Skip to main content

For sure, I am not a Bible Scholar but I am familiar with the Bible and the Old Testament. It was not written contemporaneously but centuries later from stories told by Ancient Hebrews to each other whilst they were guarding their flocks and enjoying the night skies full of stars.  And the Ancients were probably drinking some wine which served to loosened their imaginations just a tiny bit or a lot.

Be that as it may, however, I am have a big problem with the Thou Shalt Not Kill commandment in the chapters written or attributed to Moses.

Later in the Bible, God commands the Hebrews to kill the people of Caan, men, women, and children, even babies in the wombs saving only virgins.

So is the Thou Shalt Not Kill commandment really Thou Shalt Not Kill Unless God Commands You to do so?

Paranoid schizophrenics often cite God for their killing of another person.

Islamic Fundamentalists like Isis use the "in the name of Mohammed"  and they are compelled to murder in his name.

Seems to me Christian fundamentalists have too much in common with the Isis than I am comfortable with and I wonder if they can see the similarities.

Or can this be explained away?


It seems a petite, very small tax of 0.1 cents on each dollar processed thru Federal Reserve Bank daily would cover the whole budget of the United States of 3.5 trillion a year.

Math proof (please check)  follows.

Please assume a $1 tax on 1000 dollars.

14 trillion divided by $1000 = 14 billion a day

14 billion times 5 days a week = 70 billion

70 billion times 52 weeks = 3 trillion 640 billion a year ~ yearly federal budget

Now that works if my math on $1 on each $1000 is correct.

One dollar is 100 cents.  One thousand dollars is 10000 cents therefore

the financial transaction tax is 0.1 cent per each dollar.

The Federal Reserve Bank processes all retail, all goods and services, stocks, bonds, every transaction that goes thru banks.

I am not an economist so this seems so easy to me that I must be making some horrible calculations here or there is some "moral hazard" with taxing the Federal Reserve to pay for the Federal Government, or there is some "funny money" all mixed in with the balance sheets of the Federal Reserve that makes this proposal not a viable way to pay for our debts.


Okay, we are stuck with the "guns everywhere" and just about anyone can get their hands on one without much trouble.  Example, of course, is the killer of Officer Ramos and Officer Lui in New York City.  It was indeed a moving tribute to the latest victims of gun violence to see how many police officers showed up at their funerals.  

The NRA was noticeably silent about these police officers death.  Interesting.

After all, it's not guns that kill police officers, it's the bad guys.

So to help the NRA out here, I have a few suggestions.


So when a gun is bought legally, it is equipped with SMART computerized technology which means only the owner can shoot it. The SMART GUN can not be given or sold to anyone else and if it is stolen, it will not work. period.

If said owner wants to sell the SMART GUN, said owner will have to ship it back to the manufacturer and manufacturer will reimburse said SMART GUN owner. The Gun Manufacturer can then reprogram said same SMART GUN so next owner can use it.

Also through an act of congress, Legislation, yeah right and it will not be easy, all weapons now in possession of gun owners will have to be fitted with SMART GUN technology so we can eliminate most of guns getting in the hands of criminals or felons.

ACCIDENTS or CARELESS USE OF HANDGUNS can also be prevented by other technological advancements in the cleaning of said SMART GUNS by having computer prompting and if not done correctly, than said gun will not FIRE ACCIDENTALLY.

ALL GUNS that cannot be converted to SMART GUN TECHNOLOGY will then be sent back to manufacturer and replaced by the newest SMART GUN counterparts.

My intention and suggestions for the gun owners in the this country is to IDIOT PROOF guns and their owners and to protect the public at large so that we can leave peacefully and at the same time, eliminate gun trafficking and "GUN WALKING' and protect citizens especially in poorer and dangerous neighborhoods.

It does not take away RKBA.  It just makes it something we can all LIVE with while respecting the Second Amendment at the same time.



Fri Jan 02, 2015 at 10:07 PM PST

A Gun from Georgia

by virginia dare

A few years ago, a person bought a gun from a gun dealer in the state of Georgia.  This same person then gave it to a friend/relative.  

Years later, that gun from Georgia ended up in the hands of a mentally unhinged criminal who murdered two NYPD policemen execution style just sitting in their police car.

How many hands touched that gun?  How many times was it sold or given away to another person?  

How can we stop this madness?  


Cialis and Viagra commercials abound ad nauseam on main stream media.  Children do ask about ED and those special moments and I don't know what parents say in response.
It's probably very interesting to have these conversations about sex with younger children about this subject.  But, older children and teens, this would be an opportune time to broach the subject.

And it is really a great time to bring up the subject of "the glove", "rubbers",---Trojans.

The conservative right seems not to have issues with ED as being mainstream but Trojans might be a bridge too far for conservatives.  However, Darrell Issa had no problem nor did Hobby Lobby and the Supreme Court  in dealing with birth control writ large discussing the issue of birth control which to them is mostly due to the fact that women have sex.

It is not one-sided here as it takes two to tangle and it seems Adam's role in social, sexual, and political intercourse has been taken off the table.  It's still all about Eve.

What i would like to see is advertising for Trojans as common as those ED commercials

Rush Limbaugh would be a great spokesman for "rubbers" as I am sure that he used them when he visits the Red Zones of the World (Dominican Republic).  


Sun Jul 27, 2014 at 06:20 PM PDT

AEI President Brooks, Go to Hell

by virginia dare

Latest Moyers and Company interview with Brooks, president of AEI made me want to throw something at the TV.  A supreme "moral capitalist", he thinks just because he met with the Dalai Lama and he thinks the spiritual leader of the whole world agrees with him that forcing citizens to share the wealth is wrong and it should be voluntary.

Bill Moyers tried mightily to get Brooks to concede that workers need a raise in the minimum wage but could not get Brooks to agree.  

Brooks argues that it would be better to raise the Earned Income Tax Credit and offer it to single men who have children.  Brooks think punishing the rich just because they are rich, in this case Walmart whose workers receive over $4000 in government subsidies is still not enough of a reason for Walmart to raise their workers wages to cover the shortfall.  Brooks argues that it will force Walmart to layoff workers and it will increase unemployment among those who need these jobs.

Brooks's arguments rang hollow and he certainly is unimpressive in his skills in promoting the free market that allows for such low wage jobs that it,meaning the free market has produced.

It seems to me jobs produced by the free market should produce "living wage" jobs according to the cities where they are located.  In New York City, this would mean much more than the minimum wage, etc.  Government should not subsidize any for-profit company especially if it performs for Wall Street.

And I did not glean from Brooks any suggestions to how to change the current situation.  Really bad performance  by this conservative freakazoid.

But i do have another suggestion besides the "living wage" per cost of living by city and state and this would really curl Brooks's hair if he had any, and it's called a JUBILEE.

A JUBILEE for those college graduates who now are drowning in debt due to education loans and it would also begin for those entering college now.

Make it for TEN YEARS while the graduate gets settled into a job, buys a house, buys a car, etc and then he or she can then pay off the loans (with no added interest either) and this would really stimulate the economy and it would happen NOW.  

Just my two cents, Mr. Brooks, of the AEI.  I have a great idea and you got NOTHING!


There is a 7-11 close to where I work and sometimes I stop there for a protein bar and coffee before I go to work.  One morning I noticed that one of the young women behind  the counter who was usually very cheerful appeared to be agitated and nervous.  i asked her what was wrong and she told me that her babysitter had not shown up that morning and she had to take her kids to her sister's house and have her sister watch them.

"That's great that you have a sister that can help out,"  I responded.

"No, it's not great. My sister is an alcoholic and I can't trust her," she said. "I can't wait till I get off work."

Then she added, "I would have called in sick today, but I can't do that because I'd lose my job so I'm stuck."

What a choice this single mother has to make to  feed and house her children.  I don't know any of this mom's background and what other choices she has made in her life as to the father of these children, etc but I didn't need to know.  I, too have been there as a single mother with all the responsibility it entails.  

In the book SOPHIE'S CHOICE by William Styron which was made into a movie with Meryl Streep playing Sophie, a Nazi officer at the train station orders Sophie to decide which of her two children will live.  She has to decide between the baby in her arms and a young boy holding her hand.  If she does not choose, both will die.  

Today's Sophie has to sometime choose between losing her minimum wage job or putting her children at risk.  This is an American Gothic Story playing out daily in every city and every state because there is no safety net for child care facilities for the working poor.

And you can bet the so-called Religious Right, the Tea Party, and all of the conservatives would not support child care facilities for the working poor.  So single mothers will continue to make these choices and feel the stress and anxiety that ensues.  

And if these moms make another choice to end a pregnancy because..well, just because, for a myriad of reasons, (usually poverty) and because they have to work to take care of the children they already have, now thanks to the Supreme Court, they can be subjected to being harassed for making that choice.  

There is a streak of cruelty that runs through our American society and today it was on display with this decision by the SCOTUS.


I watched this interesting movie on Free Speech cable channel recently and found it very informative.  It is also available on-line.  The film offers a lot of history and explanation on how we got to where we are as regards to our financial system.

Main theme is how we are all captive to a "debtor" nation and nothing is going to change until we understand how we got here.  It also shows a path forward to change our ways from consumerism to production.

What really struck me as a "game changer" was the notion of wiping the slate clean of our debt.  That's right.  Put this into motion and you would own your house outright with no debt etc.  Also, if you owe money on your education loans, again those debts would be wiped clean.

Ultimately, it is just wiping the slate clean and starting over in a debt-free environment.

Also, they suggest no tax on labor or businesses.  The IRS would be abolished and in place only a consumer tax on what is bought.

Frankly, I don't know what would happen to the banks and their very complicated machinery of debt financing.  

But, wow, it could change our country and provide zillions of jobs.

I encourage all to watch this most interesting film.


Sun Jun 08, 2014 at 10:52 AM PDT

The Gun Conumdrum

by virginia dare

The Second Amendment, RKBA, continues to trouble and divide our nation's citizens.
"Guns Everywhere" (think Somalia) ..."Stand Your Ground"  (makes some trigger happy) versus sane background checks, closing of gun show sales loopholes, and/or gun registration.

"A well-regulated militia", that collective noun in the second that has been ignored by many states and the NRA, contains what might be the answer to our gun conundrum.

With FREEDOM comes RESPONSIBILITY!!!!!! Example, did you know that in North Carolina, if your gun is stolen or lost, you do not have to notify any authorities?  Sacre Bleu!!! Unbelievable… Just go out and buy another gun.  More cash for the arms dealers.

And in Chicago suburbs, you can buy ONLY ONE GUN A MONTH!!! Therefore, you can buy twelve guns a year and sell them.

SInce guns are bought legally or illegally through straw purchases from within and outside state borders, it can be argued that STATE LAWS take a back seat to FEDERAL LAWS as citizens of all states are affected by this legal or barely legal commerce.

A well-regulated militia means what it says.  To be afraid of the gun lobby is downright silly.  We should not be afraid to argue for tough gun regulations, after all, the Constitution, is on our side.  The emphasis should be on the first part of the Second.

Otherwise, our landscape will and is  now beginning to resemble the Middle East and Somalia where ARMS DEALERS hold court selling to both sides of any conflict.  Here, in the United States, ARMS DEALERS  who sell their killing machines on the internet, gun shows, to "friends" without any background checks is the same as arming both sides of conflicts.
Sellers do not care what happens to their weapons after they are sold.

FREEDOM-LOVING RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERS should not be afraid of a background check or gun registration.  They should not be afraid of notifying authorities if a gun is stolen or lost.  And do they really want to belong to the "GUN OF THE MONTH" club"?

Clearly, it is past time to enact such regulations and pay attention to the Second in its entirety.  

As to specific regulations concerning any privacy HIPA violations (those under care for mental issues), these should be waived and those would-be buyers deprived of being able to buy a gun.  In fact, there should be a moratorium on gun sales until a solution to selling guns to those who are mentally disturbed is put in place.  

To be in favor of a lengthy process to obtain a weapon whose only purpose is to kill is not only wise but CONSTITUTIONAL.

To be against such a process is UNCONSTITUTIONAL and INSANE.

RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERS should not be afraid regulations and neither should progressives.

Thank you for reading this diary.  I know there will be pushback but I do not care.  It is time to push back against ARMS DEALERS hiding behind the Second.


After watching CNN's special on Guns today with a special focus on suicides by gun (more veterans of our wars committed suicide last year then were killed in Afghanistan), I am more convinced than ever that the United States of America has to come to terms with separating weapons from veterans in mental crisis.

And after the recent shooting in Colorado after an eighteen year old purchased a shotgun legally less than a week before critically wounding another student then taking his own life, I am for a lengthy waiting period before buying a weapon and also having the purchaser take a comprehensive safety course on such a weapon and being interviewed by a mental health professional to determine the reason for and necessity for buying such a weapon and if a student and living at home the mental health professional would also interview the parents, guardians, and teachers of a younger age buyer if they are aware of this would-be weapon owner's desire.

The cost of such a comprehensive background check would be paid for by the gun manufacturers of America and the NRA.  Included in the purchase of the weapon if all the checks are done would be malpractice insurance covering the use of the weapon in connection with any criminal act by the purchaser.

No weapon should ever be sold over the internet nor should ammo be sold in this way.
All guns and ammo should be sold through gun dealers. No gun show loopholes

All those who purchase said weapons would have to notify the police and the FBI that they have bought a weapon and show proof that there is a proper gun safe at home.
Because of the extra police work involved, there should be levied a "sin" tax on the weapon as well paid for by purchaser.

Since gun owners have proudly showed on youtube clips how easy it is to change magazine clips of 30 or less rounds, effectively a semi-automatic operates as an automatic and therefore should be outright banned for sale in the United States.

To eliminate gun violence on the streets of Detroit, New Orleans, and other plagued inner cities where it is "fast and furious" and straw purchased guns are sold illegally, it is necessary  to institute a gun registration so that every gun can be traced back to its original purchaser.

My understanding of the Second Amendment in that the right to keep and bear arms was in context of a "well-regulated militia" in place of a standing army at the time of its passage which there was none.  Now we do have such standing armies and the National Guard and local police.  

Frankly, the ability of any Tom, Dick,Harry, SusieQ, to buy any weapon or ammo without adequate scrutiny has made life cheap and unless a person has eyes in the back of his or her head, makes no one safer.


It seems that when the Affordable Care Act is fully implemented, it will work I believe to provide what many Americans need.  However, I do have a problem with some of the high deductibles that are part and parcel of this act.  

Because as a provider, there are some who are unable to come up with their deductible when they need services. In fact, every day at our outpatient surgical care center, we have cancellations because there was a deductible that could not be met by the patient and their procedure was cancelled.

As those who are on Medicare for the first 80% of their bill and a secondary to cover the remaining 20% know, there is no need to pay a deductible.

I am wondering if there would be an insurance market or model for a secondary insurance to cover the deductible ranging from $2000-25000 so that the deductible would not be a factor in patients getting their services without the angst of worrying about the deductible.

Is this something that would be feasible?  To me the deductible is another doughnut hole in coverage.  


Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 09:26 PM PDT

Obamacare Redux

by virginia dare

With the delay of the employer mandate and the Republicans going after the individual mandate, the rolling out of the Affordable health Care Act continues to be a a prickly, difficult, really too difficult endeavor and I can only imagine how many hours CMS officials and their workers put in to make this happen.  

And with each delay and controversy, I fear for the implementation of Obamacare.

Did it have to be this way and is it too late to considerably improve this needed health insurance reform?  

I do believe that in the end we will have to go to a single-payer system and we are just tying ourselves up in knots and pretzels trying to keep private insurance in the mix.

Obamacare was the first step in trying to change the system by keeping privates in the mix.  But, indeed, it was the camel poking its nose into the tent of the Medical Industrial
Complex (MIC).  And the camel's nose is getting a beating.

It is the complexity and multiple moving parts that make this effort to extend health care to all regardless of pre-existing conditions, self-employment, or no employment, high income or none(medicaid), part-timers and full-time employees, so difficult.

Perhaps it would have been much easier for the federal government to just outright purchase Blue Cross and offer an array of plans from the Cadillac to just the basics,
low to high deductible to all who were not able to buy insurance from the privates.

With the Cadillac or Mercedes plan, one would not have to wait for hip replacements or other non-emergent surgeries.  With the basic plan, you would be placed on a waiting list, for example.  

Innovations with a federally-controlled Blue Cross would be easy to implement with a states input and every viable option to reduce costs could be more easily handled.

Yes, there would have to be federal subsidies for those who need it.  But any profits would be immediately churned back into paying for health care for all those who enroll.
The basic plan would be cheap enough that many employers might want to sign up their employees.  

Basically, doctors and hospitals just want to get paid.  American citizens want to have insurance to meet their health care needs.  

The politics of it all just stands in the way of meeting the needs of providers and citizens.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.


Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site