Charlie's Chatter

Well, now that Edward Kennedy has died, many United States congressmen are using his death in an increased attempt to push for health care “reform” legislation. “Ted Kennedy’s dream of quality health care for all Americans will be made real this year because of his leadership and his inspiration,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in a statement. Oh yes, by all means, use the death of a Senator in order to help push for legislation which will cost taxpayers trillions of dollars over the years, legislation that will make health care even more costly and complicated for most Americans. Stupid !   But then, maybe I am being ignorant here, and perhaps it is many of the American taxpayers who are stupid, since perhaps many of them will put up with this. And perhaps the congressmen know it !
    I certainly do not consider Ted Kennedy a man worthy of emulation. Yes, I realize that he was a “hero” at Chappaquiddick, since he swam 500 feet across a saltwater channel to get to Martha’s Vineyard, a dangerous swim through ocean and tidal currents, especially at night. However, I am skeptical. I can only consider his two oldest brothers as heroes since they clearly served honorably in the US Armed Forces during the Second World War. Ted Kennedy, on the other hand, never had a real job in his life. Sorry, but in today’s climate I do not consider most Senators to be holding down real jobs just because they are Senators. Instead they are politicians who are benefiting at the expense of taxpayers, and most of them vote for many laws which make life harder and/or more expensive for most Americans.

The point that smoking is bad for you has been hammered home again and again over the past few decades. Starting many years ago, numerous lawsuits were filed against tobacco companies, lawsuits which claimed enormous damages due to diseases said to have been caused by smoking, particularly lung diseases. Now I am not going to do the research on this, but I thought that at least a couple of national agreements were made in the US Courts many years ago, agreements in which tobacco companies made huge payments to the federal government, State governments and lawyers. Among other things, I thought that part of these huge payments were to settle future “damages” claimed by sick consumers because of smoking. Well, I guess I was wrong.
    Today I read that a jury in a lawsuit decided that cigarette maker Philip Morris USA should pay $13.8 million in punitive damages to the daughter of a longtime smoker Betty Bullock who died of lung cancer. (A jury in 2002 recommended Philip Morris pay a record $28 billion in punitive damages to Bullock, but a judge later reduced the award to $28 million.) Plaintiff’s attorney Michael Piuze said the jury’s verdict amounted to a “slap on the wrist for Philip Morris.” “I liked it better when it was $28 billion,” said Piuze, who represented Betty Bullock after she filed the lawsuit. “She wanted me to beat the crap out of Philip Morris, and we did it once.” Jurors said the figure they reached was a compromise, with some arguing that Philip Morris shouldn’t pay anything, while others believed the cigarette maker should pay billions of dollars in damages. Matt Reed, 37, of Burbank was one of the three dissenting jurors, who believed Philip Morris should pay a higher amount than the verdict. “Some of us looked at it as an opportunity to deter this behavior,” Reed said. “I don’t find $13.8 million to be much of a deterrent.” Other jurors felt Betty Bullock should have been more responsible, but using a formula decided on an amount for the years she suffered from lung cancer. “I saw it as a personal choice,” said Poulet Minasian, 25, of Los Angeles. “There was a big gap in the amount (during deliberations), but the $13.8 million made sense.”
    Good grief !   Holy Smokes !   What is it with most members of these juries? Do they think that the tobacco companies not only take tobacco from farmers who grow tobacco, but also take money that is grown on trees? Imagine what would happen if every smoker in the United States who died from lung cancer or emphysema got more than 10 million dollars! These tobacco companies would go bankrupt, taking down with them people who have nothing to do with all of this, to include some of their product lines which have nothing to do with tobacco. What would all the State governments do when they will collect much less taxes from cigarettes? Finally, a terrible message would be sent to the numerous lawyers who get huge amounts of money from successful liability lawsuits, malpractice lawsuits and the like. The lawyer who said, “I liked it better when it was $28 billion” was not giving a moral judgement; he liked the higher figure because it meant at least an extra 9 billion dollars for him, this despicable man! This is abominable!
    (To those persons out there who say that the tobacco companies do collect money that “grows on trees”, but it is called “tobacco” which they then sell in cigarettes to make a lot of money, what I have to say to those idiots is unprintable.)

I’ve got to stop reading the news. There is almost always something about president Obama in the headline news, and most of it I find disturbing. The latest incident is Obama’s selection of 16 people to receive the Medal of Freedom, which is said to be the nation’s highest civilian honor. I almost had a heart attack when I read the names of a select few of the people who were chosen by Obama for this award. These people give evidence of Obama’s preference for “human rights” and for “diversity” – cultural diversity, ethnic diversity and sexual diversity. Consider some of these people:
    Harvey Milk, whose only claim to fame is that he was one of the first openly-gay elected officials to an important post in a major city – San Francisco. His major activities, even as an elected official, were active campaigns for gay rights. He and the San Francisco mayor were assassinated by a disgruntled man. Harvey Milk has since been called a “martyr for gay rights”. Yep, that’s the kind of guy to whom we really need to give high honors.
    Sidney Poitier, a very good actor and civil rights activist whom I used to like and respect until recently when I discovered that he is and has been a very liberal activist.
    Archbishop Desmond Tutu, whose only claim to fame is as a civil rights activist, mostly in South Africa.
    Reverend Joseph Lowery, whose only claim to fame is as a civil rights activist. He gave the benediction at the inauguration or president Obama. In his benediction he said, “Lord, in the memory of all the saints who from their labors rest, and in the joy of a new beginning, we ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get [in] back, when brown can stick around, when yellow will be mellow, when the red man can get ahead, man; and when white will embrace what is right. Let all those who do justice and love mercy say Amen! Say Amen! And Amen!”
    The Indian chief Joseph Medicine Crow, who, being a “red man”, is satisfying the prayerful request of Joseph Lowery which I quoted just above. (By the way, I do not know anything at all about Joseph Medicine Crow, and he might very well be a good man.)
    Edward Kennedy, the hero of Chappaquiddick and a man who has never held down a real job in his life. Yes, he has been a Senator for a very long time, but as with many Senators the only work that he has done is to play politics, give and receive political favors and to help spend taxpayers’ money.
    Muhammed Yunus, an economic and political activist from Bangladesh. He was born to a Muslim family, and I think he remains a Muslim. For the purpose of religious diversity, I sure hope that he is.
    Billy Jean King, an openly gay former tennis pro.

So there we have it. Out of sixteen people, Obama chooses three Blacks, two Hispanics, one person from Bangladesh and one American Indian. Hey, that’s ethnic diversity! Out of sixteen people Obama chooses two who are (were) openly gay. Hey, that’s sexual diversity!

In the days immediately after the attacks on the World Trade Center, I still remember some of president Bush’s words to the American people. It was said that these attacks had been orchestrated by Osama bin Laden and his leaders. President Bush made it very clear that the United States was going to go after Osama bin Laden and his leaders and bring them to justice. I think that Bush even said that “he can run but he can’t hide”. Well, it was soon made known that Osama bin Laden and at least most of his leaders were in Afghanistan. The United States demanded that the Taliban, who constituted the only effective “government” in Afghanistan, turn Osama bin Laden over to United States custody. Afghanistan refused to turn him over to us, either because they would not or perhaps because they could not. In any event, Afghanistan publicly refused our demands. Then, after a delay of several days, the United States Armed Forces, with some help from a few allies, invaded Afghanistan with the intention of searching for Bin Laden and his leaders, and either capturing them or killing them. After much bombing and fighting, it was said that Osama bin Laden and most of his leaders had escaped to Pakistan and were hiding in some tribal areas in the mountains of Western Pakistan. Since then the search for Osama bin Laden supposedly continues, although we hear less and less about that search as time goes by.
    In the meantime, the United States, along with a few allies, continue to have thousands of troops in Afghanistan, and many of our troops continue to be injured and killed every month. I recently read that the new commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, said that “the Afghan people are the reason we’re here”. He also said, “We’re here to protect the Afghan people. And we’re here to protect them from everything that can hurt them, both enemy activity but also inadvertent activity by Afghan forces or ours”. NO !   NO !   NO !     We invaded Afghanistan for only one purpose over seven years ago – to capture and or kill Osama bin Laden and his leaders. What has happened to that original goal? Now it appears that we are trying to “build” a “democratic” country in Afghanistan, and somehow furnish them with a competent and democratic government that will supposedly not only be good for the Afghan people but also protect them from Taliban and Al-Qaeda violence. This is nonsense !   I’m afraid that we are going to end up as Russia did in Afghanistan, with lives wasted, not to mention huge amounts of taxpayer money, and all for nothing.   Whatever happened to Osama bin Laden ?
    A very good article on this subject can be found in this blog post of Diana West.