyone can do anything about the impending economic demise or expanding restriction on freedom at this time. Those who object to the current malaise have little choice but to wait to “make a difference.” Besides, Obama has repeatedly promised that the situation will get worse before it gets better.

Those who object may not see positive change until 2010 at the earliest. That’s when the entire House of Representatives is up for re-election. Writing your congressman and senators may help vent frustration, but that’s about it. We’re experiencing a one party system in control of the government and in charge of policy and budget. Elected officials will do as they please, then posture and dupe to their own advantage come election time.

Meanwhile, as we hope for meaningful change, we play the waiting game. As Frank Sinatra sang in September Song. “Oh, it’s a long, long while from May to December. But, the days grow short when you reach September….Oh, the days dwindle down to a precious few—September, November….”

What now? Actually, there are things to be about none of which involve direct action. One can waste time watching TV. There are sports, soap operas, “B” movies and other forms of escape. More profitable endeavors fortify the spirit and might include hobbies or working in a “Liberty Garden” reminiscent of the old Victory Gardens of World War II. Even listening to favorite music helps pass the time and soothe the sentiments.

My favorite pastime is catching up on reading—or re-reading—good and worthy books. We are, after all, not the first discontents to buttress ourselves through troubled times.

In “Gulliver’s Travels” (1726) Jonathan Swift satirizes man’s abuse of human reason as reflected in political, social and academic institutions. He regards humans, at best, as fools; at worst, apes. It is Swift’s musings on man’s corruption of his highest gift, his ability to reason, whereby he excoriates most “civilized” institutions.

Satire and parody run through Lewis Carroll’s “Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland” (1865) and the sequel “Through the Looking-Glass“ (1871). Both tales embrace masterfully inverted logic. In the former, Alice encounters illogical and strange creatures. In the latter, Alice moves through a mirror and into an unreal world also dominated by illogical behavior. Children love it and adults see the parody of those in high places who make believe they practice clear thinking.

“Animal Farm” is George Orwell’s 1945 parody and anti-utopian satire. A group of barnyard animals run off their human masters and set up their own egalitarian society. Eventually, the power-loving pigs form a dictatorship even more repressive than that of their former human masters. “Repressive” is the operative term.

“Atlas Shrugged” (1957) is a profound novel by Ayn Rand whose female protagonist, Dagny Taggart, struggles to manage a railroad within the pressures of onerous government restrictions and overwhelming bureaucracy. This novel is Rand’s most compelling presentation of her philosophy of objectivism.

Find these books in a library, if you can.

Regardless of the level of frustration, it is healthy to use one’s time wisely while playing the waiting game.

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).