Invisible Cars, Tanks, and Soldiers

Mercedes has released a new car with an innovative feature: a disappearing roof.  There is an electric capability that, when activated, causes the roof to either go transparent or go opaque.

The technology used for this is different than that presented for new tanks that the military will be rolling out.  These tanks will be able to take pictures with a camera from one side, and project it on the other side.  The technology would be similar to the Amazon Kindle, except color and a faster refresh rate.

BAE Systems plans on rolling this out in 5 years, as well as working on this eCamouflage for airplanes as well as soldier's uniforms after that.  This will be great for troops moving around.

My main concern is the cost.  Not only would it be expensive to fund it, unquestionably, but what about maintenance?  If the tank takes a shot, does it ruin the screen that portrays the image?   Or is there a bulletproof material that prevents that?  What about soldiers running into each other?  How would they detect each others presence?  Can this detection process be used by the enemy to detect our soldiers, virtually rendering the technology useless?

What do you think?

Health Care Repeal

The House is set today to vote on repealing the Health Care law that was passed last year.  Now that the majority of the House is Republican, it's first item on the agenda is reversing the financial behemoth that is socialized health care.  While the majority of Republicans are set on passing the repeal, it doesn't stop there.  There are financially conservative democrats that are looking to pass the repeal as well.

But the bill isn't just being fought on the one front.  Now there are 26 states that are looking to have the law overturned in Federal courts, and even more hopefully, the Supreme Court, on the basis of State's rights.  The majority of courts haven't been sympathetic to the cause, but there are still many that are.

The war is being fought with the ammunition of numbers.  Those in favor of the Health Care law are arguing that repeal will affect almost half of the citizens of the United States, while those in favor of repeal are arguing that the numbers are hyperinflated with only speculative affects, pointing to the fact that many individuals with pre-exisitng conditions were already being accepted by and covered under pre-Health Care law insurance providers.

Personally, the cost of maintaining the law, especially during the economic conditions our country are currently in, are absurd.  It should never have been enacted, as nothing should, without having the finances to cover its initial cost and maintanence costs.  We should be paying off the debt we do owe and cut the special-interest spending we do have before we think about enacting any other social benefits.  But, as history has suggested, socialistic benefits seem great at first but end up leading to failure and high-cost, low-return programs.

What do you think?

Debt Ceiling Hypocrisy

President Barack Obama is currently asking the House to raise the debt ceiling of the American people, something he already did once last year.  What makes this even worse is the comments he made while a Senator during President George W. Bush's tenure.

On March 16, 2006, Obama said, “The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure.”  Now he is having to eat his own words as there is opposition to his agenda.  His press secretary, Robert Gibbs, further explains that "no" vote was a message to "make a point about needing to get serious about fiscal discipline."

But here we are, almost 5 years later, and now Obama is fighting to have the debt ceiling raised, and not concerned about getting "serious about financial discipline."  Is this also a sign that we are here as a "sign of leadership failure?"

In the home, we have to make financial decisions daily.  We have creditors that lend us money, and we make the choice to accept that additional debt increase.  Creditors stop lending to those that are proven to be irresponsible with their spending habits, though.  They deny us credit and we are forced to make tough decisions that require "tightening the belt" and sacrificing the wants to take care of the needs.

Obama is the head of the family we call America.  If he is being denied credit, it is partially due to irresponsible spending.  I suggest that he follow the same advice that financial specialists give to individuals that are struggling financially: cut up the credit cards (don't borrow any more), cut the fluff (stop spending on special interest programs) and pay down your debt (self-explanatory).

What do you think?

Getting Started

First off, I want to say welcome to my new blog.  I welcome all comments from any opinion, but I would like to ask everyone to be respectful in the portrayal of their opinions and refrain from swearing, insults, or other forms of innapropriate behavior.

I plan to blog on my personal views of current events, politics, and the military.  Though they will not always be congruent with your own beliefs, I encourage you to offer up your views and voice, and I will respond in kind.

I look forward to interacting with you and growing my intellectual pool.

--Xander Gamble