Angela Merkel

Yesterday, German chancellor Angela Merkel made a speech to the youth wing of her Christian-Democratic Union party when she rocked Deutschland by declaring that Islams are bad for their health Multiculturalism Has Failed in Germany.

Merkel said that the hope of having separate cultural groups happily coexisting inside Germany was “not the reality.”

The Chancellor made it clear that she was not proposing Germany seal its borders. Germany could not risk being seen as a country which rejected foreigners, she said, because, “that would do great damage to our country. Companies would go elsewhere, because they couldn’t find workers here.”

Merkel went on to explain that “integration is one of the key tasks facing us in the future. At the same time it must be a trademark of Germany that the country gives people here an opportunity.”

It is about time someone realizes that the house divided against itself will not stand. There has been an alarming rate of Islam growth in Europe, and how those Islamic resist the Europe modern laws.  Geert Wilders, a dutch politician, has been hiding from the  Islams after being threatened to death for his practice of free speech by criticizing Islam. In a nutshell, Islamic think they are blessed to do anything, even killing, while all “infidels” are not allowed to do anything even breathing. Geert’s trial is ongoing.

How can the multicultural blend together if one culture remains intolerant? Pretty much worthless! Like nobody would want a free gallon of “multicultural” ice cream after a tiny spoon of stool is added and mixed in the gallon..

In general most modern cultures (e.g. religions, races, etc) are tolerant of others, however there are handfuls of intolerant cultures those seek more power over others. These ignorant cultures do not know how to get along with others, leave alone any significant difference…

Leaders do not like reality much and their fantasies that “everyone gets along” are getting out of control. The reality is that there are always some good and some evil in this world.

Thomas Sowell noted that somebody eventually had to say it — and German chancellor Angela Merkel deserves credit for being the one who had the courage to say it out loud. Multiculturalism has “utterly failed.”

It’s not too late for Deutschland and all other modern countries to do something..

Update (Oct 20th): Thomas Sowell’s new article came out today as a sequel to his  “The Multicultural Cult” article. Part 2 here.

Another article covers this.

Countless number of  freedoms are going to vanish, but here’s a start of 20 freedoms highlighted by IBD:

The sections described below are taken from HR 3590 as agreed to by the Senate and from the reconciliation bill as displayed by the Rules Committee.

1. You are young and don’t want health insurance? You are starting up a small business and need to minimize expenses, and one way to do that is to forego health insurance? Tough. You have to pay $750 annually for the “privilege.” (Section 1501)

2. You are young and healthy and want to pay for insurance that reflects that status? Tough. You’ll have to pay for premiums that cover not only you, but also the guy who smokes three packs a day, drink a gallon of whiskey and eats chicken fat off the floor. That’s because insurance companies will no longer be able to underwrite on the basis of a person’s health status. (Section 2701).

3. You would like to pay less in premiums by buying insurance with lifetime or annual limits on coverage? Tough. Health insurers will no longer be able to offer such policies, even if that is what customers prefer. (Section 2711).

4. Think you’d like a policy that is cheaper because it doesn’t cover preventive care or requires cost-sharing for such care? Tough. Health insurers will no longer be able to offer policies that do not cover preventive services or offer them with cost-sharing, even if that’s what the customer wants. (Section 2712).

5. You are an employer and you would like to offer coverage that doesn’t allow your employers’ slacker children to stay on the policy until age 26? Tough. (Section 2714).

6. You must buy a policy that covers ambulatory patient services, emergency services, hospitalization, maternity and newborn care, mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment; prescription drugs; rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices; laboratory services; preventive and wellness services; chronic disease management; and pediatric services, including oral and vision care.

You’re a single guy without children? Tough, your policy must cover pediatric services. You’re a woman who can’t have children? Tough, your policy must cover maternity services. You’re a teetotaler? Tough, your policy must cover substance abuse treatment. (Add your own violation of personal freedom here.) (Section 1302).

7. Do you want a plan with lots of cost-sharing and low premiums? Well, the best you can do is a “Bronze plan,” which has benefits that provide benefits that are actuarially equivalent to 60% of the full actuarial value of the benefits provided under the plan. Anything lower than that, tough. (Section 1302 (d) (1) (A))

8. You are an employer in the small-group insurance market and you’d like to offer policies with deductibles higher than $2,000 for individuals and $4,000 for families? Tough. (Section 1302 (c) (2) (A).

9. If you are a large employer (defined as at least 101 employees) and you do not want to provide health insurance to your employee, then you will pay a $750 fine per employee (It could be $2,000 to $3,000 under the reconciliation changes). Think you know how to better spend that money? Tough. (Section 1513).

10. You are an employer who offers health flexible spending arrangements and your employees want to deduct more than $2,500 from their salaries for it? Sorry, can’t do that. (Section 9005 (i)).

11. If you are a physician and you don’t want the government looking over your shoulder? Tough. The Secretary of Health and Human Services is authorized to use your claims data to issue you reports that measure the resources you use, provide information on the quality of care you provide, and compare the resources you use to those used by other physicians. Of course, this will all be just for informational purposes. It’s not like the government will ever use it to intervene in your practice and patients’ care. Of course not. (Section 3003 (i))

12. If you are a physician and you want to own your own hospital, you must be an owner and have a “Medicare provider agreement” by Feb. 1, 2010. (Dec. 31, 2010 in the reconciliation changes.) If you didn’t have those by then, you are out of luck. (Section 6001 (i) (1) (A))

13. If you are a physician owner and you want to expand your hospital? Well, you can’t (Section 6001 (i) (1) (B). Unless, it is located in a country where, over the last five years, population growth has been 150% of what it has been in the state (Section 6601 (i) (3) ( E)). And then you cannot increase your capacity by more than 200% (Section 6001 (i) (3) (C)).

14. You are a health insurer and you want to raise premiums to meet costs? Well, if that increase is deemed “unreasonable” by the Secretary of Health and Human Services it will be subject to review and can be denied. (Section 1003)

15. The government will extract a fee of $2.3 billion annually from the pharmaceutical industry. If you are a pharmaceutical company what you will pay depends on the ratio of the number of brand-name drugs you sell to the total number of brand-name drugs sold in the U.S. So, if you sell 10% of the brand-name drugs in the U.S., what you pay will be 10% multiplied by $2.3 billion, or $230,000,000. (Under reconciliation, it starts at $2.55 billion, jumps to $3 billion in 2012, then to $3.5 billion in 2017 and $4.2 billion in 2018, before settling at $2.8 billion in 2019 (Section 1404)). Think you, as a pharmaceutical executive, know how to better use that money, say for research and development? Tough. (Section 9008 (b)).

16. The government will extract a fee of $2 billion annually from medical device makers. If you are a medical device maker what you will pay depends on your share of medical device sales in the U.S. So, if you sell 10% of the medical devices in the U.S., what you pay will be 10% multiplied by $2 billion, or $200,000,000. Think you, as a medical device maker, know how to better use that money, say for R&D? Tough. (Section 9009 (b)).

The reconciliation package turns that into a 2.9% excise tax for medical device makers. Think you, as a medical device maker, know how to better use that money, say for research and development? Tough. (Section 1405).

17. The government will extract a fee of $6.7 billion annually from insurance companies. If you are an insurer, what you will pay depends on your share of net premiums plus 200% of your administrative costs. So, if your net premiums and administrative costs are equal to 10% of the total, you will pay 10% of $6.7 billion, or $670,000,000. In the reconciliation bill, the fee will start at $8 billion in 2014, $11.3 billion in 2015, $1.9 billion in 2017, and $14.3 billion in 2018 (Section 1406).Think you, as an insurance executive, know how to better spend that money? Tough.(Section 9010 (b) (1) (A and B).)

18. If an insurance company board or its stockholders think the CEO is worth more than $500,000 in deferred compensation? Tough.(Section 9014).

19. You will have to pay an additional 0.5% payroll tax on any dollar you make over $250,000 if you file a joint return and $200,000 if you file an individual return. What? You think you know how to spend the money you earned better than the government? Tough. (Section 9015).

That amount will rise to a 3.8% tax if reconciliation passes. It will also apply to investment income, estates, and trusts. You think you know how to spend the money you earned better than the government? Like you need to ask. (Section 1402).

20. If you go for cosmetic surgery, you will pay an additional 5% tax on the cost of the procedure. Think you know how to spend that money you earned better than the government? Tough. (Section 9017).

It’s going to be a karma biting the asses of the supporters for this bill unless as usual they remain blind to the facts. We will only go poorer with more broken systems.

While it looks nice, Apple Inc. keeps coming up with new innovations. My hat off to that company and its appreciated practice of capitalism. Hard to dislike those companies.

Amazing Feeling inconvenient to me the other day when news popped everywhere that many people especially feminists are disgruntled and/or mock the name of that product iPad. These people compare that name with a specific feminine hygiene. Here and this. iTampon? Pleeease! Apparently, these people look for problems or something to complain about, leave alone the fact that the term “PAD” could mean 13 different things according to Merriam Webster Online Dictionary. They could spend the time doing more productive things. Really!

Occurred to me yesterday that it’d be phony of these whiners if they own google accounts or use google websites. GOOGLE name implies GO OGLE (fill in this blank) We know what Ogle usually implies much more than what “Pad” implies. Why did they not complain?

Why didn’t GOOGLE company name itself GO-OGLE-at-her while the executives were at it?

In summary:

Now that’s why I am a conservative.

Still not used to write down year “10″ in date format of yy. Guess my mind is behind.. on break until this Monday. Upcoming articles will come in then.

Not surprised that Republican Party Chairman Michael Steele said Republicans screwed up after Reagan era. Many of the Republicans those days are liberal (we call em “RINO” for Republican In Name Only) and screwing around with our nation’s economy, patriotism, integrity and so on.

Enjoy this one below. Rings right to me

Tightly related to the “aughties” above, and more popular with pedants who enjoy thinking they’re clever, this label stems from “naught,” another infrequently used word for zero, and one still somewhat popular with English sports announcers (who, it should be noted, do still shit outdoors).There is some merit in the name, as this was the decade of the wardrobe malfunction, celebrities getting out of cars without panties, and that one Christina Aguilera video. Any of those things would have gotten someone strung up as a witch as recently as the 1980’s, so it’s fair to say that this has been a fairly ribald decade by historical standards. But naughty? That sounds a little too tame. Maybe the ProminantGutterTramp decade? Or, if we insist upon something shorter, how about The Testes? That one even rhymes with all the existing decades, which should really help when it comes to integrating it in the lyrics of any children’s songs.”

Heh.

United Naive Nations General Assembly has already declared the decade of 2001-2010 the “Decade of the Promotion of a Culture of Peace and Non-Violence for the Children of the World” in 1997. That was years away before this 2000′s decade came. That name is ridiculous and unrealistic since we know the Islam and other cultures suppress children (hope you know!). One of my relatives, also a female reserve veteran, spent time in the Middle East during the Gulf War. She stayed with one Kuwait hosting family most of that time and she was not entitled to interfere family matters at all, but to protect Kuwait. One day 16 year old daughter of that family lifted her veil to a male teenager in the public, and that practice is considered a sin condemned to death .So to that female relative’s horror, the family got the word about that daughter’s violation and then immediately drowned that teenager daughter in the pool before eyes. She could not do anything. That incident is not uncommon in the Mideast and around the world. What is U.N.G.A. thinking?? Sweeping the facts under the rug and pretending this world is getting better from somehow other than the obvious necessity of having a war for peace. It tells us they are either dumb or dumber really that naive.

Andy Serwer of the TIME Magazine has a name suggestion which seems more compatible for this decade, the  “Decade from Hell“. At least he doesn’t skim around trying not to offending a soul.

There are many possible names people came up for this decade. Such examples are “Me” Decade (by the pundits), “s” & iDecade. I have some name ideas for this decade:

1. Decade that Tries One’s Soul
2. Decade of Pity Parties
3. DUH Decade
4. Decade of Dividing Wall between the patriots and the moonbats
5. EntitleDecade
6. Decade-ISM
7. Green Decade BS
8. Colbert Decade (Get it?)
9. Blame Bush Decade  (or BDS Decade according to Krauthammer)

Steele said it was an “ignorant moment” for Reid.

“In fact, you know, I’m kind of sick and tired of the left and Democrats in this country when they get into trouble and don’t get their way and their backs are up against the wall on legislation or whatever it is they’re trying to do, they go to that card, they play that race card, that slavery card, that civil rights card.

“This has nothing to do with health care,” Steele said. “If you have a philosophical or political or business disagreement with this administration or Harry Reid on health care, it has nothing to do with the historic roots of slavery. So it was an ignorant comment.

“Harry needs to go to the well of the Senate, take it back and apologize for offending the sensibilities of the American people on something so important,” he told [CBS' "The Early Show"] anchor Harry Smith.

Looks like Harry Reid has no clue on our history and logic (Didn’t slaves get free health care?). Deroy Murdock, a Project 21 member and a media fellow with the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace at Stanford University, condemns Harry Reid:

It is astonishing and outrageous to equate those who seek the defeat of Reid’s 2,074-page, $2.5 trillion legislative monstrosity with those who were happy to keep blacks in chains, unpaid for their back-breaking labor and traded back and forth like cattle.  The fact that Reid would use such deplorable, insulting and insensitive rhetoric indicates that he is out of credible arguments to defend his own proposal.

While awaiting for Reid to apologize, I’d not be surprised if the organizations representing the minorities (tend to favor liberal agenda in general) do not step forth and blast Harry Reid for his comments. What about Obama? Nada. What about Pelosi? Don’t count on it.

Harry Reid is finished! May he go back in Nuclear Dump Site Nevada cave with his doltish mind in 2010.

Just like mixing the oil and the water. There is no such thing as supporting women and multiculturalism simultaneously. I am no “radical” feminist saying all the darn things like “A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle.” There would not exist a woman without her father which happens to be a man (and vice versa, man needing a woman like a mother)

I am all for women to have the ability to vote, get educated, work, pursue for happiness, etc. It’s really sad seeing how the feminism destroying the women and their womanhood by twisting facts with emotions anger and throwing pity parties. Check this link debunking women as the victims. Our culture is one of the best cultures in the world for women.

Now onto multiculturalism, there are many cultures, ethnic groups and religions oppressing women. First thing comes in my mind every time I hear someone claiming to be multicultural is ISLAMISM. I have talked with some Islams in the past and I got uncomfortable with them trash-talking about women. It’s so obvious these cultures hate women or think low of women. Those multicultural people are either naive or really do not care for women. (Note: NAIVE is one of 2 traits found among the liberals)

So being multicultural feminist is just phony! You cannot just be number 1 fan of New York Yankees and Boston Red Sox at the same time. Liberals want to just please everyone (Note: NARCISSISTIC is 2nd trait found among the liberals) without realizing anything. Make up your mind!

I choose women over Islamism.

Off the subject, the other day it amused me when I read this article. Heh.

Check out my first article “Forecast on Government Health Care Reform: Another Failure” at Deaf Conservative Republicans Blog (click this page to see the article).

Makes you wonder the false pretense the liberals act as the advocate for the minorites, women, elders..

Pray for this bill to be defeated or else probably a lot of people including me would go Galt!