Search This Blog

Loading...

Saturday, March 31, 2012

Saturday At The Movies! Asinine Lefty Mythology Edition.

Many great cultures of the ancient world have their own mythologies that they have passed on to the societies that came afterwards. Untrue stories designed to teach life's lessons and to entertain those who listened. Like everything else about our time as world leader here in the United States, we have a second rate version of those mythologies, our political left uses myth not to entertain us, but to cajole and scare. They use myth not to highlight a life time lesson, but to obfuscate fact and to perversely change public opinion for their nefariousness purposes. Please enjoy our greatest economic mind going about the work of destroying those myths. I felt this series to be apropos in light of each of these myths being posited as the basis of every economic argument Barack Obama is making in favor of the American people reelecting him President.

The Robber Baron Myth:



The Great Depression Myth:



The Robin Hood Myth:



The Social Security Myth:



The Free Lunch Myth:

Friday, March 30, 2012

President Obama, Why Are You So Insistent On Forcing Me To Label You As Incompetent?

Yesterday, I chanced upon a television which was broadcasting this fine piece of speechifying by President Obama. Bear in mind, that when he was elected President, I promised myself that I would not fall victim to the same sort of derangement syndrome that so many on the political left were guilty of while George W. Bush was President. I have tried to be fair in my analysis of this man, and gosh darn it, he just makes respecting him impossible. This speech, all eight minutes of it is a great illustration as to why.



Right off the bat, he tells a tale of how our legislative representatives are faced with a choice of standing with the, "big oil companies," or with the poor down trodden citizens of America. I am tired of this type of demagoguery. All the, "big oil companies," do is to provide hundreds of thousands of high paying jobs and produce a product that improves every aspect of every life in America and many lives around the world. Their product is in fact so useful, that many in our nation have begun to describe it as some sort of Constitutional Right, when in fact, it is a product, which is produced like any other.

In his next breath, Barack Obama decided to tell me that oil companies are raking in big profits, and as you may have guessed, I have a problem with his statement both factually, and in the tone he used. Oil companies are not raking in big profits, they are earning them. I am not an expert on the oil business, but I believe there is much more to it than raking in. Drilling for oil, from the movies I've seen is rough work, and hard. After the stuff is extracted from the ground by people who have worked very hard to do so, it must be transported somehow to a refinery. I bet that those people work hard as well, and deserve to be paid for that service, just like the roughnecks who got it from the ground in the first place. It must be refined, which I am sure involves people working hard, and then transported again, by even more hardworking Americans. On top of that, the company who is selling the oil had to bet a veritable fortune of their own capital on each and every well that they drilled. If the well did not produce, there is no government in the world who would have paid their losses for them. Add to that, the small fact that the revenues that any company produces is a measuring stick in our economic system for how much they have benefited us all, and this statement becomes one of the dumbest I have ever heard.

The next lie has to do with tax payer subsidies for oil companies. Yes, for all of you on the left, I called the statement a lie, as this is something that President Obama knows. The government has never written a check to an oil company to subsidize anything. What our Teleprompter in Chief is referring to are the legal tax deductions that oil companies, just like every other American business, take when filling out their tax returns. He has called all of their legal deductions, subsidies. But, for anyone who is interested, here are the facts on those supposed subsidies.  Just as an FYI, the oil industry as a whole pays the second highest rate of taxation of any American business.  Tobacco companies are the only businesses which pay a higher rate.  He went on in his speech to lie about this fact as well.

He talked about how the oil companies are making record profits from an increase in prices, but he neglects to state why.  Every business strives to seek a return on their investment, which is measured as a percentage of the revenue that they keep.  For oil companies, their margins are in fact the lowest of any industry in existence.  Factually speaking, they make about $.03 per gallon sold.  The government in contrast, which by the way does nothing to help extract, transport, refine, transport, or sell, makes $.44 per gallon sold, a profit which is 14.667 times greater than the profit made by the people doing the actual work.  What Pinocchio Obama also fails to mention is the fact that oil companies also reinvest that money back into their company to fund research into things like alternative energy, and better and safer technology with which to extract oil more efficiently.

Then Barack Pinocchio decided to travel down the path to flat out deception.  Domestic Production is up in our country, but that is in spite of Barack Obama's efforts and not as a result of them.  Private land being leased by oil companies in North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Texas, Oklahoma, and in other places have accounted for the increase.  It takes a special kind of person, completely devoid of any integrity, to pose for a photo op in front of pipeline building equipment for a project that he so vehemently opposed, and tried to shut down.  Barack Obama in this little piece of his speech is spiking the football over the Keystone XL Pipeline, something which he still has not signed.  The southern portion of the pipeline was already started under President Bush, the guy that Little Barry blames for everything.  There literally are no words adequate to describe just how disgusting a human being Barack Obama truly is.

So, then we get to the nub of it, right around the 4 minute mark, investments in the, "green fairy," once again.  Rather than allowing a business to operate which has a proven track record of success, and by the way has made all of our lives better, why not instead put the majority of our resources into something that Obama likes, and something that would help his political allies profit from?  He states the green technologies have never been more promising.  What exactly is that promise that he sees in wind and solar?  Was it the half a Billion we lost on Solyndra?  Is it the fact that not a single company he touted or gave money to in the first stimulus has survived the 3 years of his Presidency, and in fact have lost money despite the federal gift of millions, all of it at our expense?  The Chevy Volt can't go from here to there without bursting into flames it seems, and every other nation in the world who started down this idiotic path has already ran their morons out of town who inflicted it upon them.  Is that what President Obama finds so promising about the, "green fairy?"

I have never known another human being with the ability to say as many things which are just flat out wrong with the arrogant level of confidence that Barack Obama has.  His statement that gas prices are only low when the economy is doing badly may be the stupidest thing any human being has ever said.  Keep in mind that Richard Gere, George Clooney, and Debbie Wasserman Schultz still walk the Earth.   Gas prices have spiked not due to any economic conditions which the President has laid on the table, but entirely this time due to the purposeful inflation of our currency, inflicted upon us by himself and Ben Bernanke.  Higher gas prices was one of his stated campaign promises, as a necessary, "price signal," to get us to want his hybrid cars and windmill technology.  One of his major goofs of course, besides his bizarre belief in sticking the nose of government into the free markets that have made us an unparalleled economic success, was the not so small fact that the promised, "green fairy," technologies are no where near capable of meeting our energy demands on even the tiniest scale. They aren't there after having been pushed by massive government subsidies in place since the 1970's, and they won't be for many decades to come.

Then we get to the money quote, "we can't just drill our way out of this problem."  This makes me mad for two reasons.  The minor reason is that this idiotic line is being delivered by a man who has done not one single productive thing during his entire life. What on Earth would Barack Obama know about what would and would not work in any context when it comes to business, economics, productivity, our pricing system, or in any market place?  He has never run so much as a lemon aid stand.  The major reason why it angers me to hear this oft repeated statement of course is that we can just simply drill our way out of this problem.  Part of the issue with using slick sounding catch phrases and nifty slogans for our political discourse is of course that more often than naught, they are simply incorrect.

5 minutes in, and we get that horrendous, "we only have 2% of the oil but use up 20%," nonsense. Putting aside for the moment that this is complete baloney, a lie, a fabrication, and quite possibly the most egregious piece of bull shit since the peak oil theory was postulated by Marxists in the 1970's, who cares? What ever oil we use in this country is used for the purposes of getting to work, building products that benefit all of man kind and was rightfully purchased in what ever market place in which it was sold. We grow food with that oil that quite literally feeds the entire world, and even if we produced not one drop of oil here, that does not lead to the moralistic nonsense that we are not allowed by the oil deities somehow to purchase it. There is no law or belief any where that says we should only use what ever we can find within our own borders. Nations have been trading goods and services across their borders for millennia, and suddenly oil is the only thing that stirs up moral outrage. Spare me the idiocy of the political left, and nothing highlights that idiocy quite like the moronic statement which led off this paragraph.

Thursday, March 29, 2012

The Real Issue With Obamacare.

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Amendment IX.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights,
shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained
by the people.

Amendment X.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution,
nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to
the States respectively, or to the people.

For years, about one hundred of them, our Congress, President, and Supreme Court have been operating under the delusion that the Tenth Amendment to our Constitution does not exist. For this reason, the geniuses who got their heads together to challenge this sink hole of a law, decided to leave that out of their list of things to gripe about in court. Antonin Scalia decided to add that to his decision making process anyhow. Following is an audio excerpt of Antonin Scalia schooling Donald Verrilli on just exactly what the Tenth Amendment means, and why it is applicable in this case. This speech by the way, above all the other hand wringing statements made which caused the various earthquakes amongst the political left, should be what they fear the most. Antonin Scalia has just made the Tenth a part of the Constitution once again, and it's about freaking time.




A small history lesson is in order. When the Constitution was originally drafted, the 13 existing states which made up the first version of our fledgling nation refused to consider ratification of the document as the law of our land without adding some guarantees of certain freedoms. These first ten Amendments to the Constitution became known as the Bill of Rights. At first, James Madison, the author of the document, verbally expressed dismay at the idea that these Amendments would even be considered, not because he was not in agreement, but because he felt them to be unnecessary. Since nowhere in the document was authority given for the federal government to abridge those freedoms, he felt it would be impossible for this to ever happen to us. After further consideration, and the realization that sometime in the future, it would be possible for the government to grant itself further authority and increase its own size and scope, he decided to add another two Amendments which were not previously discussed. The entire purpose of Amendments IX and X was for the prevention of a government being allowed to grant itself more power than was originally granted. The Tenth Amendment says, if we didn't expressly grant authority to the government in the Constitution, then they don't have that authority. Those many powers not granted to the government expressly, belong to the states, and or the People.

This law flies in the face of the concept of the government being prevented from adding to its own scope. Buried within the 2900 pages of vague and purposefully unreadable language which contains as its number one most oft repeated phrase, "at the discretion of the Secretary," and as its number two most oft repeated phrase, "such sums as are necessary," is the government's granting itself a plethora of new found authority. Every single carrier of Health Insurance now fits the legal definition of financially distressed. Only one bank in America may now be able to give a Perkins or Stafford Loan. All Real Estate Transactions will now carry a 3% Federal Excise Tax. All Financial Transactions, including direct deposits of your pay check will now include a 1% Federal Excise Tax. All citizens have now been ordered to participate in the purchase of insurance, so that the federal government may then regulate the insurance market. Several medications have been removed from the FDA Approval because they have been deemed to not be cost effective. IPAB's will now decide the best course for medical treatment, irrespective of the advice of medical professionals. Being an actual doctor is not a prerequisite by the way for being appointed to an IPAB, but being politically connected is. Demands to inspect lunches packed by parents and then subsequently tossed aside in favor of a government approved bill of fair, that's now not only legal, but in practice nationally. Basically any activity, food, or even your choice of beverage are now all deemed to impact your health in some way, and subsequently open to federal oversight. Sodium, Sugar and Carbonated beverages are already in the cross hairs. My guess is that red meat, including hot dogs and hamburgers can not be far behind. With 2900 pages, there is no way that your Senator of Representative read the whole thing. Most of the crap that is in this Law is a complete surprise to the folks who voted it into law. That alone, should be a crime. But don't worry too much about your elected representatives, they at least had the good sense to exempt themselves from the ravages of this Law, and over 2500 waivers were granted to the various organizations that stood up and promoted it. It's too expensive for GE to pay their share of the costs, but us regular folks, well let's just say that we're up the creek not only missing a paddle, but the entire canoe.

Obamacare, if allowed to stand in any form at all, represents the end of any freedoms granted to us by our creator and protected for us by our Constitution. Literally, there is no end to what the government would be allowed to do to us under the guise of looking out for our health. Many of my liberal friends will scream that no one would ever think to remove those very freedoms in such a manner and that even mentioning such a possibility is the height of hyperbole. To those people I say, how on Earth can you be so blindingly stupid? The very fact that they have rammed such a Law through the Legislative Process and had it signed into law tells me that they intend to do this very thing. We have already heard the nonsensical shouts of how farting cattle are creating asthma attacks for our nation's children. With the Constitution removed, the burden of proving these asinine allegations is no longer necessary. All it takes now, that Obamacare is law, is a chief Executive that agrees with this type of idiocy. By the way, we have that now.

I've said it before, but it bears repeating. I do not care if the vote for striking this abomination down comes with a tally of 9 to 0 or 5 to 4, I only care that the right decision is reached. By the way, Roe V. Wade was a 5 to 4 decision. Supreme Court Cases where the winner is only able to tally 5 of 9 are just as binding as those where the winning side has 9 of 9.

Beyond these issues, as to whether the law itself is constitutional, there is still the basic issue of whether it was even smart.  Our health care and insurance markets are screwed up, not the health care system itself, just the market place in which it operates.  The reason it is so screwed up is due to the government's past interventions.  The answer to these problems is not going to be found in the form of giving us more of what created the problem in the first place.  Rather than offering hugely expensive and expansive solutions designed to somewhat mitigate the ill effects created by government intrusions, why not just return to the free market principles which have always worked, when ever they have been tried.

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Another Week, Another Presidential First, We'll Call This One Treason.

Make no mistake about it, as a President of the United States of America, there is only so far that even our worst chief executives, no matter which party you happen to belong to, or where your ideology happens to place you on the spectrum, have managed to fall. Barack Obama has shattered that record, and managed something that no other President has dreamed of in their deepest narcissistic meanderings. Open treason committed against the United States of America is something that even James Earl Carter and Millard Fillmore kept clear of, Barack Obama, not so much. Asking the leader of our primary enemy that they cool down their shenanigans until after November in order to help their paid agent get reelected as our leader constitutes, beyond a frightening realization that we elected a traitor to our nation as the head of it, a treasonous act. Yet, somehow, I believe that only half of America's population knows that this event even occurred. That would be the half that watches Fox News, reads the conservative blogs, or listens to talk radio.



I have asked many times, and have never received any kind of an answer, this one question. If you were going to set about the business of destroying the United States of America from within, would you do anything differently than what Barack Obama has done as President of the United States? I'll leave that as an open question to those liberals who read my blog.

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

Obama's Second Day In Court, Cautiously Optimistic.

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

So, two days of oral arguments down, and one more to go. Apparently, those who have watched the courts for years and then fed us their plethora of incorrect predictions of how cases would be decided upon are now telling us that this piece of crap law is indeed in trouble. Jeffrey Toobin, as far a left Obama cheer leader as has ever existed in the MSM drive by media has labeled the day a disaster for the Zero Administration. Before we all get too excited though, bear in mind that those who predict the courts direction based on questions asked during oral arguments have been wrong as often as they have been right. What is wild however, and actually has me feeling as positive for the future of our great nation as I have felt in these past miserable 3 years is this little fact, the spinmeisters have already started with the narrative that if Obama loses this battle, it bodes well for him winning the general election.

Many on our side of America's ideological divide have echoed this sentiment. To my fellow residents of the right, I can not agree with the position that we should allow something bad to stand because it will represent a better victory in the future. I can not root for a prolonged economic malaise and continued hardship, just because it is temporarily expedient from a political perspective. Make no mistake about it, this law, Obamacare, represents the end game for all of our Constitutional Liberties. Many on the left are lamenting the fact the the Obama Administration Solicitor General's performance seems to be not up to their expectations. In his two appearances before the Supreme Court so far, David Verrilli has convinced 0 judges of any of the positions that President Obama dispatched him to argue in favor of. I wouldn't blame David Verrilli however, convincing anyone who is awake that Obama's positions on anything is in keeping with the Constitution as sanely regarded is too tall a task to ask of anyone. President Obama and his minions asked David Verrilli to argue that our Federal Government has the power to force a transaction that constitutes commerce in order that they may then be able to regulate it. Our entire republic's basis is built on the principle that government's authority is limited by the consent of those governed. Obama's position is that there ought to be no limits on what ever authority the Executive Branch wishes to appoint itself. It would be hard for any attorney to argue that position, no matter how slick his or her tongue may be.



The Commerce Clause in our Constitution has been stretched beyond all original intent of our founders. It was originally included solely as a means to prevent Virginia from imposing tariffs on goods produced in Massachusetts which were then sold in Virginia. It was meant as keeping our 50 separate republics on the same currency standard, and to create one economy. by stretching the meaning to include that every citizen in the country be forced to buy a federally approved product, at threat of violence is scary indeed. What happens when the government decides that George Foreman Grills are a basic human necessity due to the healthier diets achieved by people who eliminate all taste from their meats before consumption? A great day for America my friends, that's what. Some small child in California has an asthma attack, and it's forced Chevy Volts for anyone living in Maine. At least that will be a bail out for Government Motors that actually has a chance of succeeding.

Monday, March 26, 2012

Some where In Between.

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

The problem with paying attention and studying history and economics is that life holds precious few surprises along those areas of consideration for me any more. I pretty much know what is coming next. During the campaign of 2008, when my coworkers asked me what was wrong with the specter of an Obama Presidency, even before it happened, I told them in detail, what exactly the next 4 years would look like. Here we are in 2012, and not a single prediction was off the mark. Stagflation has taken root, new regulations are choking private sector growth, the federal behemoth has grown in size and increased its own scope, and America is seen as a fat bloated paper tiger by some very dangerous and by the way insane tin pot dictators who are hell bent on destroying both Israel and the United States. We have seen a half dozen revolutions by dumb college aged students in several formerly benign Middle Eastern nations in which the hard line Islamists wasted no time in taking over and summarily killed off the college aged flower eyed revolutionaries. One of those new Islamist nightmare states even took the step of taking American citizens as hostages.  Something else looms however, and it truly transcends political party lines.



In case you missed it, Timothy Geitner, the tax cheat who we were all told to overlook his felonious behavior since he was the only living American smart enough to lead us out of our economic malaise, admitted the following in his testimony to the House Budget Committee. Our Statutory spending is greater currently than our tax revenue, both now and during any time in the future. That is to say, under our current course of action, there will never be a point in time when that this will not be the case. He also admitted that there is no plan under consideration by the Obama Administration where this will ever be addressed. Addressing the problem is not considered a favorable course of action by these people. He also admitted that our economic collapse will occur in 2027, which for those of you keeping score at home is just 15 short years from now.

Our budget is comprised of two constituent parts. Discretionary spending is what it takes to actually operate our government. Entitlement spending is that portion that is mandated spending as a matter of law, it was voted in by our Congress at some point in the past and then signed into law by a past or present President. We have all sat and listened to people scream and yell about some wasteful program that they want to see cut, but the truth of the matter is that our budget has zero chance of ever being fiscally sane until we change those laws which require the entitlement spending. We can cut every penny of Discretionary spending, end the EPA, Department of Defense, Education, HHS, Labor, Energy, State, Transportation, Interior, all foreign aid, the SBA, and that will still leave us with an unmanageable budget shortfall, which will put off our demise perhaps until June of 2027 rather than January of that year.

Today, our Supreme Court is deciding if one piece of those massive entitlements is in fact Constitutional. If the court does indeed strike that law down, then the crisis will be averted for a decent amount of time, at least on paper, but that is only the beginning. It was Art Laffer who identified the trend with revenues raised through taxation. Our revenue will always be between 19% and 21% of our GDP. No matter how much we soak the rich or stimulate the economy, this level of revenue has always been consistent. During our entire history as a nation, 19% and 21% of GDP has been the limits of money flowing into the federal government. If we place ourselves, as we have done, in the position of spending more than that on our various bag of free goodies from the public largess, we will eventually collapse. Knowing that we can no longer afford to repay those bills, our boys in Washington have taken to printing more paper which looks like money and are easing that into the economy. As a nation, we are shocked that things are beginning to take more of that worthless paper in order to buy things, such as gasoline or groceries.

There is ultimately a problem with this approach to our fiscal problems with this thinking however, and that is that at some point in time, as history has already shown by the way, people around the globe will simply stop accepting our currency for anything other than lining the bottoms of bird cages, lighting fires, or wrapping raw fish with. We will revert to the barter system, or cigarettes will once again become our new money. (From 1777 through 1791, three states used tobacco as the official currency. Tobacco was also accepted as payment by many foreign governments as well.) Fiat money being created by tin pot dictators to pay for their massive appetites is nothing new. Neither is the concept that it has never worked in the past. It may surprise some of you to know that it is not even new here in America. Franklin Roosevelt, Richard Nixon, and Jimmy Carter all took up the practice. What is new in America this time around is the fact that we now have a predicted end date for our demise as a nation. If your child is born this year, he or she will not have graduated high school before the end is reached. We are doomed about the same time as those religious school confirmations of faith will be occurring. That is not what scares me however. What scares me is that the people in charge have just admitted to knowing that this is true, and have told us that they plan to do not one single thing about it. They plan on continuing their spending anyhow. The Federal Government has an appetite you see, and it is large indeed. The sacrifice, in their eyes anyhow, is for we the people to make, and not for them to do with any less. My fear is that we, as a nation have not already risen up to put these people out of our misery.

Those of you who have read my stuff before know that I am not in favor of a standard which ties our economy to a hard asset either. Gold for example, made such a poor currency in the past, that even when we used it, people printed up paper to take its place. We had the exact opposite problems with Gold, which resulted in crippling deflation and depressions. There has to be a solution some where in the middle. The Federal Reserve system was put into place precisely to prevent these people from doing that which they are doing today. Currency in itself, whether it be tied to a hard asset, or just based on faith such as today's was never more than a substitute for the sum of our labors which facilitated an ease of trade. If you grew Lima Beans and I shod horses, when I wanted windows installed, there was no way in which I could trade my services to the window installer if he wanted steak. Currency allows for me to sell my services of putting iron on the feet of horses, indirectly trading with the entire community as I do so, and making it easy to purchase the services of the window maker who does not even own a horse, and does not like Lima Beans. For this purpose, Gold was chosen as the standard measure of value, and since the beginning of time, its value has been assigned to it by people. Paper can receive the same assignment, except that printing more of it creates its own problems. Gold was too scarce, and paper too abundant. The Fed was supposed to keep our printing proclivities in check, while allowing that supply to grow in pace with the population and the size of our economy, epic failure.

Our system's breakdown was in the fact that we depended upon our society always being led by sane people. It was when we allowed ourselves to be convinced that only geniuses could lead us that we started down this destructive path. The well educated Ivy League crowd has always been able to explain and spin why the malaise has not in fact been their fault, and indeed someone else's doing. They have eloquently told us time and again how if we just followed them a little further down the road to our fiscal implosion, that the impossible would somehow become possible. A decade and a half is what we now have left to not only change our path, but to start actually correcting our past mistakes. Other wise, our currency will be canned foods, shot guns, and ammunition. I would rather not live in that world, but one positive thing is this, the hippies would be the first to lose.

Sunday, March 25, 2012

Sunday At The Movies! Thomas Sowell Interviews Episode 2

Thomas Sowell makes some critical observations of how our country is being dismantled by the Marxist that have taken over the Democrat Party. Our Constitutional Liberties are being stolen from us. Our precious checks and balances system is being subverted, almost unnoticed by an American Public that is seemingly intent on watching reality television rather than preventing the loss of their God given right to Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness.



As a bonus feature, Mark Steyn gives his impressions on the very same set of circumstances as Sowell in another interview with Peter Robinson. Steyn's style of delivery is different than Sowell's but his insight is just as keen.

Saturday, March 24, 2012

Saturday At The Movies! More Milton Friedman Stuff.

The record of individual freedom and the flowering of a society are crystal clear. Over the course of Human History, in nation after nation, the placement of restraints upon a society, for what ever reason always has the very same results. The wealth of those societies disappears, and the lot of the ordinary man is worsened. The results of free market principles, where ever in history they have been allowed to flourish, has led to unprecedented wealth and improved living standards for those people who were lucky enough to live in those societies.



This clip represents Friedman's analysis on government regulation and its true effects. The man was a fearless debater, as is evidenced by his willingness to tell Drs. attending an AMA convention exactly why they were doing more harm than good to their patients by demanding that medical professionals seek a medical board licenses to perform as physicians. By the end of his speech that day, the Doctors agreed with him. Today of course, the Institute for Justice has noticed that in most states, people giving hair cuts for a living are required to attend more class time than the people working as Doctors. Clearly the licensing pendulum has swung way too far in the government mandate direction.



One of the major problems with Welfare is that precious little of the money confiscated from taxpayers in order to help the poor actually makes the completed journey to actually help the poor. Since the poor are never actually helped, they can always be counted upon to continually need more and more, necessitating further assistance, which is then used as a bludgeon to further increase taxation rates in order to help the poor. It never ends, and there will always, thanks to liberal politicians, be plenty of poor people around. We, as a nation, were already well on our way to eliminating poverty in America prior to Lyndon Johnson's war on poverty. Since the advent of the, "Great Society," however, not so much.



One of the many problems with the liberal mind set is to assume that our economy is a zero sum entity. The fallacy that if Bobby and Johnny are playing with a red ball, Jane and Sally don't get to play. Never allowing for a second red ball to be introduced into the mix. It is possible to create wealth, or as it became known under Ronald Reagan, Supply Side Economics.

Friday, March 23, 2012

So What!?

Michael Ramirez Cartoon


We have all heard, since the early 1970's, that familiar liberal attempt to make us all feel guilty for driving our cars, heating our homes, turning on lights to read, watching television, or participating in any activity which uses energy or energy byproducts in our daily lives. The U.S. only produces x percentage of the world's oil, but manages to consume y percentage. We are led to believe, either through the usage of crying caricatures of Native Americans, inaccurate disproportionate maps, or unnwatchable Hollywood bilge such as, "Avatar," or, "Dune," that somehow this resource is a zero sum endeavor, and that we hear in the United States are in fact stealing the precious life blood of some distant unknown land. Many of my smarter compatriots on the right have taken up the sport of pointing out the total baloney in the arguments being put forward, and I admit that it has been great fun to read this commentary. I wish to take a different approach.

So what? Let's assume for just one moment that everything Barack Obama has said on the subject of oil production and oil prices are true. I realize that this acceptance of fantasy is harder for people with any sings of intelligence, but just pretend you're reading a Tolkien or Lewis novel or something like that. Fairies and Orcs are real, so why wouldn't it be possible for President Obama to be telling the truth? So what? Even if we produced not one single drop of oil domestically, why does that lend any credence to the argument that we should somehow be prohibited from its usage? The purchase of oil is not a wealth transfer, it is a wealth exchange. For those who do not fully understand the distinction, let me explain it to you.

We buy oil in this country and we use it, rather than let it sit on a shelf somewhere. Farmers use it in their machinery to make food grow on their farms, which is then used to not only feed us here in America, but pretty much the rest of the world as well. Glad uses oil to make sandwich bags so that people all across America can pack lunches if they so choose rather than blowing their entire disposable income on restaurants during their work week. They also make garbage bags so that environmentalists will be happy when we no longer take our refuse and throw it where ever we see fit. Doctors, operating on patients will use energy for lighting so that they can see where to cut, plastics exist all over that operating room, and the sterilization process uses extreme heat, and then air conditioning to keep the operating room at a constant non bacteria breeding ground temperature. As this could go on for days, I believe every one should get the point by now, so what?

Now let's take a look at the argument that it will take x number of years for new production and sources to come on line anyhow. So what? Nobody in the known universe is suggesting or even attempting to suggest that our need for affordable energy is a short term proposition. We have all heard the arguments that our manufacturing base has been fleeing the country. Let me let you in on a well kept secret. The manufacturing of the entire globe will follow where the cheap affordable energy, and to a lesser extent, the cheap affordable labor are. As long as we have oil here in America, and we are willing to allow the free markets to provide that oil to those who want it, we will continue to have a manufacturing base. Our base started to flee, not coincidentally, the very same day that our elected leaders thought it would be a good idea to meddle in those markets. 5,10,15,20,and 30 years from now, we will look back on today and say, "gee, I wish we had had the foresight to drill for more oil x number of years ago." So even if Barack Obama's asinine predictions, based on nothing real by the way, about how long it would take to get oil from a new source to market, so what?

While we're at it, let's talk about the concept of, we already are drilling, and are drilling more than we ever have. So what? Our population is growing by about 150,000 people per month. It stands to reason that more of us will use more resources to create more stuff. Assuming that this is true, (remember that we are still operating in the Obama bizarro universe here,) this is still a poor reason not to allow anyone who finds it economically advantageous to drill, to drill. The beauty of the free market system is that when production is actually too high, the price signals of economic loss will tell those drilling when to stop. People who lose money on an endeavor, will soon stop. People who make money on an endeavor will continue, and find ways to do more of it. The profits that big oil, or little oil for that matter, are able to turn, represent nothing more than the measure by which they were able to benefit their fellow man. When you buy a gallon of gasoline at what ever price per gallon that you pay, it is because at that moment in time, you would rather have the gasoline than the money. Conversely, when gas prices climb too high, people make the conscience decision to drive less. the fact that oil companies are able to produce such large profits, is a good thing. This means that society as a whole, has determined that their product is very important and useful to the rest of us. So, for those who inexplicably feel as though the President's assessment as to our current oil production is accurate, so what?

Alternative forms of energy, known as, "green energy," are the future of the world and America is another of his favorite talking points. Never mind that belief in this necessitates a complete misunderstanding of economics and reality, let's assume, since we have already agreed to do so, that it is all true. So what? when I decide to travel the 3 hours to Pittsburgh to watch my favorite Hockey Team play in the Stanley Cup Playoffs this year, I will purchase sufficient energy to put me in a 3000 pound piece of American machinery and travel the 180 miles at an average speed of 65 miles per hour. I will then, after watching what hopefully will be a great game, travel the same distance home again. My cares for this energy are that it will be a) reliable, b) convenient, and c) affordable. I want to actually have a reasonable assurance that I will make it there and back, that I will be able to utilize the energy when it is convenient for me to do so without hours of preparation ahead of time, and that it will cost me personally a price that I feel is worth it to pay for such an endeavor. Do I ultimately care what the source of that energy is? Most Americans do not, and for those who do, they are free to put that into their equations. Alternative sources, without the government's meddling into the market place, would cost much more. Since this is a free country, those people who care are free to pay that price. When those alternative sources become more efficient to utilize than current sources, I will be the first to use them. Even before the Obama Administration began its war on energy, BP was the leading researcher into wind and solar power. They are in the business of providing us with our energy needs, and from their perspective, they are selling us the ability to travel 180 miles in 3 hours for about $20. Ultimately, their decision as to what the end product will be depends upon their ability to bring it to market in sufficient quantities as to satisfy those three conditions that I mentioned earlier. Even if we witnessed today, the full splendor of the green fairy, and we were fully capable of satisfying our energy needs through the wind and the sun, the free market system would still be best suited to tell us when oil production was not longer needed, and when it would be a good time to stop producing it. So, even if the President's assumptions about how soon we would be able to replace fossil fuels as our primary source of energy, so what?

Now, since I am a jazz fan, and since the Miles Davis tune bears the same name as my posting, please enjoy Miles Davis and John Coltrane performing, "So What."


Thursday, March 22, 2012

Our Constitutional Scholar President Gets His Tuchus Beaten Again By SCOTUS

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

It's a bad day for a liberal President when even Justice Ginsburg rules against you.  Not only did the Obama Administration fail to convince the court's only openly Marxist jurist serving on the bench, but they also have to live with the notion that she wrote the concurring opinion.  This case marks the second time during Administration that President Obama has had one of his policies lose in the Supreme Court.  While he is not the first President to find himself on the wrong side of the question of Constitutionality, he is still 0 for 2.  This is not the record we would have expected for a person who was marketed to the country as a, "Constitutional Scholar."

His first smack down came in January of this year if you will remember, when a 9 to 0 decision said basically that Barack Obama, or any President does not have the authority to tell churches who they could and could not hire based on the religious leanings of the church.  In that case, a Lutheran Church ran a private school, and made the decision to hire as teachers, only those people that they felt would be good role models for passing on the Lutheran message as it pertains to all things educational.  In other words, they wanted their teachers to be Christians, and to pass those beliefs on to their students.  This is what the parents who sent their kids to a Lutheran school wanted, and this is what the owners of the school wanted.  President Obama disagreed.  In Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church Vs. Equal Opportunity Employment Commission, the court decided that a President was not allowed to violate the First Amendment because his ultimate goal is to put an end to the practice of any religion other than Islam in America, nor for any other reason that he might have.

Yesterday's loss, which makes him Zero for Two, came in the form of Sackett vs. The Environmental Protection Agency.  In this particular case, The EPA decided that they would prevent the Sackett's from building a house on a piece of property that they owned.  The EPA decided that the property consisted of, or was located on wetlands in Idaho.  Here is where it gets dicey, they did not want to defend their position in court, and decided to dispense with the entire concept of due process.  They thought a good way to do this would be to tell the Sacketts that they thought it was possible that their property was inappropriate to build a house on, and therefore they should stop while the EPA took an indefinite amount of time to consider the matter.  They threatened to fine the Sacketts $35,000 per day for each day the Sacketts defied the order to stop building, and then further threatened to increase the fines to $70,000 per day if the Sacketts challenged them in court.  Nice!  So, for those of you keeping score at home, Little Barry read the Constitution and decided that the Fifth Amendment meant that he could circumvent Due Process by simply declaring that it was possible that a person was doing wrong without ever actually alleging it.  Since the allegation was never actually made, then a fair and speedy trial would never be warranted, regardless of the fact that deprivation of property was ongoing, permanent, and beyond redress.

The Supreme Court yesterday did not agree.  The decision was unanimous, not that the Sacketts could start building, but that due process must be granted.  For those who believe that this decision was limited in scope, and therefore not terribly important, I disagree.  It is a shot across the bow of a President who has been effectively creating law by executive fiat since he lost control of the Legislative Branch in January of 2011.  Things that Obama does are making their way to the Supreme Court in rapid fashion, and I do not believe that to be an accident either.  One other interesting thing to note here, he lost 9 to 0 on this one.  Putting aside any of the idiotic claims that this man is somehow a Constitutional Scholar, in his two trips to the Supreme Court so far, he has a combined score of 18 against, and 0 in favor of himself.  This does not exactly inspire confidence in his understanding of, or even his promise to uphold our founding document.  By writing a concurring opinion, Justice Ginsburg, the farthest left member of the court basically told the man child President that he has gone too far.  Removing Due Process prior to deprivation of Life, Liberty, or Property is the stuff that monarchs do to their subjects.  This is not something Presidents do to their fellow citizens.

The bad news for President Obama is that this is not going to be his last trip to the Supreme Court.  On Monday, he gets to go again, and this one will be a dozy.

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

Budget Battle Redux! Maybe We'll Actually Pass One This Time.

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

So, here we are in familiar territory, again. Yogi Berra, famous as much for his Malaprops as for his stellar baseball play, once noted that a situation was like deja vu all over again. That's where I am. Once again, at some time in the past, a budget was, according to law, supposed to be passed by our congress and signed into law by our President. A deal was struck which allowed the Federal Government to continue on without any budgetary constraints on its spending and the can was kicked further down the road to some point in the future. Once again, here we are in that future, and the debt, spending, lack of budget, are all here waiting for us taking up that all too familiar position of a looming crisis. Once again, this looming crisis will be dutifully reported on, as the end of all financial life on the planet as we have known it, should we fail to just allow the President and his Marxist allies have their own way.

Let's review a few pertinent facts this time around. Passing a budget is one of the very few Constitutional Duties our Congress actually has. The last budget passed in this country actually occurred during a year when the Republicans held the Presidency, and both Houses of Congress. When the Democrats held all three of these things, they not only failed to produce a budget, but failed to even discuss one. They passed their monstrous destruction of our Health Care System instead. Since the Republicans retook the House in 2011, they have produced a budget for both years where such a budget was statutorily called for. The Democrats have not only failed to hold any kind of a vote on these budgets in the Senate, they have not even held a discussion on anything related to a budget within the confines of their chamber. (Harry Reid appearing all over television and carping about it does not count as a Senatorial Discussion.) Again, as is always the case, the Media will report it to the American People as though it is Republican Obstructionism that is preventing a budget from being passed. Republicans do not hate old people and or puppy dogs.

The media, and not coincidentally the Democrats in Washington are of course blasting Paul Ryan's latest effort to bring some sort of fiscal sanity to our Government. They are painting a picture of Ryan's America straight out of the darkest ramblings of the bleakest Charles Dickens Novel. Even if these portraits turned out to be true, there is one inescapable fact. Paul Ryan has at the very least come up with a budget, as is the duty of Congress. The Democrats in Washington have not so much as discussed a budget since the ancient date of 2007. Paul Ryan's budget addresses the only area in which our out of control debt situation can successfully be addressed. That is the statutory spending, otherwise known as entitlement spending. As of 2010, entitlements have grown larger than our revenues of $2.3 Trillion. The fiscal problems that we are experiencing today are entirely related to our spending, as a nation, and not at all related to the revenue confiscated by our government. The economic debates over this fact have been proven so many times now, by every competent economist, (which Paul Krugman does not qualify,) that it has become beyond tiresome to mention or write about it yet again. I suppose that is the goal of the political left in some fashion, just tire us out by making the same idiotic arguments over and over and over again. I believe Joseph Goebbels referred to this as white noise.

Maybe this time, the Republican leadership will actually stay and have this fight. I am hopeful, but not optimistic. By drawing the line in the sand, the GOP held House could in fact inflict a balanced budget upon the country very suddenly. In the long run, and possibly the short term, this would in fact be a very positive thing for the United States of America. My suspicion though is that a new deal will be struck which will allow for another period of time in which our Government is allowed to spend money without anyone controlling the purse strings. A future date to address the now increased problem of fiscal insanity will be set, and I will be writing this very same article again.

Here is the Daily Caller take on the Ryan Budget.


Tuesday, March 20, 2012

The Obama White House Scores Another Presidential First!

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

Well, it is that time of year again, time for the Anti Semites of the world to gather around the globe and discuss how they will go about the business this year of wiping Israel off of the map and finally ridding the world of Jews. For those of you who are new to this event, it is called the Doha Conference.  A new wrinkle will be added this year, Reverend Jeremiah Wright will be adding his own little laughably asinine twist to the festivities, He will be leading the, "March on Jerusalem." This little piece of ground bears repeating once again, Reverend Wright is the pastor of Barack Obama's church, where a peculiar brand of Christianity called Black Liberation Theology is practiced. This particular style of Christianity is basically a cross between hard core communism, peppered with pure Jew hatred, and topped off with the separatism of the races as preached by the Nation of Islam. Before anyone climbs aboard the, "calling Obama a Muslim bandwagon," slow down. The race separatism as preached by the Nation of Islam was not a Muslim thing. It was started only in this country when Elijah Muhammad started teaching and converting Black prison inmates to Islam here in America. The separatism, which truly transcends race, was something that caught on immediately for much of the African American community as a whole. Many of the African American preachers who were more interested in filling their donation coffers than in the spiritual aspects of Christianity found it to be a fruitful message.

Enjoy a picture of Reverend Wright's home in the most exclusive neighborhood in Chicago.



It's not exactly the stuff of casting away Earthly rewards for the higher spiritual existence is it. While I am a Capitalist, and unabashedly so, I believe in earning an honest living, which by the way race hustling and swindling parishioners through an organization that portends to be a church does not qualify as such. Back to the topic at hand.

There is one line in Pamela Gellar's essay that was pointed out to me by a fellow blogger.

The White House has refused to comment on Wright's decision to endorse the March on Jerusalem, or the presence of state department consultants at the so-called Doha Conference.

This indeed represents a Presidential first. As a kid, and a committed leftist, (people who knew me then probably still don't believe my conversion to the light,) I was thrilled when Jimmy Carter announced that he would be pushing the U.N. to hold a conference on Human Rights. This forerunner to the U.N.H.R.C. started my path to life on the Right. The conference, held in Sweden if memory serves, decided that the tiny nation of Israel was the single greatest violator of human rights in world history. Since its inception, the U.N.H.R.C has had among its members such paragons of human rights advocates as China, the nation that imprisoned the dali lama and occupied Tibet, Saudi Arabia, the nation where non Muslims can be executed for traveling to Mecca, Libya, the nation where a brutal thuggish insane dictator was just ousted at the insistence of the world community, Iran, a place where gay people are buried up to their necks and then stoned to death, and who can forget our good friends the North Koreans, a place where people are literally shot for not sufficiently showing enough mournful emotion when their tin pot dictator passes away. Welcome my friends to the ultimate madness made possible by allowing moral equivalence to gain a foothold.

It has always amazed me when people on the left will be willing to tell me who is a racist, who is antisemitic, who is homophobic, and who respects human rights. Growing up I heard that Nixon hated Jewish people, and yet, it was Richard Nixon who formally recognized Israel and made them an ally. It was not Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, Jack Kennedy, nor Lyndon Johnson who took this courageous first step. As a matter of fact, Lyndon Johnson actually took the step of ordering a U.S. Naval vessel to take up a position with an invading armada during the 1967 war against Israel. (what the orders given to the USS Liberty actually were is still not clear. The Liberty was a naval vessel which was on loan to the NSA. One thing is certain, if during a time of war you align yourselves purposefully with an invading fleet, there is a good chance you will be shot at, and the Liberty was.) Never before in our history has a President, nor any Secretary of State seen fit to participate in the Doha conference. For those of you who might have missed the historic and political significance of this event amidst the bloodbath known as the Republican Primary, I'll lay it out for you. The United States, under the current leadership is now participating actively in a discussion on how to eliminate Israel and kill off the world's Jews.

I have for years been one of the very few Jewish Conservatives. It still perplexes me. Liberalism is anathema to everything we believe. The entire economic philosophy is based on jealousy. One need look no further than the Ten Commandments to see that this is wrong. Welfare is dishonestly labeled as charity, and moral equivalence allows for any cruelty to be leveled against people who seek any type of freedom. I believe, for lack of a better explanation that the reason why so many of my fellow Jews vote with the Liberals is out of some sort of political momentum. We all grew up hearing Democrats good, Republicans bad. My conversion continued when Jimmy Carter, appointing people to serve on the Holocaust Memorial committee, looked at a list of potential candidates and famously wrote the words on the first draft, "too many Jews." The top White House visitor during Bill Clinton's 8 years in the Oval Office was Yassar Arafat. Now, Barack Obama has topped them both by sending a White House representative to see just how America can help with ridding the world of Jews. It would seem as though those promises made to AIPAC have most definitely reached their expiration date.

Let me address some of the criticism that I know is forthcoming, before it arrives. Some will say that being against Israel is somehow not the same thing as being antisemitic. Those of you who say this are full of baloney. You are either being dishonest with others or yourselves. Antisemitism in America is frowned upon, as is bigotry in general. The anti Israel canard was invented to display your hatred of Jews without overtly demonstrating your bigoted tendencies. I have sat and listened politely to your whining about, "all of that aid to Israel," for years. I refuse to sit quietly by any longer. At no point do you fine bigots bring up the Aid to Egypt, a nation which has actually taken American Hostages by the way, in the same breath. Both countries coincidentally were given those economic incentives as a part of the very same act, put into place by the Carter Administration as a part of the Camp David Accords. One of these countries by the way has repaid every penny in this aid, making that aid in fact trade. Guess which one it is. As a matter of fact, with all of the foreign aid handed out by the United States, only one nation around the globe has taken the step to completely repay us. That nation is Israel. So, to all of you who single Israel out as being a welfare recipient, you are truly hateful bigots, and worse, you are purposefully blinded by that bigotry. Be proud at least in who you are, wear your antisemitism on your sleeves, I believe history has already provided a truly appropriate symbol for you.

Some of you point out that Israel's policies are unnecessarily cruel to those poor perpetual victims, the, "Palestinians." You say this as if the, "Palestinians," are a peaceful restive people who only want to live in a world where they are able to grow olive trees and bang their foreheads into the ground 5 times daily. You will argue that criticism of Israel's policies does not reflect bigotry at all, that you are merely sticking up for the poor helpless souls being persecuted by the Israelis. Those of you who say this deserve none of my respect, nor the time I am about to spend trashing this worse than evil thought process. The Jewish presence in that region dates back over 4400 years, and in fact is the earliest written recorded history in the world. That history of Jewish presence is unbroken, despite the claims that the Jews were somehow nomads wondering the globe in search of air conditioning. The slightest bit of actual research, and not just parroting crap you've heard will show you this. The number of Jews living in Israel is a very tiny minority of population when compared to her enemies. The thought that 12 Million Jews are able to inflict such brutal crimes on 500 Million Arabs is preposterous on its face. The Israelis have a right to protect themselves against daily attempts to kill them. By the way, the efforts the Israelis take to protect themselves are mild when you compare them to what any other people anywhere else in the world would be doing. There is only one nation in the world today that takes the precaution of giving 24 hours advance notice during time of war of an imminent attack. This is done to protect civilian life, and it isn't Hezbollah, Hamas, the Syrians, or even the Jordanians who do this. If the, "Palestinians," laid their weapons down today, there would be peace, If Israel did this, there would be a massacre. Only a bigot is unable to see this very clearly.

There are some who will say that all foreign aid should be eliminated, and while this is not antisemitic in nature, it is ridiculous to believe that it will have any sort of an impact on our fiscal problems. Elimination of all foreign aid, as proposed by Senator Rand Paul, would shore up 5 whole days of our budget shortfall for the entire year. Foreign aid is a mere pittance of our annual budget. The true behemoth, which we refuse to address is our statutory entitlement spending, which has grown as of 2010, to be larger than our revenue.

Sunday, March 18, 2012

Sunday At The Movies! Thomas Sowell Interview Episode 1.

My next Sunday Series will include a group of interviews Peter Robinson held with Thomas Sowell on his program entitled, "Uncommon Knowledge." Sowell is brilliant, and perhaps one of the most succinct voices in either side of our political divide. As a Student of Dr. Milton Friedman, (a fellow who was one of the pioneers of the Libertarian Movement,) you get a real sense of how free market economics is so intertwined within his political philosophy. Sowell is a Harvard graduate, a decorated Marine, Economics Professor, and a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution.

In this first interview, he speaks about political myths versus the realities. He pulls no punches, so enjoy.



As a bonus feature, enjoy what Sowell hes to tell us about the Occupests, who at this very moment are making their way back to annoy us in down towns all across America.

Saturday, March 17, 2012

Saturday At The Movies! Front Page Edition.

Yaron Brook from the Ayn Rand Center and Terry Jones from Investor's Business Daily discuss President Obama's latest gaffetastic campaign speech covering a plethora of energy related subjects with Allen Barton. It is truly amazing that our President has managed to travel through the last three years and not get a single fact or historical perspective correct. Barack Obama is the undisputed king of the straw man argument, which is a terrible thing to have as a sole qualification for the highest office in the land. Besides, even if we do use 20% of the world's oil while only holding 2% of its reserves, so what? We purchase the oil we need to and then do something constructive with it, like producing enough food through those huge mega conglomerates to feed the rest of the world. We create wealth and products that benefit the rest of man kind.



Front Page discusses the status of the Obamacare Law now that we are putting two candles on the birthday cake. Shockingly, it turns out that many of the promises Barack Obama made have reached their expiration date.



Alfonzo Rachel discusses Derek Bell and the movie produced based on Bell's Critical Race Theory. Rachel cuts to the heart of how the liberals are inherently dishonest about every single argument that they make on every subject that they discuss.

Friday, March 16, 2012

What We're Up Against In The General Election!



Let me start off by saying, unequivocally, that I do not condone the message of the door magnet pictured above. While I do agree that America would be much better off with someone else performing the duties of the Presidency, more specifically, just about anybody else, I do not believe that this blatantly racist message has any place in any of the discourse, from either side of our political divide.

My problem with this message does not stop there however. My problem is that I don't believe it, not one little bit. I saw this picture posted yesterday by a Facebook friend. Of course others piled on with blistering anti conservative messages and anti GOP attacks, all of which accused those of us who reside right of center as being racists. Sound familiar? Mission accomplished.  I did some checking however, and this is what I found. Click the link and you will see that this particular door magnet, (I'll explain why I believe it to be a door magnet later on,)  is only available through a definite left of center source for such campaign paraphernalia.  Personally, I have never actually seen such messaging which legitimately originated from our side.  I have seen plenty of infiltrators who pretend to be Tea Partiers so that they could make it appear as though they represented our racist roots.  We have all seen the advertisements for the SEIU crowd to, "crash the Tea Party," and do exactly this type of thing.  We have all read the Chuck Schumer email which told his fellow Democrats to stop debating issues and just blindly accuse us of racism.  None of that matters however, the media in this country gave up reporting in an honest manner a long time ago.

The owner of this vehicle took definite strides to avoid placing bumper stickers on his car. Those other two adornments are static window clings.  One if for Benelli Fire Arms, an Italian manufacturer of shotguns.  The other window cling is promoting duck hunting.  Both of these adornments will have relevance past this year.  Clearly, the owner cares enough about keeping his car free from adhesives and the ugliness of old bumper stickers that even activities and companies with which he will be permanently affiliated do not receive that place on his rear.  The thought that a political bumper sticker which will lose relevance 8 months from now would be given this position is not believable.  This is either a door magnet or vandalism.  I am giving the good people at American Progressive Politics the benefit of the doubt.

The person who donated their car for this photo, probably without knowing about it may or may not be aligned with our side politically.  What I do know is that this is just the beginning.  No amount of dishonesty is out of bounds for the political left.  They are going to pull these kinds of B.S. tricks to label us as racists.  We need to find a way to fight back against this chicanery.  We are all used to the left lying about any subject in which the debate.  They lie about their own positions on every subject.  We are used to them leveling the most blatantly dishonest attacks, and then pulling the victim card and screaming about the, "mean Republican Attack Machine," as if any type of truthful debate about substantive issues constitutes some sort of out of bounds thuggery.  Selective editing by news editors, and doctored photography published in magazines and newspapers are all par for the course.  This one is different though.  This is the combination of their, "astro turf," and those very lies.  This is creating the evidence for their false claims of what ever evil that they will be accusing us of perpetrating.

Thursday, March 15, 2012

I'd Like A Cheeseburger With A Side Of Unbridled Undeserved Fear Please.

I must have missed it on T.V.  Sometime, during the last week, almost everyone in America it seems had simultaneously lost their collective minds.  Something to be terribly afraid of, without warning crept out from underneath what ever hideous rock, and became the latest paralyzing event for America.  Move over, "War of the Worlds," Vampires, Hydraulic Fracturing, and what ever other phony baloney scares our news media have cooked up in order to distract us from real issues or problems that we are facing today. Pink slime it seems is what we should all truly be very afraid of, even though we have been eating it and surviving its menace for literally, over half a decade.  Never mind that the alternative is something far worse, and is actually deadly.  The movement to ban it has already reached the mob mentality fevered proportions born of an easily distracted sound byte society.  The only good news for the instantly misinformed ipod generation, we will probably be onto the next outrage sometime next week.  Hopefully, this will occur before people start dying of their own destruction due to salmonella, e coli,  or campy.  All of this of course would have been our own dumb fault anyhow.

When I first heard of Pink Slime, while nominally paying attention to a television turned on in another room, it never dawned on me, that they were actually referring to hamburger itself.  I thought at first that it was some nefariousness unwanted contagion hidden within the meat.  So, in order to set the record straight, please click the link in order to learn some real facts about the supposed menace of Pink Slime, formerly known as hamburger.

Myth 5:

Dangerous chemicals are added to boneless lean beef trimmings.

Fact:

This is a reference to ammonium hydroxide, essentially ammonia and water, both naturally occurring compounds that have been used to make foods safe since 1974, when the Food and Drug Administration declared it GRAS or Generally Recognized as Safe, the highest safety attribution the agency assigns to compounds. Boneless lean beef trimmings receive a puff of ammonia to eliminate bacteria safely and effectively. When combined with moisture naturally in beef, ammonium hydroxide is formed, which is a naturally occurring compound found in many foods, in our own bodies and the environment. Food safety experts and scientists agree it is an effective way to ensure safer ground beef.

This one part of the conjured up terror is especially amazing to me, particularly when the alternative is considered. The alternative of course is purposefully inflicting our children and ourselves with food born pathogens. I don't know about you, but I don't want to inflict myself with food poisoning. That we as Americans would fall prey to some chicanery such as this is nothing new. We watched it happen about a month ago with hydraulic fracturing, a process of oil production which has been in use since the 1960's, and only declared a terrible menace late last year, it surprised the hell out of me to learn that there are about 1 Million such wells in operation which have been around for about 50 years. What is becoming new is the speed with which we can be so easily turned into an angry mob and mobilized into some idiotic action, such as purposefully poisoning ourselves. the last straw for me occurred this morning. A Facebook friend sent me an invitation to join a, "cause," (another topic entirely,) which sought as its goal, the elimination of bacteria free hamburger meat being served in our society. It wasn't phrased that way, it wanted the end of, "Pink Slime." I won't be joining this cause of course, as it is beyond stupid. It is dangerous.

I realize that it is sexy to have the appearance of someone who actually cares, and who is fighting to save the planet from what ever terror lies in wait for the unsuspecting unwashed masses. Just please, to all of you junior James and Jennifer Bonds out there, please take the time to use two or three brain cells in those big brains of yours to make sure that you are actually saving the world for the rest of us. I have been hospitalized once in my life due to food poisoning, and it was as a result of my own stupidity. I learned from my mistake, and I have ceased the practice which led to this. I do not want to have a repeat performance because somebody else was saving me from a terror that was not real, or fixing something that wasn't broken to begin with. There is nothing sexy about being one of Milgram's 37, mindlessly participating in any bit of idiocy your overlords tell you is the crusade dujour.

Wednesday, March 14, 2012

Finding Out What's In It! Part XVII




I have heard, read and often repeated that President Obama's promises all come with an expiration date. During one of his Kabuki Theater Production style addresses to a joint session of Congress, Barack Obama promised this, in regards to the cost of his program designed to destroy our Health Care System.

“I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits — either now or in the future. (Applause.) I will not sign it if it adds one dime to the deficit, now or in the future, period.”
Well, guess which promise reached its expiration date.  It's not as if this was going to be some kind of a surprise to anyone paying actual attention though.  For those of you who do not possess an adult memory, here was an exact description of what was going to happen, and indeed just happened, made by Paul Ryan before this monstrous destruction of our nation was passed into law.




We all sat through those endless idiotic propaganda pieces masquerading as serious news reporting which basically said that everyone on the right was misinformed as to the true facts surrounding this sink hole of a Law. One of the facts that supposedly made those of us on the right misinformed was the concept that Obamacare was deficit neutral, and cost only, (Gulp!) $940 Billion. Not that CNN, MSNBC, Time, Newsweek, ABC,NBC,CBS, or the WAPO will ever own up to their blatant dishonesty when discussing this issue or their coverage of it, but at some point in time, we all of us owe them a giant, loud, and obnoxious, "I told you so." The main increase in cost of course is due to the absolute chicanery inherent in how the CBO was directed to score this attempt to turn our republic into a Socialist worker's paradise. The taxes for this thing started in 2010, and the benefits will not start until 2014. Of course, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to look at the mythology that baseline budgeting produces to realize that what seems deficit neutral this year, with 10 years taxation paying for 6 years of entitlement will look a lot less rosy next year when 10 years of taxation has to cover 7 years of entitlement. Now that Obamacare has had a second birthday, the cost has ballooned from $940 Billion to $1.76 Trillion. Just imagine what will happen when and if we get to put 4 candles on that birthday cake.

Special note to George Will, and every Republican Party Apparatchik who views the Presidency as unattainable, and is advocating for winning both houses of Congress. Go to heck! If we don't win all that is necessary to repeal this disaster in 2012, and then fail to actually repeal it, the gig will be over. There will be no need to ever again worry about who wins what, we will be the Worker's Utopian Republik of Amerika at that point.

Tuesday, March 13, 2012

A Perfect Example Of A Bureaucracy Increasing Its Own Scope.

Via the Daily Caller today., I found this little snippet. It stands as that perfect example of the dangers of allowing government bureaucracies the authority to grant themselves power beyond their original mandates. This is one of the many bad things which happens when governments grow too big in both size and scope. Nobody has a handle on what they are up to, and the growth of the behemoth is uncontrollable, unwieldy, and impossible for anyone to predict what the next outrage will be. Some time last year, the undisputed king of big government recognized the ridiculousness of the problem and appointed one of his many federal czars to monitor the explosive growth of governmental overreach. Long time big government cheer leader Cass Sunstein, the man who proposed a holiday be observed on tax day each year to thank the big brother government for taking care of our every need, has been appointed by Barack Obama to tell little Barry when our federal over regulation becomes too onerous for the little people to bear it any longer. Somehow, I think he missed this latest attempt by the IRS to destroy the 350,000 small businesses who were giving tax preparation behemoths Jackson Hewitt, Liberty Tax Service, and H & R Block, some actual competition. There are many, namely the 350,000 individual tax preparers, and the Institute For Justice, who recognized this as the crony capitalism that it is.



This is not an argument about whether or not tax preparers should be held to some standard by the people who employ them. It is an argument about who are the best people to establish that standard, and who benefits the most from this government's intrusion into the market place, a place by the way our founding fathers worked so hard to create a society where the government would never be allowed to intrude upon. The fact is, there are already a bevy of regulations on the books, even before this power grab which were designed to insure that consumers were protected against tax preparation fraud. I do not remember reading a single story of how unsuspecting citizens were targeted by gangs of errant tax preparers and subsequently had their lives destroyed. This is about three very large corporations lobbying legislators to eliminate that pesky competition, and doing so under the guise of protecting the little guy. The little guy of course is the American Consumer.

What are the results of this going to be? One, each tax preparer is now forced to pay a licensing fee. The fee in this case is $150. While that may seem small, that will translate into a figure of over $100 Million being taken out of the market place and placed firmly into the coffers of the IRS. They of course get to include it as a part of their budget, and this will make them happy. The three large companies who do tax preparation will also be forced to pay their share of the fee, but for them, this is merely the cost of eliminating competition, and they will pass this extra expense onto their clientele, who now have fewer options of where to take their business. So, the big three are happy with this. We consumers on the other hand, we get to pick up the tab for all of this. Our tax preparation costs just went up, and all we have is a guy named Cass Sunstein in Washington to protect us from a malevolent big government, who as it turns out is actually in favor of a malevolent big government to begin with. That's not all though. The IRS as it turns out is offering, at a prohibitive cost of course, a class to train the tax preparers how to pass their test in order to become licensed. The class costs money, which of course enriches the IRS, and taking the test costs money, and guess who profits from that as well. As it turns out, this new government regulation is also a big money maker for the bureaucracy who inflicted it upon us, as they all are. The whole scheme is just another tax which is called something else, lest we realize it is a tax. These little bombshells are literally all over our daily lives, fees, licenses, little additions to the cost of our everyday lives, all designed to incrementally tax us without our realizing it. More than 53% of Americans are paying a Federal Tax. Only 53% of Americans realize it as such.

Another thing to consider is this. Who gave the IRS this authority? What part of their charter and establishment gives them the power to create their own legislation, and inflict their own power of taxation upon the public? Before anyone answers that I don't know what I am talking about, that taxes are so important that only knowledgeable preparers should be allowed to perform this financial rocket surgery, keep this in mind. I myself have my taxes done by a CPA. That is my choice. CPA's are more expensive than other preparers. I have made it my business to inquire about the qualifications of the person doing my taxes. I also recognize that many people in our society do not wish to pay the price that a CPA might charge to have their taxes done by this level of professional. That is not my business. By chasing the lower cost preparers from the market place, the very people who the IRS claims to be helping are hurt the most. The lower cost choice has now been removed from the market place, and in subsequent years, every level of preparer left will be raising their prices accordingly. They now have increased costs to pass on, as well as increased demand for their limited time.

Our government has run amok. The march of onerous regulation moves forward, and we are allowing ourselves to be distracted by asinine debates such as whether or not Gay People can ruin their lives or not by getting married or not. When Barack Obama was inaugurated in January of 2009, our nation ranked as the 4th most economically free society in the world today, a list in which we once held the number 1 spot. Today, we sit at number 10 on that list, and I am afraid to think of where we will be in 4 years if this little man child President were to be elected for another term. These are the kinds of things which should be hammered relentlessly during the fall's general election. These are winning campaign issues.

Monday, March 12, 2012

How About That Smart Diplomacy!

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

During the campaign of 2008, we heard all about how George W. Bush's, "cowboy style," of diplomacy was causing massive problems for us abroad.  The world, at least in terms of the tales told by leftists, hated even the slightest mention of anything American.  We no longer had any friends, and no one wanted to play with us any longer.  Even though there was not a single shred of actual evidence to substantiate this ridiculous claim, a compliant and totally in the tank media repeated it so often that our diplomatic corps started chanting that annoying 7 year old's refrain, "nobody likes me, everybody hates me."  So, here we are a scant 40 months later, and how has the new diplomatic strategy, post Hillary's famous, and by the way not well received reset button, done?  Is the world a safer place for America and our interests?  Is the security of Israel stronger and in better shape today than it was in the ancient date of 2008?  Is America respected around the globe suddenly?  Are American interests and America's citizens suddenly enjoying a more secure journey when traveling abroad?  Did Iran respond in the manner we would have preferred to those toothless and idiotic U.N. sanctions?  Did, "smart diplomacy," which turned out to be nothing more than Barack Obama wagging his finger at foreign heads of state and later apologizing for past American leaders, all with that flair of condescension he has mastered all to well, lead to the results 52% of Americans believed they would when voting for this man?  I must say that they led to the results that I expected, which is precisely the world we live in today.

Here, my gentle little snowflakes, are the results of, "smart diplomacy, the finger wagging condescension of an American President, no longer backed by a viable military he has seen fit to destroy.  The article is quite lengthy, and in German, but if you open the link using Google Chrome, you will be able to translate it into English, or cut and paste it into Yahoo Babelfish.  If not, I'll summarize it for you.  The Iranians have successfully tested a nuclear device.  Two things to bear in mind about this test.  One, they did not do it themselves.  They had the North Koreans looking over their shoulders.  What extent of the North Korean participation actually was, is unclear.  That is different from actually detonating a bomb by themselves.  This step however is a heck of a lot closer than anyone thought previously.  It also represents a direct contradiction to two important pieces of liberal bilge which has been promulgated upon us in the past.  One, the Iranians are clearly not developing nuclear capabilities for the purposes of supplying their country with electricity.  Two, the National Intelligence Estimate which Barack Obama and Joe Biden were parroting from the roof tops in 2007 has been proven laughably wrong.  Once again, these two clowns who are now our President and Vice President find themselves on the wrong side of a foreign policy issue, and dangerously so.  They used this estimate during the 2008 general election campaign to argue that we needn't worry about those rascally Iranian darlings developing a nuclear device, and that appeasement would work far better when dealing with bad guys anyhow.

A challenge for my liberal friends, (or progressives, or no labels, or what ever in the heck you call yourselves these days.)  When, in the course of all of human history has appeasement worked?  Has a lasting peace, ever in human history, ever been negotiated through only diplomatic means?  There are three events so far which stand as the only three conditions that have led to a lasting peace.  One, a decisive military victory of one side over another.  Two, a huge imbalance of power which made war unpalatable for one side and a waste of time and resources for the other.  Three, the free trade of goods and services across the borders in dispute.  All three of these conditions are possible without a single diplomat being employed, and in fact have happened repeatedly throughout human history.  While diplomacy may help to foster an environment which avoids unnecessary misunderstanding, by itself, it has never accomplished anything near the accolades claimed in the stuff of Hollywood movies or television.

This latest version of appeasement is even more egregious than most other instances. We are attempting to coerce Iran through economic sanctions, which thanks to the corruption inherent in the U.N., have never been successful.  Iran has announced loudly, and often that her only goal is to eradicate Israel and kill every Jew on the planet.  Team Obama insists that we must seek to understand the plight of the Iranian Street, and seek to gain knowledge of why it is that they are suffering so greatly that they would seek to attain the ultimate killing weapon.  One quick perusal of  their religious text, and it should be obvious to anyone beyond the age of five that yes, what they are screaming that they want to do is really what they intend on doing.  Their motivation is not to improve upon their lot in life, but to actually, just like they are claiming, kill every person of Jewish faith on Earth.

Thomas Jefferson and John Jay purchased a copy of the Q'ran in 1788.  After having read their copy on a return voyage from England, both men wrote forwards in this book, which became the White House copy. Unless Barack Obama has done something to deface these words, they still exist today.  The forwards admonish every future President to consider the Muslim Faith America's scariest enemy and predict that future warfare would be waged against them almost exclusively.  While it can be argued that these dire predictions did not hold up to the judge of history, they did prove somewhat correct in identifying the complete incompatibility of Islam and the principles of Freedom upon which our nation was founded.  When Thomas Jefferson was sworn in as President, his very first act as Commander in Chief was to declare war on the Muslims who inhabited Libya.  This action was largely based on his reading and understanding of the Q'ran.  He recognized that diplomacy would be a waste of time, and that more American lives would be unnecessarily forfeit should he indulge that particular course of action.  The resulting lasting peace won by Thomas Jefferson's methodology lasted until 1904.  Morocco became the next flash point of Muslim terror to be waged against the United States. The assassination of an American Ambassador and the kidnapping of his family led to another non diplomatic solution enacted by Theodore Roosevelt.  This action, a decisive military intervention, produced another period of Muslims leaving us alone which lasted almost another century.

The record of appeasement is also very clear.  It has led, always to some very horrific results.  It enables bad guys to get stronger, so that when dealing with them becomes a matter of survival and not just choice, they have improved resources, increased alliances, and have already achieved some of the more heinous parts of their objectives.  Today, Iran is much closer to achieving a nuclear weapons capability, and their intentions have been spelled out since their revolution in 1978.  The clock on this one is nearing an end, and we can not afford 4 more years of Smart Diplomacy.  Israel certainly can not afford 4 more years of America employing, "smart diplomacy."

Exit Questions:  Why have our own media sources in this country completely ignored this ominous event?  Is there anyone left in America dumb enough to believe that our Main Stream Media is objective?