How the Left Deceives About Climate Change (Part I)

A few weeks back there was a climate change show on in Colorado. Here are some of deceptions used by the show: The show claims that if your weather is not within the norm for the day, season, or year, it is due to climate change. Here is what we know: Climate change is constantly occurring on Earth. There have been 5 Ice ages and subsequent warmings over the past nearly 1 million years. Each Ice Age and subsequent warming trend lasts tens of thousands of years. Prior to the first ice age, the earth had no glaciers, even at the poles, in its history. My point is that the Earth has gone through cycles of cold followed by a warm up long before there was an industrial revolution and man. To suggest the current warming is due to manmade carbons is just wrong. And to suggest that a season of cold, hot, windy, drought, or snowy weather is due to climate change is also wrong. We cannot see climate change, it happens slowly over thousands of years. And to suggest global warming also explains cold and snowy weather just makes little sense.

Viewing the cores of glacier ice in the Antarctica (800,000 years of data) you can find that temperature and CO2 are “relatively” related or partially correlated (but the correlation is weak at best). For instance, temperatures do not rise or lower proportionally to CO2. But let’s be clear about one point: it is CO2 that “relatively” tracks temperature by 200 to 1400 years and not vice versa. In other words CO2 lags temperature changes! Hence, to assume that temperature is tracking CO2 is grossly wrong. Currently, atmospheric CO2 is about 100 PPM higher than the highest level found in Artic ice and increasing about 2 PPM per year. Yet, temperatures were much warmer during many periods over those 800,000 years of data. The swing in temperature over an ice age is about 5 to 7 degrees Fahrenheit. The Left talks about swings in temperature of several degrees over a few decades in parts of the world. This is wrong.

One scientist on the show explained that CO2 molecules can remain in the atmosphere for up to 100 years. He also explained from 2014 to 2015, it is the first time in a healthy economy that CO2 in the atmosphere did not go up. And he said the obvious reason is due to renewable energy sources. So let’s put together an example with approximate numbers. Let’s say in 1915 (before the industrial revolution) that the amount of CO2 emitted in the atmosphere increased by 1 PPM (Part per million). In 2014 that number increased to 10 PPM (per the Al Gore charts showing CO2 going up about 100 PPM over 10 years). About 13% of the energy used for electricity came from renewables in 2014, but 70% of new energy sources in 2015 came from renewables. So let’s assume for 2015, the amount of carbon emitted into the atmosphere accounts for only 8 PPM (down 20% - a very rosy prediction considering Asia is far behind in renewable use). So the amount of carbon emitted into the atmosphere is not flat but 8 PPM minus 1 PPM (1915) is 7 PPM. So there is something these scientist are not explaining to us (they have contradicting stories).

Do Peripheral Nerve Disorders have any Benefits?

Do peripheral nerve disorders have any benefits? Maybe but probably not, and if yes, the negatives surely outweigh the positives. But a person actually asked me this question, a question I never thought about in the past, and it got me thinking. For most people I think the answer to this question unequivocally no. For me, I do think there are some benefits.

Paresthesia, muscle stiffness, muscle cramps, and muscle fatigue and pain are all bad. These symptoms hamper everything I do in life. However, I started to wonder if fasciculations are all bad. It is true, my symptoms bother me too much to jog and do many sports. But for some reason I can cycle and I can do this at a fairly high level. So why is it I can do this (which is probably temporary as my symptoms progress)? Why is the symptom of exercise intolerance avoided for this activity? When I was competing at the Master Nationals time trial championships I met a fellow rider who had the same experience I had with BFS / CFS. He could no longer run, but he could compete at cycling at a high level (much higher than myself I might add). How is this possible?

First, I believe fasciculations are constantly exercising the leg muscles and making them somewhat stronger. 24/7/365 fasciculations can wreak havoc our lives and led to many detrimental symptoms, but they can also keep legs strong and lean.

Second, all this activity helps maintain my weight and keep me light (I am by no means a small cyclist, but I am not large either). Small is good in cycling – you need to produce less power to maintain higher speeds. I suspect we may lose a couple hundred calories per day because of this constant muscle activity.

Third, the pain from BFS/CFS seems to mask a lot of the pain I would feel from cycling workouts. In order to be good at any athletic sport (especially individual ones that are races against time), you need to tolerate huge amounts of pain. In fact, I broke my leg in a fall (a chipped bone in my shin) and sure it hurt, but not enough to stop cycling or competing. The doctor said the pain and or discomfort from such an injury would have forced many to stop most activities and it would certainly affect performance – Not me. Granted, it was not a bad break, but it was a break nonetheless.

To conclude, and this may sound weird, but if people with peripheral nerve disorders are able to overcome their symptoms and force themselves to become active and exercise, they may be able to benefit from their symptoms. Well, at least to a very small degree. So much of what gets printed about peripheral nerve disorders is negative, I am merely trying to find some positives that some people may be able to build upon.

The Mysteries of Cramping

Today, people still do not understand the true reason behind why cramping happens – unless you have some sort of neuromuscular disorder or disease where cramping is a symptom. The misconception is that cramping occurs because muscles are depleted of water, minerals and electrolytes through sweating. This is false, in fact, cramping has nothing do with the muscles and everything to do with the nerves. This was theorized back in the 1990s by Martin Schwellnus. Schwellnus hypothesized that neural signals between the muscle and spine are distorted do to muscle fatigue. A distorted signal could cause the muscle contraction signal to keep firing, hence causing a cramp. Schwellnus came up with this hypothesis after it had been proven (2 decades ago) that there is no correlation between electrolyte levels and cramps. So why do we still think electrolytes are the answer to prevent cramping?

I believe the answer is simple – the 10 billion dollar sport drink industry. Gatorade, founded in the 1960s, still to this day has commercials about how their product stops cramps. Others are doing the same thing and this is false advertising. I would say hydrated muscles complete with electrolytes would perform better than the converse, but it does not stop the process of muscle fatigue.

Scientists are finally starting to catch on to Schwellnus’s theory. Two neuro scientists – Bean and MacKinnon, have created a supplement that has ion-channel activators that controls the nerves within the digestive track which simultaneously calms nerves throughout the body making it much harder for fatigued muscles to disrupt the nervous activity between muscles and the spine. This supplement should be available on the market soon.

Of course, I have been preaching something similar for years. I have Cramp Fasiculation Syndrome (CFS). I am an avid fitness enthusiast, but with CFS exercise is increasingly more difficult due to muscle pain and cramps. People would tell me to hydrate more and drink Gatorade, but I would explain that I am fully hydrated. They would argue and say “you can’t be hydrated if you are cramping”. I would say “Oh, yes, you can!”. I am living proof of this.

With CFS, my muscles are constantly in pain and are fatigued. Why? That is the 6 million dollar question, but I contribute this to two factors. First, people with CFS have a tough time resting and sleeping properly due to all the fasciculations occurring in their bodies. It feel like bugs are crawling under my skin. Secondly, I have constant small muscle fiber fasiculations (twitching), 24/7/365. Hence, my muscles never rest and this is a good reason why they are fatigued, even before I start to exercise. And this explains why they are more apt to cramp than a person without this type of peripheral nerve disorder.

Bean and MacKinnon are working on a drug that would help people with MS and ALS who have cramping symptoms. CFS has some of the same onset symptoms of MS and ALS, but with one major difference. CFS symptoms are due to an imbalance at the nerve endings, MS and ALS symptoms are triggered from the brain. MS and ALS causes muscle atrophy in most patients. Smaller and weaker muscles fatigue much easier than normal ones. Hence, it is easy for someone to conclude muscles for MS and ALS patients can cramp easy.

People with restless leg syndrome get cramps because their leg muscles are fatigued, not because they need Gatorade. This is so intuitive to people with muscular disorders that cause cramping. Obviously, the first thing I did was drink all the time to eliminate cramping and it did not work. It did absolutely nothing to help me. I even experimented further: I found that I could ride 30-40 hard miles on my bike and the chances of my cramping was about the same whether I started on an empty stomach and 16 ounces of water, or if I ate a full meal and had 32 ounces of Gatorade. I ate and drank nothing during the ride to control the experiment. In fact, my performance was not much different in either case. With my legs, cramping is likely to kick in after 3 hours of constant exercise and that threshold could go down depending on the intensity of the workout. It could happen within 30 minutes if I am really pushing myself to the limit in say a time trial activity.

Bean and MacKinnon’s company is Flex-Pharma: http://www.flex-pharma.com/. I have written them and will see what they say about their supplements and drugs for treating CFS.

ISIS Recruiting Falacies

The Left claims that Trump’s proposed temporary ban on Muslim immigration into the United States has and will be a great recruiting tool for ISIS and other Islamic extremist terrorist groups. I find this very hard to believe that this “one action” will radicalize Muslims to fight Americans more so than any other actions taken by Americans or our government. Besides, if Muslims are radicalized by Trumps proposed plan it means they were on the fence. If this is the tipping point, then it is good they expose now because it is just a matter of time before it happens. Keep in mind, Trump’s plan is merely a proposal and it would be temporary.

How are Trump’s words going to radicalize Muslims more so then American bombs? How are Trumps words going to radicalize Muslims more so then online recruitment propaganda? This is fearmongering at its best. Remember, radical Muslims do not need much to be radicalized - such as a cartoon depicting Allah in a bad light. If that is all it takes, then I highly doubt Trump’s words will have much of an impact. It will not take much to radicalize these folks, they are overly sensitive and it would be just a matter of time before they are radicalized anyway.

Caving to political correctness is not the solution. Terrorists are offensive people and catering to them through political correctness will cost lives. For instance, the Obama administration’s unwillingness to allow immigration officials search social media sites of Muslim immigrants is a good example. Why is Obama willing to search the social media sites of Americans for election purposes, but not profile Muslim immigrants? He does not want to be politically incorrect. The results – San Bernardino! In fact, Obama does not want to profile Muslims at all when it comes to anti-terrorism policy. Why is the Left so afraid to say “Islamic Extremists”? They are afraid to be politically incorrect. What message does this send to terrorists? It tells them that what they are doing is working. It has Americans afraid to the point they are respecting terrorists.

Trump’s proposal is targeted at fixing a glaring problem in the immigration system. If someone finds it offensive so be it. American lives matter more than those of terrorists. It is a privilege to be an American and if someone is offended by the process then they can go to some other country.

The liberal media and their coverage of Trump is generating these talking points. After all, it is better to talk about Trump and his plan then to talk about Obama and his failures – that is the bottom line. They are fearmongering Americans just as they did to Barry Goldwater in 1960. This is what they do, this is their mission, they are not concerned about the truth and doing what is right. It is obvious, they are concerned about ensuring that Hillary Clinton is the next president of the United States.

Trump and Korematsu

I am no fan of Trump and would accept any candidate to win the GOP nomination over him. He is not a political outsider as many claim – he is just on the other side of the bargaining table with politicians winning them over by greasing their pockets with lobbying money. This vicious cycle of money has led to quid pro quo politics which is exactly what is destroying the fabric of this country. Trump is just as divisive as Obama and our country needs a leader who can do a better job uniting instead of insulting everyone in his path. What also makes Trump exceedingly dangerous is his massive ego – which may be worse than Obama’s. Sure, all politicians are full of themselves, but Trump is on another level with his narcissism. Trump’s arrogance is also a huge problem and will get in the way of him being an effective and competent leader. And let’s be clear, Trump is not even close to being a conservative. He is a moderate with many left leaning tendencies.

All week we heard about Trump’s proposal to place a temporary ban on Muslim immigration into the United States. The media, Democrats, and Republicans have all come down hard on him mostly calling him a racist and bigot for wanting to profile based on religious beliefs. Despite all the heat one would have to respect Trump’s willingness to hold his ground. Trump at least has the fortitude to say what others are thinking. Although his ban is a minority point of view, nearly 30% of Americans do agree with him. But when you really get down to it, his proposal is not over the top by any stretch of the imagination.

First, Trump’s proposal is not permanent, it is temporary until the process can be revamped to prevent more terrorists gaining access to the United States through our immigration process. It is obvious that the immigration system failed drastically and led to the San Bernardino massacre. Trump may have been able to avoid the bigotry and racists comments if he suggested to shut down immigration to the United States for everyone until the broke system is fixed.

Second, Trump is certainly right in pointing out that political correctness is a huge problem, especially when it comes to fighting terror. Once again, you got to give him credit for saying what others are thinking. His Muslim immigration ban proposal is certainly not politically correct and that is why the backlash is a bit overrated.

Third, Trump was not completely wrong in citing the FDR internment camps back in WWII to defend his idea. FDR ordered the imprisonment of 120,000 Japanese (over 70,000 were US Citizens). Every Japanese prisoner had all of their personal belongings and wealth confiscated and never returned. In Korematsu v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that the process of arresting and imprisoning people based on race was acceptable during wartime. Most people do not know this, but the Korematsu ruling is still on the books and has never been overturned. And today, we are at war with radical Islam so precedent is on the side of Trump. And history has been very favorable to FDR, he is rated as one of the top Presidents of all time by most liberal historians (most of which are liberal). It is weird how liberals hail FDR but call Trump a racist or bigot. And what Trump is suggesting is much more moderate than the stunt pulled by King FDR.

The Obama Legacy: Global Lawlessness

If there is one word to sum up the Obama legacy, it would be lawlessness. At home and abroad there is nothing but chaos and no respect for the law. Obama had a chance to change many of the chaotic outcomes, but he failed on every front.

At home, violent crime is up in most major cities including homicides of police officers. There is no question that Obama’s rhetoric has not helped matters especially when he increasingly blames the police on very public cases. The first amendment is all but gone on our university campuses. There is no tolerance for any speech that opines an opposing view. This behavior has been building up for years, but it does not help when you have a president who tries to silence the media, implement the fairness doctrine, place a “snitching” policy on neighbors, and publically chastises Fox News every opportunity that arises. It also does not help when the DOJ looks the other way when the Black Panther Party tries to intimidate people at election polling places. Obama and his justice department do not lead by example. Obama is the first president since FDR to have a losing record at the Supreme Court. This proves that Obama is trying to garner more executive power by breaking the law.

It certainly sets a bad precedent when the president and his administration have no respect for the law, it should come as no surprise the result is lawlessness. Obama has not been able to transcend race, in fact, he and his proponents use the race card more often. When discussing crime, Obama only talks about white on black crime and fails to see the significant rise in black on black crime or black on white crime. This type of prejudice fosters lawlessness and pits ethnicities against each other.

Abroad, things are much worse. Obama made many blunders. First, in the Arab Spring, Obama supported opposition forces, but refused to put troops on the ground to influence the outcome for new governments. The result, Libya and Somalia are now terrorist safe havens, and Egypt is controlled by the terrorist group the Muslim Brotherhood. Remember, Obama went to war unilaterally in Libya and the fact the US no longer can keep an embassy there following the Benghazi attack illustrates the colossal failure.

In Iran, Obama failed to support the Green Revolution uprising to overthrow the current government. Instead, Obama has made a treaty with Iran that will eventually lead to a nuclear bomb and worse yet, it provides Iran billions of dollars that will ultimately go to sponsor more terrorism around the globe.

In Syria, Obama did nothing to remove Assad from power even when he crossed his redline and used chemical weapons. Now the situation in Syria has deteriorated to the point that it is impossible to move forward with a plan since there are multiple factions fighting against each other including ISIS.

Obama retreated from Iraq and Afghanistan too fast and now ISIS and the Taliban are stronger than ever. Obama misjudged the strength of ISIS and now they are killing thousands of people around the globe in terror attacks. Still, Obama fails to use ground troops to fight ISIS. The Obama air war against ISIS is ineffective without any ground support to identify targets.

The overall result from all the civil wars, chaos, terror, and lawlessness is over a million refugees fleeing Africa and the Middle East trying to get to Europe. What’s worse is that ISIS is smuggling terrorists into Europe by posing as refugees.

Obama did nothing to stop Russia aggression in Crimea, Ukraine, and Syria. If anything this showed the rest of the world that America was no longer a leader and would do nothing to stop foreign and terrorist aggression.

What if Obama talked about the police with respect? What if Obama was not so prejudice? What if Obama was not so paranoid? What if Obama was not in such a hurry to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan? What if Obama had taken the ISIS threat seriously from the beginning? What if Obama used ground troops to fight ISIS? What if Obama used ground troops to influence the government outcomes in Libya, Egypt and Somalia? What if Obama did not go to war unilaterally against Libya? What if Obama supported the Green Revolution? What if Obama acted sooner in Syria? What if Obama stood up to Russia? If Obama did not make so many blunders, there would be much less global chaos, death, and destruction. The world would undoubtedly be a better without Obama as the leader of United States, but we still have another year of this callous leadership.

Similarities and Differences

Democrats alike want us to “Celebrate our differences”. However, to Democrats, the only differences they want us to celebrate are those differences you can visually see. I, on the other hand, would like to celebrate those similarities you can see. What the so called Party of Science fails to understand is that the genetic makeup of all humans is 99.9% the same. We all have same number of bones, muscles, organs, etc. (unless there is a rare genetic mutation). We have a lot more in common than not. So, when a liberal sees a person they like to point out our differences. On the other hand, when I see a person that is what I see a person – not a size, height, skin color, eye color, or hair color. By celebrating our differences, liberals are saying we are different and not necessarily equal. And that can be proved or confirmed through liberal policies on welfare, diversity, and affirmative action. Differences or uniqueness in appearance is so important in our country, we strive to make statements by getting tattoos, piercings, and wearing wild clothing. This is what Democrats and liberals think is important to individuality and to define one’s persona.

The biggest difference between human beings is not how look, but how we think. That is why we people strive to look different – because we are so similar in appearance. But when liberals talk about “celebrating our differences” they are not talking about the difference in how we think. In fact, there is only one way to think in a liberals’ viewpoint, and that is their way, no exceptions. Liberals feel they are 100% right and conservatives are 100% wrong, period! Unfortunately, what liberals do not realize is that they are being indoctrinated. Their thought process is being hijacked and replaced with the thoughts of just a handful of people. It has gotten so bad, the government is trying to take over our thought process in many instances by taking over health care, loans, and even what can eat or drink. This process is not much different in the corporate world where leaders want “yes men”. They do not want to hear different opinions or have people ask questions, they just want people who conform.

The true value of diversity or multiculturalism is not how we look, but how we think. And liberals, the government, and corporations could care less about your opinions unless they agree with theirs. This is what is killing America. This is the dumbing down process of America and downward spiral to mediocrity. It is not racism (although it does exist at some small level), it is war on debate, opinion, and opposing viewpoints. How do you kill opinion and the thought process of others, you find everything you do not agree with offensive, annoying, or politically incorrect to silence the opposition.

To make matters worse, technology is also working in a negative way to restrict our thought process. First of all, it places the opinions of a few at our fingertips. Secondly, it replaces our thinking process for things like spelling, math, and a unique perspective. How many times has someone posted a unique quote on FB? Most of them are just passed along. Original thought is being replaced by the thought of few found on technology. And for those of us who believe in evolution would understand that this is not a good thing.

Do not take my word for it, just look at the facts. We can see it in our dwindling intellect at schools. We can see it in our lack of innovation. We can see it in a flailing economy. We can see it with our lack of problem solving skills. We can see it with the growing use of the words politically incorrect, annoying, blame, any excuse, and offensive.

Globally, extreme thought has offered some people hope that they can be unique, different, and part of a cause. Unfortunately, that cause is terrorism. Liberalism is also a view of extreme thought that is used to divide groups of people based on gender, ethnicity, and socio-economic status. Liberalism is barbaric in it can convince people that abortion is a good thing. Liberalism blames every problem in society on something that has nothing to do with the root cause – Whites, the wealthy, corporations, guns, and religion are a few examples of what they classify as evil. Liberalism lives in the past and refuses to perform any form of strategic thinking. For instance, slavery is continually brought up as a present day issue that is proof of racism. Liberalism thinks money (other peoples’ money) is the only variable for solutions to problems and it can be used solve every problem such as poverty and climate change.

I wonder if the last American will remember to turn off the lights if they are not reminded to do so.

Obama's First Amendment Doctrine

Over the years, we can get the jest of where Obama stands on free speech. Firstly, he is a proponent of free speech so long as others agree with him. Secondly, he is a proponent for lying and manipulating speech in an effort to make his administration look good. And finally, he condones the use of violence to protect his point of view.

John Kerry recently said the Charlie Hebdo terror attack was “rational”. Okay, so it is rational or justifiable for someone to kill twelve people over a picture or cartoon? And Obama’s non-reaction to the attack tells all. The US was the only major country not to condemn the attack and send representation to the funerals. Obama’s response was much different following the recent attacks in Paris highlighting a distinct difference in the two attacks, at least in Obama’s mind. This means the Obama free speech doctrine condones violence to protect his viewpoints.

Obama wanted to implement the fairness doctrine to quiet conservative speech on the radio. However, Obama was not open to implementing a similar policy on other mediums such as the internet or on TV that are dominated by liberal viewpoints.

The Obama administration has lied to the American public about the Benghazi attack and about how America is doing in the war against terror – especially ISIS.

After the passing of ObamaCare, Obama wanted to quiet opponents of the law and tried to implement a “snitching” policy where citizens could report any “bad mouthing” neighbors.

Obama targeted media persons and outlets that did not report on issues in a favorable matter towards the administration (Benghazi). James Rosen (FOX) and Sharyl Atkinson (CBS) were probed by the DOJ. Obama bad mouths FOX News every chance he gets. However, the DOJ never investigated the NY Time and its reporting of sensitive national security material over the killing of Bin Laden and the Stuxnet virus used to slow the Iranian nuclear program. Hence, national security leaks are permissible if and only if it makes the administration look favorable.

Obama targeted conservative groups trying to get tax exempt status through the IRS. Obama wanted to eliminate any effect these groups and their money would have on the 2012 election.

Obama declared the Supreme Court’s “Citizen’s United” decision as one of the worst in U.S. history. Obama does not feel “money” is free speech, but free speech is also freedom of expression. And people use money to express themselves every time they buy a product or service. Once again, Obama wants to narrow the meaning of free speech.

Obama’s non-tolerate free speech doctrine has reached the minority community and our college campuses. Dozens of times conservative speakers have been turned away from universities. A Halloween costume sparked outrage at another school. Black Lives Matter hate speech of killing police officers and their view that only black lives matter is a direct result of Obama prejudice. Obama speaks openly about perceived injustices on blacks only (especially by whites and the police). It is no surprise that violent crime is up in most major cities and against police officers nationwide. How self-centered are these university protesters? They believe their movement is above life. This was apparent when they complained the Paris terrorist attack took media attention away from their effort.

Free speech has been limited in the past, especially during times of war. For instance, in the Supreme Court ruling on Schenck v. United States, the justices stated leaflets containing draft resistance propaganda was a criminal offense. This was a horrible but unanimous decision. The Supreme Court found the basis for their decision from the newly passed Espionage Act of 1917 by Congress which was drafted once the U.S. entered WWI. And it is important to note that the United States was in a declared war at the time of the Schenck ruling. Today, the US is not in a declared war nor is there any type of legislation like the Espionage Act on the books. Remember, Obama moved unilaterally to go to war in Libya and now Syria, so the U.S. may be in a war, but it is not a declared war by Congress. In other words, there is absolutely no reason to mitigate free speech in the US at this time. However, Obama attempts to do it on a daily basis.

Does BFS / CFS Affect People Randomly?

Does BFS / CFS affect people randomly? The answer to this question is surprisingly yes and no, in my opinion. If we divide people suffering from chronic BFS / CFS into two groups: Those people who have BFS / CFS induced, triggered, and or exacerbated symptoms from stress and those people who have BFS / CFS induced, triggered, and or exacerbated by some other reason (Vaccine, Prescription Drugs, Spine or Neck Injury, History, Exposure to Chemicals, Illness, Excessive Exercise etc.) we can have two answers. We will call the first group “Stress Induced” and the second group “Other Induced” respectively. To answer the question, Stress Induced is not random and Other Induced is random.

Obviously people inflicted with chronic BFS / CFS symptoms from a neck injury, vaccine, prescription drug, exposure to chemicals, and an illness all seem to be random events that could happen to anyone. Hence, understanding the root causes of these types of induced BFS / CFS is not an easy undertaking. In fact, it may be outright impossible. One thing that is clear from my study on BFS / CFS, people inflicted with these types of BFS / CFS may see their symptoms increase over time and finding remedies to mitigate symptoms much more difficult.

The key group of people to evaluate and understand is the Stress Induced group, because their infliction with BFS / CFS is not random, hence there must be something linking these individuals – they must have something in common, a common thread. That common thread is personality type. I have done a brief survey of some of the survey participants in my study and found that over 90% would classify themselves as a Type A personality. And a majority of them would say they are extreme Type A personalities. And it should come as no surprise Type A personalities endure much more stress than Type B personalities.

Here is a breakdown of BFS / CFS trigger statistics taken on 710 survey respondents (560 after outliers are removed):

Vaccine: 8.8%

Chemical Exposure: 4.7%

Prescription Drugs: 20.0%

Spine or Neck Injury: 9.8%

Illness: 28.8%

Excessive Exercise: 25.4%

History: 21.1%

Other: 20.8% (Something other than what is listed in the survey triggered the symptoms)

Stress / Anxiety: 70.5%

Stress / Anxiety exacerbate symptoms: 89.6%

People that have Stress / Anxiety induced and exacerbated symptoms: 66.4%

A few things can be obtained from these statistics. First, Stress / Anxiety induced BFS / CFS is the most common type and secondly, these induced BFS / CFS percentages add to more than 100% (209.8%) because people can choose more than 1 thing that induced symptoms. Hence, on average, people select about 2 triggers. The results also note that 66.4% of the survey participants have stress induced BFS / CFS and also have their symptoms exacerbated by stress. We also may be able to conclude that people with more than one trigger including stress should be classified as random and is not predictable BFS / CFS type (ie. stress and illness). Only 17.4% (a little more than 1 in 6) have stress as their only trigger. I would theorize their BFS / CFS symptoms are predictable and tied directly to their personality type. Especially the 15.5% of the people who claim their symptoms were triggered solely by stress and stress exacerbates symptoms.

In conclusion, it is a reasonable hypothesis to theorize that there is a common thread between many BFS / CFS sufferers and that is personality type. About 1 in 6 people in my survey have stress as their only trigger and say stress exacerbates symptoms. Over 90% of the people surveyed say they suffer from Type A personality. And nearly 3 quarters of them classify their personality type as A+ or A squared or A cubed. Hence, it is reasonable to assume that many of these strong A type personalities may solely contribute to about 1 in 6 of the total cases of BFS / CFS. I personally, have a super strong type A personality, but I also believe there could be more triggers to my BFS / CFS. So, I may not belong in this category, but we may seek further help to see if we can control that Type A personality. For me, I have tried most everything and nothing seems to calm my brain activity. Unfortunately, one thing that may help are drugs that inebriate us and that is no good.

I came up with this hypothesis because I converse with dozens of people with BFS / CFS who reach out to me. I started to realize that most of these individuals sound a lot like me: successful, driven, responsible, accountable and so forth. These are all great traits that I wish more people had. However, our personalities can be killing us, making us less healthy because of all the stress we put on ourselves. In fact, if we are so stressed out it places our entire nervous system out of whack; that is serious. And it deserves some needed attention from the individuals and the medical community.

Is it Possible to Have More than One Peripheral Nerve Disorder?

Is it possible to have more than one peripheral nerve disorder? Three years ago I would have said it is highly unlikely – like a 1 in 10 million chance. However, today, I am convinced the prevalence of a peripheral nerve disorder is much higher than I originally anticipated. It would seem the likelihood of getting a peripheral nerve disorder would be much less than 1% (1 in 100). If 1% were the case, they garner more attention. But I am starting to believe that 1 in 100 is much closer than my original estimate of 1 in 10,000. If the odds are 1 in 100 then the odds to have more than one peripheral nerve disorder is 1 in 10,000, meaning up to 32,500 people in the United States can have two peripheral nerve disorders.

Several years back one neurologist opined that I have both Raynaud’s Syndrome and BFS. I thought the two were related and the symptoms were caused by just one peripheral nerve disorder. I told the neurologist that the chance of that happening was 1 in 10 million! I still believe I was right in that case, I only had one peripheral nerve disorder, but my math was wrong. I changed my mind about the probability of having a peripheral nerve disorder a few years back when I was diagnosed with a muscle contraction issue. It is very prevalent in my quad muscles. Essentially, my muscles do not contract fluidly, they contract like a sponge. It is estimated my quad muscles contract about 12 times slower than normal.

My theory is that this issue has basically eliminated any fast muscle twitch I had. I notice when I cycle I do not accelerate into a sprint very well. Once I get myself into a set pace, I am fine, but to change speeds it seems I am much slower than my competition. Other than this, I do not see any negative effects on my lifestyle from this anomaly. Hence, it is highly plausible that more people may have muscle contraction issues but may not have seen a doctor about it. Why? It does not affect their lives. Mine was only discovered because I was being evaluated for BFS/CFS type symptoms. I suspect, disorders such as rippling muscle disease are more prevalent than 1 in 10 million.

BFS is a muscle firing problem caused by an imbalance at the potassium channel at the nerve endings whereas contraction issues are caused by an imbalance at the calcium channel at the nerve endings. They are mutual exclusive and therefore, I do have more than one peripheral nerve disorder. This was verified by neurologist who said he has seen dozens of patients with BFS and none of them have contraction issues with their muscles as a symptom (I am unique in this respect). He tested me for lots of potential causes but like my BFS, the origins are unknown.

This really got me to believe the probability of getting a peripheral nerve disorder is much higher than I originally anticipated and I believe these odds are increasing over time. This is a hypothesis, and I cannot prove it, but the quantity of people in my BFS survey is a little bit of data to support this theory.

I posted a very brief video of me punching my quad muscles to show that they react much differently than a normal quad muscle – they are not fluid:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M59D3jQtMgQ

The below video (very brief) shows what appear to be fasciculations in my right quad. However, I have quad muscle flexed (okay do not laugh at my chicken legs) and generally you cannot see fasciculations when the muscle is flexed, just when it is relaxed. That is why I am not sure what you are seeing is fasciculations – I actually believe when my leg is in this state the muscles are confused as to whether contract or fire and it cause a fluttering motion (much more prominent in person than on film).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOM2XXcnZPs&feature=youtu.be

The Keys to Training

Everyone has their keys to training. I have not read any books on it, but having a neurological disorder I have found the following works training plan works for me:

Go – You may not feel like working out, but once you start you will get into it. If you do not get into a bad habit of missing days, then you will train your body and mind to want physical activity and it will feel deprived on days you miss a work out. I sleep worse on my days off – it is like my body did not get what it needed during the day.

Get a computer – Having a computer on my bike has helped me immensely. It tracks my workouts on GPS (gains and distance), speed, cadence, power and heart rate. These are great pieces of information that will enable you to put together a great workout plan. It helps you compete against yourself anyone else who may have done the rides or runs you do. For instance, data from a hill climb race I saw how much time I lost over the last 1.8 miles to other riders. I did great up to that point, so my hill climbing endurance is not where it needs to be. The downside is that a computer may take you away from enjoying rides and focusing on the beautiful scenery.

Work Out Hard – I lived on the philosophy of riding and training hard every day. I am not that gung ho anymore – I do some recovery rides and take some rest days. But most days, I really do push myself. Some think I over train, and that may be the case. However, I am willing to have shorter workouts if I work hard (1-3 hours). I do not think that is any different than people going on 3 to 5 hour rides at a medium rate of intensity.

Compete – The best way to learn and push yourself is to compete. The more I compete the more relaxed I became about doing it. This is key to me, because stressing out only makes my symptoms worse and it makes it impossible to sleep. I have to try to stay away from that vicious cycle.

Work Out Alone – I do not ride with others. It may become too easy to draft off others and not get as good a workout. There is plenty of time for drafting in races. On the other hand, riding with others does teach you how to handle riding in groups. Riding in groups can be intimidating, but competing will address that.

Cross train – Anything that works on your core is good. Unfortunately, for me, I cannot do many of the exercises I enjoyed in the past – so I stick with just cycling and some strength lifting and exercises.

Get a Coach – If that helps motivate you or gets you the tips you need to train correctly and improve.

Train at altitude – It has really helped to expand my VO2 levels. This is one way to naturally dope your body with red blood cells.

Get good gear – It is very easy to be stingy and get cheaper gear. Good gear is better. I have not spent anywhere near what others spend on the race circuit. They have multiple bikes for competing. I have one bike, but it is a good bike. I convert it between a time trial bike and road bike. I still do just fine without a specialized time trial bike, but the key is that I got a good bike.

Enjoy pain – The few times I have ridden with others I can hear them say “Oh crap here comes a hill” while at the same time I am saying “Oh boy here comes a hill”. I accelerate to the hill with joy while others put their heads down before they even hit the hill. Maybe it is easy for me to enjoy pain because I already live in pain – so what is the difference? I probably suffer more after similar workouts than others so I do not know if that is a good reason. However, I can tell the difference between good and bad pain and more good pain is a definitely a good thing especially if it masks bad pain.

Improve – I am not happy if I am not improving. If you are not improving change things up. Competing is a sure way to get better.

Enjoy life – I am grateful for every day I get. I had my scare that I was dying of some neurological disorder. Now I understand that I am lucky, I get to live with paresthesia in the hands and feet, irritable bowls, and muscle pain, fatigue, stiffness, and cramping. This may not sound like a bunch of joy, but there are so many people that have it worse than I do – so I truly believe I am really lucky.

Listen and Learn – A lot can be learned from other more experienced people in your sport.

Evolve – If one sport is not working out so well, do not be afraid to try other sports. I found cycling after other sports washed up for me. It sounds crazy that I can bike but at the same time I have a tough time walking without lots of pain. I have pain in cycling but trust me it is so much more tolerable than the pain I have from other activities.

Live in the Moment – I used to fear how long I could cycle – I figured it was just a matter of time before that became too painful or dangerous due to paresthesia symptoms in the hands. That day may come much sooner than later, but right now I am going to live in the moment and try to enjoy what I have.

Never give up! – It is easy to quit. I could have quit a long time ago. Instead, I quit some other activities and moved on to another section of my life.

Liberalism and Sexism, Lies, Hypocrisy, and Deceit

What is this country coming to? I cannot stand it and liberals are behind it. Just in the past week we have seen the following nonsense:

Harry Reid asking for Marco Rubio to resign from the senate for missing too many votes. I wonder why he didn’t feel that way about Obama, Clinton, or John Kerry when they ran for president?

Liberal moderators at conservative debates (John Harwood) lied and passed judgement in their questions to presidential hopefuls.

Hillary Clinton has already used the “sexism” card against her opponent – Bernie Sanders.

Hillary Clinton was caught in several lies during her Benghazi hearing. She knew it was a planned attack from the get go; she claimed Sid Blumenthal was not an advisor; and she said 90 to 95% of her emails were archived at the State Department. Her emails tell a much different story. Still the media and the Left said Clinton’s testimony was brilliant.

Obama placed ground troops in Syria to fight ISIS. Yet, he has still not asked for congressional approval to go to war. How does Obama get around this and avoid backlash from the left and media? He changes the definition of the word “combat”. The troops are there to fight ISIS, but are not combat troops, so in his view, he is not in a war. I bet if George W. Bush pulled this stunt there were would be a much different reaction.

In fact, Obama claimed the first US military casualty fighting ISIS in Iraq was not in combat when he engaged ISIS to free over 70 hostages.

MSNBC anchor, Melissa Harris-Perry, redefined the definition of “hard work” as only applying to slaves working in cotton fields. Hence, the word “hard work” should not be used in present day speech.

Actor Quintin Tarantino came off his pulpit to declare police are murdering black civilians just days after a black police officer was murdered in New York. The actor was pouring more fuel onto an already highly combustible situation between blacks and the police across the country.

During the Democratic debate, candidates took turns at offering “free” things to the American people. We all know nothing is free – someone has to pay for it. None of them offered their plans on how they will pay for all the free stuff.

Obama continues to deceive people by saying our national deficit is decreasing. That is true, but our debt is still increasing at a record pace. Obama is trying to trick people by talking about deficits and not debts hoping that they can confuse the two. This is another crafty ploy of the Left.

Obama offered this verdict on the Hillary Clinton email scandal before the FBI finished its investigation.

A partisan investigation by the DOJ cleared Lois Lerner and the IRS of any wrongdoing in the IRS targeting of conservative groups scandal. I wonder why the media did not mention this investigation was partisan, but they had a lot to say about how partisan they felt the Benghazi congressional committee was.

Muslims get 240,000 thousand dollar settlement for being fired after refusing to deliver beer because it was against their religious beliefs. On the other hand, Christians refusing to hand out gay marriage licenses or baking a wedding cake for a gay wedding are be being sent to jail and persecuted by the left and media.

So, if you are caught in a lie or want to deceive the American public, just change the meaning of a word and the liberal media will support it. Selective amnesia also helps to make a point: War is bad when Republicans do it, but not so bad when Democrats do it; The VA scandal was not so bad; and Republicans are held to a higher standard (Rubio) than Democrats. And when all else fails, use the race or gender card to win your argument.

Obama, not Bush, is the War Criminal (Part II)

The difference between Bush and Obama is that Bush made mistakes and Obama is afraid to make tough decisions and make mistakes. The other stark difference is the media. The media scrutinized every action the Bush administration made while it has given the Obama White House a pass on everything. While Obama and the media has the audacity to say the Bush administration committed civil liberty violations with enhanced interrogation techniques at Guantanamo. The Obama administration is much worse, they are the executioner with their drone program – so nobody gets a trial. In fact, innocent civilians are executed under the Obama program and passed off as collateral damage. Yet, the media has nothing to say about this. While Bush was deemed as evil for being forthcoming and transparent about his fight against terror, the Obama administration has changed intelligence and lied to American public. Obama has leaked national security information to the press on stories that paint their image in a good light – the bin Laden killing and the Stuxnet cyber program. But, on the other hand, the Obama administration unlawfully targets journalists who print stories showing how inept the administration was in handling Benghazi, Libya, Syria, and terrorism as a whole. Obama has moved unilaterally to go to war without Congressional approval in Libya (which is in chaos) and Syria (which is in chaos). Now there is a huge humanitarian problem in these countries and they are fleeing by the thousands to take refuge in Europe. Obama takes absolutely no responsibility for his actions or inactions to get boots on the ground.

The true war criminal is not Bush and Cheney, but Obama. He is the only one who has broken the law – 1. Leaking national security information; 2. Violating the freedom of the press; and 3. Changing (altering) intelligence. Yet Obama takes credit for killing bin Laden using intelligence garnered via enhanced interrogation techniques under Bush. Obama took credit for a stable Iraq even though he voted against the Bush surge, and once Iraq became unstable under his watch he blamed Bush for getting us there in the first place. The entire Benghazi terror attack was a crime and cover up by the administration. They lied about it not being a terror attack and then sat idle and did nothing as a few men fought bravely for hours before losing their lives. Obama never sent any help. And to this day nobody has been held responsible for this attack. And worse yet, nobody in the Obama administration has been held responsible for breaking any laws or lying to the American public. And the media can care less about finding the truth.

So let’s summarize, Bush left office with a stable Iraq but was wrong about the weapons of mass destruction based on global faulty intelligence. Remember, the Iraq war was a coalition of countries who went to war based on the same intelligence. On the other hand, Bush left Obama a very unstable situation in Afghanistan. But, to Bush’s credit there was not one single terrorist attack after 9-11 on our home soil.

The situation is much different with Obama. He has lied about intelligence to paint a rosy picture about his fight against ISIS. Iraq is in chaos and mostly under terrorist control. He moved to go to war unilaterally in Libya and Syria and now they are in chaos and under terrorist control. This has lead to the biggest refugee problem around the globe in decades. Obama has tried to cover up terrorist attacks against our homeland by refusing to admit to the fact they were terrorist attacks – Fort Hood, Boston, and Benghazi. Obama and his surge failed in Afghanistan and left the country unstable and in Taliban control. Obama has negotiated with terrorists and what’s worse he has negotiated with state sponsors of terror such as Iran. He wants to give Iran 150 billion dollars of taxpayer money to kill more Americans and Israelis. Obama leaks national security information that makes him look favorable and persecutes journalists who write stories that show his incompetence. Obama takes credit for things that go well on the terrorism front and blames someone else when they do not. Obama criticized the Bush administration for its treatment to enemy combatants, but under Bush they at least get a trial. Obama kills terrorists without a trial and does not care how many innocent civilians die in these drone attacks. And this is the biggest difference between Obama and Bush: Since Obama never captures terrorists, he can no longer collect valuable intelligence to fight them. Bush collected valuable intelligence including the information that led to the killing of bin Laden.

So who is the real war criminal?

The Truth About Benghazi

After Hillary Clinton’s eight plus hour testimony we can learn a few things. Sure, the only thing liberals are concerned about was Clinton’s demeanor and that she seems to be the central focus of the committee’s investigation. They can care less what come out of her mouth. Clinton may have acted well, but that was all it was – an act. There are several things we learned and in turn, more things that do not make any sense.

First, we learned Clinton knew the evening of the attack it was planned and more importantly it was carried out by al-Qaida. She said as much in emails to her family and the Egyptian head of state. She knew the attack did not grow out of a protest over a film, which incidentally happened in Tunisia and Egypt just days earlier. The next day, Clinton issued a very carefully worded statement and the focus was around one sentence which I will paraphrase: Some believe the attack grew out of protest over an anti-Muslim film. The word “some” is what is important here. Usually this type of statement is followed up by a statement such as: “but I believe” or “but others believe”. This did not happen. A week after the attack, it would be easy to conclude that the “some” Clinton was referring to was in fact the White House. They continuously pushed the talking points that the attack occurred because of a film. And this makes some sense, Obama had a motive to do so. The election was just 7 weeks away and Obama campaigned on the fact that al-Qaida was decimated following the killing of bin-Laden. Hence, an al-Qaida attack would prove this narrative false. It was clear Clinton knew the truth, but yet she hid behind the Obama administration narrative and did nothing. So the real question is why didn’t Clinton stand up to the Obama administration and tell the truth? The answer to that is simple, even though she was only going to be the Secretary of State until the end of the year, she had bigger aspirations and was running for President. Besides, the State Department was warned dozens of times by Ambassador Stevens of the deteriorating situation in Libya and that would look bad on her watch. So Clinton came out publicly preaching the film theory to the public. We know this was a lie and cover up.

Secondly, we learned that the State Department decided that it was not going to rebuild the Libya embassy immediately following the attack. On the surface, this makes sense, it would be too dangerous to rebuild an embassy. But think about this one. Just days and weeks earlier the Tunisia and Egyptian embassies were attacked, but those embassies remain. The difference is that the Tunisia and Egyptian attacks developed over protests of that film. So if Clinton really believed the Libya attack was over the film, it is very possible she would have rebuild the embassy. After all, her emails showed how proud she and the Obama administration were over the fall of Qaddafi. So it is a hasty decision to remove the embassy and concede Libya is more unstable after the fall of Qaddafi than before. So it also begs to reason, was Clinton aware of any Ambassador Stevens requests for more security?

Thirdly, maybe Clinton was not aware of the constant requests for more security and the devolving situation in the proximity of the Benghazi embassy. But we know a few things. Stevens was smart and he was experienced – so he knew the squeaky wheel usually gets what it needs. That will explain why he made several hundred requests for more security. It is hard to believe that Stevens would not have access to Clinton’s personal email, but let’s say it is true. Clinton said Stevens had other ways to contact her. So that means he had her personal phone number? This is a logical assumption. So, it would be hard to believe that Stevens did not call Clinton personally when dozens of requests for more security were ignored. As I stated, Stevens was experienced and knew how to play the game. It only begs to reason he followed this algorithm – you keep moving up the leadership ladder until you get what you need. Also, after close calls at the Tunisia and Egypt embassies one would think that Stevens request for more security would be granted since they held more credence. And one would think that help would be moved into close proximity to the Mediterranean region after all the instability. So it makes little sense that the Libya security situation was not on the Secretary State’s radar.

Fourth, not one person was fired or reprimanded over the attack. Obviously someone dropped the ball over security, right? By some accounts there were 600 requests for more security and the one that reached Clinton – she thought was a joke. There were warning signs in Tunisia and Egypt, but still no extra security. This could only mean one thing – there was a cover up happening and firings and reprimands would only attract attention to the issue.

Fifth, and most puzzling, why didn’t the administration or State Department send help? It does not matter if they would get there in time. They could control the crime scene; prevent looting; recover bodies; help the wounded; start tracking the terrorists; and dozens of other things. It makes no sense to not send any help, you have nothing to lose and everything to gain. This too sounds like a move to cover up the actual events that transpired that evening. How? Well, it let the terrorist get away, it let terrorists loot the embassy of any evidence, and it let the crime scene be cross contaminated. Most importantly, if help got there on time, it would cover up the fact the attack was planned. The military never leaves anyone behind. Several men died going after deserter Private Bergdahl. If we have dangerous missions to save a deserter then why not go and try to protect American sovereignty. This to me is the most conspicuous thing that about the whole Benghazi cover up.

Sixth, Clinton claimed 90 to 95% of her emails are archived on the State Department site. None of this has been corroborated by the State Department which will be taken up by the FBI and her email server.

Can Clinton be trusted to be truthful, transparent, responsible, and to make good decisions as our commander in chief? Or will she be the same lying, deceitful, and irresponsible leader who will take credit for other’s successes and blame others for her failures? Sound familiar, it should, it is four more years of Obama. For instance, both Obama and Clinton took credit for Qadaffi’s fall in Libya, but once the security situation worsened in Libya, they pointed their fingers at others. That is their pitiful leadership abilities.

Obama, Not Bush, is the War Criminal (Part I)

Believe it or not, there are actually many similarities between Bush and Obama and the fight on terror. First, Obama tried a troop surge strategy in Afghanistan, similar to what Bush used in Iraq to win that war. Obama’s effort failed only because he did not have the backbone to give the strategy a chance to win. Secondly, Obama has expanded Bush’s NSA metadata collection and thirdly, Obama expanded the Bush drone strategy.

The two obviously had some vastly different strategies to fight terror and it mostly evolved around civil liberties and intelligence gathering. Obama and democrats were obviously outraged by the enhanced interrogation techniques used by the Bush administration at Guantanamo Bay. Hence, Obama has been on a mission to close Guantanamo Bay. He has negotiated with terrorists groups to release dozens of dangerous prisoners from Guantanamo. In one instance, he traded five terrorist leaders for an American military deserter – a terrible trade. Obama has increased drone attacks for one simple reason – he wants to kill terrorists and not capture them. He does not want any more enemy combatants in Guantanamo. Unfortunately, this strategy means less intelligence gathering to fight terrorism. Obama, has even given enemy combatants more rights – they are tried in civilian courts and not military tribunals. He has essentially given a terrorist more rights than a military person accused of committing a crime.

Terrorism and chaos in the Middle East has expanded under Obama. He withdrew troops too soon from Iraq, and he has been unwilling to fight expanding terrorist organizations such as ISIS. He called ISIS the “JV Team” and said al-Qaida was “dead” and “on the run” after the killing of Osama bin-Laden. Obama has since given a rosy outlook on the strength and condition of ISIS on several occasions. Well, it seems that the administration not only has less intelligence on terrorism, it also has been changing military intelligence reports to detail they are doing a better job fighting terrorism, specifically ISIS, than what is a reality.

The Bush administration was skewered by Democrats and the media when they went to war with Iraq and did not find any weapons of mass destruction. And let’s not forget that Democrats voted to go to war with Iraq. The problem was there was faulty intelligence. Some say the Bush administration doctored the intelligence. If that is true, then they would have planted some weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. There is a difference between the entire country (and globe for that matter) acting on faulty intelligence and the country being lied to by altered intelligence. Obama is committing a crime and deceiving the American public, whereas Bush was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Bush was acting to try to keep America safe whereas Obama just wants to finish his term to pass the problem onto the next President. Bush was truly acting in a responsible fashion whereas Obama is our biggest national security risk. In fact, Obama is acting no different than terrorist who deceive and try to manipulate personal perception through propaganda.

Who is Politicizing Benghazi?

Who is actually politicizing Benghazi? The media and Democrats are saying Republicans are politicizing the Benghazi attack by focusing their investigation on Hillary Clinton. They make it sound as if it is a witch hunt and there is no need to investigate the attack on the U.S. embassy that killed 4 Americans including the Ambassador. The truth of matter is that both the media and Democrats are also politicizing the Benghazi issue by only telling half-truths. It is probably true that Republicans want to destroy Hillary Clinton and that is there focus during this election season. Democrats would do the same to any Republican front runner under investigation for ties to some cover up. Kevin McCarthy’s gaffe is probably partially true, but truth be told, what is really hurting Hillary’s poll numbers is her email scandal and not so much Benghazi. When Clinton left the State Department her favorable ratings were high.

To add fuel to the media and Democrat storyline, a former staffer, Bradley Podliska, working on the Benghazi committee resigned claiming the focus is to destroy Hillary Clinton. Democrats of course moved to kill the committee but that failed.

I was in the car driving this past weekend and heard several different accounts of this news story by NPR, CBS, and NBC radio. They made it sound as if the sole purpose of the committee is to destroy Hillary Clinton and that there was no need for any investigation. Wow, really? The American public has yet to be told the true story of what happened on that day and there are dozens of important questions that need to be answered. What the media and Democrats do not tell you is that Podliska believes the families of those killed in the attack deserve answers, but he believes the focus should not just be on Clinton, but expanded to include other departments. Podliska never said the committee was on witch hunt and believes the committee is necessary. It just needs a wider focus to answer some questions such as:

Why where talking points changed to lie to the American public to cover up that Benghazi was a terrorist attack? Who changed the talking points and why? Why did Democrats politicize this event, cover up the truth, and blame a man (Nakaula) who made a film called “the Innocence of Muslims”? Why weren’t reinforcements sent to help those under attack at the embassy? Who gave the stand down order, which was essentially a death sentence for those under attack? Where was Obama when all this went down? Why didn’t the state department improve security as the situation deteriorated over time? Why is the Hillary response to the attack – “What does it matter”?

Actually, if the Democrats did not politicize the Benghazi attack and were truthful and transparent from the beginning then we would not be in the situation we are in today. If the media covered the story and really tried to get answers then we would not be in the situation we are in today. In other words, if the Democrats and media had not tried to cover up the story and protect Hillary Clinton, then there would be no need for a committee trying to find out the truth. Democrats and the media only have themselves to blame that Republicans are politicizing Benghazi and focusing on their darling Hillary Clinton. If Clinton did not feel she is the next President waiting then there would not be a need for the committee to focus on Clinton. The bottom line is that everyone is responsible for politicizing Benghazi – Clinton, Democrats, the Media, and now Republicans.

Pope Preaches Morality, Not Poltics

The Pope was not being political when he was in the U.S. In fact, he was preaching the morals that most religions practice and preach around the globe. Liberals have mistaken many of Pope Francis’s viewpoints and therefore believe he is a Democrat and follows liberal political philosophies. This is not true, just as it is not true that more liberals will convert to Catholism based on the Pope’s beliefs.

The Pope preaches the sanctity of life and is anti-abortion. This is certainly not a view held by many feminists, liberals, or Democrats alike.

The Pope defended marriage between a man and women. Sure, Pope Francis said “if someone is gay and searches for the lord, and has good will, who am I to judge”. But when the Pope was in the U.S. he secretly met with Kim Davis, the disgruntled county clerk in Kentucky, defending her actions of not handing out marriage licenses to gays. Once again, this is hardly a liberal point of view based on their outrage over Davis’s actions.

Pope Francis talked about caring for the less fortunate. All religions talk about caring for the poor or others who struggle. Liberals feel they have a monopoly on this issue – They care for the poor and Republicans and conservatives do not. They believe the Pope is agreeing with their socialistic plans of spreading the wealth from the rich to the poor. They believe the Pope is agreeing with their views that owning a home is a right and healthcare and education should be free for all. However, the Pope never endorsed any such plans or theocracy. Pope Francis may not have that much faith in capitalism from his upbringing in Argentina, but if he saw how it generates jobs then he would become a believer. If he saw how lower taxes and strong economic growth create jobs and lift people from poverty, he would not argue with that result. In other words, the Pope would not disagree with any approach that solved the poverty issue on this planet – conservative or liberal.

Democrats think that Pope Francis sides with them on immigration. Once again, this is not entirely true. If immigrants coming to the U.S. are poor and needy and our economy and poverty programs are unable to pull them out of poverty then what is the point. The Pope may want America to take in more immigrants and grant amnesty to those who are here illegally, but the Pope already understands that the U.S. is already the most generous nation on the planet and is doing more than most countries around the globe.

Pope Francis talked about caring for our environment and leaving the world a better a place than when we entered. Once again, all religions preach this moral code. This does not mean climate change is manmade or is even occurring. It means curbing pollution and doing what is right. The Pope understands among the most needy people in the world, climate change is their least popular issue. After all, if you want to care for the needy it really does not make sense to pour billions of dollars into climate change philosophies.

The Pope understands that the Catholic religion, if it were company, would be the most profitable company on the planet. Yet, with all those profits, the Catholic religion can only do so much to thwart poverty, ease the flow of immigration and refugees, protect the environment for later generations, and stop abortions. You can have lots of manpower and money and still merely make a small dent in these issues. In fact, the Church and Pope realize it is important to prioritize what issues are most important. And that is not easy to do.

Pope Francis is not a liberal or conservative, but merely a person preaching moral behavior that is no different than the philosophy of any other religion.

What is the U.S.'s Biggest Threat to National Security?

What is the U.S.’s biggest threat to National Security? Well, it isn’t terrorism or Iran. It‘s the man who won’t stop them – Obama and his administration.

1. ISIS is growing and expanding its powers around the world yet, Obama has done very little to stop it.

2. The Obama Iran treaty will essentially give them a nuclear bomb and enough money to sponsor thousands of more acts of terrorism around the globe.

3. Obama clearly favors Islam States over Israel. And it should not be about religion, it should be about Democracy over terrorist dictatorship states.

4. The Middle East is more chaotic than ever before.

5. As violent crime and murders have reached their highest level in decades in the U.S., Obama continues to fuel the violence through his black prejudice. Obama and the Black Lives Matter movement blame Whites and the police for the killing of black residents. Remember, Obama only speaks out (and usually wrongly without facts) against Whites or police injustices including the killing Black citizens (Louis Gates, Travon Martin, Michael Brown, Eric Gardner, the Charleston massacre, and so forth and so on). Obama never says it is an injustice when Blacks kill Blacks, Illegal aliens kill anyone, Blacks kill Whites, Terrorists kill Americans (he refuses to call them terrorists), or Blacks kill police. Obama prejudice is fueling the crime spike in America.

6. Obama’s Secretary of State (Hillary Clinton) committed a felony and used a private email server without proper encryption to transmit national security issues.

7. Obama told us Al-Qaida was dead and we learned that was not true. They are alive and well.

8. Obama has recognized terrorist states and states that fail to heed to basic civil liberties of its citizens – Iran and Cuba.

9. The Obama DOJ comes down hard on States which have tougher immigration laws than federal statutes, but it fails to enforce federal laws against lenient sanctuary cities and states.

10. The Obama administration has done nothing to secure the U.S. – Mexican border. In fact, Obama immigration executive actions have led to a drove of immigrants crossing the border – mostly children.

11. Russia has been militarily aggressive in reclaiming some cold war satellite states including the Ukraine and Georgia. Obama has done nothing.

12. Obama negotiates with terrorists and state sponsors of terror. For instance, he negotiated for the release of deserter Beau Bergdahl for 5 Taliban terrorists in Guantanamo Bay. It was already mentioned he negotiates with countries that sponsor terrorism and genocide - Cuba and Iran.

13. Obama has already stated the biggest threat to national security is climate change. This is a naïve leader with his priorities in the wrong area.

14. Obama has already given terrorists the same rights as American citizens – the right to a trial in our justice system. Remember, military members accused of committing a crime are not afforded these rights. Yes, terrorists have more rights than our military personnel.

15. Obama’s strategy to kill insurgents via drone attacks and not to capture them has led to a huge hole in intelligence. Obama is more concerned about closing Guantanamo then capturing terrorists and using enhance interrogation techniques to garner information.

GOP 2nd Debate: Fiorina Wins, Trump Loses

Here is how the candidates in 2nd GOP debate finished:

1. Fiorina – She stood up to Trump and won every battle and showed more substance than any other candidate especially on foreign affairs and dealing with Russia and Putin - which is surprising because she is an outsider.

2. Rubio – He was steady and was second in terms of substance. He did not get into any fights, but he corrected Trump.

3. Christie – He can tangle with anyone and his demeanor was fantastic. He did not overreact which many thought he would. And he tried to put a stop to the debate format of trying to pick fights between candidates – or at least arguing with substance.

4. Huckabee – Many thought he had a weak night, I did not. The governor rightly pointed out that touting successes is not what a debate should be about. It should be about solutions to help Americans. He is smooth and the most articulate person the stage.

5. Bush – He was in many fights with Trump and won most of them. He defended his brother successfully and went after Trump for trying to legalize gamming in Florida under his watch.

6. Paul – Stuck to his Libertarian views and I thought he called out the hypocrisy of other candidates when it comes to the 10th Amendment and the enforcement of marijuana laws.

7. Walker – Talked the least, but needed to talk more. Had a good moment when he smashed Trump saying “we do not need an apprentice in the White House”. He is my favorite candidate, but he has struggled trying to gain traction and formulating plans. He should focus on how to take down big labor in the U.S. – that is his strength. 8. Kaisich – Probably the best rounded candidate experience wise – Congressman, Governor, and private sector experience. He touted his successes continually. He lost the debate on Iran and the current Obama agreement.

9. Carson – Not a terrible night, but his substance is lacking. He schooled Trump on vaccination studies. He makes some great points, but he does not have enough substance to back them up. 10. Cruz – He seems so fake to me and everything he did seems so scripted, including sucking up to Trump about immigration. He lost his only real fight with Bush about Supreme Court nominees – namely Chief Justice Roberts. Cruz slams Roberts, but Bush reminded him he supported Roberts nomination.

11. Trump – He lost about every battle he had and as the night wore on and the substance of the debate heated up, Trump was nowhere to be found. He was stale and he continues to put forth the same dog and pony show with no additional substance. It is obvious he does not study up on issues like the others – especially outsiders like Carson and Fiorina.

What Really Matters to Liberals

Black lives matter, if and only if, they are killed by a white person, especially a white police officer. Other than that all other lives do not matter: black on black crime, police officers shot in the line of duty, citizens attacked by illegal immigrants, aborted babies, and so forth simply do not matter.

Planned Parenthood matters even if they have broken the law using federal funding for campaign contributions or selling aborted fetuses without consent.

The first amendment and free speech matter only if you agree with their opinions.

Political correctness and being offended easily matters to avoid debate over issues.

The murder of Americans by guns only matters for political reasons to push gun control.

Using the race card matters to avoid debate and to divide and polarize Americans over ethnicities for political purposes.

The war on women debate matters to divide and polarize Americans over gender for political gains.

Changing the meaning or adding new definitions to words matter to win debates.

Negotiating with terrorists and state sponsors of terrorism matters.

Protesting violently matters to make a point and garner attention.

Climate change matters because fear mongering is a useful tool to polarize and divide the public for political purposes.

Green energy matters because it proves propaganda and brainwashing are useful tools for political gains.

Blaming others and taking credit for others success matters because it is a useful tool to win debates.

Islam and atheist matter but other religions do not matter.

Most lives may not matter but their taxes matter.

Welfare matters even though it has done nothing to correct poverty.

Hypocrisy matters if they can get their neighbors for believe and fight for their causes.

Individual accountability and responsibility do not matter so long as they defend their causes.

Narcissism and not admitting to mistakes matters.

Getting annoyed and being a problem creator and not a problem solver matter – after all, having the know how to negotiate and solve problems would bring unity.

Understanding only one side of problem or issue matter.

Pretending to understand math and science does matter to mask incompetence.

Hating corporations and loving the government matter.

Expecting the government to intervene in our way of life matters even at the cost of our freedoms.

Bullying matters so long as it not done to them.

Race, gender, sexual orientation, and socio economic status matter to put labels on citizens to divide and conquer for political gains.

Perceived fairness matter equality does not matter.

Politicizing events matters so long as it defends their goals and objectives.

Lying at all costs matters to defend the cause.

ObamaCare and Planned Parenthood

ObamaCare and Planned Parenthood are mutually exclusive. As more people enroll in ObamaCare it should render Planned Parenthood more and more obsolete. After all, once people have medical insurance, there is no reason to be using free clinics or services provided by Planned Parenthood, right? You would think that to be the case. After all, who in their right mind would go to a free clinic when they could possibly go to a leading medical center for help?

However, there just does not seem to be many truths out there when it comes to ObamaCare and Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood claims that each year they have more and more usage of their facilities throughout the U.S. and continue to expand at the expense of taxpayer funding. On the other hand, the Obama administration claims to have signed up over 10 million people for ObamaCare insurance the past two years. If 10 million people were taken of the uninsured list, then why is Planned Parenthood growing?

There are probably many answers to this question. First, ObamaCare is not signing up many of the uninsured that the welfare program had intended. Instead, ObamaCare is more than likely signing up mostly people who already had insurance but lost it due to ObamaCare logistics or maybe a few that found a less expensive plan in ObamaCare exchanges. Secondly, it is highly feasible that ObamaCare numbers are being inflated.

One argument to defend ObamaCare would be the closure of free clinics and Planned Parenthood saving the taxpayers some money. But that is not happening only illustrating that ObamaCare is a failure. But we know the left would fight to keep these facilities open even if ObamaCare was succeeding on any level.

It is baffling how an operation such as Planned Parenthood remains open. Its founder, Margaret Sanger, was a racist who wanted to control the African American population through abortion. This barbaric objective remains alive to this day since a vast majority of their clients are black minorities. Yet, Sanger is revered as a hero by the Left and the Smithsonian contains a bust of her on display. The Left may as well see the KKK and its members as heroes! Oh wait, they do, Senator Robert Byrd was treated as a hero for 50 years as a West Virginia Senator. Now we have learned that Planned Parenthood has monetary incentives to push couples or women to have an abortion since they are profiting off the sale of fetus organs. And of course, a large portion of Planned Parenthood taxpayer funding is used to contribute to Democratic political campaigns. Why would any Democrat want to do away with an organization that greases your wallets? And finally, who is going to look after the medical wellbeing of illegal aliens if free clinics or low cost medical operations such as Planned Parenthood closed?

ObamaCare and Planned Parenthood should be mutually exclusive entities. However, the Left will never let that happen. Hence, the Left’s narrative for the War on Women will never go away and they will defend Planned Parenthood forever. I like to refer to them as Aborted Parenthood. After all, there is no Parenthood if there are no babies, right?

2016 Election is about Instability

Where there is instability, there is worry, fear, and anxiety. Today, our country and the globe is filled with instability. The earth is actually a very stable planet, without such stability life could not exist. For instance, without the moon’s gravitational force the earth’s rotation would be erratic. This would cause such widespread variances in our global climate it would be impossible to grow food crops. The moon is the perfect size to yield the optimum gravitational force to control the Earth’s rotation around its axis. This, in turn, leads to our stable climate with four predictable seasons. The Left would lead you to believe climate change is the biggest global instability we face; that is not true. In fact, our climate and weather patterns are much more stable and predictable then other things happening in our country and around the globe:

1. The FED claims our economy is stable so much so they are considering an interest hike. However, global market instability in China and Europe (Greece) has made our markets as volatile as ever.

2. There are more people out of the labor force in over 40 years (masking the true unemployment rate), wages continue to be low, and more people working part time jobs has questioned the stability of millions of families in our country. Job and economic growth have been weak in the Obama years. Much of this can be explained by the destructive nature of ObamaCare and government regulations.

3. The threat of terrorism around the globe, especially in the Middle East, has always been high. Now, the threat at home is bigger than it’s been before. ISIS and other radical groups continue wage jihad on innocent civilians around the globe and at home. Terrorist organizations have put together armies of people brainwashed with propaganda, recruited through social media, and have nothing to lose and therefore are willing to die for their cause. This is new and larger breed of terrorism threatening stability in the West.

4. The biggest State sponsor of terrorism, Iran, was just given a sweetheart deal from Obama that will enable them to pursue the nuclear bomb, eliminate economic sanctions, and provide them billions of dollars in charity to continue to fund terrorism. In fact, one could argue there is more global unrest today since World War II: More wars, terrorism, economic turmoil, and poverty.

Unfortunately, many of the candidates in the 2016 election bring with them more question marks than answers. Hence, they are unknown quantities and therefore bring more instability. And people are drawn more to these instable candidates then ones with proven track records. Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders are prime examples of this. Do we really want a billionaire egomaniac running our country? Trump may be the most selfish and instable character ever to run for President. Trump is worse than a flip flopper. Trump is a narcissist and every decision he has made in his lifetime is what is best for him and not for his company and employees. Sanders is an outspoken Socialist. Do we really want the instability of all the changes a socialist President would bring to this country? It could be orders of magnitude worse than Obama. And it is the weak Obama Presidency that is to blame for getting us into this instable environment.

Joe Biden is a buffoon, unable to put two sentences together without offending someone or making some false claims. Hillary Clinton is more than likely a felon who put our national security at risk to cover up her inept leadership on issues such as Benghazi. And they are two likely candidates to win the Democratic nomination.

It is sad, but there is an excellent chance the next President will bring more instability than even Obama. I understand that Americans are fed up with Washington politicians, but that does not mean they should forget their sense of reason and select a candidate that is naïve, a criminal, moron, or worse yet a socialist.

Is Obama Prejudice?

Is Obama Prejudice? I believe so and this is why he does not transcend race, religion, or any gender gaps. It is why the country is more divided on these issues then it has been in decades.

If I where President and only inquired about civil liberty injustices in cases where Whites were murdered by Blacks or Hispanics – I would be viewed as a bigot. So why is the opposite not true? In fact, in most cases that Obama has opined and interfered with the DOJ the White person was vindicated of all charges. Obama only cares about White on Black crime. He does not even care about Black on Black crime. Everything from the Cambridge incident to Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, and the Charleston massacre. Obama invoked the N word when talking about the Charleston massacre while relatives to the victims talked of forgiveness. To think prejudice and bigotry are one-sided issues is completely ignorant. Everyone regardless of ethnicity and gender is capable of prejudice.

If I where President and went after Sanctuary states and cities on immigration policy and failed to make states and cities with stringent immigration laws follow federal laws – I would be viewed as a bigot. So why isn’t the opposite true? Obama only enforces the parts of federal law on immigration he likes – and this is wrong.

If I where President and refused to call out Jewish or Christianity acts of terror I would be viewed as biased. So why aren’t Obama’s actions of calling out Jewish and Christian flaws, but failing to recognize the terror imposed by millions of Muslims around the world acceptable? He is merely covering up and justifying the horrific acts of terrorism committed each day by these barbaric peoples. This does not say ALL Muslims are extremists and or terrorists, it just calls out the small fraction of people. After all, without the help of law abiding Muslims condoning and joining the fight to stop extreme Islam, the fight will be difficult.

If I where President and declared a war on White Men, I would be viewed a bigot. So why then is it acceptable to declare a war on women or anything else Obama deems as an injustice. But who is really discriminated against in the U.S.? White men with better grades and credentials can lose a job opportunity or a spot in a college to a far less qualified person. Is this equality or fairness? Of course not, but it is in the liberal mind.

Instead of treating everyone in the country equally regardless of race, religion, or gender, liberal fairness treats everyone in the country differently. It is prejudicial treatment and actions, yet no one calls Obama out for being the bigot he is.

My Life may not Matter, but my Taxes do?

The new movement “Black Lives Matter” does not seem to like it when others opine that “All Lives Matter”. Let’s face it; if I created a group that said “Old White Male Lives Matter”, I would be pegged as a racist. Thus, according to the Black Lives Matter movement, my life does not matter. Truth be told, when I am gone very few people in the grand scale of things will care. I am an ordinary person who did not achieve extraordinary feats to make me famous.

All that being said, we live in a society that rewards bad behavior while being a stand out citizen is not even noticed. I have been an exemplary citizen – never taking a penny from the federal government and paying more than my fair share in taxes and charitable contributions. I am accountable for my actions. I do not blame others for my mistakes and shortcomings. I am responsible and charitable. But none of this means a thing to our government or racists organizations such as “Black Lives Matter”.

If my life does not matter, I wonder if the government would let me stop paying my taxes? Absolutely not (So my life does matter, but only when it comes to the State garnering their fair share of my wages)! I wonder if the government would let me choose where my tax dollars go because I do not want to give a cent in welfare assistance to folks living in Ferguson MO, Baltimore MD, or anyone who has ties to “Black Lives Matter”? No, the government would not give me that option. Why then do I have to turn on the news to find groups of racists like “Black Lives Matter” spew their hate towards others and talk as if it is okay for someone to murder me or a another person because they White. These groups have a very narrow focus and are very short sighted because they do not understand that a plurality of those Black Lives that matter, live off the hard earned dollars of hard working people. And without these other groups of people, they too would not exist. That is the cold hard truth about the situation.

The government may revoke the non-profit status away from any organization that does not embrace the Supreme Court’s gay marriage ruling. They are infringing on their first amendment rights because they view them as bigots breaking the law of the land. Well, what is the difference between bigoted organizations such as Black Lives Matter or citizens breaking the law in Ferguson and Baltimore by destroying property, assaulting police officers, and looting stores? Why aren’t they being penalized for their actions?

I am willing to help anyone who is willing to help themselves and be stand out citizens. I am sorry, but I did not see that in Ferguson, Baltimore, or the behavior of the Black Lives Matter organization. These people should watch the actions and listen to true black role models. No, I am not talking about race baiting leaders such as Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, or Barack Obama. No, these people would learn a thing or two by listening to the victim’s families in the Charleston massacre. I know I learned a lot by listening to these people. I learned I have a lot more room for improvement as a human being than I previously thought. We are all flawed, but those families in Charleston are the least flawed human beings I have ever had the honor of listening to. I wish I could funnel my tax dollars to help these families directly. Although, they probably would not accept it.

Debate Proves Trump IS a Political Insider

I have written extensively about that there is little difference between most big corporate managers and politicians. Both corporate managers and politicians would do anything to better their career, power, and retirement accounts at the expense of the company and its employees and the American citizen respectively. Trump specifically points out several cases in the first Fox News debate how this is true.

First, Trump explains how the vicious cycle of money works in politics. He claims he donates money to every politician and expects favors at a later date – a kind of quid pro quo process of lobbying that is destroying this country. Trump may not live in DC, but he has millions of dollars in the pockets of DC politicians. This is no different than the sleazy politics of the Obama administration. Take the Solyndra or other green company scandals for instance. The politicians of these companies provided cash to the Obama administration in return for a larger sum of tax payer money in the Stimulus. The result: they went belly up costing the taxpayers billions while both parties lined their pockets, retirement accounts, and campaign accounts with millions of dollars. This is the vicious cycle of money through lobbying that is destroying this country, and Trump admittedly partakes.

Secondly, Trump went on to brag about how he uses loopholes in laws or tax codes to his advantage. When questioned about going into bankruptcy proceedings four times Trump explained how he took advantage of laws to better his company at the expense of taxpayers. Trump basically admitted he will stoop to any level to better himself and his company. As president can Trump be trusted to be a hypocrite and reform laws he has openly taken advantage of? I seriously doubt it!

Trump is no different than any other politician: an egomaniac narcissist willing to step on whomever gets in their way. Trump is a DC insider because he is connected at the hip with dirty politicians.

Forget that Trump was schooled during the primary. For instance, Rubio explained how it is not Mexicans coming across the U.S. border in droves, but Latin Americans. Forget the fact that Trump was shown as a non-Presidential joke every time he opened his mouth. I laugh at Trump the same way I laugh at Biden every time he opens his mouth – they both continually misspeak. Forget all these issues with Trump, and remember he is a political insider.

I suggest if you want to vote for political outsider consider Ben Carson or Carly Fiorina. Both seem much more polished and not the polarizing figure that Trump is. Trump will do more to divide the country than to bring us together to solve problems. If you are angry at the way things are going in this country; that does not mean you have to vote for a nut case in protest. There are plenty of good candidates that have a record of attacking the system head on. For example, Scott Walker, took on Unions in Wisconsin and won. Trump is a farce and may be just as sleazy as Obama and his Chicago style politics.

Cycling and BFS/CFS

Seven years into my diagnosis of BFS/CFS my exercise intolerance continues to get worse. CFS/BFS are benign disorders because they will not kill you, but that is not entirely true. If a person can no longer exercise, they will waste away and die younger. And there is nothing benign about worsening symptoms that are debilitating. Many sports I performed a few years ago are becoming much more difficult to perform – hiking, rock climbing, wrestling (some things are considered too dangerous such as rock climbing with paresthesia symptoms in the hands) and so forth. Even walking is becoming exceedingly difficult – lots of pain and discomfort and longer recovery times.

Cycling is the one sport I am able to do with less pain and in fact I am able to do at a fairly high level. I am astonished as to what I have accomplished in the sport this year. Right now, cycling is saving my life. I do not know what I would do without it – I believe I would be becoming a burden on my family. I am not too sure how long I can keep it up, but right now I am living in the moment and trying not to worry about it. I have plenty of pain when I cycle but it is far more tolerable.

This past week I competed in the National Senior Games in Minneapolis Minnesota. I placed 10th and 14th in the two road races, but 3rd and 7th in the 10K time trial and 5 K time trial respectively. This exceeded my wildest expectations. My times have improved by nearly 2.5 minutes in the 10K time trial in just over the past year. Yes, I invested in better equipment, but I am still the only person competing in time trial events with a road bike and not a specialized time trial bike.

Each day is difficult, I wake up stiff and in a lot of pain. I force myself to cycle and usually feel better for doing it. My rankings in USA cycling continue to rise steadily. At the Colorado state time trial championships I won Category 5 (although not officially recognized) and broke 1 hour for the 25 mile time trial. That is a huge barrier, breaking 25 mph for one hour! On shorter events I am now breaking 26 mph. Even my training runs are a lot faster. I have taken 10 minutes off my time to do the 4000 feet climb and 18 miles to the summit of Cottonwood Pass. I am on a roll and rank 18th in the country for Category 5 Time Trials.

BFS and CFS changes lives, but it is not over. We have to work that much harder to succeed. I remind myself everyday how lucky I am because people have it so much worse than I do. This helps me to stop feeling sorry for myself and to push forward.

My USA cycling results can be found at (This does not include my results at the Arizona, Colorado, and National senior games):

http://www.coloradocycling.org/results/individual?usac=457284

The Wacky Left

Sure, the right has its side show in Donald Trump (and yes, it is even scarier that he leads in many polls). But the Left is out of control and no one seems to care. Democratic, presidential candidate Martin O’Malley has apologized for saying “all lives matter” and then the next day claimed climate change led to rise of ISIS. So basically, all lives do not matter (especially White ones) and he invented a new fearmongering science overnight.

Meanwhile, Obama has refused to reach out to any of the military families who lost loved ones in the Chattanooga terrorist attack (and he has refused to call it a terrorist attack). He still has not recognized the murder of a young women by an illegal alien in a sanctuary city (San Francisco – which violates federal immigration law that Obama refuses to enforce) – which supports O’Malley comments that White lives do not matter (we know this because Obama only opines about White on Black crime – Charleston massacre, Trayvon Martin, Henry Louis Gates, Michael Brown, Freddie Gray, and Eric Gardner to name a few). In fact, under Obama, Black on White crime has increased by 13% for violent crime. The end result of Obama’s policy of only politicizing black on white crime (and in most cases, a crime was not committed): Riots and chaos. Do we still think Obama can transcend race, especially when he invokes the N word? All of this is just one week removed since Obama caved to Iran to agree to a treaty that will eventually yield an atomic bomb. And let’s not forget Iran is the biggest reason for Middle East instability because they are a state sponsor to dozens of terrorist organizations including ISIS. The Cuban embassy opened on U.S. soil after decades of being banished for supporting terror and civil rights violations (which incidentally still happens daily). So yes, negotiating with terrorists and civil right violators is the Obama administration’s key foreign policy achievement to date.

If all of this is not bad enough, Obama is proposing to place gun control on people who collect social security benefits through executive order. I do not see how this is remotely constitutional.

Hillary Clinton was showing off her ignorance by demonizing trickle-down economics with false facts. It is almost comical as she defended Big Government spending Keynesian economics after 6.5 years of one failure after another by Obama (ObamaCare, Stimulus, etc.).

Two videos surfaced of Planned Parenthood doctors profiteering off the tissue of aborted babies. And what’s worse Democrats are still defending this organization. They should rebrand themselves with a new name: Avoided Parenthood. If this was a legal or transparent process doctors would not be negotiating prices, there would be a documented table of prices.

I would never join a political party and the above issues are why. We are being brainwashed by politicians into thinking terrorism, civil injustices (including abortion), fearmongering by using fictitious science, Keynesian economics is the only way to run a country (big government), and only minority lives matter are not only the correct way of thinking, it is the only way to think.

And all of this happened just over the past few days.