Puleeze Stop Using the "R-word"

This will be a short column, and I'm sure it will piss off some of you. Be that as it may, I have to get this off my chest once and for all!

I sent out an email message that was (I admit) controversial.  Most of you who read my columns received it, so I wont describe it here except to reveal that it identified none other than the infamous Adolph Hitler - may he rot in Hell.  But the clues were eerily similar to the biography of another leader and would lead to a misidentification for some.

One of the offended parties who received the email took offense and wrote back a scathing email message labeling me a racist for equating that cursed Austrian (not German) Bastard with our current president.

I beg to differ, and I am not a racist. My neighborhood is about evenly divided between Blacks and Whites, and I smile and greet everyone exactly the same every day.  I hold no fear nor malice for any of my neighbors regardless of the color of their skin. I repeat: I am not a RACIST!

When will the liberals and (well , let me come out and print it) Democrats stop using the hateful "R-word" to defend their leader even when it doesn't apply, which is most of the time?  Whenever they can't debate or refute the message, they will impugn the character of the messenger. It's supposed to be the conversation stopper and it used to work, but not anymore..

The Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King once said that he prayed for a time when a person was judged, not by the color of his skin, but by the content of his character.  For many of us, including me, that time has come. I leave it to you to parse that statement.

The Frozen Frog

Here comes another one of those urban legends, but this one has a different ending - perhaps a very happy one, too.

Every so often, I receive a picture (see below) that purports to be a frozen Alaskan Tree Frog, that has the ability to freeze in the winter, lose heartbeat, breathing and circulation for months on end, and then revive completely in the spring thaw.

Wow!  That's amazing!  Only problem is, the above picture is not of an Alaskan Tree Frog (there is no such animal) nor is it even an Alaskan Wood Frog (Rana sylvatica), which does exist and does all those miraculous heart-stopping-starting things.  The picture is probably a garden ornament with frost on it, not a live (or dead) frog at all.

What is amazing about the Alaskan Wood Frog is that it has been studied by scientists and biologists to determine what causes this wonderful reaction to freezing temperatures.  What they found is that the wood frog has an unusually high amount of cyroprotectants in its body that prevent the cells and tissue from losing moisture as they freeze.  These are composed of blood sugars and urea, and they lower the freezing temperature to prevent loss of vital fluids, or freeze drying. This enables the frog to recover as though nothing at all happened once the 'melt' occurs.

What if scientists could produce artificial cyroprotectants that could be injected into the donated organs of living or deceased people?  An organ must be implanted within hours of harvesting to be usable now, but with the addition of cyroprotectants it could be frozen and kept in an organ bank for weeks or months while a matching patient could be found to receive it.  People needing organ transplants would have a better chance of getting the heart, liver, kidney or lungs they so desperately need to survive.

It isn't yet a reality, but the research is already being conducted to produce the cyroprotectants similar to those found in the little Alaskan Wood Frog, and we might soon have another modern miracle of science that will prolong thousands of lives.

Okay, now you can say it . . . Wow! That's amazing!

You Call That a Debate?

I have tried to keep a cool demeanor about the televised GOP Debates, but Wednesday's "Tora!-Tora!-Tora!" attack by three partisan Democrats acting as moderators was too much for me.  I cannot sit idly by and watch every single Republican candidate get smeared and disrespected over and over again by those hacks.

I must admit that I didn't stay tuned to the debate for any more than about the first half-hour, and I knew where it was going after the first question posed to all of the people on the stage. In case you missed it, it was, "What is your biggest weakness?"

Why would anyone ask that question of ten people who have the courage and credentials to run for the highest office in the country and, arguably, the world?  We don't expect to hear, nor do we care what their weaknesses are. That is why presidents (excluding the present one) have strong people in advisory and cabinet positions. We want to know about the candidates' positions on issues, not their weaknesses.

My hope was that Governor John Kasich would field the question with a rejoinder that would put the questioner, Hillary sycophant Carl Quintanilla, in his place. I was mistaken, and I learned the next day that Kasich had appeared on Charlie Rose's show later and praised the moderators. How asinine!

Even Donald Trump fielded the question with less-than-robust criticism, and it wasn't until Ted Cruz spoke up and listed one of his strengths as his "greatest weakness" that I felt someone was finally protesting the bias that was about to be exhibited.

Cruz, of course, was also the candidate who eventually grew tired of the negative and contentious questions and yes, argumentative follow up remarks by the moderators, who tried to outgun the candidates on stage. He used some of his time to berate and chastise the three alleged moderators for their blatant disrespect, guilt by false innuendo, silly questions and lack of objectivity.

Some of the questions the candidates were asked included:

          "Are you a really a comic book villain?" (to Trump)

          "Can you do math?" (to Carson)

          "Why don't you resign?" (to Rubio)

Becky Quick lived up to her name when she took the "Candy Crowley Offensive" against Dr. Ben Carson over his tax plan, interrupting his answer and explanation and citing numbers that had questionable validity from some liberal think tank. It was in all likelihood the same one that declared the recession was over and we were in a recovery phase back in 2009. Yeah, how did that work out for us?

It was at that point that I decided to see how my Kansas City Royals were doing in their quest for the World Series title. The outcome was a heck of a lot better on that score.

Beating the COLA

I guess that by now everyone who is currently receiving Social Security benefits knows that there won't be any cost of living Adjustment (COLA) for 2016. This, in spite of the fact that all of the financial advisors whose columns I read are in agreement that the only reason for the lack of an increase is due to the decline in the price of oil.  They also are in agreement that oil and gasoline prices are a minute part of the budget for most seniors.

Grumbling aside, I want to share with you the means I used to get my COLA for 2016 without the help of the government gurus.  I hope that it might open the door for those of you who draw SS to also find some extra $$$ to supplement your monthly benefit.

It is a rather strange coincidence that the announcement about the lack of a COLA came almost simultaneously with the date on which Medicare Part D recipients are able to make changes to their prescription coverage for 2016.  It borders on being a great stroke of luck! 

I have started to receive solicitations via email and snail mail from insurers who want my business, and I'm certain you are getting them too.  Anyway, one that I got advertised a very low premium - one-third of my current one. 

I decided to go to Medicare.gov and see if my scrips were on their formulary.  I have two that are pretty high cost.  It turns out that they were on there along with all my other generic ones, so I did a cost comparison.  Well, I was pleasantly surprised by the results. The projected cost for all of my prescriptions was about $600 lower.

Obviously, my next action was to call the toll-free number, which put me in touch with a representative who enrolled me in less than an hour.  He also enrolled my wife in the same call.

Judy had a different problem with our current insurance than mine; her premiums are more than the cost of her prescriptions, and that premium was going to go up by about 18% next year.  Her enrollment was even more beneficial than mine.

Now, let's get back to that non-COLA that was announced last week.  With the savings we will get in premiums alone (not even the lower drug costs, mind you) it will amount to a 3.2% increase in monthly benefit for me and a hefty 8.2% for Judy.  Not bad when you consider that the past Social Security COLAs were under 2%.

If you are one of the senior citizens on Social Security and Medicare Part D, I urge you to log on to medicare.gov and try a cost comparison for your current provider and those on the website in competition for your business.  You might also be pleasantly surprised by the results. You have until December 7th to change providers, so don't delay.

A Logical Progression

I read an article today about a 6-month-old infant being thrown from a 6th floor apartment window in New York City.  She is the third such death in New York City in as many months.  I can't say that I'm surprised.  Well, maybe I'm a little surprised that New York City is the only place where it is happening.

The current trend is only an outgrowth of the recent disclosure through videos of the Planned Parenthood practice of 'harvesting' not only fetuses, but human babies who have traversed the birth canal and are all-but-born.  After all, if we can decide to kill them at the moment of birth, why should we stop there?  Some people might make the decision to 'terminate the pregnancy' a few months after birth, and what's to stop them?  We're told that there's no value to the first nine months of human life - the pre-breathing period!

Oh, I forgot to mention that those videos were 'heavily edited'.  That is Liberal-speak for 'they were reduced from an hour in length to 5-to-10 minutes to capture the germane facts', but let's not quibble over semantics, shall we.  There is little doubt that the practice is a daily one, and 'harvesting' is a good way of describing what Planned Parenthood is doing - growing crops of humans in the womb and then plucking the fruit for its ripe tissue.

I'm not sure with what crime the authorities should charge the woman in the above cited article.  Is it really murder, or should the charge be 'failure to recycle', as in failure to allow the harvesting of usable cells?

Why are we shocked that some people have taken our callous opinion of  what constitutes a human being and applied it to their own miserable situation?  And what's to stop us from applying the same logic to those elderly people who have lost their value; especially those who have dementia, Alzheimer's, or are otherwise unable to think for and care for themselves.  Look for articles about people throwing their elderly parents out of  high windows or off bridges in the near future.

Where does it stop? Hmmm?

(Now that I've opened the wound, I do hope you will realize that I am attempting to be facetious and satirical, and that I DO NOT condone the practice of throwing anyone out of a sixth-floor window.  Just so we're clear on that.  And, since I'm now in serious mode, I got to thinking that maybe my title for this column gave me insight into what the modern term, 'Progressive', as applied to some politicians, really means.)

What would have Happened if...?

Presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson made a statement during an interview on Fox News Channel about what he would have done if he had been in that classroom on the campus of Umpqua Community College when the murderer, who shall remain unnamed to deny him his notoriety, began his shooting spree. 

Dr. Carson's answer was that he would have acted differently than the students did and he would have defused the situation early on.  His exact quote was, "Not only would I probably not cooperate with him, I would not just stand there and let him shoot me." He continued, "I would say, 'Hey, guys, everybody attack him. He may shoot me, but he can't get us all.'"

For making that "outrageous" statement, Dr. Carson has been excoriated, pilloried and mocked as being out of touch with reality.  Even some of his Republican opposition is joining the fray.  He is accused of blaming the victims for not defending themselves.

I'm not going to defend Dr. Carson for his brave, though hypothetical position, which might seem to belittle and chastise the dead and wounded for inaction; but I do want you to think for a moment about another murderous incident that occurred several years ago. 

If the passengers aboard United Flight 93 on September 11, 2001 had not fought back and at least partially subdued their murderers, would we have been mourning the loss of 435 senators and representatives plus the destruction of our nation's capitol in addition to those on the plane?  Might we have been looking at the ruins of the White House, or possibly the Supreme Court?  We don't know what the target of that jet aircraft was on that fateful day, but it is best that we never found out for certain.

Was the act of bravery performed by the passengers of Flight 93 not the very same kind of reaction that Dr. Carson posited in his interview on Fox and Friends?  Why do we label those passengers heroes, yet we use a similar scenario, with only one perpetrator instead of four, to call Dr. Carson a "looney?" 

I understand that the prescribed action for such a classroom massacre scenario is for the students to "seek shelter," "find a place to hide."  Tell me, where do you find such shelter in an open classroom?  You might as well put the gun to your own head and pull the trigger if you're going to allow the armed individual to do as he pleases.

Yes, I believe that Dr. Carson's answer to the murders that occurred in Roseburg, or anywhere else for that matter, are reasoned and effective in preventing the wholesale slaughter that takes place and will likely continue to take place in the future.

Your comments are welcome...

False Alarms

 I could have titled this column "Identity Theft Scams", but that likely would have put off some readers, since everybody is getting numerous alerts in print and video media about that topic these days.  And if you listen to any talk radio, which I confess that I do from time to time, every other ad is for some service that will prevent identity theft. 

Frightening, Isn't it?

Well, I'm here today to put your mind at ease.  And to start that process, I want you to ask yourself this question:  Do you personally know anyone who has lost their life savings to someone who stole their identity?

If you answered that question as I think you did, in the negative, then you are not alone.  I do not know of anyone in that category either.  What is more to the point, I am not overly worried about someone stealing my identity or, for that matter, stealing my life savings or even the meager amount of money in my checking account.

I cannot describe your situation, but I do know that my financial institutions will not transfer any funds from my accounts to anyone else's without first contacting me to determine whether I truly authorized the transfer.  In fact, I cannot transact any business in cash, stocks or bonds without getting a message of confirmation that also requests that I contact the company if there is any mistake in the transaction.

I only have two credit cards and no debit cards, and they are both flagged for any credit transaction above an amount that I specify.  I set that limit fairly low, well below that usual plastic ceiling of $500.  If anyone were to access my account or get my card, and they try that 'test purchase' for $495 to see if it goes through, it won't.  Instead, I'll be notified by the credit card company to determine whether or not I want to accept the transaction.  Gotcha, thief!

Of course, there are also other safeguards that I take to protect myself, such as never using a credit card for any purchase where it leaves my sight for any period of time, which always happens at restaurants, nor using one for an online purchase from any website that is not encrypted (https), nor clicking on links in unsolicited email messages that require a log in or other personal data.  I also monitor my credit card purchases for any activity that I didn't initiate.

Changes in profile, such as address, phone numbers or email addresses are also subject to a confirmation from me.

Lost or stolen wallet or purse?  I have photocopied every credit card and any other card that shows membership which I have in my wallet.  A single sheet of paper will hold 8 photocopied cards.  If there is a security code on the back of the card, I write that code plus any phone number right under that card copy for reporting lost or stolen cards.  I keep the photocopy in my carry-on suitcase - NEVER IN A BAG I WILL CHECK. If my wallet is ever lost or stolen, I can immediately notify all companies and either freeze or cancel the accounts, depending on the situation.

Large transactions, if I'm fortunate enough to have the funds to make them, will usually require me to send a signed letter or fax before they can be executed.

What I'm trying to convey here is that my personal and financial information is not out there waiting for someone to steal it without my knowledge.  There are safeguards to prevent that.

Even when hackers get into the database of some department store or other company where I have an account - and I assure you that I have fewer than I can count on the fingers of one hand - those safeguards are still in place.  Nobody can steal my identity without my immediate knowledge.

I am not overly superstitious, so the fact that I'm publishing this for the whole world to see doesn't make it any more likely that I'll be a target for identity theft, real or unreal.  I am cautious, however, in that I do not and will not ever join any social network or put my personal data online.