San Juan Mountains

San Juan Mountains
San Juan Mountains: Grenadier Range

Friday, July 31, 2015

Hamilton Collins Defends David Mitchell

Yesterday I received a series of comments to three of my most popular blog posts from the past.  All three blog posts had to do with a likeable fellow by the name of David Mitchell who promises potential followers of his stock market investment plan perpetual 20%/month total returns regardless of market conditions.  Mitchell is also a Christian and a pastor of a Baptist church.  I have written three posts about him, found here, here, and here, that take exception to his claims.   Hamilton Collins is a graduate of Mitchell's most advanced stock trading program and believes that I have treated Mitchell unfairly.  He wrote to correct what he believes are several of my most glaring errors.  Here is the gist of Mr. Collin's comments, found posted in the comments section on the second link listed above:

"Mr. Welshman,
(The following diatribe of sorts is in reference to the numerous posts regarding Pastor David Mitchell.)
I have been using Pastor David Mitchell's, NeUventure On Wall Street (NVOWS) trading system now for 12-months. My results are far less than they should be at a mere 35% return so far. The S&P has moved 7.5% in that same time period. I had nearly doubled my money in 4 months using the Seminar 2 options trading strategies when I broke some rules and made some big mistakes that gave it all back in 2 plays. Since December 2014, the market has been erratic and difficult to make headway and thus I'm only ahead 35% truly since January when I basically started over.
Your original post pulled out the key marketing quotes and you are holding those to the fire without the 16 hours of teaching contained in the 2-day Seminar 1 event. When I originally heard the same radio spot that your quotes come from I was interested, but woefully skeptical. A few weeks later, I dubiously walked into their Seminar 1 advertised on Christian radio here in San Diego, CA. As a Christian I was very concerned about a pastor tied to the stock market. After 2 days of me delivering a barrage of skepticism, the teachers were able to put my mind at ease regarding their motives and connections to God's promises. That said, I invested in their lifetime education called Top Gun. With that I and my immediate family have access to all 4 levels of seminars for life.
Since receiving their almost daily "Market Alerts" for 12-months now, it is crystal clear that David Mitchell and NVOWS are highly concerned for their students well beings. They are ultra careful when dissecting the news and the recent market action when "timing" the market. You are correct and David Mitchell teaches, that we can't predict the future, but you can time the market to a degree. Learning how to "put the odds in your favor" which is the core of NVOWS teaching regarding timing the market, is what makes their system effective.
In support of these same tenants and others of the system, you should read How to Make Money In Stocks by Bill O'Neil and look into the newspaper O'Neil has built called Investor's Business Daily (IBD.) By doing that, you would see that both men teach the same truths about timing the market, pattern recognition and fundamentals that make up three legs of the trading table. IBD and NVOWS use different terminology at times but when you dig into the concepts you'll see their teachings are well aligned. IBD also teaches much higher annual returns than the industry standard of 10% buying and holding mutual funds.
Regarding the "Forbes...richest people," how about reading classic books about the all-time greatest traders and comparing their thoughts on the market to those of David Mitchell's and Bill O'Neil's? Here are a few classics:
• Reminiscences of a Stock Operator by Edwin Lefèvre
• The Battle for Investment Survival by Gerald Loeb
• Stock Market Wizards: Interviews with America's Top Stock Traders by Jack D. Schwager
After reading those you'll see that taking control of your money and making focused investments with properly timed buy points when the general market is properly positioned, you too can make much greater returns than the -3.5% to 8.7% you graciously shared on 7/21/12.
I've written too much and yet there is so much more to say. Bottom line, David Mitchell runs an outstanding business at a very fair price and watches out for his students. Having met the man once in Dallas, TX at a Seminar 3, eaten lunch with him that day and attended his church one Sunday, I can confidently say, he is first and foremost a man of God with Christ driving his every decision. As a business man living for the Lord, he honors God by teaching us how to be safe in the market and then guides us in our early stages of learning. Thank you for the opportunity to stand up for Pastor David on your blog. Much appreciated."

 I appreciate Mr. Collins respectful and thoughtful challenge of my position and have decided to dedicate today's blog post to my response. I did a little checking on the surname "Collins" and discovered that it is predominantly Irish, with a tiny percentage of those so named being Welsh.  I had suspected as much as I immediately sensed an ancestral bond with Mr. Collins.  He seems to be a genuinely good egg.  If he were here I would toast him with a pint of Boddingtons ale.   He also seems to be a Christian.  I was refreshed to receive a long series of comments about David Mitchell from a man who appears to be a quality individual, a Christian and who has gone through the NVOWS program.  So let's take some time and consider what he wrote above.
Mr. Collins begins by citing his investment performance for the past 12 months.  Using the program taught by NVOWS he has been able to realize a total return of 35% on the entirety of his stock portfolio, compared to a mere 7.5% total return on the S & P 500.  During that same period of time my portfolio has generated a tax adjusted and weighted total return of 5.5%.  Clearly Mr. Collins, by following NVOWS, has smashed my returns for the past year.  But I do not believe that short term performance necessarily indicates that an investment strategy is viable for the long term.  My best 12 month total return was +131%, which I realized in 1999.  That year the S & P 500 was up 20%.  If I have done the math correctly my one year performance actually exceeded the market by more than Mr. Collins has over the past 12 months by following NVOWS.  My point is simple, short term returns really do not tell me anything about the usefulness of an investment strategy.  I believe that at the very least a ten year investment history should be established prior to pronouncing NVOWS a success.  Incidentally, my ten year tax adjusted and weighted total return is 8.3%.  Is there any NVOWS practitioner who has done better?  More importantly, is there any NVOWS practitioner who has realized 100%/year the past ten years?  How about just 50%/year the past ten years?  I will even go as low as 25%/year the past ten years.
Mr. Collins points out that I have "pulled out key marketing quotes" and I am "holding those to the fire" in my analysis of the NVOWS program.  I plead guilty as charged.  Indeed, Mr. Collins recounts how he was initially quite skeptical in regards to those same key marketing quotes that I find so disturbing but that after going through the program his skepticism was vanquished and he has now come to believe in the system as expounded by David Mitchell.  To be clear, let's establish precisely what those key marketing quotes are.  In my view they consist primarily of the following:
  1. By following the NVOWS program any intelligent and hard working investor can realize 20%/month total returns in perpetuity and in all market conditions.
  2. The means by which the above returns can be realized repudiate the long-term, fundamental buy and hold approached expounded by many money managers as the key to financial success.  
  3. There are investment advisers who are currently realizing 20%/month total returns in perpetuity and throughout all market conditions and the key to doing the same is to replicate their stock transactions as precisely as possible.
To keep things simple I will assume that 20%/month translates to 240%/year.  I realize that is not taking compounding into account but my feeble brain can only work so hard.  It seems to me that if there is a universe in which a particular group of investment advisers are realizing 240%/year it should  not be hard to find out about them.   Mr. Collins himself gives me three book recommendations which I assumed would lead me to these fellows.  After a good deal of internet searching about the contents of those books I still had not found what I was searching for (my apologies to U2).  So I decided to spend a good part of yesterday afternoon doing a series of diligent Google searchs in what turned out to be a vain attempt to find out who these men and women are.  Despite spending several hours trying to find just one person who has been able to realize 240%/year for ten years by timing the market and utilizing sophisticated stock trading strategies, I was unable to find a single example.
Before I show you what I did find, let me point out that I believe it is fair to hold the people at NVOWS accountable for their claim that 20%/month total returns are realistic and attainable.  That claim may be a key marketing quote but it forms the basis for what they profess to be able to accomplish.  For that reason I do not believe it to be unfair to expect that anyone who follows the NVOWS program should attain that rate of total return.
I began my search by Googling "stock market gurus."  I figured that would bring up the names and investment performance history of some of these fellows.  This website led me to a fascinating analysis of a relatively large number of professional investment advisers and money managers.  The study examined the relative performance of 68 stock market gurus and it tracked the accuracy of their stock market forecasts as well as the performance of their stock selections.  In a pure random walk down Wall Street I would expect that the median degree of accuracy would be 50%.  In other words, simply guessing what will happen tomorrow or which stock will go up or down should, over the long term and with a sufficiently large sample, give me a 50% accuracy rate.  The highest rated guru rated a 68.2 accuracy level.  The second highest rated guru is a personal favorite of mine.  He is Ken Fisher and he attained a 66.4% accuracy rating.  Other popular figures included Doug Kass (49.2), Jim Kramer (46.8) and Gary Schilling (36.6).
Ken Fisher is a billionaire who has made his billions by advising rich clients.  His investment strategy is decidedly long term and fundamental in nature.  He eschews practically everything taught by the folks at NVOWS.  A link on the website brought me to a particular description of Fisher and provided a chart of his performance.  The commentary on the chart said this, "The following chart summarizes the annual performance of Ken Fisher’s public stock picks relative to matching investments in the S&P 500 Index, as calculated by Forbes, during 1998 through 2014. Ken Fisher’s public picks outperform matching S&P 500 Index investments in 11 of 17 years. On average, he outperforms matching benchmark investments by 4.7% per year."  So in my first examination of a man deemed to be the second best stock picker in the country I found a performance that exceeded the stock market indices by 4.7% per year.  I consider that to be pretty good but it pales in comparison to 240%/ year in perpetuity.
Next I decided to Google "top stock pickers," hoping that would lead me to this elusive group of people.  That brought me to this website.  Although I was in search of people who have proven the ability to obtain 20%/month total returns by trading stocks I was taken to a website that informed me that stock picking was a total waste of my time.  Here is some of what the website had to say, "There is just no point in expending energy researching individual stocks for 99% of the population....Let me tell you about a friend of mine who invests in the stock market. We’ll call him Matt. Matt manages a pretty sizable fund at a well respected firm in New York City. He spends perhaps 80-100 hours per week studying his industry (technology stocks) and has done this for over a decade. He reads annual reports, market news, and press releases from his Bloomberg terminal, and studies investor decks the moment they become available.  After hundreds or thousands of hours of careful research and methodical number crunching, Matt leverages his research and his decade of experience to purchase tens of millions or hundreds of millions of dollars of equity in the companies he selects. Matt’s target is to be correct just 60% of the time. If he hits that target, his fund will make hundreds of millions of dollars, and he’ll take home a fat bonus. He’s well incentivized to squeeze every additional basis point in return he can each year for his investors.... Because of his training, expertise, resources and results, thousands of wealthy investors give Matt hundreds of millions of dollars to invest for them via his fund.  Matt’s fund has well over $500 million in assets under management. He buys and sells enough shares of multi-billion dollar companies that he can single-handedly change their market price with individual transactions. Because of his efforts, resources, training and expertise, Matt has beaten the market by about 1-2% per year throughout his history as an analyst." 
For a moment there I thought I had found one of those clandestine stock pickers who can realize 20%/month in the stock market by trading stocks ahead of the curve.  Matt sounded just like that sort of fellow.  But for all of his abilities Matt is simply a good investment adviser who has been able to realize a one to two percent premium over stock market indices for his clients.  I consider that to be a pretty good performance record.
Next I decided to go to Investopedia.  Certainly that website would know the identities of the people who are realizing 20%/month total returns in the stock market.  I searched the website for the "greatest investors of all time."  What I found was a list of twenty men who have made reputations for themselves by trading stocks.  What I didn't find was anyone who has come even remotely close to attaining 20%/month by using sophisticated trading techniques.  The top three guys on the list were John Bogel (famous for recommending that everyone purchase index funds exclusively), Warren Buffet (a notorious long term investor whose 25%/year total return since 1976 in his Berkshire Hathaway stock is legendary), David Dreman (a curmudgeon long term value investor).  Other notables included the father of fundamental analysis, Benjamin Graham, infamous contrarian value investor John Templeton and retired Fidelity Magellan manager Peter Lynch.  Although all of these men have realized fantastic market beating returns over their careers none of them even came close to approximating 100%/year in perpetuity, much less 240%/year.  I kept looking.
Next I stumbled across an article in Forbes magazine about a man named Michael Steinhardt.  The magazine christened him "Wall Streets Greatest Trader."  That got my attention.  Could it be that I had at last found one of the elusive 20%/month men that I had been so desperately searching for?  If the editors at Forbes believe Steinhard is the greatest trader in the history of Wall Street I surely must have found an example of what the folks at NVOWS have been describing.  Here is the article.  Steinhardt did indeed have an amazing run of success in his private hedge fund.  Here is how Steinhardt was described in the article, "During the three decades that Wall Street grew up, morphing from a gentlemen’s investment club into a global financial colossus, Michael Steinhardt emerged as the world’s greatest trader. From 1967 to 1995 his pioneering hedge fund returned an average of 24.5% annually to its investors, even after Steinhardt took 20% of the profits. Put a different way, $10,000 invested with Steinhardt in 1967 would have been worth $4.8 million on the day he shuttered his fund. (The same investment in the S&P would have been worth $190,000.) It was a performance that landed him on The Forbes 400 in 1993, with a net worth estimated at more than $300 million."  25%/year, after his enormous fee, was an astounding rate of total return for a hedge fund.  Indeed, the author of the article went on to point out that Steinhardt's success was the seminal event in the massive expansion of hedge funds in the years to come.  If there were stock market gurus out there who could realize returns like that, people were willing to plunk down lots of money and pay enormous fees to get in on the action.
Steinhardt is now Chairman of the Board at WisdomTree Investments.  Here is what the article said about Steinhardt's current investment activities and goals, "With $35 billion under management, WisdomTree has only a 2.1% share of the $1.7 trillion (assets) ETF market, but that’s up from less than 1% in 2010, and it has been steadily chipping away at BlackRock and State Street, which have a combined 61.9% market share. The company uses academic investment theory to create ETFs that seek to consistently outperform the market, albeit just by a point or two."  What?  Just a point or two?  Why not 15 or 20 points better?  What happened to the 25%/year he realized earlier?  Why is he not repeating that performance?  I guess that genius has an expiration date.  It is called luck and the bell curve.
I gave up my search for a Wall Street guru realizing 20%/month in total returns and turned my attention to Mr. Collin's argument that O'Neil's Investors Business Daily is essentially the same program as NVOWS. If that is true then I should certainly be able to find a non-fundamental, non-long term, non-buy and hold approach to stock investing that has realized 240%/year over the past ten years.  The total returns for the model stock portfolios recommended at IBD are available to the public for analysis.  Here is what I found.  An abstract of a critical analysis of the IBD approach said this, "This paper examines the profitability of trading strategies derived from stock rankings published in Investor's Business Daily. The best system provides market-adjusted abnormal monthly returns of 1.81% from buying S&P 500 stocks, and a 3.18% abnormal return on an arbitrage portfolio. Stocks selected for trading have above average volatility, but a portion of abnormal return may be a reward for identifying stocks with short-run sustainable price momentum. Results seem indicative of market inefficiency, but the phenomena may be temporary since abnormal returns are lower during the second half of the data set."  So according to this study, which costs $36 dollars if I want to read the entire paper and not just the abstract, the average rate of total return realized by using the IBD stock investment program averages about 2-4 percent above the average return on the stock market indices.  Once again I was foiled.  No 240%/year returns are to be found following the IBD system.
Unless someone can provide a list of names of the people who have been following the NVOWS system who have realized 20%/month for at least ten years in the stock market I am driven to the conclusion that those people do not exist.   Moreover, every bunny-trail I went scampering down indicated to me that the best way to realize market beating total returns in stocks is to use a long term, fundamental approach to stock market investing.  Beating the market indices by a couple of percentage points per year is possible and indicative of market inefficiency, as the abstract quoted above illustrates, and a handful of skilled investment advisers have been successful at doing so.  But believing in an apparently mythical group of people who can consistently realize 20%/month by means of sophisticated trading techniques just does not seem to be true.  That, Mr. Collins, is the point of my blog posts.
Mr. Collins concludes by extolling the Christian virtues of David Mitchell.  I will not challenge his statements.  I will accept that Mitchell is a genuine and sincere Christian pastor who wants to help people realize market beating returns in the stock market.  But as I have written in previous blog posts, sincerity of purpose does not equate to quality of advice.  When something sounds too good to be true it usually is.  I am still waiting for empirical, historical and statistical evidence for a period of at least ten years that illustrates precisely what the followers of NVOWS have realized on their portfolios.  Thank you, Mr. Collins, for your comments.  I have enjoyed the interaction.

Note to regular readers of this blog:  I am heading for the mountains for a week of climbing.  Hence there will be no posts to this blog the first week of August.  See you on the other side.

Update:  September 30, 2016

It has been over a year since I wrote this post and I am still waiting for some practitioner of the NVOWS system to come forward and attest to the fact that he has realized just a measly 20%/year for the past ten years on his stock investments.   Yes, you read that right.  I am not asking for 20%/month, as David Mitchell says you can achieve.  I am asking for a simple 20%/year for the past ten year period.  Hello....hello....hello.... is there anybody out there?

Thursday, July 30, 2015

My Day At The Central City Opera

I went to the opera yesterday.  In particular, my wife and I had the opportunity to go to the Central City Opera House for a production of  Verdi's La Traviata.  As is almost always the case in my life, we were able to go to the opera because of the generosity of a wealthy benefactor who gave us the tickets.  It proved to be a most interesting day and I would like to share some of the highlights with you here today.
The only thing I knew about La Traviata prior to yesterday was that it was a popular opera composed by Verdi.  Other than that I had no idea what it was about.   So as not to be completely lost my wife agreed to use her PED (personal electronic device) to gather information about the opera and to read it to me while we were driving up into the mountains.  By the time we arrived we had some idea about the storyline and we were able to follow along without getting hopelessly confused.  The opera was set in Paris and performed in Italian.  I found that confusing.  I understand why it was performed in Italian since Verdi was Italian but why it was set in Paris made no sense to me.  It seemed to me that it would have been far more reasonable to set the opera in Rome but I rolled with the punches and suspended my disbelief that a bunch of Frogs would be running around 19th century Paris singing in Italian.
Central City was once known as the "richest square mile on earth."  During the late 19th century it produced more gold than any place on earth.  I have a special affinity for Central City because the great majority of the original gold miners were from Wales.  They came to Colorado hoping to make a life for themselves and perhaps even strike it rich.  As the hearty Welsh miners went about their work digging holes and extracting the yellow metal from the earth, they longed for the days when they were treated to the classic Welsh operas.  Arias about slaying red dragons and conquering the Scots and the Irish filled their minds and occasionally erupted from their dust-caked lips as they labored in the mines.  One day a group of them decided to band together and use some of their wealth to build an opera house.  The Central City Opera House is the result of that decision.  It is a beautiful old building and, in my humble opinion, the best place to see an opera.  We sat in the third row of the small building, just a couple of feet from the cramped stage, and were treated to an afternoon performance of vocal music of the most outstanding quality.
We drove up a couple of hours prior to the matinee performance to enjoy a leisurely lunch together.  As we strolled about town something was immediately and painfully obvious.  Colorado had decriminalized gambling in three mountain towns a couple of decades ago in the hope that doing so would revitalize those towns and keep them from becoming just more ghost towns in Colorado's high country.  The initial response was overwhelming as people from all over the country came to Colorado to gamble.  The revenues produced by the gambling profits were used to build lots of shiny new government buildings, all of which stand in stark contrast to the ancient buildings of the old city.  Over the years, as more governments throughout the Socialist Democracy of Amerika made the decision to increase revenues by decriminalizing gambling, fewer people made the trip to Central City and its sister-city Blackhawk.  As we wandered around yesterday I noticed that probably about half of the old buildings were either for sale or vacant.  If the original intention behind the change of the gambling law was to revitalize the town, I would say it has been a colossal failure.  Government never gets things right.
After lunch we walked over to the opera hall entrance.  We had to wait a couple of minutes prior to entering so we found a shady spot and sat down on a rock wall.  Shortly after sitting down a woman wearing an extremely short bright red dress and sporting high heels that looked like small ladders entered the courtyard.  I could not help but notice her.  My wife noticed her as well and whispered to me, "that is a man."  No, I thought incredulously, that can't be a man.  She was staggering about, desperately trying to not fall off her shoes.  Then she disappeared around the corner.  I considered my wife's opinion that we had just witnessed a pervert in action and made a mental note to try and make eye contact with the lady as we entered the building.  Shortly thereafter we were walking up the front steps and the "lady" appeared.  She did not make eye contact but the unshaven face betrayed her gender.  Being Welsh I am accustomed to being around bearded women but this was no bearded woman.  This was a bearded man dressing up as a woman.  I only had one thought at that moment.  Please, please, please, do not have the seat next to me!
Immediately after the "woman" passed us by and while we were waiting for the lady at the front door to take our tickets a female midget walked up.  She forced herself in front of us and demanded the ticket lady answer a question she posed.  As we gazed down upon her she forcefully queried the ticket lady in the most un-munchkin-like way.  She wanted to know if this was the same opera house she had been to previously that had forced her to walk up several flights of high-stepped stairs just to get to her seat.  She desperately wanted to be able to complain that the Amerikans with Disabilities Act applied to her and she was going to sue the Central City Opera for failure to provide her proper access.  The ticket lady assured her that there were no flights of stairs and that the only way into the building was by walking up the five steps we were currently standing on.  Even the midget could do that so she turned on her tiny little heels and stomped off, no doubt coming to grips with the fact she would not win the litigation lottery on that day.
We entered the building and took our seats in the third row.  The building quickly filled up.  As we looked around we both noticed something at the same time.  We were the youngest people in the entire opera house.  The average age of the patrons had to be around 70 years old.  Unlike the midget, who was able to walk away without falling over, most of these folks were tottering around like a bunch of drunks.  The ravages of age make it difficult for seniors to walk around on uneven floors in the dark.  One kindly fellow almost broke my wife's foot when he stomped on it while passing.  He quickly apologized.  Despite their infirmities everyone got to his seat without falling over and, as far as I know, no lawsuits were filed.
La Traviata is a wretched tale about a prostitute and the French aristocracy that have nothing better to do than get drunk and have sex with prostitutes.  The three main characters are a bunch of sniveling wimps who spend most of their time crying about how hard their lives are and how much they love one another.  Love quickly turns to hate however as the main couple spends most of their time either fighting or professing their undying love for each other.  It was impossible to form any emotional connection with any of the characters and when the heroine dies in the final scene I thought that she deserved to die an early and painful death.  Whether Verdi meant to mock the French aristocracy or whether he meant to portray them accurately I will never know.  What I do know is the story is insipid and meaningless.
That having been said, the music and the singing were powerful.  My wife and I just sat back and allowed our ears to be filled with some of the most glorious and inspirational music you will ever hear.  Being in Italian I could pick up a word here and there but it was not enough to ruin the vocalizations that I was witnessing.  The ensemble pieces were rousing and one duet between the female protagonist and the second male singer was fantastic.  For several hours yesterday the amazing sound of extremely talented and highly disciplined voices filled the tiny confines of the Central City Opera House.  It was a joy to experience and I wish you had all been there to share it with us. 

Wednesday, July 29, 2015

James Holmes Is Loved

James Holmes is the man who killed 12 people in an Aurora theater on July 20, 2012.  He was high on government approved and administered mind-altering drugs at the time of the murders.  Although his government approved drug use was likely a contributory factor in the murders, it does not excuse him for what he did.  He was convicted of the murders of those 12 people last month after a trial that lasted months and cost millions of taxpayer dollars.  There were no other suspects in the case and everyone knew that Holmes was the person who did all of the killing.  Why the trial had to take months and cost millions of dollars makes no sense to me.
The acting Constitution of the Socialist Democracy of Amerika no longer contains the provisions for a quick and speedy trial that were found in the original Constitution of the United States of America.  The fact that it took a full three years to arrive at a guilty verdict dramatically illustrates just how far the system of injustice we suffer under in this country has separated itself from the intentions of the original framers of the Constitution.  The fact that it took months and millions of dollars to come to the conclusion that Holmes is a murderer worthy of death only further illustrates that the system of injustice in this country is largely based upon psychobabble and its primary mission is to enrich the participants in the system with money transferred from the taxpayers.
As if things could not get any worse, the circus that is the James Holmes prosecution goes on as the case is now in the sentencing phase and the powers that be are attempting to decide whether Holmes should be executed or sent to the loony-bin for the rest of his life.  There is no question about the right thing to do.  Holmes should be executed.  There are no provisions in the Law of God for exceptions to the sanction of death for murder based upon a spurious notion of mental illness.  Indeed, there is no such thing as mental illness.  Everyone is responsible for every action all the time.  Nobody is ever given a free pass to sin under the terms of biblical law.  Holmes should have been executed three years ago and saved the taxpayers millions of dollars.  But that is not how the government sees things.  There was far too much money to be made and far too much publicity to be obtained for the career bureaucrats involved to do things correctly.
To aid the people responsible for determining Holmes' fate, a parade of family members have taken the witness stand this past week to testify just how much they love him.  A headline in the newspaper yesterday announced that "The gunman's family and friends testified to try to prove that they still love him."  The story tells me that, "The picture showed a little girl and her big brother wrapped in the kind of Velcro hug that only kids can give.  How do you feel looking at that photo, the defense attorney asked?  Chris Holmes gazed at the image of her 2-year old self, now displayed for jurors on a giant courtroom video screen.  'It makes me happy,' she answered quickly.  Then a pause.  'It make me sad at the same time.'"  Boo Hoo.   I have only one question to ask....what does any of this have to do with a murder trial?
The newspaper article answered that question for me.  It said, "The question before them this time:  Does the horror of his actions inside the Century Aurora 16 movie theater outweigh the rest of his life?"  What?!  Let me get this straight.  The system of injustice in the Socialist Democracy of Amerika believes that determining whether a murderer of 12 people was loved by his family when he was a child is a relevant issue?  The article informed me that jurors were going to be given the privilege of watching old home movies of Holmes running around being a kid.  Ostensibly those movies will show that his parents loved him.  Again I must ask, what does any of this have to do with justice?  Where are the home movies of the 12 people who are dead today as a result of Holmes' actions?  Where is the testimony from their surviving family members about how much they loved them?
Holmes' family members have been effusive in their praise for him.  They have fallen over themselves declaring their love for him, both before and after the fact of his murderous rampage.  There is something very wrong with that sort of behavior.  I do not care that they are related.  I do not care that they come from the same family.  There is something drastically and morally wrong when family members rise up in support of a known murderer and proceed to profess their love for him after the fact of his murders.  James Holmes deserves hatred.  He is unrepentant of what he has done.  He is pretending to be mentally ill in order to save his own filthy hide.  Everyone, including the members of his immediate family, should hate him for who he is and what he has done.  The mere fact that people are willing to take the witness stand in a public trial and profess their love for an unrepentant convicted murderer is only another example of the depths of moral depravity the citizens of the SDA have fallen to.  Yes, James Holmes is loved, and those who love him will be held accountable for that action. 

Tuesday, July 28, 2015

Let Iran Have The Bomb

The following countries have a nuclear bomb.  The total number of warheads in possession is listed after each country:
  1. United States:  4804
  2. Russia:  4480
  3. France:  300
  4. China:  250
  5. United Kingdom:  225
  6. Pakistan:  120
  7. India:  110
  8. North Korea:  10
In addition to the above countries it is also believed that Israel has ~250 warheads.  Israel does not publicize its nuclear arsenal.
Here is a list of countries that the Socialist Democracy of Amerika has invaded in my lifetime.  The invasions listed below have resulted in tens of millions of deaths of the citizens of these countries.  Also please note that none of the countries listed below ever constituted a legitimate threat to the lives and property of SDA citizens:
  1. Vietnam
  2. Cuba
  3. Thailand
  4. Laos
  5. Congo
  6. Cambodia
  7. Cyprus
  8. Lebanon
  9. Iran
  10. El Salvador
  11. Libya
  12. Egypt
  13. Grenada
  14. Honduras
  15. Chad
  16. Bolivia
  17. Panama
  18. Columbia
  19. Liberia
  20. Kuwait
  21. Iraq
  22. Somalia
  23. Bosnia
  24. Afghanistan
  25. Sudan
  26. Syria
Compare the two lists.  Do you notice anything?  Right!  No country shows up on both lists.  The SDA has only invaded countries that do not have nuclear bombs.  Do you think I am the first person in the world to figure that out?  Neither do I.
In my lifetime Iran has not invaded any other country in the world.  In fact, you have to go back hundreds of years to find a time when Iran invaded another country.  On the other hand, Iran has been invaded many times during my lifetime.  Much of the time the Iranian government was nothing more than a puppet government established by the western political powers, especially the SDA.  I write all of this to make a rather obvious point.  Iran is not a threat to SDA security and anyone who believes that to be the case is basing that belief upon something other than the facts.
There is a television commercial running in the Denver area that is paid for by some group that believes King Obama sold the SDA down the river when he signed the treaty with Iran about nuclear bomb production.  According to these folks Iran is about to launch a nuclear attack against the SDA and Obama is wholly complicit in that anticipated attack.  According to these folks the SDA military needs to invade Iran and destroy all of the buildings where they might possibly be building nuclear bombs.  In the course of doing so it is expected that there will be tens of thousands of innocent citizens killed but our beneficent and gentle rulers assure us that such collateral damage is necessary to protect our freedom.  For those who believe such things I have a couple of questions:
  1. What is the moral basis for believing that the SDA has the right to tell another sovereign country what to do?  Specifically, what moral principle exists that declares the government and military of the SDA can inform Iran that it is immoral for it to make a nuclear bomb?  
  2. What is the moral principle which says that the SDA has the right and responsibility to invade Iran if Iran refuses to stop making a nuclear bomb?  I think I know the answer to that question.  I think the answer, despite all evidence to the contrary,  will be that Iran intends to use the bomb against the SDA so we have the right to engage in a defensive first attack.  For those of you who believe that, go to question three.
  3. If the SDA has the moral right and responsibility to protect its own citizens by launching a defensive first attack against our enemy Iran, why does that moral necessity not exist when it comes to Russia, China, Pakistan and North Korea?  All of those countries can be ranked higher on the "enemy" list than Iran.  
  4. Why is it moral for the SDA to have the world's largest nuclear arsenal and immoral for Iran to want to make a single nuclear bomb?
  5. Why is it moral for the SDA to be the only country in the history of the world to have used a nuclear bomb on another country and, if the SDA's use of that bomb was moral, why can it be that no other country could ever use a nuclear bomb in a moral fashion, especially if it is defending itself from an SDA invasion?
I believe I know the answer to all of the questions asked above, and it has nothing to do with morality and everything to do with hegemony.  Like a good bully, the SDA only invades countries it knows it can beat up with ease.  The SDA has the right to invade, attack, kill and control the citizens and governments of foreign countries simply because we can.  It has nothing to do with being morally proper and everything to do with the fact that we are the most powerful military complex in the history of the universe.   Combine that power with the pervasive belief of Amerikan "exceptionalism" and you have a sure prescription for world-wide hegemony.  Everything we do to other countries in the world is good simply because it is we who are doing it.  Anyone who does not like that will be killed.  Is it any wonder we are the most hated country in the history of the universe?

Monday, July 27, 2015

King Obama Is A Terrible House Guest

What would you think if you invited a friend over for dinner and the first thing he did when he entered your home was criticize the way you maintain your front lawn?  Suppose the first words out of his mouth were, "You are cutting your grass way too short and you need to put more water on the dry spots."  How would you react to that?
Imagine for a moment that a wealthy benefactor invited you to his private country club for a round of golf.  Do you believe it would be a reasonable thing for you, immediately upon entering the club, to look around and ask him if the people who are employed at his club are racially diverse?  What do you believe would be the response of your benefactor if the first thing you asked him is if the club employs any Welshmen?
Consider for a moment the scenario in which you are invited over to your neighbor's home for a pool party.  How do you think your neighbor would respond to you if the first words out of your mouth were, "I believe you need to get a bigger pool and the water could stand to be cleaned up a bit"?  How should he react to your negative criticism of his pool when you are an invited guest to his home?
How would you react to me if you made the very bad decision to invite me over to your home for a couple of games of ping-pong and the entire time we were playing I was badgering you about being a God-hating, State-loving worshiper of career politicians?  I suspect you would be a bit upset by my harangue, especially if it is true, and I could expect to never be invited to return.
All of these are examples of what most sensible people recognize as bad behavior.  The behavior is bad not because the things that are being said are untrue but because they are untimely.  Good manners involves the practice of saying and doing the right things at the right time and place.  Every example I listed above is clearly an example of bad manners.  In each of my examples the person exhibiting bad manners is guilty of extreme selfishness and massive disrespect for his host. I believe we would all be quick to condemn the rude and selfish person whenever any of those behaviors are displayed.
Good manners require that when we are a guest of someone else we should treat our host with dignity and respect, even if we disagree with the way our host conducts his life.  If we are so disturbed by the way our potential host lives his life, such as being a serial pedophile or a mass murderer, we should decline any invitation to come to his house and accept his hospitality.  Once again I believe everyone reading this blog post would agree with what I have written up to this point.  It is just common sense.
Let me give you a quote from an article I read in the Denver Post on Sunday.  The headline of the story was "Trip talk stays blunt."  The subtitle was "Obama In Kenya."  Here is some of what the article said:  "U.S. President Barack Obama mixed blunt messages to Kenya's leaders on gay rights, corruption and counter terrorism Saturday with warm reflections on his family ties to a nation that considers him a local son....Obama did little to paper over policy differences with Kenya's government, most notably on gay rights.  He drew on his own background as an African-American, noting the slavery and segregation of the US past and saying he is 'painfully aware of the history when people are treated differently under the law....That's the path whereby freedoms begin to erode and bad things happen.  When a government gets in the habit of treating people differently, those habits can spread.'"  Fortunately the head of the Kenyan government replied and informed King Obama that, "gay rights is not really an issue on the foremost mind of Kenyans, and that is a fact."
King Obama is a rude and obnoxious guest.  He is going to another country and ordering the leaders of that country around, expecting them to bend to his will simply because he is the King and ruler of the most powerful military force in the history of the universe.  The head of the Kenyan government would have done well to thank him for his opinion and send him home, informing him that he is only welcome to return when he improves upon his manners.
Why is it that there is no outcry from the citizens of the Socialist Democracy of Amerika about the public embarrassment our King has committed?  Why do most of the citizens of the SDA seem to approve of our King's rude and obnoxious behavior?  I can answer those questions.  It is because we see ourselves as "exceptional" and everyone else as idiots.  Everyone in the universe should bend to our will, and the will of our King, for no other reason than we are better than everyone else.  What arrogance!  What stupidity!  What rudeness!  What hypocrisy!
Obama lectures the Kenyan government on what happens when people are treated differently under the law while, at the same time, heartily endorses the recent supreme court ruling which mandates that Christians be treated as second class citizens when it comes to the issue of homosexuality.  If a Christian holds to and proclaims the historic Christian doctrine of the sinfulness of homosexuality the law of the SDA proclaims him guilty of hate speech.  What is that if not treating people differently?
King Obama is right about one thing however.  When he says that treating people differently is the path whereby freedoms begin to erode and bad things happens he is spot on.  In the Socialist Democracy of Amerika the rich (never defined) are treated very differently.  As a result the top 3% of the income population is forced to pay 25% of all federal taxes.  Indeed, in the SDA almost the entire federal tax bill is paid by the minority of citizens who make the most money.  What is the tyranny of the majority if not a perfect example of Obama's bad thing happening?