Home » Other Related » Recent Articles:

An Old Man,a Doctor, and His Guns

April 25, 2013 Other Related No Comments

This was a story I found, it is interesting:

I visited a physician last week. It was a “new” doctor in the practice–a young lady (at MY age, EVERYBODY is “young”–when I was born, the Dead Sea wasn‘t even sick) who was quite enthusiastic. She was obviously a liberal by her dress and manner. I was thinking of hitting on her, but I don’t like the phrase, “You remind me of my grandfather.”
She asked me what was wrong, and I replied, “I have a cut on my leg; and I think it may be getting infected.”
She said, “Before we start, I have to ask you a few questions. Are you allergic to any medications?”
I replied, “No.”
She said, “Do you have any guns in the house?”
I said, “HUH??”
She replied, “Guns. Do you have any guns in the house?”
I asked, “Why?”
She said, “I’ve got to ask this question. It is required under the Affordable Care Act.”
I asked, “What are you going to do with the data?”
She said, “We compile it, amalgamate it, and submit it to the government.”
I said, “Well, I have a Tommy Gun. I let my kid Tommy play with it.”
She said, “What’s a Tommy Gun? I don‘t think that is the kind of gun they are concerned with.”
With THAT, I knew I had a live one. I said, “It’s similar to a B.A.R., but a little heavier and shorter. I have a B.A.R. also.”
She said, “A B.A.R.?”
I said, “Yes.”
She looked puzzled. Then she brightened up and asked, “Do you have any assault rifles?”
I attempted to look puzzled, and said, “I don’t know. What is an assault rifle?”
She said, “That’s a gun that is used in wars.”
I said, “As a matter of fact, I do. I have a replica of a Revolutionary War musket.”
She began to look a bit exasperated. I pretended not to notice and kept up the appearance of trying to be helpful.
She said, “Do you have anything more modern than that?”
I replied, “Well, yes I do. I have a replica muzzle loader from the Civil War. Do you know the difference between a musket and a muzzle loader?”
She rather peevishly said, “No, I don’t; and I don’t want to. What else do you have?”
I said, “I have an M-1.”
She asked, “What’s that?”
I said, “A rifle.”
She asked, “What kind?”
I replied, “It is called a Garand.”
She rather loudly said, “I don’t care if it is a grand rifle or not. Is it an assault rifle?”
To which I replied, “I don’t know. I don’t know what an assault rifle is. You say it’s a rifle used in war, yet you say that my musket and muzzle loader are not assault rifles.”
She calmed down (a bit) and asked, “Anything else?”
I said, “I have an MG-.30, and an MG-.50. I‘m also part owner of an Apache. But they are not rifles.”
She stated, “Well, then, I’m not interested in them. Anything else.”
I replied, “Well, yes. I also have a 12-gauge and a 20-gauge pump. They are not rifled though.”
She said, “I’m not interested in pumps; I’m interested in guns.”
I replied, “Well, then, I have a Colt, a Luger, a Glock, a bazooka, a Parabellum, a Kalishnikov, a Henry, a Uzi, a Llama, and a Beretta–but they are not rifles.”
She then said, “I’ve had enough of this. I think you’re toying with me. Let me see your leg.”
I then said, “Excuse me, but before you look at my leg, I have a few questions to ask of you.”
She replied, “Of course. What are they?”
I said, “I have given you a lot of information about my guns. I am somewhat concerned about your knowledge and ability to assimilate, make coherent sense of that information, and report it correctly. Do you know the difference between a .22 caliber and a .223 caliber? It’s a rather fundamental difference.”
She replied, “Actually, I don’t.”
I said, “I see. Let me ask some more relevant questions. “How much money do you make?”
She said, “That’s personal, why do you ask?”
I said, “Well, in pushing the Health Care Act, my president cautioned the population about doctors that would amputate a leg rather than treat a cut because they make more money that way. Consequently, I wish to know if you are financially troubled. What kind of car do you drive? What are your house payments? How much is your mortgage? How much credit card debt do you have? Do you have a student loan; if so, how much?”
She said, “I’m not going to answer those questions. You have no right to ask them.”
I then asked, “Do you have training and education in homeopathic techniques? Do you know the benefits/effects of CoQ10, ginseng, fish oil, Creatine, BCAA, and other such herbal treatments?” Do you know the difference between Panax ginseng, American ginseng, and Siberian ginseng?”
She replied, “Well, no.”
I then asked, ”Well, have you studied it at all?”
She replied rather defensively, “NO; it’s all a bunch of hogwash anyway.”
I said, “Oh, then you have read the research on it. What have you read?”
She then said, “I don’t waste my time reading such things. Why are you asking me these questions?”
I said, “Well, if I’m going to turn my body over to you for treatment, I believe it is reasonable for me to know something about your motivation, training, experience, and competence. Do you know anything about the practice of holistic medicine?”
She said, rather angrily “No, I don’t.”
I said, “Oh. O.K. How much experience do you have in practicing medicine?”
She replied, “Well, not very much.”
To which I said, “Well, we all have to start somewhere. What medical school did you go to; what is its rank in terms of other medical schools; where did you intern; and where did you do your residency? What is the rank of the hospital where you did your internship and residency?”
She rather peevishly said, “All my credentials are posted in the waiting room.”
To which I said, “Really? The rank of your medical school is posted in the waiting room? Do you have any experience with leg injuries? If so, how much?”
I guess that was too much for her. She rather crossly said, “I think it would be best if you saw a different doctor.” and started to leave the room.
I said, “You know, doctor. You asked me irrelevant questions about my guns, and I answered them. Whether or not I own guns is really none of your business and has absolutely nothing to do with any treatment you might prescribe. On the other hand, I ask you questions quite relevant to my situation, and you refuse to answer them. Isn’t that somewhat backwards?”
She said, “But I HAVE to ask those questions. It’s the law.”
To which I replied, “Actually, it is NOT the law. Here is what the law says–taken directly from the Affordable Care Act:”
‘‘(1) WELLNESS AND PREVENTION PROGRAMS.—A wellness and health promotion activity implemented under subsection (a)(1)(D)may not require the disclosure or collection of any information relating to—
‘‘(A) the presence or storage of a lawfully-possessed firearm or ammunition in the residence or on the property of an individual; or
‘‘(B) the lawful use, possession, or storage of a firearm or ammunition by an individual.
‘‘(2) LIMITATION ON DATA COLLECTION.—None of the authorities provided to the Secretary under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made by that Act shall be construed to authorize or may be used for the collection of any information relating to—
‘‘(A) the lawful ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition;
‘‘(B) the lawful use of a firearm or ammunition; or
‘‘(C) the lawful storage of a firearm or ammunition.
“You may verify this at: http://housedocs.house.gov/energycommerce/ppacacon.pdfand
“As you can see, you have broken federal law TWICE–once by asking, and once by collecting data. It is perfectly legal for me to own guns; it is not legal for you to ask and/or collect such data. YOU are breaking the law, and yet YOU are the one that is angry. Not only that, but you erroneously stated that you must ask such questions, and you did it in a very authoritative and convincing manner. You gave me false information, which I then acted upon by answering your questions. On that basis, how can I be expected to trust your medical judgment? When I attempted to ascertain your medical competency, you became defensive and hostile.”
“There is really no need for me to see another doctor in this practice. I‘ll go somewhere else, where my privacy is respected…

We The People

April 5, 2013 Other Related No Comments

This is self explanatory, and excellent.  If only we had the courage to do what he says…


American Manufacturers Keep U.S. Oil Fields Domestic

March 20, 2013 Other Related No Comments

As America travails toward becoming energy independent, domestic oil exploration will continue play an essential role. American equipment manufacturers and oil field services companies are working to ensure every part of the domestic oil industry stays American. These companies engineer, build, and service world class machinery while employing thousands of Americans. Here are just a few of the U.S. companies helping to make the energy sector domestic from the drill to the frac sand quarry.

New Oil Rigs

An oil rig is a complex collection of instruments designed to extract oil from underground deposits and channel it to where it can be stored and used. New Oil Rigs builds these structures for use all over the world, and they do it exclusively with American components. What they don’t make in their own factories, the contract out to other top tier American companies. They get engines from Caterpillar and pumps from Gardner-Denver, to name just two. This company builds rigs in 14 different configurations to fit a wide variety of drilling situations. New Oil Rigs supports its customers by providing comprehensive training for operators and ongoing service.

Chieftain Sand

Hydraulic fracturing has been a huge step forward in accessing vast U.S. oil and natural gas deposits once considered inaccessible. Small cracks act as channels to bring these deposits up. But first, fluid containing specially processed sand is pumped in to prop the cracks open. Chieftain Sand optimizes frac sand for flow capacity, conductivity, and other metrics that must vary from drill site to drill site. The result is the most effective frac sand in the world. The company’s plants in Wisconsin and Arkansas ship tons of proppant sand for use at hydraulic fracturing sites all over North America.

Cambelt International

Getting 100 tons of frac sand down a well isn’t a simple task. First it has to be shipped and stored on site. Then it must be carried to a blender where it’s mixed with fluid and pumped down the well. Downtime at the oil field can be incredibly costly so it’s important that the frac sand equipment is reliable. Cambelt International of Salt Lake City manufactures the most durable frac equipment in the world. They build transport and storage trailers called frac sanders as well as T-belt cleated conveyors to get the frac sand from storage to the blender. Cambelt’s conveyor belts are made with fully molded rubber. They aren’t laminated so they can’t split on the job. Reliable machinery is essential for the complex operations at a drill site.

Center Rock Inc.

You might recognize this name from back in 2010 when two engineers dropped everything, packed some drilling implements, and flew down to Chile at their own expense to rescue 33 trapped miners. Center Rock, a small Pennsylvania company, showed not only that they have a strong sense of social responsibility, but that they manufacture some of the best drilling equipment in the world. They make drill bits to penetrate any kind of rock. And while this equipment works for whatever the situation requires, most of their customers are drilling for oil.

Rethinking Redistribution of Wealth

March 18, 2013 Other Related No Comments

Our president has said “spreading the wealth around is a good thing”. And it is … IF it’s done via the charitable heart of the individual. But when the middleman is in Washington, DC the inherent flaws of socialism rear their ugly heads. In the words of founding father James Madison, “Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government”.

I was watching television the other night and I came to the conclusion that maybe this “redistribution of wealth” policy of the current administration could be tweaked a little to make conservatives like me more amenable to it. Currently the goal is to take from those who earned their money and give it to those that have no interest in earning it. That is inherently a bad policy. It sounds all well and good but there are countless reasons why this ideology is dangerous (to say the least).

The underlying reasoning is helping those that need help and I think the majority of Americans embrace that idea. The problem is in the “method” of redistribution. Our government would have us believe that THEY can spend OUR money more wisely that WE, the people, can. If you aren’t laughing then the odds are that you’re a politician! If there was ever an oxymoron it’s “Wise Government” …

Look at the current status of our government. They spend ONE TRILLION more dollars than they bring in every year. Do you know how much ONE TRILLION dollars is? Start counting right now. It will take you 536 years to count to one trillion! Well, if you don’t stop for a breath anyway.

If the goal is to help people escape poverty then giving money earned by hardworking citizens to those who have done nothing to earn that money will not teach the lessons that need to be learned in this nation. Milton Friedman said “The great achievements of civilization have not come from government bureaus. Einstein didn’t construct his theory under order from a bureaucrat. Henry Ford didn’t revolutionize the automobile industry that way. In the only cases in which the masses have escaped from the kind of grinding poverty you’re talking about, the only cases in recorded history, are where they have had capitalism and largely free trade”.

It’s about self reliance, hard work, ingenuity, honesty, integrity, and perseverance. We must stop using the tactics currently employed by our leaders. Envy, hate, and resentment hurt our society and the ultimate result of the “redistribution of wealth” achieved by those means is best described by Winston Churchill as “the equal sharing of misery”. Margaret Thatcher summed it up precisely: “Socialism is a great until you run out of other people’s money”. Now that I’m clear in my abhorrence of the redistribution of wealth, let me explain the “tweaks” to the ideology that would make it more palatable.

It all boils down to WHO we extract the money from to accomplish this grand scheme. My first criteria would be to garnish the wages of those that add no redeeming value to our society. Has anyone been watching American Idol this season? If so, I think we can agree that Nikki Minaj should start off the list of people that add nothing to our society. Well, nothing positive. She does add arrogance, rudeness, conceit, and self aggrandizement to our society. I never thought Idol would find someone more full of themselves than Simon Cowell but I guess if you dig far enough down in the barrel you can find about anything. Another addition to the list is Kim Kardashian. Do I really need to explain that one?

In the next category I think we need to add actors and actresses that access their uninformed, unintelligent minds to bless us with their liberal wisdom (another oxymoron). Does anyone really care what Matt Damon, Ashley Judd, or Sean Penn think? They are most certainly in favor of redistributing wealth (mostly other people’s wealth) so why don’t they put their money where their mouth is and pony up about 95310302f their wealth to the government so they can pass it out to those people they claim they so desperately want to help? Or do they think they can spend the money more wisely on their own?

Lastly, I would like to propose that the career politicians that so excitedly support the redistribution of wealth are added to the list along with an assurance to the American people that the legislation they write will not exempt them from their own legislation as most of their legislation typically does. In addition, those that have made a killing on Wall Street via their use of insider information should be required to be wealth redistributed FIRST. If Nancy Pelosi loves redistribution and she’s made millions due to her political ties and her access to information most traders would kill for, then let’s raid her bank account first. I’m sure she’d willingly provide access to her ill-gotten gains because she’s a real patriot, right?

Stop laughing and wipe the tears from your eyes so you can see the remainder of my list of other politicians and celebrities that should surrender their money so they look less like the hypocrites we, and they, know they are: Warren Buffett, Harry Reid, Barack Obama, Valerie Jarrett, George Soros, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Chris Rock, Alec Baldwin, Al Gore, Michael Moore, Ariana Huffington, Oprah, Mark Cuban, Jay-Z, Bill Maher, Michael Bloomberg, Chris Mathews, Rachel Maddow, George Clooney, Paul Krugman, Andy Stern, and Al Franken. For good measure lets go ahead and throw in all of the news media that tout the evils of capitalism; ABC, NBC, CBS, and PBS.

IF those people on the list would practice what they preach they could probably eliminate the debt, eliminate the deficit, provide free health care for those that genuinely NEED it, feed every hungry mouth in the USA, and even give us all a free Netflix membership. But don’t hold your breath. They’d rather sit up on their high horse and pretend they care about others than to actually do something about the issues that plague our country.

So if the liberal progressive legislators want conservatives on board for redistribution of wealth … there’s the plan. By the way, one final word from Thomas Jefferson …

“The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.”

Sponsored by:



YOUR DAILY BECK! Glenn Beck Video


%d bloggers like this: