Search This Blog

Loading...

Saturday, April 30, 2011

Saturday At The Movies! Milton Friedman and Thomas Sowell.

It is interesting to me that Dr. Sowell was a member of the communist party prior to his meeting Milton Friedman. Friedman had a unique ability to take an opponents statements during a debate and reduce them to the core argument. This is something else Sowell learned. The debate in this first clip was Friedman schooling Frances Fox Piven on the difference between equality of opportunity and equality of results. My favorite quotation is that it makes no sense to cut down the tallest trees of the forest simply to insure that all trees are the same height.



Thomas Sowell speaks on behalf of Robert Bork during Bork's confirmation hearing for his Supreme Court Nomination. He dissects the dishonest matter in which the political left unscrupulously attacked Bork. It is tough to listen to Joe Biden's questioning of Sowell here, as Biden doesn't cary the intellectual weight to hold Dr. Sowell's pencils. Bear in mind, Joe Biden is the Obama Administrations expert on Foreign Policy. Small wonder that the world is in flames.

Friday, April 29, 2011

Friday at The Movies! Red Eye Edition!

I know I am no longer able to stay up until 3:00 am to watch the overnight shows.  But if I were, Red Eye would definitely be on the list.


Thursday, April 28, 2011

When Democrats Lie To Us, They Call It Messaging, As In Blaming Big Oil.

Filling up my gas tank now costs roughly three times what it did when President Obama was inaugurated. We were all treated to endless stories in 2008 how President Bush was responsible for gas prices. Now that a Democrat is in the White House, It is somebody else's fault. "Big Oil," gets the blame this time, those evil greedy business owners who work to bring a product to market which enables our entire economy to function. Question number one: What will we do when we successfully destroy every oil company in existence? The batteries on those hybrid cars are good for an average 25 miles per full charge, depending on where in our country you actually live. That electricity used was probably produced by burning fossil fuels anyhow, as very little of it comes from the green energy fairy.

So, Barak Obama, a man who among his campaign promises while running for President was that Gasoline would eventually hit $4.00 per gallon, thereby making his alternative green energy pill easier for Americans to swallow has set up a commission to investigate why Gas Prices have hit $4.00 per gallon. Steven Chu, his Dept. of Energy Secretary, a man who stated during the campaign of 2008 that he personally wanted to see gas prices hit $8.00 per gallon has vowed to hold those evil Big Oil CEO's accountable. Please God, let those CEO's grow a pair for a change and start really telling the truth while they are hauled in front of the inquisitors this time around. What won't be investigated by the President's commission or Chu's charade, I bet this won't.

Why a three inch lizard is more responsible for your pain at the pump than all of those big bad oil companies put together.

Last December, the Fish and Wildlife Service announced that the lizard, a three-inch-long reptile native to the American Southwest, "faces immediate and significant threats due to oil and gas activities and herbicide treatments" and initiated the process to get it listed under the Endangered Species Act.
In 2002, the Center for Biological Diversity first petitioned to have the lizard, originally considered a subspecies of the common sagebrush lizard, listed as endangered. The Bush administration delayed consideration for six years. Last year, the Obama administration put it back on the fast track.

As director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Steven Chu, Obama's secretary of energy, expressed a fondness for high European gas prices as a means of reducing consumption of fossil fuels. In a September 2008 newspaper interview, he said: "Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe." Gas prices in Europe then averaged about $8 a gallon.

As gas prices here soar toward $5 a gallon, Chu's friends at the Interior Department may help him and President Obama get the rest of the way toward their goal. If the dunes sagebrush lizard, now considered a separate species, is granted endangered status, oil and gas production in the Permian Basin in New Mexico and Texas may have to be shut down.

The Department of Energy says the Permian Basin has a quarter of the nation's proven reserves and 20% of the nation's daily production comes from there. It has a quarter of the nation's active oil and gas wells and is home to 21% of the rigs actively drilling in the U.S.

Gulf oil production is expected to be down 20% in 2011, meaning the loss of 375,000 jobs. But that's a drop in the barrel compared with the loss of production and jobs if America's biggest oilfield is shut down to make a lizard's life more comfortable.

The truth is, that since the Department of Energy was created for the express purpose of easing our dependence on foreign oil, it has exclusively worked to end our domestic production. The messaging has been that greedy Oil Industry Executives are somehow robbing us blind by having the temerity to make a profit, like any other business which operates in our country. One of the single most comical aspects of my existence is meeting the endless supply of people who are convinced that their own profession is the sole noble profession which actually deserves to be compensated. Talk of capping executive salary and state sponsored jealousy are nothing but the deflection of corrupt politicians who use their messaging to keep us from scrutinizing them. If an Oil Executive makes an obscene amount of money, it is because they have provided an obscene value to their fellow Americans. That is how our economic system works. If you do not believe me, try living your life for one week without using any oil at all. See how that works out for you.

Question number two:  Who's business is it what a CEO is compensated or how large his bonus may be?  It does not help me in the slightest that a cap may be placed on someone else's salary.  If I make a CEO's life miserable, it will put not one extra steak on my supper plate.  As a matter of fact, it will have the opposite effect.  This is due to something called the Laffer Curve.  In economic terms it boils down to the concept that a rising tide raises all ships.  When you penalize CEO's, they will be disincented to risk their hard earned capital, thus hiring less people, and it will in fact harm us all.

Don't fall for the messaging this time around.  We don't need repackaged verbal crap from our national leaders, we need leadership from them.  When a Democrat states that they lost due to poor messaging, what that really means is that not enough people believed the lies.

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

Now That The President Actually Held A Birth Certificate Press Conference, Can We End The Circus Now?



Ariel Photograph of Proposed Obama Memorial and National Park.

Well, the President actually put an end to the birth certificate silliness.  Thank you President Obama.  After a campaign in 2008, in which all in the media portrayed Obama as a messianic figure, we discover via a birth certificate that he was born on Earth after all.  In fact, he was born in the state of Hawaii, and raised by a family of devoted communists.  More importantly, Obama the mere mortal, has lost a very powerful straw man.  He is no longer going to be able to fight against the single dumbest non issue when ever anybody points out that he is the single worst President in our Republic's proud history.

Let's recap his term so far.  The middle east is in flames, and the Muslim Brotherhood has moved from being a fringe outlawed group of fanatics operating in 80 countries to being the thugs in charge of two of the top oil producers in the world, and we are helping them in at least two other places.  Thanks Barak!  Our economy is in a shambles with our creditors announcing that they are going to put us on a spending diet, while we quibble over raising our own meaningless debt limit, as if that is our decision anymore anyhow.  Thanks Barak!  We have just seen the most cynical political maneuvering in history to pass another entitlement law guaranteed to wreak havoc on our economy for multiple generations and at the same time will destroy the world's greatest medical care system.   Thanks Barak!  He has turned our national defense capabilities into a tool for tin pot despots around the world and outsourced our sovereignty to the United Nations.  Thanks Barak!  Think for a moment my fellow conservatives, shouldn't that be the national narrative, and not what planet this boob was born on?  Unemployment remains at unnecessarily high numbers thanks to the onerous regulation of an executive branch run amok.  Thanks Barak!  Gas has hit $4 per gallon on its quick rise to $5 per gallon, largely due to Obama's regulatory war against anyone who works in that industry.  Thanks Barak!

I will say, that I find it amazing that it took another colorful character like, "The Donald," to get him to drop this bomb on us prior to his previous release date which was October of 2012.  While I wouldn't vote for Trump as dog catcher, not because of his fighting spirit, which I love.  (I question Trump's conservative bonafides, in that he has been a conservative for less time than Colin Powell has been a liberal.)  Think about this for a moment.  Our President held a press conference to answer the idiotic charges proffered by a reality television show host.  Trump has done something which not a single Republican Politician has been able to do at any time.  He made Barak Obama account for himself.  Now, if we could only make Barak Obama account for himself on something of substance.  That would be a real trick.

My fear has always been that real issues would fall by the way side as we indulge our national attention deficit disorder.  We have very real problems facing us, which are infinitely worse now than they were 30 months ago.  These problems were caused by a creeping lurch towards Socialism since Woodrow Wilson was President.  We are faced with some hard choices.  Which direction will we take in the future?  Barak Obama's birth certificate is the least important thing to be discussing right now, followed by our own view of our debt ceiling as a close second. 

I saw this question as a suggestion for a bumper sticker yesterday:

"If you were going to destroy America, would you do anything different than what Barak Obama has done as President?"

Maybe the way I phrased it is a bit long for a bumper sticker, but I think the point is valid.  This, and not the place of his birth should be what we are talking about.

UPDATE: An example of what I have been talking about, as presented by the President himself.



Hat tip Doriangrey.

Tuesday, April 26, 2011

Green Technology, Unicorns, and Adult Memories.

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Gas right now, for those of us in flyovercountry is, for all intents and purposes $4 per gallon. The general belief is that it will soon be $5. This really should not shock anyone, as one of Barak Obama's campaign promises to the SEIU, Acorn, AFSCME, and the coalition of the smug, (the ecofascists,) was that he would do exactly that to gas prices. You may not have known this, as our alphabet media sources made the decision for us all that this part of Obama's message was not really all that important for us to know. Now that gas prices are that high, and it is clear that America is feeling the pain, Obama has taken to the airways to fix blame, anybody but him. Oil company executives are getting the blame this time around. He is talking about record profits, and the supposed subsidies that they receive. Let me disabuse you of this nonsense first.

The Oil companies have not reported their earnings yet for this quarter. How on Earth can Obama, or any politician for that matter know what the profits are, let alone whether they are at record levels. Dissemination of that particular information, of any publicly traded company, prior to being released to the general public as a whole is in fact against the law. So, if President Obama is privy to that knowledge and has made the decision to announce that prior than the boards of those companies, he has violated the insider trading laws and should be impeached for such.

Next, how did profit become a dirty word in America? In a free market system, such as ours used to be, and I hope will be again, profit and loss are equally important. When a company reports a profit, it is a measure not only of how wealthy the shareholders have become, but also of the value they have provided for the community at large. Oil companies produce a product. That product has proven to be so useful to the rest of us, that its usage has become literally a part of every aspect of our society. Oil companies did not trick us into making this situation, we found these uses for ourselves. Now that we are able to use it for making every aspect of our daily lives more convenient and comfortable, many have come to believe that it should be a basic right, akin to a free press and the right to bear arms. That oil company profits are big, is an indication that they have done a good job in supplying us with their valuable product with not a single interruption of supply, and in a manner which has also been convenient.

Subsidies, this is a specious argument at best. The fact is that oil is a product that has become so popular, the government has not only seen fit to tax the income of companies who produce it, but also levy an invisible extra tax at each location where it is dispensed. Not only the federal government is in on this, state and local governments have figured it out as well. The net flow of cash between oil companies and the various government entities are flowing more to the government than the other way around, I can assure you. Don't get me wrong, I don't believe the government should be subsidizing any business, but claiming that allowing Oil companies to take tax deductions is a subsidy is just plain dishonest. Most especially since they are actually paying a tax beyond their share of corporate taxation rates.

While green technologies are not like unicorns in the sense that they really don't exist, they are every bit as useful right now. That does not mean that we should shut down all research and development of Solar, Wind, Hydro Electric, Nuclear, etc. On the contrary, keep going. But shutting down Oil and saying we will use a form of energy which honestly will not be able to do the job necessary is just plain stupidity. Edicting that in 10 years time, we will be operating our nation on 20% green sources can only have a limited amount of effects, not one of them good. We will be forced to cut our overall energy usage, which will create a real hardship for many Americans, the poorest among us will be hit the hardest. These technologies have been around for a very long time, and have not been developed to date not because of a lack of government intervention, but because that even with the full weight of the government behind them and against oil, oil is still more efficient, and in fact a vastly superior product.

So, besides demonizing big oil, or the patsy of the month, what else is President Obama and his team of academicians doing to help out?

Here is what the Obama Administration is really doing to help Americans with their pain at the pump.

Shell Oil Company has announced it must scrap efforts to drill for oil this summer in the Arctic Ocean off the northern coast of Alaska. The decision comes following a ruling by the EPA’s Environmental Appeals Board to withhold critical air permits. The move has angered some in Congress and triggered a flurry of legislation aimed at stripping the EPA of its oil drilling oversight.
Shell has spent five years and nearly $4 billion dollars on plans to explore for oil in the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas. The leases alone cost $2.2 billion. Shell Vice President Pete Slaiby says obtaining similar air permits for a drilling operation in the Gulf of Mexico would take about 45 days. He’s especially frustrated over the appeal board’s suggestion that the Arctic drill would somehow be hazardous for the people who live in the area. “We think the issues were really not major,” Slaiby said, “and clearly not impactful
The closest village to where Shell proposed to drill is Kaktovik, Alaska. It is one of the most remote places in the United States. According to the latest census, the population is 245 and nearly all of the residents are Alaska natives. The village, which is 1 square mile, sits right along the shores of the Beaufort Sea, 70 miles away from the proposed off-shore drill site.
The EPA’s appeals board ruled that Shell had not taken into consideration emissions from an ice-breaking vessel when calculating overall greenhouse gas emissions from the project. Environmental groups were thrilled by the ruling.

Barak Obama is banking on the fact that for the most part, our media are not only biased, but willing to lie to us as well. Why shouldn't he? They were very willing to do just that throughout the 2008 campaign and the first 29 months of his Presidency. An example of one network not in his pocket, and they are continuously vilified for it. All we really need to combat the goofy arguments of the left are the glimmerings of an adult memory.

Monday, April 25, 2011

A Lesson In Unintended Consequences: The Story Of Liberal Economics.

Michael Ramirez Cartoon


On of my many peeves about the liberal mind set is the innate ability to avoid any discussion about the responsibility for enactment of their destructive policies.  I have never fully understood how it happens, but it always does.  One reason may be their ability to shed tears at any provocation and immediately be able to claim that they are the only one who truly care about the terrible problems that they create.  One example would be liberals successfully banning of DDT, the subsequent deaths of 50 Million People world wide due to increases in a Malaria epidemic, followed by an endless supply of liberals bleating on endlessly about how we, as human beings must do more to stop the horrific spread of the Malaria epidemic that they themselves caused.

Example number two, takes us to Barak Obama's home state of Illinois.  The blue staters in Illinois, in typical liberal fashion ran up a deficit that has ended up crippling the state.  Don't fret over it though, they had a plan.  Tax the living snot out of the private sector, and just confiscate the short fall from others.  Read the link to see how that is working out for them.

Amazon leaves Illinois, and Illinois tries to make the rest of America pay for their stupidity.

The unintended consequence of course is that businesses leave.  Why should they stay?  The more Illinois acts irresponsibly, and tries to make others pay for their idiocy, the more those being forced to pay, (against their will in most cases,) will make the decision to leave.  If Durbin's new scheme to steal from the private sector actually does become law, what will keep the Amazon's of the world here in America.  Amazon is very capable from opening an online business in the Cayman Islands, or even in China if they so choose.  At one time, on line gambling was the hot thing to crack down on.  When we as a nation tried that, we succeeded only in increasing the volume of online gambling.  How much longer will we allow the liberals of this country to run amok and keep creating the very problems that they are constantly whining about?  Good luck Illinois, I don't feel compelled in the slightest to help you out of the situation created by your stupidity.  Think long and hard before electing another liberal to any job with more responsibility than dog catcher.

Another lesson in unintended consequences comes to us from Washington.  This one makes me laugh, because I don't live in Washington.  If I did, and actually bought one of these smug mobiles, I would be fighting mad indeed.
How much more of this Socialist nonsense will you good folks in the State of Washington force upon yourselves?

So, to reiterate, for those of you who did not read the story, here it is.  Washington's liberals succeeded in making cars which run on gasoline economically inferior to those which are hybrids.  They had to impose literally the highest energy taxation rates and punitive measures to achieve this.  They also had to throw in some hefty subsidizing activity for a health dose of crony capitalism on the other side, but after a couple of Billion in expense that Washington's citizens could not afford, Washington did succeed in its destructive quest to engineer society.  The result of course was a collapse in the revenue collected by the commerce having an adequate oil supply produces.  So, in order to make up this shortfall, rather than allow the free markets to do what they have always done so well, Washington is going to punish her citizens for doing what the state forced them into.

Saturday, April 23, 2011

Saturday At The Movies! It's All About Breitbart.

Breitbart having a conversation with Juan Williams about class warfare.



Breitbart with William Bashir, not able to get a word in edgewise past the Soros Talking Points Memo. It is actually funny to watch Bashir lose his cool when Breitbart mops the floor with him. According to the Bashir Narrative, conservatives are not allowed to answer the typical charges of whatever.



Hugh Hewitt and Andrew Breitbart discussing the Bashir meltdown.

Friday, April 22, 2011

Another Earth Day Is Upon Us.

The early spring always brings a two punch of the giggles to us conservatives.  First, we have tax day, as a cruel reminder of the governments constant confiscation of the fruits of our labor to pay for their endless and always growing spending habit.  One week later, we get Earth Day, which is the culmination of a years worth of Halloween type scare tactics to convince us to abandon all reason and a growing percentage of our valuable economic freedom to the Socialist Agenda.   I am sure that the spectacle of this year's hysteria will be no different.  There will be many people who fly around the world to meet in air conditioned resorts and determine how the rest of us should be content to live in 7th century comfort.  Behold, the ghost of Earth Day Past.



It should be noted that MIT conducted a study recently where they concluded that a homeless person living on the streets of Boston exceeded the CO2 emissions level suggested by the U.N. climate change gurus, by a factor of 400%. The Obama Administration has effectively laid off the entire U.S. Oil Industry and promised to bankrupt both the Coal Producers and the Electric Utility Companies as part of his array of campaign promises. He is attempting to make conventional sources of energy much more expensive than they should be, and at the same time is subsidizing the green jobs myth with money borrowed from China. All of this is designed to force us to make the decision to buy into the solar and wind farce. How is it working for you? I paid $62 to fill my tank this morning. That increased cost will be passed on to every other sector of our economy.

What worries me most about the whole climate change debate, is how about half or our population could by into the theory that our very act of breathing could be considered air pollution. It takes a logical acrobatic exhibition that staggers the imagination to be able to agree with this preposterous theory. Even after the scandal broke of the emails being sent around between all of the climate scientist detailing how they were going to continue lying to us common folk in order to keep their gravy train rolling in the cash, it is still being reported as fact by our main stream media. Al Gore's claim that the debate is now over doesn't strike anyone as suspicious? Why would he buy beach front property in the middle of a soon to be submerged coast line if he believed his own propaganda?

Just to show you Earth Day Celebrators what company it is that you keep, get a load of this.



When did agreeing with stupidity become cool. My favorite part of the video above is the woman who claimed to be familiar with dyhydrogen monoxide, and continued to sign the petition to ban the evil water from our planet. All kidding aside, destroying our economic viability for a non existent problem is no laughing matter. Real Americans are suffering real hardships as a result of this lunacy. November of 2012 is coming, and not a moment too soon. We need to put a stop to the ecofascism which is making us all worse off. This year, celebrate earth day by fighting against ecofascism. 

Thursday, April 21, 2011

Demagoguing China.

I have heard many statements about China, and the Chinese leaders recently. The talk has been from both sides of the aisle, and not much of it has been friendly. So, naturally, I choose to defend China. First off, it is not China's fault that we have acted so irresponsibly with our national finances for the past 80 years. All China has done, is to accept the role of one of our creditors, at our request.

Vilifying a creditor is nothing new, it is a terrific tradition which traces its cowardly roots to the middle ages. dating back to medieval times, the nobility class, when in a snit would seek to attack the neighboring kingdoms over various disputes. Waging warfare costs money. That money would sometimes have to be borrowed, failing a sufficient revenue stream resulting from taxation. When the war was waged, if a kingdom was successful, money could be stolen, to repay the creditors. This is where the term, "to the victor goes the spoils," came from. This system worked out fine for the kings who won, but what about those who lost? Well, they had blown all of the currency needed to wage the war, and were now in a tough spot, as they needed to repay their creditors. That is when these same kings declared the creditors to be enemies of the kingdom, and edicted laws making usury illegal. Creditors were rounded up and beheaded. Who's fault was it really? It did not take long before people with wealth did not want to be creditors, most especially if the military prowess of a particular king was in question. In any event, once in that position, creditors were quite literally invested in the success of those they loaned money to. China, is in this position today.

Much has been said publicly about our loss of manufacturing base in this country. A lot has been said about the growth of manufacturing in China. It would probably surprise you to discover that we still manufacture quite a bit in the U.S. Maybe our manufacturing is not the percentage of world manufacturing that it once was, but that is the fault of overbearing regulation, and not a result of American economic decay. Cause and effect have been reversed for the purposes of political narrative. We have made it virtually impossible to produce energy sufficient to keep up with our demand within our own borders. We have passed many regulations designed to make our workplaces safe, but many more designed only to promote the well being of someone politically connected. (DOTIPCC is the perfect example of this. There are many Americans who own trucking companies in America who do not operate a single truck. They merely own IPCC numbers and lease them out to trucking companies who do own trucks. This adds billions of dollars each year to transportation costs, which helps to reduce a companies incentive to manufacture within our borders.) It may interest everyone to know that trucking regulation was lobbied for by the rail industry. Does that sound familiar?

Yes, China has been gaining traction on us in terms of manufacturing. They have done this by adopting, at least in part, our own economic system. China is still a long ways away from our GDP. At our current rate of decline, and China's current rate of growth, it will take them about a hundred years to reach about half of our GDP. China has also not adopted our system completely. They still do not have individual property rights. Capital investment will never reach its full potential in that part of the world. Simply because no one with money to invest will see China as a risk free proposition. It will be front of every one's mind that China has the legal authority to confiscate any investment when it suits them to do so.

China needs us to pay them back. China is not so wealthy, as not very many are, that they can keep loaning us money and not have a care in the world as to whether we pay it back or not. When any nation floats us a loan, they do so with the intention of being repaid with interest. If we don't pay, they lose a lot of money. China is as much afraid of our default as we are. This is one reason why they continue to loan us money. It is not because they wish us to be continuing forever as their subordinate, it is because they fear the repercussions to their own wealth and self interests if our paper becomes the value overnight of bird cage liners. That means that they lose a lot of money. Many of our wealthiest companies were destroyed by the collapse of Bear Sterns. China is more afraid of this than we are.

There will still be a point in time when they will see us as chasing good money after bad.

Wednesday, April 20, 2011

Finding Out What's In It! Part IX: A Look At Who's Really Killing Grandma.



So, who's really looking to kill grandma?  We will of course take some snippets from the article linked to, but I have some things I must say first.  I would suggest reading the whole Hotair post however.  One, it gets tiring to see on a daily basis, that those, (meaning myself of course,) awful, evil conservatives want to kill small children, put old people out into the street, and beat up puppies and kittens.  We actually love our parents, grandparents, and children as much as the liberals do.  What's more, we believe that our core policy beliefs will be better for them than those proposed by the other side of the aisle.  I also love my pets.  I also seem to remember the absolute joy in deriding Governor Palin because she called attention to the, "Death Panels."  The meaning got switched to the end of life counseling program, which created an easy straw man for the Socialists to defeat in a closed debate.  (I say closed, since the country stated very loudly and clearly that they wanted nothing to do with this sink hole of a law, and got inflicted with it anyhow.)  The term Death Panel referred to a bureaucratic process where a panel of bureaucrats made decisions on who got treatment and what treatment would be administered based on an excel spreadsheet rather than a doctor's medical opinion.  President Obama went to the airwaves constantly to tell us, that even though this law may make that possible, it was not anything he would consider doing to us.  Well guess what.


Democrats and Republicans are joining to oppose one of the most important features of President Obama’s new deficit reduction plan, a powerful independent board that could make sweeping cuts in the growth of Medicare spending.

Mr. Obama wants to expand the power of the 15-member panel, which was created by the new health care law, to rein in Medicare costs.

But not only do Republicans and some Democrats oppose increasing the power of the board, they also want to eliminate it altogether. Opponents fear that the panel, known as the Independent Payment Advisory Board, would usurp Congressional spending power over one of the government’s most important and expensive social programs.

Under the law, spending cuts recommended by the presidentially appointed panel would take effect automatically unless Congress voted to block or change them. In general, federal courts could not review actions to carry out the board’s recommendations. The impact of the board’s decisions could be magnified because private insurers often use Medicare rates as a guide or a benchmark in paying doctors, hospitals and other providers.


What this is, for those who are not paying attention, is a system where costs are going to be controlled by bureaucrats who are charged with rationing of resources.  If the cost benefit analysis curve dictates that Grandma is too old to waste the funding allowed for hip replacement surgery, then it's hard cheese for Grandma.  If a child with Downs Syndrome, such as Governor Palin's, does not fit the criteria of a sound economic investment for removal of a busted appendix, Sorry Governor, perhaps you should say your goodbyes now.  The Death Panel has just been given its authority by President Barak Hussein Obama, and it has been done so under the provisions of the new Health Care Law. 

Most of the nation now owes Sarah Palin an apology.  With all of the Democrats and a good chunk of the Republicans laughing at her for pointing this out, she stuck to her guns.  As it turns out, she was 100% right on this one. 

Something else to note here.  This law has been struck down in its entirety by a Federal District Judge as unconstitutional.  This law, which is sucking down a ton of our fiscal resources, technically does not exist.  Obama, should not be appointing 15 person death panels.     The entire process in place right now, besides being evil on its surface, also manages to remove any semblance of the checks and balances system which is the cornerstone of our republic.  As of right now, medical decisions, thanks to a cynically vague law, and a suave lying President, allows 15 unelected, unaccountable, bureaucrats to take lordship over the lives of literally every American Citizen.  What if a future President decides to only appoint people to this panel who will agree to only approve medical care for those who support the President politically?  I realize that Obama would never do that, after all he promised, and we know from experience that his word is as good as gold.  Will that be true for every one who follows our current President though? 

Fellow conservatives, don't sit out the next election.  We need to fire Barak Obama, and we need to fire his minions.

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

Tuesday at the Movies! Thomas Sowell on Intellectuals and Society.

Sowell is not picking on education. He is picking on education for purely theoretical pursuits who then inflict untested theories as a matter of public policy. These are the people who are currently in charge of the United States right now. Their untested theories looked good on paper, but in reality have led to unmitigated disaster. When it is sorted out, they end up blaming us, little folk for not being smart enough to understand their genius. Intellectuals find it unfair to look at the very real world results they reap for the rest of society.

Monday, April 18, 2011

The Other Shoe Drops, Debt Limit From The Lenders Point of View.

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

I have written several times on the budget.  In the various places where my articles appear, these articles are usually the most heavily commented upon.  First let me say, I enjoy the comments which dissent from my opinion as much as those that agree.  I love the debate.  That being said, there is a basic disconnect of folks when it comes to understanding the debate on budget, as it relates to the debt ceiling.  They are related, but they are two different things.  Government's borrow money to pay for things, and they have been doing it since at least the middle ages.  Deficit spending is nothing new.  There have been great advantages gained for governments which have done this in a responsible manner, and there have been disastrous effects for governments who have done this irresponsibly. 

We all have seen the convention centers in communities which have served to build commerce in down town areas.  The local merchants are benefited with higher revenues and local citizens are benefited with greater employment opportunities due to increased business opportunity.  The increased levels of taxation due to the increased business activity will allow the bond payments to be made.  The International Exposition Center in Brookpark, Ohio is a great example of this.  That facility was so successful in its boom, the Mayor of Brookpark actually tried to steal the property through the evil concept of Eminent Domain.  An example of a nation who borrowed irresponsibly would be Greece.  Greece was borrowing money to pay for government benefits for its citizens.  This, in any context is a diminishing asset.  Unlike the Convention Center, which operates continually, and will bring in a steady stream of income for many years, benefits are gone once the money is spent.  The asset itself disappears.  Money borrowed to pay for the basket of goodies from the public largess will not be replaced by any type of return.  To continue these benefits, either a new source of funds must be found, or more money must be borrowed.  The result in Greece was massive riots, and a delay of the problem being faced, as other European nations got together and gave Greece another massive loan. 

What does that mean to us.  Well, we have to borrow 40 cents for every dollar we spend.  This money is not being used to build anything which will pay a return.  Yes, there are some, "investments in infrastructure," which are part of our budget, but they represent a small pittance of our budget.  When you stop to consider that the return of these investments is considered as an afterthought, and only mentioned to sell the spending after the fact, it actually adds up to nothing more than an insulting waste.  (I have yet to see any believable estimate of increased business revenue related to any of the Obama Stimulus projects.)    With 67% of our budget going to mandated statutory spending, our government is borrowing money to pay for nothing more than mandated benefits.  We could cut every single penny of discretionary spending, and we would not have a balanced budget.  That is to say, our spending would be greater than our revenue, as a nation.  So the budget, without changes to the benefits it pays in terms of wealth redistribution, will never be balanced.  Quite simply put, continued spending on a diminishing asset which is greater than our ability to produce wealth will eventually lead to massive failure.  There is no other possibility.  There will be a tipping point when we will be stealing from the poor to give to the rich.  We are closer to that than many realize right now.  What will happen eventually, those called upon to be productive will either move away, not produce so much, or just plain quit and join the group who are being paid for. 
The debt limit is nothing more than our own self imposed limitations on just how big we will allow the cumulative effect of our deficit spending to become.  The current debate over this limit I can only characterize as silly.  One reason it is silly, is because when we approach our own self imposed limit, we just raise it.  The other reason it is silly, it matters less what our limitations are, than the limitations set by those who are loaning us the money.  That debt limit matters.  Here is the other shoe dropping.  The point may be moot soon anyhow.  Just so that everyone understands, a balanced budget may very well be forced upon us.  Eventually, our creditors will refuse to loan us another dime.  When that happens, our government will be forced to scale spending back to meet revenues suddenly.  We will no longer be able to borrow 40 cents for every dollar spent, and at least some of our current 67% which we spend as a matter of law will have to stop. 
Standard & Poor’s also said that it revised its outlook on the long-term rating of the U.S. sovereign to negative from stable.
That singular statement from the above linked article should send shivers up the spines of every liberal in the country.  It means that the party is about over.  It means we have reached a point in this country when those producing can no longer keep up with the demands to transfer the fruits of their labor to those who do not.  (I consider those who work in any form for the government to be in the ranks of those who do not produce.  While I will concede that they are often working just as hard as the rest of us, this does not mean that they are producing wealth.  Their income is only possible due to the taxes paid by the private sector.)  We are reaching the point when a debt limit will be imposed upon us involuntarily by the people we are borrowing from.

It would probably be smarter of us to take care of this problem now, before others solve it for us.

Sunday, April 17, 2011

Sunday At The Movies! A Double Feature.

The warm up movie is a beautiful 5 minutes of torturing a bureaucrat. Watch as one of the geniuses at the EPA tries to explain that it really is no problem that their newest overbearing regulation has cost a pantload of jobs during a time of economic crisis. Hey, as long as he still has his gig paid for by the American Taxpayers, why should he care.



The main feature is Sarah Palin announcing her candidacy for the office of the Presidency. Red meat for conservatives to be sure. Say what you want about Mrs. Palin, but she knows how to speak to the conservatives of this country. 99% of the negative things said about her are just flat out fabrications. One of the reasons she is so vehemently vilified by the left is that they are just plain afraid of her charisma, and ability to clearly state her positions. Personally, I like Sarah.

Friday, April 15, 2011

Donald Trump, To Support Or Not To Support?

Face it, the 50 horsepower hair style alone is worth the reference to Shakespeare. There will not be the perfect candidate for any of us from the conservative side of the 2012 election. We are all looking for the next Reagan, and he ain't around any more anyhow. Generally speaking, I really find these types of discussions prior to the primary period to be nothing more than a fun distraction anyhow, but Trump is different. Truthfully, I don't know where I stand on whether he is my guy or not. I have seen plenty of arguments from both sides of the Trump phenomenon. I have heard people I respect refer to him as a clown, and people I respect extol him as the
GOP's only hope. Here are some pros and cons, at least as I see them.

First, he is not the GOP's only hope. After the President's speech on Wednesday, a speech which perhaps rivals Carter's malaise speech delivered just prior to Christmas of 1979 as the single greatest piece of political idiocy ever undertaken by a human being. His poll numbers were tanking before the speech, as the Nation recognizes his ineptitude. The speech cost him 5 points according to Gallup, a solidly liberal polling company. (Gallup at one time was a conservative operation, but the organization was purchased by the Saudi Royal Family in 2002, and have been a Democrat Party asset since that time.) The only GOP candidates who have a chance of securing defeat from Obama in 2012 are Gingrich, Huckabee, and Romney.

Trump knows how to fight. He is providing a blue print for how to take on Obama, and he is unapologetic for it. He has not shied away from pointing out the fact that the President is way under qualified for the position which he now holds. It is refreshing to see a conservative politician who is willing to stand up and not be afraid of the torrent of invectives which follow stating their constitutionally protected right to have an opinion. Too often, we see our leaders shy away from a fight, because believing in conservative principles usually gets one called a racist, senior murdering, puppy dog hating, child beating, whatever. On the other hand, the birth certificate issue is genuinely moronic. I can't be diplomatic about this any longer. The entire thing was invented by Philip Berg, an operative loyal to Hillary Clinton. Since then, it has taken on a life of its own. Now, Obama, has produced a certificate of live birth, otherwise known as a birth certificate from Hawaii. People want to see his original long for certificate complete with foot prints and what not. I recently had to produce my own birth certificate from West Virginia. After an effort that was sort of like walking through hell, all I could get from my native state was the abbreviated version of the document. There are so many things to beat up Obama over, any more discussion on this issue only serves Obama. It provides him a fairly easy straw man to defeat, and it takes time away from the fact that the President is not is the slightest stretch of any imagination doing a decent job.

Trump is seen as a self promoter who is only using the charged political atmosphere to promote himself and his empire of businesses, such as it is. The views on how serious a political candidate Trump could actually be vary, to say the least. For those of you on the clown side, I answer P.T. Barnum. Phineas Taylor Barnum became wealthy by building a circus. there is nothing wrong with that, it was a business. He also went on to become a U.S. Senator from New York. Self promotion is part of Trumps business, and he should not looked down upon for that. I have no problem with the fact that Donald Trump was able to use his personality to build his wealth. Frankly, if that is the best political argument against him, I say we just declare him President right now. Putting aside for the moment that this is nothing more than an adhominem attack, it also assumes that success is a bad thing for a political leader to have achieved. We have seen the results of a President who has never successfully run a lemonade stand in his life, and I will choose the successful guy next time thanks. If you wish to argue against Trump, do so by fighting in the arena of ideas.

For those of you on the Trumpi-wan-kenobi side of the argument, he does not have a political history. He is looking to jump right in to the top spot of the political world. While I do agree that he has a strong knowledge of fiscal issues, and even a better chance of making the best economic choices of any candidate in the race right now, he would also be Commander in Chief of our armed forces and quite frankly, his ideas on foreign policy do not thrill me. He is saying more of the right things now, but he hasn't always held the conservative beliefs when it comes to issues like Israel, Islamism, enforcement of our immigration policies, use of military, etc. Donald Trump was a big supporter of John McCain in the past, and I view him more as a Rockefeller Republican than he is currently letting on. I may be wrong, but time will tell.

He has accomplished two things that are positive though. He has us all talking, and he has shown that it is O.K. to fight for what we believe in.

UPDATE: I have been corrected in some information regarding Donald Trump. As it turns out, he has always been a staunch supporter of Israel.



Kudos to Mr. Trump for this stance. His bonafides as even a true fiscal conservative have been called into question by Mark Levin however.  As recently as 2009, he advocated for the Universal Health care scheme.  His allegiance seems to be ruled by expedience.  While I am not in the, "help me trumpi-wan-kenobi, you're our only hope," camp, I still believe him to be a great American patriot, who does care about this country.  I just do not believe that he would govern as a conservative.

Thursday, April 14, 2011

Thursday at the Movies! Response-a-Palooza.

Sometimes, in the life of a fledgling blogger, you dream about a President making as poor a speech as Obama did yesterday. Allow the narcissism flag fly high and proud. give no substance on national T.V., and by all means be as cynical as any politician in history. So much for that new hopety change tone. How was it received? Good question, listen to some of Youtube's best reactions to it.











Wednesday, April 13, 2011

How Big Was Obama's Loss With The Budget Deal?

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

I have read and discussed the budget deal recently with a lot of folks. I have heard reactions ranging from its a decent first step to blind outrage that the Conservatives caved yet again. I have heard punditry on who won this particular skirmish ranging from John Boehner to saying even little Barry Obama pulled political victory out of all of this. There are several points I wish to point out here.

First off, more often than not, it is necessary to wait at least 30 days to determine who was the winner and who was the loser in a political battle. The next day punditry rarely gets it correct, let alone perfect.  Last night, I saw this on Hotair by Allahpundit.  Usually, I agree with his analysis, but this time, not so much.  It should be noted, and I really can not push this one too hard, this skirmish marks an historical first for our federal government.  They will be forced to make do with less for the remainder of 2011.  No, the amount of the cuts are nothing more than empty symbolism, but they accomplished something much more than their sheer numbers would indicate.  They represent a shift in the national debate.  The debate has shifted almost entirely to our side of things.  The debate is no longer over whether we, as a nation will be growing the government a little or growing it a lot.  The debate is now over by how much we will be shrinking our government.  Achieving this just two years after the Socialist takeover of our nation is no small feat.  So, now is not the time for a Conservative temper tantrum folks, we need all of us to stay in this fight. 

Secondly, there are some unintended fun consequences to be looked at here.  The above linked to article was the result of a leak by the Obama White House who in an attack of pure stupidity, wanted to prove that their guy actually was the shrewder politician and got the better deal.  "We really put it to Boehner, who actually thought we agreed to cut spending."  What it will really show, just in time for the 2012 Presidential Election is that Team Obama is unwilling to bargain in good faith.  They issued what amounts to a statement that they treated John Boehner with contempt, dishonesty, and that they are the single most cynical administration ever.  Barak Obama hardly comes across as Presidential here.  When Brutus stabbed Cesar in the back, he was initially applauded by the Roman Citizens, just before they hunted him down and killed him.  The image of our President plunging the knife into John Boehner's back will be a lasting one for some time when this is all said and done. 

Thirdly, Barak Obama has given a speech on the budget which basically claims a mulligan on his entire State Of The Union Address.  Let that percolate for a moment.  How does he and his team spin this in 2012?  He in effect has admitted that he was showing zero leadership for the first 2 and 1/2 years of his Presidency.  He is going to renege on his tax compromise which he entered into in January.  (A tax compromise by the way that was roundly criticized by many conservatives.)  He has been forced to regurgitate his 80 year old ideas on liberal talking points and once again is claiming that they are new.  Barak Obama has been forced into a political fetal position by a man who is being labeled a weak rino speaker. 

The pennies of savings found in the discretionary part of the budget were never really the battlefield anyhow.  The real battle will be in rewriting the entitlement laws.  If you had told me that we would be in a position to accomplish this in 2011 as recently as 6 months ago, I would have called you crazy, and I would have been right to do so.  John Boehner and the other House Republicans accomplished that, and they thoroughly bitch slapped the administration at the same time. 

One more thought, none of this happens without the Tea Party.  May they keep their place at the table for a long time my friends, they may have saved America.

Tuesday, April 12, 2011

Liberal Speak Election Dictionary.

Every time the Democrats lose an election, they whine about how the electorate really wanted their ideals and values, but that somehow there was a problem with the messaging. Each time, I think to myself, if you weren't so busy trying to obfuscate your positions and hide your true intentions, then messaging would no longer be a problem for you. I have never before seen a group of individuals where spin and outright fabrications were so huge a part of daily communication. I am forced to wonder if they talk to their own families this way. The unfortunate part of all of this is that sometimes the voting public is actually fooled into believing some of the rubbish. As a public service, I will break down the message of the left into easy to understand concepts. Think of it as a key to understanding the political rhetoric of the next two years.

Protecting the middle class - This means providing a basket of benefits from the Federal Budget which will be paid for by all of your descendants for centuries to follow.

Increasing taxes for the rich - This means punishing small business owners for the risk taking necessary to build and expand their operations so that the private sector may create wealth and jobs. It is also used as a red herring to pay for the benefits mentioned above, which is laughable since if every Penney of income were stripped from those fitting the definition of the rich it would pay for the Federal Budget for no more than a few weeks.

Tax Credits to promote the Green Economy - This means providing a kickback to political supporters who helped get a leftist elected. It is also a form of crony capitalism, in that it allows the Executive Branch to defacto pick which large corporations will be successful free from the anxiety that stems from those pesky competitors.

Energy independence - This means creating enough regulation in the energy sector of the economy so as to produce artificially high prices to make it cost prohibitive for the average American to drive motor vehicles, heat their homes or to use air conditioning. Basically, it means returning our national standard of living to those standards enjoyed by humans in the Seventh Century A.D.

Reducing the deficit - You may be thinking that this means some sort of fiscal constraint, and you'd be wrong. What this means from the Socialist crowd is to increase the marginal tax rates in a bizarre, (and already proven not to work in the slightest,) attempt to mitigate an out of control deficit spending pattern increase in IRS collected revenue.

Restore our Standing in the world community - This means appeasing our enemies and simultaneously insulting our staunchest allies. It includes also the practice of projecting weakness throughout the globe and committing our military personnel to do the bidding of thuggish third world dictators, wrapped up in some sort of perverse international test. (this may seem to be an ambiguous definition, and you are correct, it is. The leftist use of our military is ambiguous and our objectives are flexible if not held to any sane standard.)

Humanitarian Aid - This is related to the previous definition. It means turning our military and national defense into a social services organization and the largest chapter of meals on wheels on the Planet.

Social Justice - this is redistribution of wealth from those in society who have produced something and given to favored political groups, people with a preferred victim status.

Political Justice - This is defined as silencing those who disagree with the government and using those organizations which agree with the government as a money laundering operation to perpetuate political contributions for all future campaigns.


Get out the vote - This is defined as busing people from states where their votes will not be needed to communities in other neighboring states to have them same day register and vote in more crucial elections.  An example would be 10,000 or so people from Illinois voting last week in the Wisconsin Judicial Election in Dane County. 

I hope you have found this partial list helpful.  Monty Python provides a lesson in why the Social Justice exercise is doomed to failure.

Monday, April 11, 2011

On To Round Two.

Thomas Sowell recently asked this pertinent question in one of his columns: "When somebody writes you a bad check, who do you get mad at, the bank who refused to cover the check, or the person who wrote it?"  Our government has been writing us bad checks for decades.  Promising us a bag full of goodies from the public largess, and convincing us that said bag of goodies was in fact free.  what we as a nation should have known, and are just now learning, is that the cost for the bag of goodies was merely shifted to some unknown time in the future.  I would like to now introduce you all to the future.  The bill has come due, and it is massive.  For those of you, about half of the country I believe, who still think that the government is some magical entity which has an unlimited source of fund with which to pay for its entitlement schemes, I must remind you that the government, no matter how hard the bureaucrats may actually be working, produces nothing.  The government's source of funds is only what it is able to confiscate from its citizens, us.  Any dime in public benefit, was taken from a private citizen, and subsequently redistributed.  At the risk of sounding politically incorrect, this is the very definition of Socialism.  These schemes have proven disastrous in every single nation where they have been tried.

On Friday, we had a last minute deal made avoiding a government shutdown.  Hooray, (sarcasm intended.)  Our government has shut down before, and not a single senior citizen, small child, or puppy dog was destroyed as a result.  On the other hand, Americans not working in the Federal System by and large did not really notice.  According to a Rasmussen Poll conducted in the 1990's, it was discovered that a negligible amount of people outside of the news media and the growing public sector workers were affected at all due to the government shut down.  So, to sum up, no matter how hard bureaucrats may or may not be working, their level of productivity is hardly vital to their fellow citizens.  That being said, something has happened which has not happened since 1995.  The debate has shifted our way a bit.  This past weekend, Our President has finally allowed himself to peek into the real world, outside of fantasy land, for just a moment.  He sent his advisor David Plouffe to several of the Sunday talk shows to make this telling, if somewhat bizarre statement.  "When it comes to entitlement reform, the President is going to use a scalpel, and not a machete."  This statement is telling in that we now know the President has accepted, grudgingly, the fact that entitlements will be reformed.  Hooray, (a little less, but still there, amount of sarcasm intended.)  It is bizarre in that, keeping the apropos medical analogy theme going here, what good is a scalpel going to do anyhow?  Our patient, the U.S. economy has cancer.  Over 67% of the patient is now cancerous mass. She needs to consume 40% of her body weight in toxic chemicals to survive.  (The toxic chemicals would be our increasing debt.)  to leave the medical analogy for just a moment, cutting a Million here and there is not going to do anything to help us now.  We need leadership from our President, and not more platitudes and gimmicks. 

I also heard from Mr. Plouffe that the President will be unveiling his plan to fix the fiscal insanity on Wednesday.  Here is my prediction for what will be the main crux of this plan.  We are going to soak the so called rich, and tax the snot out of any wage earner making more than $250,000 per year.  For those of you who have not done this simple mathematical exercise let me lay it out for you.  If our government confiscates every penny earned beyond its threshold of $250,000 per person, and maintains its current tax rates on everyone else, the deficit would still be close to a Trillion.  That also assumes of course that the so called rich stayed here, in a country where they are so despised that even its President has been on T.V. demonizing them. 

Since the President, nor any of the Democrats have apparently taken a single economics course since Maynard Keynes himself that his conclusions were in deed disastrously wrong, I will state the already proven effects of the Laffer Curve.  Taxation has a diminishing effect past its optimization point.  What this means, is that once optimal revenues are confiscated by the government, raising taxation rates actually serves to lower revenues to the fed.  An example for this will not take long to find.  Bush 43 lowered tax rates, and the revenues collected by the IRS actually increased.  The Bush tax cuts are incorrectly named.  They were tax rate cuts which resulted in a tax increase.  George Bush is not the first President to embrace Laffer, as Kennedy, and Reagan also made use of this curve.  So, my further prediction about the soon to be unveiled Obama Plan is that he will assume that his rate increases will produce an increase in revenue collected, and he will be dangerously wrong.  The fact is that I must believe that the Democrat politicians do understand the Laffer Curve, and that these tax increases represent not a means to close our deficit, but a means to effect control over a population.  After all, people will not give up the lifestyle they desire and have earned in order to live the government approved proletariat lifestyle if they can afford not to.  In order to pursue this  worker's paradise that Obama wishes to inflict upon the American People, he needs to take choices away from us by means of punitive taxation and overbearing regulation.  The only way he can get Americans to accept this, is to promise a bag of goodies to us from the public Largess. 

Enjoy Iowahawk's math again as presented by Bill Whittle. Why robbing from the so called rich will not work.

Sunday, April 10, 2011

Sunday at the Movies! Jon Stossel's give me a break about Global Warming Hysteria.

Much shorter in length than the full length wonkish scientific presentation I ran which destroyed the science behind the Global Warming Hoax. This one does make some good points quickly, and it is going to be timely real quick. As the argument against improving our economics in this country posited by the political left is that we are somehow causing this catastrophic global warming, of which warming has not been proven to be man made, nor catastrophic.

Friday, April 8, 2011

The Unions Doubled Down On Wisconsin, And Oh Boy Did They Lose!

For those of you who don't know about it, here is the background.  On Tuesday of this week, Wisconsin held an off year election to pick a Supreme Court Justice, which drew a record number of voters for an off year election.  In all, over 1.5 Million citizens of the Cheese State showed up to announce their choice.  The Unions battled hard and spent a fortune in both money and time.  They believed that their astroturfed efforts to sway public opinion against Scott Walker and the Republican Party were working.  They believed that their grandiose shows of launching recall campaigns against all things GOP were effective beyond their own sphere of sycophants.  They were using the utmost of their public relations and organizing arms to tell America that the Wisconsin law dealing with an out of control Public Sector had cost the Republicans dearly, and that the Conservative movement would rue the day that they showed backbone.  The Unions in this country decided to draw the battle lines in Ohio, Indiana, and most of all in Wisconsin.  Wisconsin, the solidly blue state turned purple recently, was probably their best chance of succeeding.  They lost.  I will repeat that, just because it feels so good to say.  They lost.  In the end, it was very close, just beyond the .5% margin for automatic recounts, but with their organization and resources blown, this one has to sting a bit.  It also bears ramifications for both parties going forward.  Beyond the immediate result, whether or not the new PEU Law would eventually be upheld or struck down, it goes a long way towards predicting a National mood, and strikes another nail into the coffin of what used to be considerable power in this Country wielded by the unions.

The unions did manage to sway support to their cause, although that added support came from Public Sector Workers only.  The only county which added a net support for the Democrat candidate was Dane County.  This is where the State Capitol is, and all of those Public Sector Union employees happen to live.  Throughout the rest of Wisconsin, amongst the people who are paying for the party so to speak, The Republicans had a net gain of support.  The unions in Wisconsin, had spent on behalf of Kloppenburg some $3.5 Million in, "Public Education," advertising during the last week of the election.  Kloppenburg outspent Prosser by a huge margin, (when the union's public education messaging is accounted for,) and the full organizational weight of the left was employed, and yet, Prosser came up victorious.  What does that mean for Wisconsin and the nation at large?  It means this, the backlash we have been hearing so much about from various media sources in regards to the GOP finally showing some backbone and sticking to their campaign promises is just an illusion.  The real backlash will occur should they stray from what they promised, like they did in 1995, and 2005.  The political left has pulled out all of the stops with this round of fighting as well.  The stakes of this fight were huge, and the left realized this.  This Law in Wisconsin will put an end to the taxpayers being forced into financing the Democrat Party against their will.  This will eventually put the Private Sector on an even footing with the Public Sector in having a voice in political self determination. 

Such is the price of believing your own hype.  They produced these huge shows and demonstrations to convince others that they held a huge advantage in public support.  Obama himself arranged to have busloads of agitators and professional protesters show up in both Madison and Columbus to give the illusion of a swelling backlash against Republican Administrations who wanted to follow up on the mandates which swept them into office.  In hind sight, they should have realized that the illusions that they created were in fact just the illusions that they created.  Losing means more than just losing now.  A few may realize the astroturf tactics used were not real.  That the next time they see the bussed in crowds chanting those cliched slogans, it represents the opinions of the demonstration organizers only.  The real loss is the fact that they opened up their funding war chests, and came up empty.  They bought in effect nothing, and will now be forced to be much more discriminating in how to distribute their dwindling funds.  Further, if they couldn't win this in bluer than blue Wisconsin, than they will have more trouble in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Virginia, and Iowa. 

All in all, we can sum up the past week as such:





The Republicans in this country are showing the glimmerings of a backbone starting to grow. This week's events should help to keep that backbone growing. It was a good week.

UPDATE: That 7500 vote lead should actually be a 17,500 vote lead. There is real evidence of a fraud perpetrated by the forces which backed Kloppenburg in this race. 10,000 Kloppenburg votes in Dane County apparently were cast where there were no other actions taken for any other issues or races. Extremely suspect to say the least. I will be holding my breath to see Michael Moore's tweets on the subject.

Thursday, April 7, 2011

Mr. Goldstone, How Do You Propose To Make It Right For Israel?

There is so much that is disturbing about this chain of events, I might miss a few points.  Please feel free to add to my list in the comments section below.  first off, I am not buying the, "I didn't know any better," defense of his slanderous attack on Israel being offered by Mr. Goldstone.  When he wrote his report on the 2008 - 2009 Gaza offensive, Mr. Goldstone neglected to notice that the practitioners of the Religion of Peace had in fact been actively engaged in kidnapping innocent Israelis and lobbing Katusha Rockets into Northern Israel targeting schools and synagogues daily.  He accused Israel of war crimes, and glossed over the fact that war crimes had indeed been perpetrated by the, "Palestinians."  Now, three years later, Mr. Goldstone admits that there were no war crimes committed by the Israelis, and in fact those accusations were entirely fabricated.  Now that the damage is done, Goldstone wants to apologize, and travel to Israel, like it never happened.  Such is the case for Israel, they literally are held under a different microscope than the rest of the world.  There is not a single other nation on Earth who would tolerate the attacks on their soil even once, let alone on a daily basis.  Israel has, as does every nation, the right to defend herself, and yet, I hear calls for Israel to show restraint.  Not only is Israel restrained from defending herself, but she is also the only nation to provide a 24 hour notice of warning to the enemy prior to making any attack during battle.  This insane rule of engagement is designed to prevent anyone from being able to make the charge that Israel targets civilians.  What Goldstone has taught us, is that an actual crime is not necessary for a charge to be levelled.

The U.S. response to this has been, to say the least puzzling.  On the one hand, our U.N. ambassador is giving lip service to being supportive of Israel, but that is where it stops.  By merely wishing the fabricated report to just go away, rather than publicly correct the record, Rice is in effect passing up an opportunity to show the U.N. Human Rights Council, (a body which once boasted as having Moamar Kaddafy as its leader,) for what it truly is.  For those who don't know, it is a vile collection of the world's most murderous thugs and brutal dictators given a platform to bully and cajole the law abiding citizens of the world.  The Obma led Kumbayah school of foreign policy has not made any of this better.  In fact, we have seen the most brutal and terrifying organization in world history already take over Egypt, a former ally, and are indeed fighting alongside this same group to help them take over Libya. Obama and the political left are not the only ones guilty of being a little squeamish when it comes to dealing with one of our staunchest allies.  President Bush held up the Bush Doctrine, which I agreed with by the way, and promptly showed the world that it did not apply to Israel.  They were the only nation in his world which was not only prohibited from presumptively dealing with terrorism, but required to show that wonderful restraint as well.  Bush 41, during the Gulf War, while stationing Patriot Batteries in Israel, threatened her to not retaliate when clearly attacked with Scud Missiles.  Carter and Clinton both legitimized the, "Palestinians," by giving advice and comfort and a seat at the table to Yassar Arafat.  You may have noticed that I always refer to the, "Palestinians," in quotes, this is because anyone who knows even the slightest thing about the region realizes that there is actually no such thing as a, "Palestinian People." 

Part of the problem in this region, not only with Israel, but Lebanon, Libya, Egypt, Syria, and Iran also is a universal refusal to deal honestly with facts.  We are paralyzed from recognizing and dealing with the truth by a political correctness run amok.  When exactly, did it become out of vogue to call a thug a thug?  Not every society and culture is equal.  Clearly, a culture which allows for rape victims to be imprisoned for allowing themselves to be in the company of a male rapist while unmarried, and refuses to prosecute the rapist, is not on an equal footing with my culture.  Clearly, a culture which allows a woman to be stoned to death for the crime of being caught in public  with a non relative male companion is not on an equal footing with my culture.  Clearly, a culture which celebrates mass murder of school children and people dancing in night clubs is not on an equal footing with my culture.  Bigotry is wrong, discrimination is not.  For what ever reason, we in this great country gave up the ability to discriminate between good and evil, and it is costing us dearly. 

For any on the political left who are regular readers of this site, here is a challenge.  Name any time in world history when a lasting peace has been negotiated.  I may be wrong, but no one has ever been able to defeat this challenge.  A lasting peace has always needed at least one of the following three conditions to occur.  One, a convincing military defeat of one nation over another, two, mutually beneficial trade of goods and services between the two nations in question, three, one nation being overwhelmingly superior from a military strength standpoint, this is what will lead to peace, as it has throughout history.  You can call me out and dismiss me as a warmonger, chicken hawk, evil, or what have you.  Before you do that however, prove me wrong in the arena of ideas, and in the real world.  Name a single instance in world history where a lasting peace was negotiated.

Hat tip to NoThreat2U.

Wednesday, April 6, 2011

Grandma Survived The Reagan Years!

So here we are, six full months after the time our Congress was Constitutionally mandated to pass the fiscal 2011 budget.  The government has been kept running by a series of temporary resolutions for continually since January of 2009.  Lost in this entire debate over who's fault it will be if the government is forced to shut down, is the fact that we are here in the first place because the Democrats shirked their responsibility by not acting prior to October of last year.  It is not as if they would have had a difficult time in passing anything.  They enjoyed a super majority in the Senate and a huge voting advantage in the House.  It simply was a political decision not to vote on anything which would have hurt their electoral chances in the midterm elections.  Now that the Conservatives are taking initiative in the form of some long missing leadership, we are being assured that small children, grandparents, and puppy dogs will suffer.  We are being told, by the absentee President himself, that a refusal to compromise, (which in Democrat speak means capitulate to our demands and abandon completely your position,) would be irresponsible. 



Thinking back to another time when the Conservative movement actually held some sway, I also seem to remember being told that Grandma would starve if we did not conform to the ideals of the social welfare state. When Ronald Reagan ran for President in 1980, and then for reelection in 1984, the mantra of those mean old Republicans want to destroy social security and force Granny to eat cat food was being heralded to the four corners of the Earth. When George Bush, 41, ran for the Presidency in 1988, we were assured that Granny, this time would surely perish under the strain of those wascalwy wepubwicans, who now had moved into the territory of flat out wanting to kill grandmothers across the fruited plain. The message of saving seniors, who by the way were actually still doing fine was a major theme of Bill Clinton's campaign. Bob Dole, himself a senior citizen, was characterized as the Grinch who would steal even the cat food for Granny to nibble on while she was forced into an early grave. In 2001, Al gore, in a losing effort this time told us that seniors would surely suffer under a Bush 43 Presidency. After 8 years of George Bush, and the seniors are doing fine. My own Grandmother, actually survived Reagan and Bush 41. It was Bill Clinton who actually did her in. I am certain it was a coincidence, and I am comfortable saying that, as I recognize that demagoguery is no way to win a political debate, nor to govern a nation.  Unfortunately though, this tactic makes up 100% of the Democrats part in this debate.  I guess that is what frustrates us conservatives the most about the tactics used by the leftists in general, that absent substance, honest disclosure of positions, honest disclosure of intentions, we are left with an endless supply of anecdotal stories, adhominem attacks, straw man arguments, and flat out lies with which to contend. Don't believe me about the hysteria of the Debate coming from the left? Have a listen to Nancy Pelosi, the leader of the Democrats in the House.



Now, here is a question for Nancy, out of the $3.5 Trillion being spent currently, why are you proposing to cut spending on feeding 6 Million seniors, and not Cowboy Poetry? I hope the American People don't fall for this baloney this time around. Saving 30 Cents on every Hundred Dollars is not so draconian that we will be knee deep in displaced starving seniors, shoeless children, or even lost puppy dogs. As a matter of fact, we could very easily do this and not see a single needed benefit be lost.

Something else to ponder, the last time the government, "shut down," Rasmussen did a survey of Americans to see who was affected. The results showed that zero percent of Americans not working for the government were adversely affected. If that survey were conducted for any private enterprise in the world, there would be a rethinking on the management level of that enterprise.

UPDATE:  I believe this Michael Ramirez cartoon states the point rather eloquently.
Michael Ramirez Cartoon

UPDATE II: Here is a fact check of what Nancy Pelosi is referring to in her tale of 6 Million seniors being starved by the evil Republicans.  You will notice from the article that Nancy's claims are suspect at best.  The cuts being suggested for this agency represent 3% of its total budget.  This represents no more of a cut than any American who has been forced to cut back a little over the past three years.  Not a single senior citizen will be starved due to this budget.  As usual for the Democrats, honest debate is not important, emotional scare tactics are.  Nancy gets 4 Pinocchios for this one.

Tuesday, April 5, 2011

Tuesday at the Movies! Jon Stewart on Obamas Transparency Award.

This award was as well earned as the Peace Prize awarded for great feats Obama was expected to perform, that little war thing not withstanding of course. In case you've missed these little facts, Obama has the lowest percentage of compliance of fulfilling FOIA requests of any President serving while the law was in effect. His Administration holds meetings at the Starbucks across the street to avoid disclosure on White House visitor logs. Bills are passed not only without Americans being able to see what is in them, but also, Congress isn't allowed to see them in certain instances as well. What must be going on in the woozy dreamlike world of the people who gave the Bamster this award? The best part of this though, is that Obama accepted the award in private.

Monday, April 4, 2011

Another Rosey Jobs Report, Another Lie.

Last week we were fed some very Rosy employment numbers. Where do you think most of those newly employed workers are being hired?  for those who would argue that it doesn't really matter that our public sector is very quickly going to be larger in both number and volume than the private sector, take a look at Greece.  What do you believe is happening there.  Part of the problem, and it is huge to be sure, is that sooner or later you run out of other people's money.  When the public sector becomes larger than the private sector, there is no way that the productive members of society will ever be able to produce enough to support those who suckle on the public teet. 
Don't expect a reversal of this trend anytime soon. Surveys of college graduates are finding that more and more of our top minds want to work for the government. Why? Because in recent years only government agencies have been hiring, and because the offer of near lifetime security is highly valued in these times of economic turbulence. When 23-year-olds aren't willing to take career risks, we have a real problem on our hands. Sadly, we could end up with a generation of Americans who want to work at the Department of Motor Vehicles.
Looking at the above snippet, it appears as though America's youth gets it.  It is far better to be one of the chosen elites of a society than one of the people tasked for doing the actual lifting.  Our nation was founded on the belief that human beings not only had an inalienable right to self determination and self reliance, but that they would be better off as a whole by being afforded the ability to participate in their own destinies.  A scant 223 years later, thanks to the liberal tripe that the Constitution is in fact a flexible living, breathing document, we are morphing into a nation divided into 3 distinct groups.  One group are the elites, who feel that we are all better off surrendering our liberties and decision making capabilities to their more enlightened bureaucratic control.  They wish to tell the rest of us what our standard of living is allowed to be, and which activities are in our best interests.  The next group is peopled with folks who would be content to allow themselves to be cared for by the first.  Their vision for themselves is to live off of the government, accepting whatever lifestyle the benevolent elites would allow.  The third group are the people who wish to see the government be limited in its scope and size.  They want the governments activities limited to those activities expressly stated in the Constitution, complete with the checks and balances system originally established.  They want to freedom to earn what ever standard of living they would be capable of earning for themselves. 

I often hear from people that I should hate the rich and that the progressives are looking out for the little guy.  I must protest this on two grounds.  One, despising the rich is nothing more than a destructive class warfare.  If we punish the rich, how does that help me at all.  If I am missing out on the lifestyle that I want to lead, what difference will it make in my life at all if others are not able to enjoy those things.  I'll explain a little further.  I like going to the Ocean.  I do not get to go every year.  Other people can go every year.  Telling other people that they can not go to the Ocean every year will not help me at all.  I still would not have gone.  The answer for me is to work harder in my daily life to earn that ability.  My lifestyle is independent of the lives of others.  Getting me to hate rich people in order to push their political agenda is nothing more than encouraging my jealously, which anyone above the age of 5 should realize is a self destructive behavior. 

My next objection has to do with this.  Are the elites actually looking out for the little guy?  You would have to be a complete imbecile or just plain not paying attention to believe the answer to be yes.  This wonderful new health care entitlement created is massively expensive.  It is adding a crippling expense of $10,000 per employee for my company.  I am a little guy.  The big guys, with political connections like GE, (you don't come much bigger than GE,) have all found exemptions from paying their fair, or any share for this debacle.  Now, we learn that they will actually be receiving funds from the Obama Administration that the rest of us are being forced to pay. 

The ruling class elites are only concerned with taking care of themselves, and making sure that they always remain in power to ensure that they will always be afforded the standard of living appropriate for those who rule.  I truly do not care what their living standard is, I just want the opportunity to determine what mine will be also.

Hat tip to Vagabond Trader.