Where is Galt?

Burning Down the House

2010-09-09T13:53:00.000-07:00

Does he have the right to do it? Sure

Is he and Idiot for doing it? Sure

Do I wish this bonehead never saw the light of national media attention? You betcha

Do I hope his huge (50 people) congregation leaves him for saner pastures? Of course…

Before the rest, let me say why I’m most opposed to it. It’s beneath us. It’s beneath Americans. It’s beneath the dignity of free thinking people.

Dare I say… This is something that they do, not us. This is what Islamic Neanderthals do. This is what those that want to still live in the thirteenth century would do. This is what the world expects from the religion of perpetual outrage. This is what you would expect from a group of sub-humans that treat their women worse than they treat their domesticated animals. In short, this is what we would expect from Islamic extremists, not mainstream Muslims, Christians or Jews.

This is not what America stands for.
Does he have the right? Sure

Is he an idiot? Yes, but…

Isn’t the Islamic world proving me right as you read this? Look around for yourself. Look at this, and this. All this protesting from a group of people that value their hatred of all things non-Muslim more than they value the love of their own children. Am I being harsh? You be the judge. How many of your children have you strapped bombs to? How many of you have cheered other people’s children as they blew themselves up to kill non-Muslims? That’s what I thought.

Pastor Terry Jones has shown us once again the mentality of that segment of Islam. If they burned the Bible in Saudi Arabia, would Christians be burning the flag of Saudi Arabia in the streets of downtown, America? I don’t think so.

Should we thank Pastor Jones for pointing this out to us?

No, I still think he’s an idiot.

Boortz on a Tear

2010-05-03T07:46:00.000-07:00

So the big BO gave a speech at the University of Michigan. In it he talked about what Government is. Of course, he got it wrong, but Neal Boortz hit it hard this morning and I thought I'd share it with you.

"Government is forcing you to buy health insurance. Government is seizing your money with a vague promise you'll get some of it back at a negative rate of return if you live long enough to retire. Government is seizing your home because some developer promises to build something on what once was your property that will deliver more property taxes. Government is finding you in an airport with too much cash in your pocket, seizing that cash and telling you that you're just flat out of luck. Government is forcing you to pay an employee more than that person is worth to your business, and then telling you that you cannot pay a top level executive what he IS worth. Government is (or will be) health care rationing. Government is telling you that you cannot invest your own money in a business venture you find promising. Government is charging you with a federal crime if you pick an eagle feather up you see lying on the ground. Government is telling you that you cannot use property that you own because it might - just might - be a nifty habitat for some esoteric mouse that, by the way, has never been actually seen anywhere near your property. Government is telling you that you cannot advertise a home with a "walk-in closet" because the phrase "walk-in" discriminates against people in wheel chairs. Oh ... and government is spending over a billion dollars of taxpayer money a year on electric scooters for lard asses who are simply tired of hauling their massive selves to the bingo game down at the community hall. Government is allowing teacher's unions to control the education of our children. Government is forcing the top 1% of income earners to pay 40% of all personal income taxes while allowing the bottom 50% of income earners to become net tax consumers. Government is chasing businesses and jobs overseas with confiscatory taxation. Government is creating a financial meltdown by encouraging and then virtually guaranteeing hideously bad mortgages by the tens of millions ... and then blaming Wall Street when it all turns into s#!t stew. Government is owning General Motors. Government is ignoring the law and giving unions advantages in bankruptcy proceedings. Government is flying elected officials all over the globe on meaningless junkets while demonizing corporate executives who dare make use of private aircraft. Government is taxing a man his entire working life, and then coming back for half of what he has left when he dies. All of this and Obama tells the grads that "government is the roads we drive on." Only a freshly minted college grad would buy a load of waste material like that. "

Way to nail it Neal! This man is the most dangerous President we've ever had. Makes Jimmy Carter look good. He hasn't a clue what makes this country great. Let's take away his congress this year.

SHWM seeks SFLS for LTR

2010-03-24T05:45:00.000-07:00

Single Hard Working Male is looking for a Single Freedom Loving State for a Long Term Relationship. This state must respect hard working productive people. State must embrace individuality and freedom. No group identities allowed. Must be willing to stay out of my way!

Is this what we’ve come to? Will I find myself looking for another place to live? How sad. Reagan once said “I did not leave the Democratic Party, they left me.” To paraphrase probably the greatest politician of the 20th century, “I am not leaving my country, my country has left me.” More to the point, my government has left me.

Our government is ignoring the will of the people, thwarting the constitution, bribing and lying to get what they want, not what We the People want.

I don’t have much faith in the courts to stop this. They couldn’t get property rights correct and I’m afraid they’ll mess this up as well. I guess it doesn’t matter. The fact that there were 26% of the people that wanted this bill probably means it’s too late for our union.

Going back to my proposal. I and many like me are ready for a new start. The hard work has been done. We have a very good framework to build a new country on. It’s called the Constitution and with a few modifications (Read that to mean more restrictions on the Government), it’s an incredible piece of paper.

So here’s the deal. 1st state to secede from the union gets me and a few hundred thousand hard working, freedom loving people. We will build a prosperous state and when other states see what happens with real freedom, they will want to join. We would gradually reform the USA into what it once was.

It’s kind of silly and I hope it never comes to that, but our imperial federal government has declared war of the producers of our society. How long can a country survive when the political class makes an enemy of the productive class? I think they have forgotten they serve at our will.

Without our production for them to seize, they’re dead in the water.

Dear Michelle Obama

2010-03-21T05:32:00.000-07:00

I didn’t understand it. In fact, it really offended me. Now, though I may not understand what you said, I can at least say the same thing. You see, for the first time in my adult life, I am ashamed of the country I live in.

Of course, your apologists were immediately able to spin and explain what you really meant. I feel I should get the same leeway.

I’m not really ashamed of our country. In fact, I feel so much pride in the gifts I’ve been given thanks to the blood, sweat and tears shed by my forefathers. The greatest experiment in human freedom to fulfill our capacity has given a brief glimpse into what we can aspire too.

Unfortunately, it’s all too brief a glimpse.

Well then, what am I ashamed of?

How about a government education system that for 50 years has made sure our kids are not taught about how great this country is? Oh, they all know how to put a condom on a banana, but how many can talk about how and why this country was formed and constitution was written.

How about around 50% of the people that do not want to be responsible for themselves? We have stolen the individuality of an entire generation in the name of group think.

How about a political class that is as arrogant as to think the constitution doesn’t apply to them? Do I need to say anything to anyone whose husband endorses bribery, kickbacks and intimidation to get what he wants? A 5th grader that reads the constitution knows that the imperial federal government is NOT allowed to make us buy anything. Come on Michelle, is your husband smarted than a 5th grader? I guess not.

How about the fact that so many people think that healthcare is a “right”? I don’t expect the dumb masses to understand that, but people in charge of making laws and enforcing the constitution should understand that there can be NO right to a product or service but with the barrel of a gun. The right to a product or service is the right to someone else’s labor. I guess slavery is ok as long as it’s against rich people and doctors, but not if it’s against people of a certain color. What a group of hypocrites!

I could go on and on, but hopefully you get the point.

You see Michelle, your husband along with his sycophants in congress are signing the death warrant of the United States. We will probably never recover from this government usurp of power. They have now paved the way for future politicians to grab more power from “We the People”. A word of caution Michelle, the next group of politicians that seek to steal power may not reflect your vision. They may be from the opposite side of the left-right axis. Then it will be your turn to complain. YOU CAN’T! You see Michelle; your husband opened the door. Remember that a government having the power to grant your wishes has the power to take them away and grant ones you don’t want.

The enemy isn’t Democrats or Republicans, it’s the government. A necessary enemy, but one our founding fathers knew had to be kept in a cage. Michelle, your husband just let the beast out of its cage.

I guess it’s not America I’m ashamed of; it’s your husband and his cronies. Never the less Michelle, that’s why for the first time in my adult life, I’m ashamed.

Right to Healthcare, part 2

2010-03-10T05:52:00.001-08:00

I have written this before, but no less than Walter Williams has weighed in on the same subject. He's a lot smarter than your average bear. I'll just let you read what he has to say.

There is NO right to healthcare!

Obama Causes Abuse of Women

2010-02-24T06:05:00.000-08:00

Let me see if I get this straight. Nevada has a domestic abuse problem. Harry Reid said so. He said that men without jobs become abusive. I haven’t heard of this phenomenon anywhere else in the country, so I must assume it is indigenous to Nevada. He also singled out men so I guess women in Nevada don’t have the same character flaw. It’s scary to think that I was just there. I mean violent men will become violent to others besides their wives and there I was, walking the streets without body guards. I really should have listened to Barack Obama and not traveled to Las Vegas.

But wait. If Barack said not to go to Las Vegas (twice), isn’t he somewhat responsible for those men being unemployed? All those tourist dollars not flowing into the state must have thrown quite a few men out of work. (And women, but we’re not worried about them). The question becomes how does Harry know this and for how long has he known it? Harry has to have known about this for quite some time and I’m sure he and his buddy BO must have talked about this at some point. Let’s face it, a population of potentially abusive men all residing only in your state must have been a point of conversation sometime.

Since Barack knew it and still heartlessly caused men to go unemployed in the great state of Nevada, thus causing the WAVE of domestic abuse in that state, we can only conclude that Mr. Obama doesn’t care about women and small children. He probably thinks domestic abuse is just fine.

The above political prognostication was inspired by the “Olbermann” style of hard hitting political commentary. Rest assured that if “Olby” had seen this happen between a Republican Senator and a Republican President, all 34 of his viewers would have been subject to the above rant. Hell, he probably would have had one of them liking sex with small mammals by the end of the piece.

A good morning’s work, Little Duke… Hit Olby, BO and Prince Harry all in the same piece. In reality, I’m sure that all 4 of my readers didn’t need me to point out how stupid Harry sounds when he leaves his teleprompter.

Hey C.A.I.R, I DON’T CARE!

2010-02-17T04:10:00.000-08:00

So now C.A.I.R. (Council on American Islamic Relations) is outraged. I can’t remember the last time Muslims weren’t outraged, but the outrage du Jour is full-body scanners at airports. See it here.

Ok, I guess I get it. After all, body scanners would make the very thing many radical Islamics want to make their number one export (Bombs) much harder to deliver. OK, that’s not what they said… Their reason is that body imaging is against their religion. If we set aside the fact that I’ve seen old Sears & Roebuck catalogs with granny corsets look more titillating than any of these computer images, I guess I can understand. What I don’t understand is selective outrage.

I mean, Muslims are outraged over body scanners, but not stoning a woman because she was raped?

Muslims are outraged over body scanners, but not blowing up a plane, bus, train or marketplace packs with civilians?

Muslims are outraged over body scanners, but not a father killing his daughter because she dated someone outside their wonderful peace-loving religion?

Muslims are outraged over body scanners, but not firing rockets and mortars from a civilian dwelling so the retaliation kills some of their own innocent peace loving comrades’?

I’m sorry, CAIR. I just don’t care. Maybe when you stop trying to blow up stuff and kill innocent people, we’ll worry more about your religion and its selective sensibilities.

The Real Senate Would Never Have Stood for This

2009-12-23T08:30:00.000-08:00

Our founding fathers had a very real reason that congress was set up the way it was. They reasoned that one body representing the people (The House of Representatives) and one body representing the States (The Senate) would make sure all voices were heard. In 1913, in our infinite wisdom, “We the People” decided to add the 17th Amendment to our constitution. The 17th Amendment stripped the voice away from the states and gave it to the people. Sometimes messing with what our founding fathers spent so much time designing has rather unsavory consequences. Now we are seeing the folly of such a short sighted Amendment.

Under the laws of unintended consequences comes the Nebraska Compromise. Ben Nelson (D) NE was told his state would not have to pay for any increases in Medicare funding caused by this horrible bill forever. It’s a great deal if you can get it and I don’t blame Ben one bit. However, one does have to wonder if the Senate still spoke for the states, would this have ever happened? I think not.

Look at it this way. Right now, the Senate is beholden to the people. Most of the people that will see the benefit of this boondoggle called healthcare are people that don’t pay taxes anyway, so why do they care? Remember, the people already have their voice heard in the House. Why do they need two sets of voices?

On the other hand, the States have no voice. If the Senators were beholden to the state legislatures that put them there, would all of the States represented by two Democrats have allowed this Ben Nelson compromise to go through? Some might have, but could you see the States of CA, AR, IL, MA, or even NY saying to their reps “Go ahead and vote for it, we don’t mind paying our Medicare bill even if NE doesn’t have to pay theirs. Hell, we’ll even pay theirs!” I’m sorry; I think it’s highly unlikely.

This may be the best reason yet that we need to repeal the 17th Amendment.

The States are stuck paying for every hair brained scheme cooked up by congress and they don’t have a say in any of it.

Is it Time to Start All Over?

2009-12-22T07:04:00.000-08:00

I mentioned in yesterday’s post that we are now officially at war with our own ruling class. It’s worse than I thought. Buried in this horrible “so-called” healthcare bill is a change of rules for the Senate. Any rules changes in the Senate require a supermajority to implement, but not if you’re Harry Reid and you want to make sure Obamacare never goes away.

This law requires a supermajority to overrule the death panel’s decisions on who will live and die. (In the writers words, “it will take a super-majority of the people the citizens of our Republic elected to overrule a regulation imposed by a group of faceless bureaucrats and bean counters”.) I’ll let you read about it here.

Pay close attention to the Declaration of Independence quote at the bottom of the piece. I am starting to believe it’s time.

When we have become a nation of men over a nation of laws, there may be no hope of any other outcome.

RIP America

2009-12-22T04:40:00.000-08:00

Alright, maybe over the top, but maybe not. Read this glowing assesment of the new America Killer from Reid and friends.

If it's such a grand idea:

Why don't the majority of Americans want it?

Why did it take bribing Nelson to get it rammed through?

Why did it have to be done now, now , NOW!?

Why arent ANY republicans on board?

This stinks and it's time to make the Democrats pay.

Simple Campaign issue for the Republicans…

“Vote us into power and we will overturn stupid, socialist idea rammed through by the Democrats”

Better yet, why doesn’t the Tea Party start a political party that has that message?
This may be the 2nd saddest day in American history. The first will be if this gets to Obama and he signs it.

That assessment may piss off a lot of people.

“9-11 was worse” or “Pearl Harbor was much worse.”

Sorry, no.

Those attacks killed thousands while this plan could kill an entire industry or an entire country.

RIP

Arrogance

2009-12-20T08:36:00.000-08:00

ar⋅ro⋅gance –noun-
Offensive display of superiority or self-importance; overbearing pride.

Any day now, The Senate will pass their version of so called healthcare reform. Ben Nelson will have taken his 30 pieces of silver (just like Mary Landrieu over in the House) and the Senate will have their bill.

Doesn’t matter that this is clearly unconstitutional.

Don’t try and argue. Anyone who understands what this country was founded on can tell you this bill is absolutely unconstitutional. Do I trust our SCOTUS to rule that way? No, but this is the same body that sanctioned stealing property from one person to give it to another. (Kelo vs. New London). No, SCOTUS is just another version of the arrogant political class.

Doesn’t matter that this hasn’t worked well in any of the states that have tried it.

New Jersey is awash in debt. Oregon has its own healthcare problems.

Doesn’t matter that this hasn’t ever worked well ANYWHERE in the world it’s been tried.

As soon as the affluent from Canada and Great Brittan stop coming here when they need healthcare and our people are going there, I’ll believe our system is in trouble. For now, no dice.

Doesn’t matter that most Americans are opposed to it.

The latest poll I saw was 56% against and 40 in favor of the current government takeover of healthcare.

The Arrogance of out ruling class has become dangerous to our way of life here in the United States. Make no mistake, they consider themselves the ruling class, doing what best for us whether we want it or not, whether we need it or not and whether it’s legal or not.

Boys and girls, we are now officially at war with most of the people in Washington. Understand that this is a war of ideas. ANY ESCALATION of that war to any sort of violence will destroy us. We’ll be no better than Hugo or Fidel or any other 3rd world tinhorn. No, we will fight this war by going back to what brought us so much prosperity. We will go back to true conservatism. We will start a new political party based on that true conservatism and take back our government, take back our lives. This isn’t so much a revolution, but devolution. We will devolve back to what made this the greatest country the world has ever seen. We will restore the meaning of the Statue of Liberty; The meaning of our constitution.

What is my definition of true conservatism? I’ll post that this week.

Every Breath You Take...

2009-12-08T04:04:00.000-08:00

Sing with me everybody!

Every breath you take, Every move you make, I’ll be taxing you…

Well, not me exactly, but the EPA. For the first time its nightmarish history, the EPA declared that a naturally occurring, necessary for life, needed for our very existence gas is harmful to that very existence. I could not make this pile of dog-squeeze up. CO2 (what we exhale) is that gas. Human beings exhale it… plants need it to survive, but that’s not going to stop our enlightened chosen one from using this to ram through Cap & Tax. With this “ruling” by the EPA, he can now do it without Congress’s help or approval. It can now be done with just issuing new regulations
.
If you are a blood brother in the cult of Global Warming, I’m sure the events of the last few weeks mean nothing. However, to those of us that live in the real world, this whole hoax is unraveling. Here’s a hint: If scientists have to make up, falsify and destroy data that disproves the existence of their god, it’s not real. Their god is the god of manmade global warming. Even Al Gore has the sense to not try and give his speech at Copenhagen.

I for one am damn glad. I am up in northern IL this week to see family and to take in some of this global warming. I’m not kidding. We will not get above 32 this week and are getting up to 10 inches of snow tomorrow. Al Gore must be giving a speech on Global warming nearby. I will probably get snowed in on Wednesday. Now don’t get me wrong, I will have the time of my life. My niece and nephews, my sister and brother in law are all great. I just can’t wait to get home to my attorney. I don’t see any signs that my sister has done anything to minimize my risk of breathing in this noxious gas called CO2. With 4 kids and two adults, that’s a lot of exhaling. I hope their homeowners insurance is up to date…

Now I’m sure this EPA ruling is not political. No way that this happened to be releases as the Anointed One heads to Copenhagen to try and get other countries to join us in our suicidal quest to destroy life as we know it. If you can’t get those lame brains in Congress to go along with you on this hoax, just find another way, Mr. President. They are starting to worry about their jobs while I guess you already know you’re headed to the Failed Presidents Hall of Fame.

There’s a seat next to Jimmy Carter waiting for you.

I Have a Friend, Part 2

2009-12-03T05:36:00.000-08:00

Some of you may remember my liberal friend and my post about him and his claim to healthcare. I called him a thief and he was not happy. He couldn’t refute it, but the truth can be painful.

He loves what’s going on in Washington right now. (he and about 36%of the population according to the latest polls) He loves to regurgitate all those great lines that liberals love, lines like:

1. It’s our turn.

2. From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

3. Soak the rich, they can afford it.

My friend works as a DJ part time and he works for a company that I own. I want to take the opportunity to explain how his “soak the rich” / “It’s our turn” mentality has affected him this year. My business in December relies heavily on Company Christmas parties. In fact, December is one of our busiest months. We average 35 to 45 parties each December. Not this year. We have 12. Nearly every company that we deal with (most return every year because I have very good people like my friend) has cut out their Christmas party this year.

The reasons are varied I’m sure, but most share the same feeling. They’re scared. What sort of massive new taxes on the rich will this congress come up with next year? Mandated taxes for health insurance? Increased energy costs due to Tax & Trade? (Even though we now know the whole global warming religion has lost all credibility.) You see, most of these companies are owned by the so called rich and they are changing their spending habits due to a predatory atmosphere in Washington. I don’t blame them.

On to the point… Who is getting hurt most by these policies? Working people and small businesses like me and my friend will take the brunt of it. Let’s just look at a small slice; the month of December and the twenty five parties we didn’t get this year. 25 DJ’s not working. 25 reception halls not booking parties. 75 chefs not working. 200 servers not working. 5,000 guests not buying any new Christmas clothes for the parties. 10 photographers not shooting pictures. This is just the tip of the iceberg. All those people whose incomes are down because of this will not be spending as much on Christmas presents. The ripple effects go on and on and on…

I guess my friend thinks that well-to-do people bury their money in a jar or send it to a Swiss bank account never to be seen again. I guarantee he will not take any blame for this and will probably try and blame it on A. George Bush, B. Sarah Palin or C. Global warming. Anybody that thinks that trickledown economics doesn’t work needs to say hello to the fool in the mirror looking back at them. I for one, like it when companies and individuals are doing well. They like to celebrate and that keeps me working hard. That’s trickledown and that’s what this economy needs right now.

Amateur Year Continues at White House

2009-11-18T06:33:00.000-08:00

Obama has once again showed the American people how little he understands about politics. In his recent decision to put KSM on trial in New York for his roll in 9/11, President Obama has gone into an area that is very hard to explain. He has put himself into a situation that he can’t win.

Very amateurish.

Obama had two paths he could follow. Each path had two different outcomes and would affect him three different ways depending on which group of people are asked.

The two different outcomes are KSM gets found guilty and probably put to death or he gets acquitted and released.

Path 1A: Put him on trail in the very military court that the Democrat controlled congress developed for such trials. He is found guilty.

Liberals: Wouldn’t be happy. They wanted all this turned into a criminal trial. Besides, a civilian trial could embarrass Bush. (Obama loses, but his nut-roots base would still support him. So basically, he wins)

Moderates: Would be happy. They don’t want this guy or any like him committing such unspeakable acts of war again. (Obama wins, moderates see him in a more favorable light.)

Conservatives: They don’t like him anyway and this wouldn’t change that. (Obama wins because he robs conservatives of a talking point or even a rallying cry for the next elections.)

Path 1B: Put him on trail in the very military court that the Democrat controlled congress developed for such trials. He is found not guilty.

Right… next topic

Path 2A: Put him on trial in civilian court and give this piece of diaper filler all the rights that an American citizen gets. He is found guilty.

Liberals: Would be happy. They wanted all this turned into a criminal trial. Remember that to them, we are not in a legitimate war. (Obama wins, but his wing nuts have supported him no matter what. They just love him more now.)

Moderates: Would be nervous. They would have months of hand-wringing while they wait to see if he gets that conviction. They remember that sometimes juries get it wrong. Remember OJ? (Obama loses, moderates see him as getting lucky when it should never have come to this.)

Conservatives: They don’t like him anyway and this would only inflame that. (Obama loses because conservatives get to beat him up about this for the length of the trial.)

Path 2B: Put him on trial in civilian court and give this piece of dog squeeze all the rights that an American citizen gets. He is found not guilty.

Forget it. The Democratic Party is remembered as the party that once had more than a few seats in congress and we think they even had a president in office way back in the early 21st century. Seriously, the Democratic Party may never recover from such a disaster.

What could go wrong?

1. Throw out evidence because there were no Miranda rights read.
2. Throw out confessions because of supposed torture.
3. Discovery leading to part of our intelligence network being upended.
4. An attack on the courthouse as a display for the world press.
5. A Judge or jury members being threatened for the rest of their lives.
6. One (1) Muslim on the jury deciding he could never vote to convict one of his own.
7. The wonderful peaceful religion of Islam holding violent demonstrations in NYC.

I could go on and on. This may go down as one of the dumbest moves in politics ever. PBO is in a no win situation and he put himself there.

Winners and Losers from Last night’s Elections

2009-11-04T07:13:00.000-08:00

In Virginia, New Jersey, and New York, there were three elections last night. There were, of course, winners and losers in the actual elections themselves, but let’s take a look at who the winners and losers were that were not on the various tickets. First of all, a recap of last night’s festivities…

The Governor’s race in Virginia went big for the GOP. This wasn’t a surprise as Virginia always seems to have a Governor from a different party than the one in the White House. New Jersey kicked out an incumbent Democrat in favor of the GOP candidate. This was more of a surprise because it’s, well, NEW JERSEY. (Democrat motto borrowed from Chicago machine: Vote early and vote often).

The third race I found interesting was the NY-23 in which a Conservative Independent narrowly lost to a Democrat. Here’s how I saw this race: Democrats nominate their candidate, obviously a liberal leftist. Republican machine nominates a “moderate” (who happens to be more liberal than the Democrat). An unknown conservative sees what’s happening and decides to challenge for the seat as the only conservative in the race. The national parties throw gobs of money at each of their candidates while the Conservative languishes in obscurity. Along come a couple of national conservatives like Sarah Palin and Tim Pawlenty. With thirty days to go before the election, their endorsement causes the Republican candidate to fall so much in the polls that she drops out and endorses the Democrat. Even with that, the conservative comes within 4 % of winning.

Who are the winners and losers?

Loser: Dede Scozzafava. She will never again be able to run as a Republican and will never be trusted by enough voters to run for office again.

Winner: Doug Hoffman. While losing the election, he becomes a kind of folk hero to conservatives around the country that are tired of both parties taking us for granted. His entry into the race caused the wolf in sheep’s clothing to drop the sheep’s clothing and endorse her kindred spirit on the Democrat side.

Loser: The national Democratic Party (And all local Republican Parties). The national Democrats threw everything they had into NJ and came away empty. They practically had two candidates running in NY-23 and even with one of them quitting and endorsing the other, they only squeaked out a win. The local Republican Party was more interested in having someone with an “R” next to their name than what that person actually stood for. This election puts “politics as usual”, local machines on notice that they had better pick true conservatives of risk killing the party.

Winner: Grass root, Tea Bag, Conservatives. We now know that we are a force to be reckoned with. We are our own political force and if the Republicans can’t deliver what we want, we will find another way to have our voices heard.

Loser: Blue Dog Democrats. If they were just a little worried about Cap & Tax, nationalized Healthcare and the unionization by intimidation Card Check, think about how they feel now. They just saw a big wave of the public switching back to the conservative side of the spectrum. Independents went 2 to 1 in favor of Christie in NJ. Reality check!

Winner: Blue Dog Democrats. Yes, they lose and win. With such a clear message from the voters, they don’t have to wonder anymore if it would be suicide to follow their Democratic leadership over the cliff. They Know! They can now vote what they feel is right and tell Pelosi and Reid to pound sand.

Loser: Party Politics. This is a wakeup call to the parties. Quit putting the party above what we believe in. I think we will see a stop to the insane idea that Republicans just need to be more like Democrats to be elected. On the other side, we are liable to see more centrist Democrats as even the rank and file of that party are getting sick to the tax & spend socialist wing of their own party.

Winner: Ideals. Instead of trying to find moderates that stand for nothing, we may now find candidates that stand up for their principals. Instead of focus groups deciding what word sounds best, we may find candidates standing up to special interests. (Then again, I am an optimist)

Loser: Pelosi, Reid and Obama. It took less than a year for the shine to wear off. More and more Americans are tired of where they see this country going. They will have a hard time (If not impossible) getting any of their socialist agenda through.

Winner: American people who now may not have to deal with the government takeover of our lives. I have been very pessimistic about our future lately. I’m still worried, but for today, at least, I see a small ray of sunshine.

Gross Profits (yuck)

2009-10-26T05:06:00.000-07:00

Most of you know where this writer falls on the whole health care debate. It’s no secret and I think I am in line with most people who don’t want the government in control of ANY aspect of healthcare.

We know that once Obama realized he was losing the debate about healthcare, he started calling it a fight about health insurance. He and his minions started berating the profits of insurance companies to try and get the people on board. Over the weekend, I discovered something that almost wants me to get the government involved.

How about a profit margin of almost 14%? That’s obscene!

I think we now have a way to pay for healthcare for everyone. These are all ideas that the Democrats could get behind because they have all been behind them before.

1. Time for another Czar. We need to limit the pay and what can be charged by these despicable companies.

2. Time to picket in front of the homes of these executives. Round up the SEIU and some out of work ACORN people and picket the homes of the principle crooks involved.

3. How about a windfall profits tax? Why not, we are all paying for these ridiculous profits by what we pay for our healthcare.

Or we could just try tort reform. Yes, I said tort reform.

I’m sorry, did I mislead you into thinking the 14% was insurance companies? No, they are at 6%. It’s trial lawyers that are at a profit margin of 14%. That's almost 2 1/2 times what the insurance companies make, but who's counting?

Don’t expect the Democrats to rain on the trial lawyer’s parade. After all, I’m sure a lot of that 14% goes right into Democrat coffers. Read it here.

The Enemy of My Friend is My Enemy

2009-10-14T07:57:00.000-07:00

For years, conservatives have been calling for us to leave the United Nations.

How do conservatives hate thee? Let me count the ways…
1. It’s a corrupt organization
2. We pay most of the bill and get no more power than any third world, tinhorn dictator.
3.Hugo, Akma-Im-a-nut-job and Kadafi , need I say more?
4.Did I mention the UN is corrupt?

Because of one UN report, we may now finally be able to get rid of the UN. Remember when PBO decided to side with Hugo and Fidel in saying that the removal of President Zelaya from office in Honduras was a “military coop” and was “unconstitutional”?

All I can say now is oops…

According to Ed Morrissey, quoting an editorial in Hondudario, the UN’s Department of Political Affairs concluded that the removal of Zelaya from office was legal and justified. I must state that so far there has been no official confirmation from the UN. However, as Ed pointed out, our own library of congress has arrived at the same conclusion.

Imagine if it’s true. We all know what happens when you disagree with PBO. FOX News has practically been labeled as an enemy of the state because they happen to ask tough questions of the Communicator in Chief. Also, how can we forget that anybody not singing the praises of Obama (Ummm, ummm, ummm) is instantly labeled a racist.
This can’t be good for the UN.

Will Barack refuse to go and speak to anyone at the UN like he does to FOX?

How long before Janeane Garofalo announces that the entire UN is racists for not agreeing with the “Chosen One”?

Years of liberals holding tightly to the idea that we must have the UN could come undone as word of this blasphemy trickles out.

On one hand, liberals have their love of any organization that makes the US weaker.

On the other hand, the UN has insulted their Icon.

What’s a good liberal to do?

Update: Just read this take from Duke at Pekin Prattles
A slightly different, but interesting look at this

It’s Never Too Late to Apologize

2009-10-09T05:44:00.000-07:00

In deciding how best to destroy what little credibility the Nobel Committee has, they have given this year’s Nobel Peace Prize to Barack Obama. Do not check your calendar, it is not April 1st. (I do have to admit, however, that I haven’t seen this good a joke come out of April Fools Day in a long time)

Here are some quotes from the committee on why they chose “the chosen one” and the translation.

"His extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples,"
"a new climate in international politics"

Translation: His global apology tour. Remember, liberals worldwide hate when the United States is strong. As Barack weakens how we are viewed through his constant apologizing and weakens us financially by destroying the dollar, the liberal world cheers.

Now the real reason…

He’s not George Bush! That’s it; there can be no other reason. He hasn’t done ANYTHING! Even the committee said as much. Besides, the nominations closed on February 1st. The Anointed One had only been in office for two weeks. What a sham this Nobel group is. Poor Mr. Nobel is turning over in his grave.

It’s so silly that I refuse to give this anymore effort…

Obama Lied, Freedom Died

2009-09-30T06:07:00.000-07:00

I think it’s time to turn that time honored phrase against the left. Of course, the difference is that Bush didn’t lie. (I can never get anyone to actually tell me what he lied about, but my leftist friends never let the facts get in the way of a good slogan.) Now it turns out that Joe Wilson wasn’t wrong when he yelled “You Lie” at the anointed one’s big speech before congress. In fact, some enterprising writers named Michael F. Cannon and Ramesh Ponnuru list 20 lies told by the great one during just this one speech. Don’t worry my socialist friends; your “chill running up my leg” media will not expose the chosen one’s lies. However if you want to know the truth, read here.

So it’s clear Obama lied. Since a massive government takeover of healthcare would take away freedoms, freedom would die.
Bumper sticker time:

Obama Lied, Freedom Died.

Of course, I’m sure I am a racist for even pointing out this article.

What is the meaning of the word “Is”?

2009-09-29T06:50:00.000-07:00

"I am in this race to tell the corporate lobbyists that their days of setting the agenda in Washington are over. I have done more than any other candidate in this race to take on lobbyists — and won. They have not funded my campaign, they will not run my White House, and they will not drown out the voices of the American people when I am president."
-- Barack Obama, Speech in Des Moines, IA
November 10, 2007

That quote is taken from the pages of “Change.Gov”, PBO’s own site set up before the swearing in on January 20, 2009. I had to look it up to make sure I wasn’t dreaming he had said it. This morning, I read this piece from Philip K. Howard writing for the Wall Street Journal. He makes the following observations:

• On July 31, Rep. Bart Gordon (D., Tenn.), a Blue Dog Democrat, introduced an amendment to the House health-care reform bill (H.R. 3200) to fund pilot projects for liability reform, including pilots for "voluntary alternative dispute resolution."

What happened? According to the online newsletter Inside Health Policy, "While Gordon's amendment originally had seven policies that states could implement in order to receive federal funding, the other five suggestions were crossed out . . . due to the agreement with the trial lawyers."

• On Aug. 25, at a town-hall meeting in Reston, Va., Howard Dean, former chair of the Democratic National Committee, was asked why there is nothing in the health-care proposals about liability reform. Mr. Dean replied: "The reason that tort reform is not in the bill is because the people who wrote it did not want to take on the trial lawyers. . . . And that is the plain and simple truth."

The upshot is simple: A few thousand trial lawyers are blocking reform that would benefit 300 million Americans. This is not just your normal special-interest politics.

I have a simple question. Since most, if not all trial lawyers organize their businesses as Limited Liability Corporations (LLC’s), doesn’t that mean that “corporate lobbyists are setting the agenda in Washington”? OK, I know that since the Clinton era, it probably means that it depends on what the meaning of “is” is. Maybe in this case, it depends on what the definition of “corporate lobbyist” or “special interest” is. My guess is that both depend on whether they give heavily to your party or not.

How’s all this Hope-N-Change working out for you?

One Nation, Under Barack

2009-09-25T05:08:00.000-07:00

By now, most of you have heard or seen the video of school children being made to sing the praises of President Obama. Chilling, to say the least… Just in case, Ed Morrissey has it here at Hot Air along with a clever twist. And a transcript of the lyrics is here.

These songs are full of campaign slogans and leftist’s talking points. “Equal work means equal pay” and “He said that all must lend a hand to make this country strong again” are in there. Ed makes his point about “He said red, yellow, black or white, all are equal in his sight”. That’s freaky. And finally, “Mr. President we know you'll do the trick”. Is it me, or is Barack Obama being treated like a deity here? At the very least, he is some mythical figure that is coming to save us all.

Now let me say that this in no way comes from Obama or any of his people. Yes, he’s been called narcissistic, but he’s not stupid and he knows this will end up being a distraction.

Everyone else has covered this well, but I have a question. Remember all those liberals that had their panties in a bunch over “Under God” in the pledge of allegiance? Will any of them stand up and say this is inappropriate? Or perhaps they think that worshiping the chosen one is OK, but acknowledging God is a terrible thing.

Left Colored Glasses

2009-09-23T08:54:00.000-07:00

From the” What planet are you from” department, we hear from Thomas Frank writing in the Wall Street Journal. He tries to make the case that Democrats should welcome the debate over healthcare. While I applaud his idea of a debate, I have to take issue with his underlying premise. In his defense, it’s very hard to see the truth through left colored glasses. None the less, I feel I’d like to take a stab at showing how ridiculous his arguments sound once exposed to the light of truth. Let’s examine his article one quote at a time.

Quote 1. “They (conservatives) deplored the prospect of government intrusion into the economy, ignoring the fact that our current troubles are the consequence of government's withdrawal from the economy.”

One name… Barney Frank. OK, two… Chris Dodd. In league with ACORN, they pushed for people to get mortgages that weren’t qualified to get mortgages. They created an atmosphere where banks wouldn’t be held responsible for writing sub-prime loans and then did their best to cover up how disastrous things were looking. Their buddies in ACORN would blackmail banks into having higher numbers of loans for those that were risky or they would picket and call the banks racist. Finally, when it all came crashing down, they all blamed the banks.

No, Mr. Frank, it wasn’t the “consequence of government's withdrawal”, it was the consequence of government interference.

Quote 2. “They (conservatives) insisted that every government action, due to some mysterious law of freedom physics, produces an equal and opposite diminution of personal liberty.”

Please, you’re making this too easy. Mr. Frank, give me one example of an increase in government power that DOESN’T result in less individual freedom. Every government dollar spent, every law on the books, every mandate to the states results in less freedom for”We, The People”.

Quote 3. “The stout-hearted defenders of freedom declared that government could never work, sometimes citing examples of misgovernment drawn from periods of conservative rule to make their case.”

This is what I was talking about when I said left colored glasses. The left can’t see individuals, only groups. So when Mr. Frank see’s people against what the Democrats want, he assumes they are all Republicans. He then seems to say A-ha; you even site examples from your own party, what morons! No, we are conservatives, Mr. Frank and we’re not all that happy with Republicans either. We haven’t really had “conservative rule” in decades. We are individuals. Try and grasp that, Mr. Frank.

Quote 4. “In their (democrats) criticism of the insurance industry they have largely avoided terms like "profiteering" in favor of dry talk about lower costs and more competition”

Like most liberals, Mr. Frank can’t cover his hatred of capitalism when he suggests the left should say something about profiteering. To the left, profits are terrible or at least profits shouldn’t be made on things people need. He ignores what made us the most prosperous nation on earth. Profit is what makes everything so affordable. The fact that Insurance companies’ profit margins are smaller than most major corporations makes little difference to anti-capitalists.

I could go on, but I’ll let the article speak for itself. I will mention a small item. Mr. Frank did get his talking points and managed to find a way to slam Glenn Beck. Way to go, but you missed Halliburton and how this is probably all Bush’s fault. Maybe next time.

Between Iraq and a soft place

2009-09-21T08:46:00.000-07:00

Now that the honeymoon is officially over, President Obama is quickly discovering it is much easier to complain about your predecessor than to actually make the hard decisions you chastised him for. Lately, our commander in chief has discovered that saying what you say during a campaign to get your wing-nut lefties in full frenzy mode can be troublesome when that rhetoric hits the cold hardness of reality. The softness of the left that was played up to in the campaign is now going to cause problems. At the very least, it will cause PBO’s support among his fringe base to deteriorate. At worst, we will see the war in Afghanistan be lost to this President and our intelligence gathering capacity destroyed for decades. There are two stark examples of what I’m saying in the news lately.

Item number one concerns Eric Holder deciding to “investigate” interrogation techniques employed by our intelligence community in the aftermath of 9-11. PBO says he has no desire to look back, but the law is the law. All due respect Mr. President, but that is not an answer. Either you have no control over your own people or you really do want to look back. Don’t tell me that you have no control over Eric Holder. As far as “The law is the law”, career justice department lawyers have ruled that there was no torture. Now, we have seen an open letter from former CIA directors from the last 35 years saying this would be a huge mistake. These directors were appointed by both Republicans and Democrats. Their opinion is not only non-partisan, but has to have more credibility than just about any other opinion out there. My guess is that Obama wants to satisfy his code pink base without really taking responsibility for what Eric Holder does. Shame on you, Mr. President, stand up and be a Man.

Our second item concerns a leaked letter to the President from the commanders on the ground in Afghanistan calling for a troop surge. The letter says that we face a prospect of losing Afghanistan if we don’t put this surge in action. I almost feel sorry for PBO on this one. On one hand, you have your legacy to think about (not to mention getting reelected). We all know how Jimmy Carter was loved after he let our hostage citizens sit and rot for a year in that hellhole known as Iran. On the other hand, Obama has his wing-nut base to think about. We all know they don’t care if we lose. A weaker USA is what they want anyway. Remember, PBO was against the surge in Iraq. He didn’t think it would work. Neither did Reed or Pelosi for that matter and they are the ones making the decisions now. Wonderful…

If he plays to the base on this one, he can join Jimmy Carter as an example of what happens to a weak President when he decides to run for a second term. If he abandons his base and does what the experts say he should, he’ll discover how his pet, the media, can turn on you in a heartbeat. Without them covering your every misstep, Mr. President, your ratings can only get worse. That’s what I call being between Iraq and a soft place.

One Good Thing

2009-09-16T05:18:00.000-07:00

Take heart America, I have finally stumbled on one positive thing that may come out of the whole hopey-changey, “let’s be more like Europe (because it has worked out so well for them)”, Presidency.

It came to me after watching the reactions and rhetoric about both Joe Wilson’s comment and the march on Washington by 175 billion people. (Hey, everyone one else is making up numbers, why can’t I?)

I was not aware, but have been informed by various members of the media and politicians on the left that these were both racist events.

Yes, according to Maureen Dowd writing in the New York Times (Circulation of 17, half of them Maureen’s family), she distinctly heard “You lie, boy” or at least that’s what he meant to say, or something like that. Representative Hank Johnson (D- Georgia) tells us that Joe Wilson’s comment will “logically” lead to men in white sheets riding around the countryside.” Wow…

As far as the Tea party protestors, those media outlets that actually noticed there were a few trillion people on the Mall simply dismissed it as a bunch of white people hating a black man. Of course, we are all very familiar with that incredible, intelligent mistress of political commentary, Janeane Garofalo, and how she said “Make no mistake, these (tea parties) are nothing more than them hating a black man in office, this is straight up racism”. Wow again…

Alright, get to the point Little Duke. (I can hear all of you). We are not even a year into this presidency and already and the term racist is starting to lose its effectiveness. I think that three years from now, we may see people laugh at someone using the term “racist”. It’s like the boy who cried wolf so often that nobody would listen when the real wolf came along. Make no mistake; there is real racism in this country, on both sides. But when the term is thrown around so much that people start to yawn every time they hear it, we will have trouble pointing out real racism when it happens.

I think it would be a great thing to take that word out of the arsenal of the left. That, my friends, may be the one good thing that comes from this Presidency. Or does saying that make me a racist?

Update: After I posted this morning, I ran into this from Neal Boortz. Couldn't have said it better myself!

Congressional Black Caucus Endorses Bringing back limited Slavery

2009-09-08T05:47:00.000-07:00

What a headline. No, you won’t see that on the New York Times front page. They still don’t know who the racist Van Jones is. Besides, I’m sure they are writing, in advance, their front page article on how none of us mere mortals could begin to understand how incredible PBO’s speech to congress on Wednesday was. (Or will be… or whatever)

Alright, I digress. The CBC did write a letter to Barak Obama telling him not to drop the public option. Let’s drop that façade right now. It’s a government option and it’s unconstitutional. Not that any of that would matter to those that believe in bringing back slavery. Ohhhh, I used that word again. I’m sure the CBC will have their collective panties in a bunch about that! Let’s see how far off I am…

The CBC thinks that healthcare is a right. They and most Uber-Liberals think the same thing. If we follow this to its logical conclusion, one of two things must happen.
1. You go see the doctor and he has to do it for free.
2. You go see the doctor and the government makes someone else pay the doctor.

Both of those scenarios are slavery. Forcing someone to work for another for free is slavery!

Some taxes are necessary. Those things that Congress is authorized to spends money on are listed in Article 1, Section 8 of that little document that liberals like to pretend they don’t see, the Constitution. Here’s a newsflash, there is NO provision for the government to spend one dime on healthcare.

So why did I write the inflammatory title of this post? We let statists dictate the terms of every argument. If we are against expanding welfare, we want poor people to starve. If we are against expanding the role of the federal government in education, we hate kids. If we think the EPA goes too far, we are against clean air and clean water. All ridiculous leaps of logic and all put forth by the left. It’s time we put them on the defensive. Instead of letting them dictate the terms of the argument, let’s turn it around on them…

Leftists Democrats, who were dragged kicking and screaming to the civil rights table back in the 60’s are today trying to bring back slavery. This time, their target is not based on color, but on attitude. If you are a producer; if you got an education; if you developed a marketable skill; if you work hard and or own your own business, democrats want to institute partial slavery on you. They will seize part of your hard earned property and give it to your neighbors so they can go see a doctor. Just say no to slavery in any form.

There, let them try and prove they are not bringing back slavery. No, it’s not “Bush is Hitler”, but being the smarter of the political spectrum means we have a higher standard and have to be more creative. If CBC, George Soros, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, NPR, ACORN(or whatever their name is this week), Daily Kos, Huffington Post and The New York Times all think it’s a great idea to seize someone’s property, let them explain why it isn’t slavery. I’m guessing they will have no reasonable answer and in fact, I’m sure I’m a racists for ever bring this up.

I Have A Friend

2009-08-19T06:57:00.000-07:00

I have a friend. He’s a very likable guy. He can be the life of the party. My friend works hard, plays hard and isn’t afraid to take chances. He’s fun to have a beer with. As I write this, he’s in California trying to make his dream of acting come true. I have a friend and he scares the hell out of me. See, my friend is a looter. No, he doesn’t think so, but maybe this post will force him or someone else to look in the mirror.

I don’t understand it. How can an otherwise basically honest man be so in favor of taking what doesn’t belong to him? Lke all statists, he justifies his looting by vilifying evil rich people or evil corporations. He justifies his looting by having the government do it for him. I guess he figures that the government stealing from those groups makes it OK. I don’t think he personally wants to steal from people; he just wants the government to do it for him.

Yes, my friend is in favor of government run healthcare. “It’s his right”.

It’s his right to take someone else’s property so he can go see a doctor. He won’t say it that way. To say it that way would shatter his house of cards. He would be more likely to say that those evil big companies can afford it or those sinful people making over $250,000 a year can afford it because they made their money by taking advantage of people anyway. I believe that most statists have to justify the looting because deep down inside, it doesn’t agree with their basic human honesty, their basic sense of fair play. Most people would say I’m naive.

I own a business. I hope to open a second and then a third location someday. That may take my income up past that $250,000 mark. Will my friend demand that I pay for him to go to the doctor? I don’t think so. Will he demand that the government take more of my money so he can go to the doctor? Why wouldn’t he? That is why he scares the hell out of me. If you have a right to take what’s mine for your own personal use, then you have a right to steal from me. I worked hard to create that wealth and what gives you or anybody the right to take it away from me? In my mind, a thief is a thief, whether you take it yourself or have the government do it. So what will it be, my friend, are you a thief or not? I guess that would be a good thing for me to know.

Lions and Tigers and Bears, Oh My

2009-08-06T06:16:00.000-07:00

And now from the pot calling the kettle black department… Nancy Pelosi, in a pathetic swipe at people concerned about healthcare legislation, said yesterday that protesters at town hall meetings ”were carrying swastikas and symbols like that.”

Poor, poor Nancy, I almost feel sorry for her. She’s still living in the 60’s (maybe yesterday was a flashback day for her). WHERE’S THE PROOF? In this day of cell phone cameras, I’m quite certain that we would have seen anything that stupid all over the news by now. We have certainly seen enough of that moron calling to see PBO’s birth certificate.

Alright Princess Pelosi, let’s do a history lesson, shall we? The swastika was the symbol of the Nazi’s in WWII Germany. What did the Nazi’s believe in; what did they stand for? They believed in a strong, powerful central government. They believed in neighbors turning in neighbors for political thought that didn’t agree with the party line. They believed in private ownership, but government control of certain key industries. Come to think of it, that does sound familiar… In short, they were Fascists / Socialists / “Progressives” if you will. I guarantee that no self respecting, limited-government, conservative would be caught dead with a swastika.
In fact, if we do see one in the near future at a town hall meeting, I’m quite sure it will be from the side of the isle that most emulates Fascists thinking.

Sorry, your highness, this may play well to your leftists friends and the media (oops, I’m being redundant), but since they won’t call you out on this, I will. From the famous line from the 80’s, “Where’s the Beef” madam congresswoman? Keep it up, though. Keep dismissing the American people. Ignore us at your own political peril.

Every time you open your mouth, you help the cause of freedom.

Arrogance

2009-08-05T05:16:00.000-07:00

When hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets to attend two rounds of tea parties, we were told “it’s just because they are racists, they don’t like the idea of a black man in office.” When huge numbers of people were skeptical of the idea of man-made global warming, we were told they were just the same as “holocaust deniers”. When thousands of people attend town hall meetings with their congresspersons to express displeasure with proposed healthcare legislation, we are told that they are all “shills for the insurance companies”. What do all of these events (and quite a few others) have in common? They are all examples of leftist’s arrogance. There are two reasons for this arrogance and politicians better pay attention to these “dumb masses.”

The first reason for the arrogance is that many people are intellectually lazy. It’s the oldest political trick in the book. If you can’t win an argument; if the facts are not on your side; if you can’t afford for the argument to get intellectual instead of emotional, the best way to shut down your opponent is to name call or make fun of the other’s position. The man that disagrees with global warming is someone people may listen to, but a “global warming denier” is a nut-case that doesn’t need to be addressed. It’s laziness or fear. If you know that your argument is weak in the first place or the facts are just not there to support you, smear your opponent. Smear his idea.

The other reason for leftist’s arrogance is far more insidious. Most statists / leftists believe they are right. They believe they are naturally superior. They think they are the enlightened ones. Listen to what they call themselves, “Progressives”. Listen to their rhetoric, “saving the planet, clean air, clean water, and a great job for everyone, ETC?” After all, who could be against those things? (By the way, conservatives believe in those things too, we just don’t think the government can make them happen as efficiently as the private sector.) Since leftists could not possibly be wrong, everyone else must be. Since they are right, we must be rubes, ignorant, racist, and clinging to our guns and Bibles.

Beware a people ignored. Politicians of both sides had better learn to discount us at their own peril. Our Declaration of Independence says we have “the right to alter or abolish” a government that does not represent the people. Keep ignoring the great unwashed masses and you may find yourself altered right out of office.

Cash for Clunkers for Dummies

2009-08-04T05:38:00.000-07:00

Ronald Regan famously said that the scariest phrase in the English language is “I’m from the Government and I’m here to help.” We have not seen a more flawless example of what he meant than the Cash for Clunkers program. In a nutshell, the program works something like this:

The Government takes money from my Granddaughter’s salary and gives it to people wanting to buy a new car. The Government then takes the older car out of the marketplace and destroys it.

Alright, you caught me. That’s not how the government describes it. Their description and the directions on how to accomplish this plan take 130 pages and this is just a little old blog entry, so I condensed it down for us normal people. So let’s look at what is wrong with this program.

The first and most obvious is the one that is so silly to even bring up. It’s not constitutional! While nobody even bothers to ask what is constitutional anymore, there is no provision in the US constitution that allows the federal government to help anybody buy a car.

The cost of the program is another example of what’s wrong. It started as only a billion (ONLY A BILLION?) and now may go to 3 or 4 billion. This makes us all feel so good about a 1.6 trillion dollar healthcare program. How much will that end up actually costing us? Don’t let the Government tells us how much something is going to cost, we’d get a more accurate answer from the guys that guess your weight at the fair.

Congress spending money it doesn’t have. They have to get it from somewhere. That’s debt that must be paid back by my granddaughter and she isn’t even born yet. A simple question is: when the government is taking money out of her paycheck to pay for my new car, what will they do to stimulate her economy?

Despite the best effort of congress to repeal the laws of supply and demand, they just won’t go away. (The laws or congress) “Helping” people buy more new cars and then destroying their old ones unnaturally distorts both the new and used car markets. Who’s buying the new cars? They are mostly people that were going to buy one in the next year or so anyway. So while new car sales will temporarily go up, they will fall tremendously over the next year or so. As far as used cars go, we are taking 666,667 older cars off the market (3 billion divided by $4500). What happens when supply of something goes down? The price goes up. That applies to the cars as well as the parts they would have supplied. Costs of both are going to go through the ceiling.

I have one last point to make. Who is buying the new cars? Not the poor. Rich and middle class are the only ones that can afford the payments on a new car. Who is building these cars? Most new car sales are the more fuel efficient and more cost effective foreign cars. These are mostly built in non- union factories in right-to-work states. Who buys clunkers? The poor, students and working class families needing a first or second vehicle are the ones buying those cars.

So let’s see if I have this straight… The government is taking money it doesn’t have to subsidize rich and middle class people buying vehicles while leaving the poor and the unions out in the cold.

That’s change we can believe in!

I Demand My Right to Demand My Rights

2009-07-17T06:40:00.000-07:00

Our founding fathers laid out the vision for a new direction in thinking. The idea that we as humans are endowed with fundamental rights was a very radical idea. These rights are a part of us and are not granted by the government or by any other individual. The right to free speech and the right to bear arms are there. The right to our life, our liberty and the right to pursue our own happiness are indelible. These rights are not granted to us because to imply the granting would also imply the power to take them away. Our founding fathers reasoned that no Government has that power.

We have been hearing for years about new rights that we are supposed to have. According to some on the statist’s side of thinking, our founding fathers just couldn’t see that someday we would need these new rights and it’s now time to enumerate those new rights as well. We hear that we all have the right to healthcare. We have the right to a collage education. We are told that we should have a right to daycare for our children, prenatal care for moms and food stamps for the baby. We are even told that we all have the right not to be offended. It’s all a bunch of hooey!

There is one fundamental difference between what I consider the classic rights and what we’ll call "the new found" rights. Classic Rights do not cost anyone anything. In other words, my right to free speech does not require anyone to give up anything for me to enjoy it. On the other hand each and every one of the so called "new" rights requires someone else to pay for them.

Let’s look at healthcare. If someone has the right to healthcare, will doctors work for free? No, that’s called slavery. OK, so the government will pay the doctors. The government has no money so they must take it from us in the form of taxes. Therefore, someone has to give up their money to pay for this "right". The fact that the money first goes into a general budget in no way changes the fact that the product of your labor is being confiscated to provide a visit to the doctor for someone else. How can that be anything but slavery? The same applies to any of the "new" rights. Our founding fathers understood that one man cannot have rights at the expense of others.

I propose a new constitutional amendment:
CONGRESS SHALL PASS NO PROVISION OR LAW OR AUTHORIZE ANY EXPENDITURE THAT TRANSFERS ANY BENEFIT, MONETARY OR OTHERWISE, TO AN INDIVIDUAL. FURTHER MORE, CONGRESS SHALL BE PROHIBITED FROM FORCING THE STATES TO DO THE SAME.

Think of the implications of such an amendment. The federal government could defend us, build roads and build libraries or any one of hundreds of other projects that help communities or states, but would be prohibited from providing anything for an individual. Farm subsidies, welfare, corporate welfare (corporations are considered individuals under the law) and so many other government functions would be carried out at the state level. While the Feds could still collect the taxes for such schemes, (we’ll deal with that issue later), they could only pass the money on to the states to spend as they see fit. Imagine a patchwork of welfare programs, farm subsidies etc. at the state level. 50 different test areas on how to best manage government welfare would give us an incredible lab. If Massachusetts wants cradle to grave healthcare, let them try it. If it works, every state would jump on the bandwagon. If it doesn’t (duh), only one state would get hurt. This is what our founding fathers first envisioned. By having stronger states, we would have these test labs of policy going on all the time.

The right to our own property is as basic a right as we have. No one has a "right" to the product of my labor. It’s my property.

An Offer They Couldn’t Refuse

2009-07-13T07:23:00.000-07:00

Instead of what happened to the Five Families in the Godfather, what if they decided to merge their operations. There had been some fighting amongst the families and they were starting to realize that fighting was hurting their growth, so they decided to merge.

Many argued for everyone to be allowed a vote in the running of this new merged family, but the heads of the Five were afraid of losing their autonomy. It was reasoned that one central controlling unit would be too dangerous to the individual families. They did not want to give up control over their own affairs. It was decided that there would be two groups making the rules and they must both agree before a new rule was put in place. The first group would be chosen by everyone. From the lowly nephew who wasn’t given too much responsibility to the most powerful member of the family, everyone would have a say in who was making the rules in this group. The second group was to be appointed by the heads of the families. This gave the families a chance to veto the rules of the first group if they felt they would infringe on their territory. With everyone having a voice, there was peace in the five families and they were prosperous.

The Families learned from one another. When one family made a mistake that hurt their prosperity, the other families did not make that mistake. When one family did something that worked, all the families emulated it.

After many generations of prosperity, it was decided that the second group would also be chosen by everyone. The Five families had now become The Twenty-Eight and they had forgotten what made them strong was their individuality. Without the Family heads choosing the second group, they had no more say in how the rules were drawn up and their individual families became irrelevant. They became just another branch of the same family tree. Now, with no checks and balances; no trial and error, every bad decision was amplified by the fact that everyone had to live with it.

On April 8, 1913, the Seventeenth Amendment was ratified and Senators were no longer appointed by the states to be their representatives in federal matters. Our country was forever changed for the worse. Without States having their own voice in the Imperial Federal Government, those states lost their autonomy. They became simply another district. Without a legislative body to say “No, that law would hurt my state”, the Federal government no longer had the states telling them what they couldn’t do.

In order to save our Union of 50 families, we must repeal the 17th amendment and restore states voices.

While I in no way equate the 13 colonies to crime families, I feel the analogy fits. Little Duke

Arrogance

2009-07-07T06:27:00.000-07:00

With the President and Congress starting to talk about ANOTHER stimulus package that will probably cost even more than the first, I have to ask a couple very simple questions.

Why does only government think that throwing good money after bad is a great idea?

Why doesn’t the government let us keep more of our money so we can directly stimulate the economy?

The answer to both questions is two words.

Arrogance and Power

I’ll let Neal Boortz deal with the power issue here. Basically, Money that passes through politicians hands is power. He can buy votes with it. Maybe not in the direct sense, but pork and pet projects allow the politician to write home to the great unwashed masses and talk about how much so and so is doing for the folks back home.

Arrogance is the idea that anyone knows how to spend money better than the person that earned it. Forget the Audacity of Hope, how about the audacities of thinking politicians make better decisions on how to spend money.

I think the issue goes deeper than that. Let’s give politicians a break and say they could spend the money as well as the person who earned it. (I know, and Santa Claus is real too) Seriously, we then have to deal with the cost of delivering those dollars to their target. Even if the cost of bureaucracy was zero (That was the Easter Bunny), there is still the cost of the people needed to collect the taxes and cut the checks. No small amount.

One more issue with the stimulus. It’s not our money. The money we are spending today is our children’s and grandchildren’s. They will have to pay it back. That would be bad enough if it worked, but stimulus will never work in the hands of politicians. It’s just too inefficient. Real stimulus is putting money back in the hands of the people. John Kennedy knew it, Reagan knew it and even Bush2 knew it in the beginning. They were all faced with down economies and turned them around by allowing the great unwashed to keep their money and spend it at home.

That, my friends is stimulus.

What politicians practice is arrogance.

Not another Cinderella Story

2009-07-06T08:09:00.000-07:00

I know it may be hard to hear me with the sounds of millions of people scraping off their Obama bumper stickers, but here I go.

Every day, we are being hit with a full broadside of reasons that President Obama might not have been the smartest thing that Americans have ever done. While I could attempt to list them here, it would take too much space and other people, far smarter than I, have done a great job of chronicling those “missteps”. Check out Capt. Ed at Hot Air and his Obamateurism of the day.

It all reminds me of a classic fairy tale. The Emperor Has No Clothes is as old as time and I think it’s time to bring it out of retirement. This is just a refresher for those as old and forgetful as me. An Emperor had a tailor make him a set of fine clothes to wear and when the tailor finished, he announced that he had created a set of clothes that were very light and happened to be invisible to anyone not wise enough to see them. Well, the Emperor, not wanting to admit to being stupid or uneducated puts them on and begins to strut around in them. Of course, all the Kings aids and friends didn’t want to admit they were stupid, so they went along with complimenting him of his choice of clothes. In that story, it took the voice of a child (an uneducated, unsophisticated child) to finally speak up and announce to the word that the Emperor wasn’t wearing a stitch of clothing. The Emperor Has No Clothes.

Well boys and girls, I’ll be the uneducated child. The President has No Clue is a modern fairy tale being played out right before our eyes. And just like the original story, we find all "the Kings" advisors, the political beltway, the intellectuals and the media in lockstep as too how great this man 's ideas are. They are all saying none of us can begin to understand his subtle nuance; his sophisticated intelligence. None want to say how stupid the ideas are for fear of not being on the inside; not being thoughtof as smart. They swoon about him while many of us uneducated types just shake our heads.

By the way, their definition of uneducated is: Haven’t worked for the Government for most or all your life. Didn’t graduate from Harvard or Yale. Don’t have a degree in journalism. Don’t live in New York, LA, Washington, San Francisco, Minnesota, New Jersey, California or Chicago. And last but not least, don’t believe that Government is why the United States is so strong.
Fortunately for me, most people in this country are “Uneducated” and I’ll be associated with them over the so called “educated” anytime.

Yes, The President Has No Clue is a new fairy tale that should frighten the hell out of kids for generations to come.

Great Read on this 4th of July

2009-07-06T08:05:00.001-07:00

I came across this post from "A Voice In The Wilderness" and thought this should be seen by as many people as possible. Great reading for those that love our country as much as I do.

What Are They So Afraid Of?

2009-07-06T07:59:00.000-07:00

Sarah Palin Announced she was leaving her office of Governor of the great state of Alaska on Friday and touched off a firestorm of speculation about what she is doing. I have heard great ideas, farfetched ideas as well as some of the craziest, dumbest theories I have ever heard. I watch the coverage on the news for most of the weekend. I also have an employee that is an avowed leftist. As I listened to him and watched some of the pundits on TV, I was struck by how vicious most of the people on the left are toward her. When I sat back and just observed, I couldn’t help but smile.

They fear the hell out of her. They are scared out of their minds because they know she resonates with all the simple, common, hard working people that do most of the working, living, paying taxes and dying for their country. They panic about her because she isn’t their kind of intellectual. She isn’t what they think a politician should act or sound like. She peaks a language that more “enlightened” people have forgotten to speak or even understand. She’s a voice of opposition to the statist’s agenda and a good looking, intelligent one at that.

She is not one of them, but one of us.

Don’t worry; I am not sure what that means any more than they do. I know I like what I hear. She says things in a very common sense sort of way. It reminds me of Reagan and how he connected with people. I seem to remember that Reagan was also hated by the left. In Fact, Statists loved Carter, Clinton and now Obama. They love Pelosi, Reid and Kennedy. They hate Reagan, Gingrich, Huckabee and Romney. They also loved McCain until he was against Obama.

I guess that answers it for me. If they can’t leave her alone because they are so scared of her (And there could be no other reason), then my mind is made up. As long as they are so scared of her, I like her. I don’t know what’s in her heart for the future.

I do wish her luck and hope to see her name on a ballot someday.

When Will We Quit?

2009-07-02T10:12:00.000-07:00

We are being used. We, the producers, the laborers, and the small business owners are being taken for everything we have. We are losing our property, our power and our freedoms. The sad part is that we are working very hard for our annihilation; for the looters. Every hour of overtime, every attempt to better our family’s financial situation just gives the enemies of freedom more money to use against us. Every invention, innovation and product improvement lines the pockets of our adversaries. This enemy isn’t foreign, it’s domestic and we are losing a war that most of us don’t even know we are fighting.

We are working, sweating and giving up our souls to three classes of people. The first two are pawns of the third. The third uses them against us, to belittle us, quiet us and keep us in line. All three groups call us evil and greedy; they think were uncouth, uneducated, unsophisticated. Those three classes are big corporations, welfare recipients and politicians. They are all looters and they will be our death unless we realize who they are and what they are doing.

The first group is just a small percentage of the big corporations. I’m not talking about all big companies. Nor am I here to say that being a big company is a bad thing. I will not use the rhetoric of the looters. You’ve heard it. “Big Oil” and “Big Pharmaceutical”; big anything is horrible according to the looters. That is, unless the politicians decide they can get a grip on them and use them to further their agenda. Then they are called “Too big to fail”. True freedom requires that companies fail. Through mismanagement, malfeasance or just obsolesce, companies fail. The first class of looters are companies that decide to get in bed with the government, take money from hard working Americans and become lackeys of politicians instead of failing.

The second group is the welfare class. Again, I’m not talking about most people that are in need of help. I remember my mom and sister and I needing to be on food stamps for a while when I was a kid. It was temporary, but necessary. I would rather see those programs become private, but that fight is for another day. No, the problem isn’t in your average person in need; it’s the class that sprouts up around them. Politicians use them as a tool to increase their power. Where a private charity would love nothing better that to eventually go out of business because they are no longer necessary, the political class needs the poor, poor, pitiful poor (thanks Neal Boortz) or they lose the power to tax us and spend the money. The political class needs a group that needs them. Those are votes that can be counted on to keep them in power. In fact, it’s in the political interest of politicians to expand that group as much as possible.

This brings us to the political class. While I may not be talking about every politician, I am talking about a majority of both major parties. Most politicians are much more interested in keeping their jobs than actually doing what’s good for America. Boys and girls, government is the problem. They are the only group that has the power to seize property. The other two groups are bit players without the government’s guns; the government’s muscle. And this group uses the rhetoric to keep us in line. If we don’t support bailing out big companies, we must want people out of work. If we want to rein in welfare spending, we hate the poor. If we don’t think the government should be helping unqualified people get a house, we’re racists. These people use slurs to get us to shut up and produce so they can seize it and use it. Government has caused nearly every problem we have today and their solution is more government. More government means more taxes and that money is spent on the first two groups in order to keep them dependent on (thus voting for more) of the third.

Where does that leave us? What is the solution? An armed rebellion won’t work. While that “solution“would kill the cancer, it would also kill the body. No, I prefer a non-violent approach. To continue the metaphor, let’s starve the cancer. Let’s quit, if we can. I understand that most can’t quit. They have obligations to their families, their lifestyle and so on. (The politicians rely on that) If you can’t quit, then slow down. If we all work less, we would start to starve the looters.

Eventually, the policies of the looters will collapse under their own weight. Until that happens, let’s keep as much “fuel” from them as we can. When will we stop feeding the looters? When will we stop working for your own destruction? When will we quit?

This work may be as close to plagiarism as I ever want to get. I borrowed this idea from nearly the greatest book ever written, Atlas Shrugged. Ayn Rand, the author, was brilliant and I put this here because I think there are too many people that have never been exposed to her work. Any brilliance in this article should be attributed to her; any lack of talent in retelling it is mine. Little Duke

Old Blog Posts

2009-06-30T09:31:00.001-07:00

OK, so I've changed names on my blog because i'm an idiot and spelled the name wrong... you can find the old posts here