Monday, December 13, 2010

A market-driven private sector is the answer

Job creation in the private sector is stalling because of the policies put in place by the Progressives. Businessmen know that as long as the Progressives—with their anti-capitalist, class-warfare ideology—are in power the government will confiscate a large share of the fruits of their corporate endeavors; money that would otherwise be plowed back into the businesses creating jobs. All this is lost on the Progressives in Congress who persist on trying to direct the economy using the tax code and massive spending programs.

What we need now more than before is over the next two years for the GOP to step up and counter the Progressives' anti-capitalist demagoguery with clarity, extolling the virtues of a market-driven private sector with its ability to create wealth and prosperity for all levels of society. The Progressives have been repeating their message over and over. It's time for GOP to do the same.

Monday, December 06, 2010

EPA extends Clean Water Act to include CO2

EPA Issues November 15, 2010 Memorandum: Integrated Reporting and Listing Decisions Related to Ocean Acidification

The EPA administrator, Obama appointee Lisa Jackson, has issued a memo requiring states with ocean boundary waters to list those waters as impaired because of acidification. The reporting requirement is an extension of Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act.

Obviously, this is another dimension of the Obama administration's drive to institute a cap and trade regime targeting CO2 emissions. The motivation for using the Clean Water Act in this way has to be a recognition by the Administration that the AGW meme is dead. The new meme is biodiversity in the boundary waters and how CO2 absorption harms it.

There are a number of technical issues the EPA needs to iron out; mainly, definition of the procedure to use to establish the pH of the waters, and determination, by the EPA, of the pH level requiring action. This should stall any concrete action by the EPA before the 2012 elections. After that, a Republican administration can cancel the memorandum.

Sunday, November 21, 2010

But, what about Social Security and Medicare?

Will Republicans Get Serious on Spending?

Senator McConnell, in a speech before the Federalist Society, said,
"Americans want less government, less spending and less debt."
"We will vote to freeze and cut discretionary spending."

Author Chapman noted that McConnell made no mention of the non-discretionary spending items: social security, medicare, medicaid and defense.

Okay, but those non-discretionary items can't be reformed with simple cuts or freezes. The first three must be totally restructured. And, defense must be put "on budget."

The problem with social security and medicare, at least, is Congress spent all the payroll deductions on general budget items rather than build up a capital reserve to fund the program in the future. This must be changed.

Exactly how this is to be done and to explain it is beyond the scope of a speech. But, it certainly is not beyond the scope of We the People nudging our Congressmen to work on the problem.

Thursday, November 18, 2010

GOP Leaders snub Obama

McConnell: "Our first goal is to reverse the damage that's been done."

The article opens by saying Sen. McConnell and Speaker-elect Boehner were too busy to meet with the President today but not too busy to speak to the Federalist Society. If that is a snub to the President, the President earned it. There is no point to meeting with Obama because, as has been amply demonstrated in past meetings, he has no interest in listening much less in learning something.

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

The new alarmist meme: Biodiversity replaces AGW

EPA tells states to consider rising ocean acidity

The New World Order activists, having failed to capitalize on AGW to destroy our economy, have changed tactics. Now it's CO2 acidification of coastal waters and how it affects "biodiversity." The aim is the same: Drag down the US economy by using acidification of inland and coastal waters to elevate CO2 as a gas needing control thereby justifying imposition of CO2 controls. The push to pass cap-and-trade legislation is not dead!

Friday, November 12, 2010

It's time to take a stand

This is the delta smelt.  This little fish is the reason O's administration is choking off agriculture in the Central Valley.  The EPA is issuing draconian measures in the name of this and similar critters in many areas of the country.  It's time for Americans to take a stand.  Will it be delta smelt or will it be human beings.

Friday, October 29, 2010

Another Tea Party

Logo of Israel's nascent Tea Party. The text reads "At the Likud's Tea Party, we say 'no' to Obama."

Credit:  CNSnews.

Monday, October 18, 2010

If you have forgotten...

If you have forgotten what is good about America, or have begun to take her for granted, I strongly recommend you read this article by a former citizen of the USSR: Love And Hate Of America by Leon A. Weinstein.

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

On the federal suit over SB1070 (revised)

Currently, the Justice Department's suit against Arizona's immigration law (SB 1070) is being appealed in the Ninth Circuit court. There have been some comments in the press maintaining that, according to our Constitution (Article III, Section 2, Clause2) the Supreme Court of the United States has original jurisdiction in suits involving the Federal government and the States.

Seeing as how this suit was filed in a Federal District court, I decided to view the complaint to see if there was some subtlety that forced the choice of venue.

The title of the complaint is The United States of America, Plaintiff v. The State of Arizona; and Janice K. Brewer, Governor of Arizona, in her official capacity, Defendants which plainly shows Article III, Section 2, Clause 2 to be the governing law. Yet, the appeal is going the normal route as other cases would. Why?

The jurisdiction of the Court is specified in 28 U.S.C §1251:

§ 1251. Original jurisdiction
  • (a) The Supreme Court shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction of all controversies between two or more States.
  • (b)The Supreme Court shall have original but not exclusive jurisdiction of:
    • (1) All actions or proceedings to which ambassadors, other public ministers, consuls, or vice consuls of foreign states are parties;
    • (2) All controversies between the United States and a State;
    • (3) All actions or proceedings by a State against the citizens of another State or against aliens.

Note that (b)(2) says the Court does have original jurisdiction in suits between the United States and a State but that the jurisdiction is not exclusive. That is, the district courts are allowed to take these suits as well. The statute is following an earlier decision by the Marshall court in Marbury v. Madison (1803) where, essentially, Marshall took Article III, Section 2 to mean Congress was prohibited from increasing the scope of the Court's original jurisdiction but that Congress could, by statute, reduce its scope.

So, this is an example where the plain language of the Constitution has been modified by Court decisions and acts of Congress. Ultimately, the appeal may go to the Supreme Court anyway.

Tuesday, August 03, 2010

Politico quick to play the race card

Ethics cases raise racial questions

A couple of Dems get caught and Politico smacks down the race card:
The politically charged decisions by veteran Democratic Reps. Charles Rangel of New York and Maxine Waters of California to force public trials by the House ethics committee are raising questions about race and whether black lawmakers face more scrutiny over allegations of ethical or criminal wrongdoing than their white colleagues.
It seems like the partisan Politico is exercising selective memory. It wasn't that long ago that there was a veritable parade of white GOP members being shown the door for a lot less.

Thursday, July 29, 2010

NCAR's atmospheric research program: Objectivity lacking?

On visiting the National Weather Service's forecast page, I noticed the following message at the top of the page:
The National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) will be conducting a survey in Fall 2010 to ask people's opinions about this web page. This survey is not being conducted by the National Weather Service (NWS) or any other government entity. If you are willing to be contacted by email to participate in this web-based survey, please click here (you will be redirected to an NCAR web page).
Atmospheric research is good, I thought, but what is the nature of NCAR's program and is it worth participating? To find out, I went to NCAR's Web page where I found a link to their strategic plan.

The following excerpt was taken from the executive summary of NCAR's plans. Note the highlighted section:
In preparing [the strategic plan update], NCAR staff and community members reviewed current trends in our science and in national and international affairs. Simple extrapolation demonstrates how important atmospheric and Earth system science are to our common future. Human activities are causing large-scale changes in the Earth system—such as alterations in atmospheric chemistry, ozone depletion, and climate change—and population growth during the next century will make the effects of humans on the environment, and vice versa, far more pervasive, complex, and substantial.
As everyone knows, the scientific method involves defining a hypothesis, testing that hypothesis against empirical data, then either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis. The key to the method is for the researchers to maintain objectivity and not be committed to certain outcomes.

That being said, NCAR's characterization of the problem—stated as a fact rather than as a hypothesis—signals a lack of objectivity in NCAR's approach to their research, i.e., NCAR's basic premise is anthropogenic global warming is true and all that remains to be done is to discover what to do about it.

So, unless the researchers are allowed to reject NCAR's basic premise, I doubt NCAR's research will be an improvement over the now discredited IPCC Fourth Assessment Report.

Wednesday, July 28, 2010

More AGW hokum

This time the bogus report comes from NOAA.
WASHINGTON – Scientists from around the world are providing even more evidence of global warming, one day after President Barack Obama renewed his call for climate legislation.
The timing of the release from NOAA is obviously the result of a political calculation rather than dispassionate science.
Rising over decades are average air temperature, the ratio of water vapor to air, ocean heat content, sea surface temperature, sea level, air temperature over the ocean and air temperature over land.
It is well-known that water vapor is the major greenhouse gas.
"What this data is doing is, it is screaming that the world is warming," Thorne [of the Cooperative Institute for Climate and Satellites] concluded.
Well, okay. But that doesn't speak to the reasons for the warming. Nor, does it speak to the fact that we are currently in the waning phase of the 200-year solar irradiance cycle meaning the globe will soon be cooling. Nor, given that atmospheric water vapor is increased, does it explain why H wants to cut CO2 emissions.

But, never mind all that. Just in case you happen to be dull enough to not be alarmed by the science, they threw in this tidbit:
And a study by Princeton University researchers released Monday suggested that continued warming could cause as many as 6.7 million more Mexicans to move to the United States because of drought affecting crops in their country.
Alarmed now, you racist dullard?

Tuesday, July 27, 2010

Is Consumers Union pro consumer?

cuAction.jpg
Your $5 will help us target Senators to support a clean-energy plan here at home that finally frees us from foreign oil and polluting energy!

Sunday, July 25, 2010

Obama addresses his base

H addresses the Netroots Nation convention. Netroots—the term is intended to evoke a grassroots image—is a network of liberal/progressive partisan activists.

After an opening greeting, the video cuts away to a Rachel Maddow clip reciting the list of legislation passed that we all know about. The video concludes with H taking—as is his habit—a poke at the previous administration and exhorts his Netroots base to "keep up the fight" and to "keep holding [him] accountable."

That last bit seems to be an invitation to Netroots to create such a ruckus over some issue that he, the president, will be forced to take some action that would not otherwise be politically feasible.


Tuesday, July 20, 2010

More leftist propaganda from the Consumers Union

CULogo.jpg  It didn't take long for the Consumers Union—publisher of a nonprofit consumer magazine and, lately, water-carrier for the Progressive agenda—to take advantage of the Gulf spill to push another of the Progessive's agenda items.

In an email with subject line Had enough? They are using corporate bad-boy BP to push enacting the Administration's cap and trade bill.

The email, signed by Shannon Baker-Branstetter of Consumers Union of the U.S., ends with the following promise (threat?)

You’ll be hearing more from us as we push for a comprehensive energy policy that prioritizes clean energy, rewards innovators, punishes polluters, and encourages consumers to put efficiency to work in our homes.

Thursday, July 15, 2010

Pay no attention to the little man on the dais

Obama spokesman's remarks draw fire from Pelosi

WASHINGTON (AP) - In spite of criticism from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats, President Barack Obama's chief spokesman on Wednesday defended his remark that the party could lose control of the House in this fall's elections. He hastened to add that he doesn't think that will happen.
Shh! No! No! There is no problem! What's the matter with him? Democrats, relax. Hit the beach in Florida come November.

Sunday, July 11, 2010

Axelrod on Fox News Sunday

David Axelrod appeared on Fox News Sunday today. When asked about the government's response to the AZ immigration problem, he appeared to be quite uncomfortable and went into a defensive posture claiming the US has assigned more assets to cover the border. Senator Kyl later correctly noted that to say "more" has been done is not the same as saying "enough" has been done.

And, Axelrod, attempting to deflect criticism of Holder's suit against Arizona, brought up the tired line:   we can't have a patchwork of fifty different immigration laws.

All that was beside the point. The point is H tried to do just enough to give him cover with the people without upsetting the Hispanic vote.

Come November, he will discover he failed.

Saturday, July 03, 2010

Judge Napolitano's misunderstandings

Judge Napolitano, on today's Freedom Watch program, raised two objections concerning government surveillance that I believe are mistaken:    The use of UAVs to monitor our borders and the use of microphones to monitor sounds in our cities.

First, the use of UAVs—drones—over our borders.   The Judge objected to the use of UAVs categorizing them as a tool for spying on citizens.   The counter argument revolves around our expectation that the federal government will control immigration across our borders and, like the use of men on horesback or riding in SUVs, UAVs simply are an enhancement of ability over men on foot patrol.

The Judge also mentioned UAVs flying over metropolitan areas.   While I haven't heard of such a thing, I can see use of UAVs as a legitimate alternative to helicopters to follow fugitives on the run as we occasionally have seen on live TV.   To suspect the federal government intends to use UAVs to conduct 24/7 surveillance on citizens is to engage in Orwellian fantasy.

The second objection raised by the Judge is on microphones some metropolitan areas have installed outdoors, the purpose of which is to triangulate to the location of gunshots.   Here, the Judge—again mistakenly—characterized these microphones as devices for monitoring conversations of citizens on the street.

Judge Napolitano is known for his libertarian approach to government and correctly brings up legitimate issues with federal government overreach.   But, as no-one is perfect, I choose to apply a commonsense filter to his pronouncements.

Wednesday, June 30, 2010

More on the Russian spies

Cypriot police say Russian spying suspect vanished

LARNACA, Cyprus — Cypriot police began searching late Wednesday for an alleged Russian spy wanted in the United States who vanished after being released on bail a day earlier in the Mediterranean island nation.

Either the Cypriots are idiots or they are colluding with the Russians.

Chicago Theatre of Absurd

Chicago gun ban on way out, but mayor vows fight

     CHICAGO – A Supreme Court ruling finding that Americans have the right to bear arms anywhere they live almost certainly means the end of Chicago’s decades-old handgun ban, but it might not make handgun ownership in Chicago much easier if the city’s powerful mayor has his way.
     Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley said officials already were at work rewriting the city ordinance to adhere to the court ruling while protecting Chicago residents from gun violence.

-Wire reports

The Supreme Court held in McDonald v. Chicago that the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process clause incorporates the Second Amendment against state and local governments thus striking down Chicago's handgun ban. But, the Mayor is determined to find a way around the ruling and deny the citizens of Chicago their Second Amendment protections all in the name of protecting the Chicago residents from gun violence.

This is absurd on its face. Despite Daly's handgun ban, gun violence in Chicago has never been higher. There have been weeks when Baghdad had fewer deaths due to violence. Indeed, a recent press conference by the Chicago Chief of Police, Jody Weis, was interrupted by a gang shoot-out less than a block away.

So, if Chicago had the most stringent handgun law in the nation, why is gun violence so high? The Mayor should stop and think about that question. It certainly isn't because law-abiding citizens have the guns.

Sunday, June 20, 2010

The Hill over the hill?

Franken launches full-throated attack on 'conservative activism' on courts

The Hill, commenting on a comic set-piece by Al Franken, wrote:

Republican senators and conservative jurists found themselves on the defensive after Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) blasted "conservative activism" on federal courts.

To say that analysis is a 'stretch' is to indulge in understatement.

It is apparent the writers at The Hill are due for a reality checkup. Franken is a clown making clownish statements. No one having a firm grip on reality would take seriously anything Franken says.

Thursday, June 17, 2010

Criminal negligence in Gulf spill

CHANGE! 53 Days Later Obama Administration Decides to Accept Dutch Offer to Help With Spill

There's no hiding it now. The Obama administration has been criminally negligent in the handling of the Gulf oil spill:

The Obama Administration turned down offers to help clean up the spill from The Netherlands and the British Government just days after the explosion. They didn’t accept the British help because they didn’t have the proper paperwork. The administration still has not given the OK to allow emergency workers to use a Maine company’s oil boom even though they were made aware of the warehouse full of containment boom back on May 21.

Wrong. As usual

In today's hearings with BP CEO Tony Hayword, Rep. Joe Barton, in reference to Obama compelling BP to establish an escrow account under Federal control, reminded the Waxman/Markey panel that BP should pay for damage claims but should be allowed to follow the "due process and fairness" of the American legal system.

Now enters Barrack 'I don't know the details but the police acted stupidly' Obama with the following gem:

“What is shameful is that Joe Barton seems to have more concern for big corporations that caused this disaster than the fishermen, small business owners and communities whose lives have been devastated by the destruction. Congressman Barton may think that a fund to compensate these Americans is a ‘tragedy’, but most Americans know that the real tragedy is what the men and women of the Gulf Coast are going through right now. Members from both parties should repudiate his comments.”

No, Mr. President. Rep. Barton was concerned about the rule of Constitutional law. Oh, yes, I forgot. You consider the Constitution to be irrelevant.

Friday, June 11, 2010

Unions have their boot on the president's throat.

It has been reported that numerous entities have offered naval assets to help with cleaning the oil from the BP oil spill in the Gulf; but those offers have been refused by the Obama administration. Why? It is because of something known as the Jones Act (US Code: TITLE 46a, CHAPTER 24—MERCHANT MARINE ACT, 1920). Basically, it is a law passed during the Wilson administration (Progressive) that protects maritime union jobs from foreign competition. The Obama administration (Progressive) is hiding behind this law even though exceptions are routine (Bush-Katrina). So, what is Obama up to? I suspect Obama is cowering before Andy Stern and the Unions.

Thursday, June 03, 2010

British Petrol: The end?

This oil spill fiasco in the Gulf may be the end of BP. The company has run through over $1B of it's $20B reserves with no end of liabilities in sight. Some commentators have mentioned there are thousands of Americans employed by BP and suggested it would be better if the company stayed together. There are other options,though.

BP took over Amoco back some years ago. It wasn't long afterwards that the Amoco executive crew left or were forced out. Then the trouble started; first with a discovery that BP was neglecting maintenance on the North Slope oil pipline. Other incidents followed over the years. BP management developed a history of taking risky shortcuts.

Which suggests an alternative to the present corporation, namely, spin off the American operation as Amoco with Americans as executives. Leave the remainder of BP under British management with that new British company inheriting the total of liabilities accrued under their management.

A former neighbor worked for Amoco back when it was taken over by BP. He posed this riddle to me one day: How do you pronounce BP Amoco? It's Bee-Pee. The Amoco is silent.


Update-June 10, 2010:  The idea of spinning Amoco off from BP was mentioned on CNBC this morning.

Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Equivocation: An example

Child gun deaths as common in rural as urban areas

For over a hundred years the progressives have worked diligently to undermine the belief systems of America. The tactic of choice is equivocation. Here is the latest example:

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Children and teenagers living in the most-rural parts of the U.S. are as likely to die by gun violence as those in big cities, a new study finds.

Okay, the equivalence is gun. The difference is in the rural areas, it's accidents mostly and a few suicides. In the urban areas, it's criminal activity. How's that for equivalence?

In Chicago, never a day goes by when there is not a report of some innocent teenager being cut down by gang bangers defending their turf. And we see images on TV of weeping mothers, and pastors and elders lamenting the state of affairs.

I have a question for you, Chicago. You have been under Progressive governance for a hundred years. How's it working out for you?

Obama is not a citizen of the U.S. (updated)

Barack Obama Kenyan Birth Certificate / Lucas Smith / Coast Province General Hospital

The link is for a YouTube video showing our President was born at the Coast Province General Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya on August 4, 1961.  The attending doctor was James O. W. Ang'Awa.  The supervisor of obstetrics was John Kwame Odongo.

It is now evident beyond doubt Barack Hussein Obama is not a natural born citizen of the U.S. and not eligible to be our president.


After reading the comments on this issue of Obama's birthplace, I did some searching and found this particular Kenyan birth certificate has been hashed over about six months ago. Judging by those comments, I no longer have any confidence in the claims put out in the YouTube video.

So we shall accept the Hawaiian birth certificate as legitimate and turn to the real reason Obama should not be our president; that he is a committed Marxist/Progressive and views the Constitution of the United States as a mere impediment to achieving his objectives.

Friday, May 21, 2010

Climate change made simple

First atmospheric CO2 and its role in climate change:

  1. Compared to water vapor, CO2 is a minor green house gas.
  2. Changes in the level of atmospheric CO2 do not produce corresponding changes in the global temperature.
  3. The level of atmospheric CO2 is a consequence of global warming not the cause.

So, what is behind climate change and what does the future hold?

  1. The global temperature of the earth is directly related to the total solar irradiance (TSI) received by the earth.
  2. The TSI has a quasi-periodic variation with periods of ~11 years and ~200 years.
  3. The TSI has been abnormally high over much of the twentieth century. This accounts for the observed temperature increases that have been incorrectly attributed to human activity.
  4. We are now at the end of the 200-year cycle's warming phase and are entering a protracted global cooling era.
  5. The TSI minimum will be reached in 2042 ±11 years.
  6. We should not expect to see significant global warming for 150 years.

My earlier post on this subject has references.

Tuesday, May 18, 2010

Global cooling is upon us

New Ice Age 'to begin in 2014'

Russian scientist to alarmists: 'Sun heats Earth!'
CHICAGO – A new "Little Ice Age" could begin in just four years, predicted Habibullo Abdussamatov, the head of space research at St. Petersburg's Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia.

Abdussamatov was speaking yesterday at the Heartland Institute's Fourth International Conference on Climate Change in Chicago, which began Sunday and ends today.

Abdussamatov explained that an abnormally high solar intensity over much of the twentieth century is responsible for observed warming not increased atmospheric CO2 levels. This anomally ended in the 1990s resulting in no additional warming. Abdussamatov is predicting we will see significant cooling beginning in 2013. The Russians, he added, are using the ISS to collect more data in order to refine the timing.

In another paper, Dr. Adussamatov concludes with the following warning:

Consequently, we should fear a deep temperature drop—not catastrophic global warming. Humanity must survive the serious economic, social, demographic and political consequences of a global temperature drop, which will directly affect the national interests of almost all countries and more than 80% of the population of the Earth. A deep temperature drop is a considerably greater threat to humanity than warming. However, a reliable forecast of the time of the onset and of the depth of the global temperature drop will make it possible to adjust in advance the economic activity of humanity, to considerably weaken the crisis.


For additional information, Dr. Adussamatov has a detailed description of "the common Grand 2-century cycle of solar activity," the declining phase of which we are now experiencing, on the Astrometria page of the Pulkovo Observatory Web site.

Terrorists pouring across our southern border

Georgia Congressman Paul Brown on WSBTV 2, Atlanta:

We have hundreds and hundreds of folks coming from Middle Eastern countries. And, frankly, I don't think most of these people are coming here to cut our grass. We must secure the border.

To view the videos:

The documents Janet Napolitano doesn't want you to see: People Other Than Mexicans Currently In Detention In ICE Custody Including From Terrorist Countries

Saturday, May 15, 2010

American voters want Democrats in majority

AP-GfK Poll flashes mixed signals for parties

According to the latest poll, 45% of voters desire a Democratic majority with 40% opposing. According to the poll, Democrats do better when health care is not the issue. Here is (presumably) a typical response:

I'm a new Democrat," said Harley Smithson, 51, of Baltimore, who said he had recently switched from the GOP. "I want to be with a party that's for something instead of against everything.

That response should be very telling for the GOP: they must get in front of the voters like Mr. Smithson and put forward a coherent plan for how they would govern. Failing to do that will relegate the GOP to minority status for the indefinite future. So, it is incumbent upon those of us that are unhappy with the current state of affairs, and do not see the Democrats as the provider of solutions, to get on the GOP's case prodding them to get their act together and do just that.

Tuesday, May 11, 2010

Epancipation

President Obama at Hampton University

The President explaining how the market of ideas is bad for the country. Too much information.  Too many arguments.  Too much pressure.   (Too many outlets for effective top down control.)

Thursday, May 06, 2010

The Progressives' scheme to seize your retirement savings

Guaranteed retirement accounts: Toward retirement income security

As already noted, the Obama administration is planning on seizing private sector retirement plan savings and converting those plans to something called 'guaranteed retirement accounts', a form of guaranteed income annuity. The kicker is the government will "invest and manage the pooled savings." This handling of the funds is similar to social security. And, we all know what happened to that fund: Congress spent it all! We can reasonably assume the same will happen to our retirement savings. This scheme must be vigorously opposed.

The above link goes to the Shared Prosperity site that originated the idea.

Wednesday, May 05, 2010

Why are our southern borders open?

US Taxpayers Pay for Germany’s Socialized Medicine – and Other Terrible News - Big Government

In this Hoover Institute video, Mark Steyn discusses his book, America Alone. What seemed to be a depressing discussion of the fate of Western culture ends on a hopeful note.

But, in listening to the discussion, it suddenly occurred to me why our southern borders are still open. Put simply, the declining birth rate amongst Americans of Western ethnicity threatens the underpinnings of the socialist state the Progressives have been working to impose for the last 100 years: there won't be sufficient young workers to pay the bills.

The same thing happened to Western Europe. Their solution was to import large numbers of Muslims to do the work. The Progressive solution for America (and, possibly, Canada) is to allow unrestricted flow of Hispanics north to fill the gap. Both ethnic groups have birthrates high enough to provide the support the socialist state requires over the long run. In effect, the Progressives are creating a new slave class.

Tuesday, May 04, 2010

Sound the alarm

Republicans Sound Alarm on Administration Plan to Seize 401(k)s

In February, the White House released its “Annual Report on the Middle Class” containing new regulations favored by Big Labor including a bailout of critically underfunded union pension plans through “retirement security” options.

The radical solution most favored by Big Labor is the seizure of private 401(k) plans for government disbursement -- which lets them off the hook for their collapsing retirement scheme. And, of course, the Obama administration is eager to accommodate their buddies.

This is seriously bad news for retirees and those still working and paying into their 401(k). Write your Congressman!

Thursday, April 29, 2010

Manchurian President?


On the Puerto Rican question

House to Vote on Bill That Could Lead to Statehood for Puerto Rico

[Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah] described the effort as part of a plan to give the island's progressive activists "legitimacy" to push forward with and build momentum toward a statehood plan. He said it's something most Puerto Ricans don't even want, but suggested it was part of an effort to bring more Democrats into Congress.

"That's what some of us who understand this bill are so just frightened about," Chaffetz told radio and Fox News host Glenn Beck. "The majority of people in Puerto Rico don't even necessarily want this."
This bill, H.R. 2499, represents an unwarranted intrusion by Congress into that which is the business of the Puerto Rican people and ought to be voted down. But, given the political makeup of the 111th Congress, this is not likely. So, where does that leave the GOP? Where to from here?
I think it is time for the GOP to stop being frightened and to start doing a better job of educating the voters—including Puerto Rican voters if they elect statehood—about the great fraud Progressives in both parties have perpetrated on the Nation. There are plenty of examples to choose from such as Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid that were structured to buy votes at the expense of sustainability. Or, how the Progressives have tossed the Constitution aside and expanded the ambit of the Federal government, trespassing in areas belonging to the States or to the People. Or, how the Congress aided the expansion of the administrative state by ceding their lawmaking powers to agencies such as the EPA.
The list could go on and on. The key is to shine a bright light on progressivism and Progressives in government rather than vaguely indicting Democrats and their big-spending ways; a saw that has become trite from over-use. The message must be about the failure of the programs instituted by the Progressives. It must be about how the Progressives are leading the Nation down a road to fiscal and economic disaster. And, it must include honest discussion of alternatives, avoiding demagoguery, that show how the Nation will get back onto a sustainable path. In a nutshell, the vision of the Founders and the concept of Constitutional government needs to be re-sold.
So, it is time to openly confront the Progressives and their demagoguery. The Tea Party movement is already into the task. Will our elected representatives actively engage? I don't know; it will take political courage to do so. We the People could help by lending encouragement.

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Open letter to el Presidente

Mexico issues alert over Arizona illegals law
President Felipe Calderon on Monday slammed the law as "racial discrimination" and said his government would "use all means at its disposal" to defend its nationals.

(In my best Cheech Marin accent) Hey, Mr. President Calderón, instead of threatening the U.S., why don't you apply your energies to improving conditions in your own country for the farmers and workers? [Oiga, señor Presidente Calderón, en lugar de amenazar a los EE.UU., ¿por qué no aplicar sus energías a mejorar las condiciones en su país para los agricultores y los trabajadores?]

Orszag on health care costs

Okay, there are many reasons to be against the Obamacare bill, but let's try to understand one aspect of the bill that has been in the news lately: The Independent Payment Advisory Board.
OMB director, Peter Orszag, gave a talk at the Economic Club on April 8th of this year during which the subject of Medicare cost containment came up. The following is a rather lengthy extract of Orszag's comments:
DR. ORSZAG: Furthermore, healthcare is a dynamic market. It’s always going to evolve. In that setting, the only sensible approach in my mind is an evolutionary one where you try lots of things, throw lots of thing up against the wall and have a mechanism in place to move to scale immediately on the most promising ideas, and that’s exactly what the legislation does, both through the innovation center that’s created and importantly through — I think folks have not really focused on the Medicare Commission, the Independent Payment Advisory Board, that’s created. This institution could prove to be far more important to the future of our fiscal health than, for example, the Congressional Budget Office. It has an enormous amount of potential power. How that potential is realized is going to have a very significant influence on our future fiscal trajectory.

DR. ORSZAG: Well, let me just first pause and point out that’s exactly what we just created for Medicare. So this Independent Payment Advisory Board has the power and the responsibility to put forward proposals to hit a pretty aggressive set of targets over the long term. And furthermore, the proposals take effect automatically, unless Congress not only specifically votes them down but the President signs that bill. So the default is now switched in a very important way on the biggest driver over long-term cost, which is the Medicare program.
MR. RUBENSTEIN: Was that explained to Members of Congress very carefully?
DR. ORSZAG: Yes, it was and that’s why this was something that was very difficult to actually — this is why I think it was under-appreciated, that this is a very substantial change. Again, a lot will depend on whether it realizes its potential, and how the culture develops, but it has statutory power to put forward proposals to reduce healthcare cost growth overtime and improve quality, and those proposals take effect automatically if Congress ignores them, or if Congress votes them down and the President vetoes that bill. So in other words, inertia now plays to the side of this independent board.

To summarize, the Obamacare bill set up an independent board to develop cost control measures using an evolutionary heuristic of some sort. And, these measures will take effect by default unless Congress enacts legislation to nullify the measure and that legislation is signed into law. So, Congress—as they are wont to do—will not be able to go to sleep but will have to maintain vigilant watch over the Board.

But, the whole issue may become moot. As already mentioned, there are many reasons to be against Obamacare; the chief reason being it's an unconstitutional overreach on the part of Congress in enacting the legislation in the first place.

Monday, April 19, 2010

Mos Eisley or...

...Congress. You will never find a more wretched hive of unseemliness and venality. We the People must be cautious.

Friday, April 16, 2010

The evil of Planned Parenthood

A video testimony of a woman that survived the saline abortion procedure.

National Day of Prayer Cancelled?

Senior US District Judge Barbara B. Crabb (Western District of Wisconsin) handed down a decision holding the National Day of Prayer is unconstitutional. The suit was brought by Freedom from Religion, Inc.
As aggravating as this suit may be because of all the forces in this Nation (e.g., ACLU, Freedom from Religion, et al) that are trying to undercut the moral tenor of this Nation, there may be a legitimate Constitutional question in this case.
The Freedom from Religion Foundation bring their suits based on the constitutional principle of separation between church and state. Unfortunately for them, there is no such principle.
The catch phrase, separation of church and state originally was expressed by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802. The phrase does not appear in the Constitution.
If that is true, what is the Constitutional question?
The root question may go back to the origins of the National Day of Prayer. This day, honorable in itself, was created as a joint resolution of Congress in 1952. And therein lies the question: Does the joint resolution of Congress contravene the first amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…
Or, to restate the question, does a Congressional resolution amount to lawmaking? I believe this question, given it's first amendment implications, will go all the way to the Supreme Court.

Thursday, April 15, 2010

The Tea Party movement: MSM doesn't get it

It is pretty apparent the MSM—at least as represented by this AP article—doesn't understand what the Tea Party movement is about. In commenting on the D.C. rally, the author made the following point:
Lost in the rhetoric was that taxes have gone down under Obama. Congress has cut individuals' federal taxes for this year by about $173 billion, leaving Americans with a lighter load despite nearly $29 billion in increases by states. Obama plans to increase taxes on the wealthy to help pay for his health care overhaul and other programs.
The point the MSM doesn't get is it's not about taxes per se. It's about the Federal fiscal policy; a policy that promises to bankrupt the nation. Lower taxes in the face of increased government spending is scarcely a comforting thought. But, unlike the tea partiers, the MSM appears to be too dense to get it.

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

Dirty tricks


Update:  The story is now validated.  There is a liberal group that is attempting to discredit the Tea Party movement by infiltrating events and acting up.  An image of their Web page appears above.  Here's the story:

Foes of tea party movement to infiltrate rallies

ALBANY, N.Y. — Opponents of the fiscally conservative tea party movement say they plan to infiltrate and dismantle the political group by trying to make its members appear to be racist, homophobic and moronic.
Jason Levin, creator of http://www.crashtheteaparty.org, said Monday the group has 65 leaders in major cities across the country who are trying to recruit members to infiltrate tea party events for April 15 — tax filing day, when tea party groups across the country are planning to gather and protest high taxes.

 

Saturday, April 10, 2010

On Repeal

Repeal! That was the immediate popular reaction to the passage of Obama's health care bill. The majority of voters, stunned by the passage of this monument to the Progressives' trampling of the Constitution and revulsed by the Democrat's callous disregard for the will of the People, reacted and are expected to vote Republicans into Congress in the 2010 elections.

But, as passion cools, an appreciation for the political realities will set in: Despite expected gains by the GOP in the Fall elections, there is likely to not be a veto-proof margin for repeal in Congress. Nor will the likelihood of partial rollback of the most egregious elements of the bill exist as long as Obama is president. But, that does not mean a GOP majority will be helpless.

Obama's health care bill, in true Wilsonian-Progressive fashion, requires a significant expansion of the Executive branch with the creation of new agencies and commissions, and the expansion of existing ones—notably, the IRS. All of this requires increased budget requests to Congress. And, therein lies Obama's vulnerability: Congress' power of the purse. A GOP majority can explicitly refuse to provide the funding.

Now, presidents have been known to move existing funds around to accomplish an objective. So, Congress will have to be on their toes as they draft the appropriations bills. And, We the People will have to be watchdogs on Obama's actions.

Friday, April 02, 2010

Apple boycotts Fox News, glorifies Che Guevara

Do a search using keyword "Che Guevara site:apple.com". It's amazing the number of Che Guevara items being sponsored by Apple. Yet they boycott Fox News.

Che Guevara is the murderous thug associated with Fidel Castro and involved in fomenting violence in Cuba and South America in the 50's and 60's.

Tuesday, March 30, 2010

Nineteen Eighty-Four

Democrats threaten companies hit hard by health care bill
Suspecting thought crime was being perpetrated, a powerful Party official issued this summons:
Rep. Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, has summoned some of the nation's top executives to Capitol Hill to defend their assessment that the new national health care reform law will cost their companies hundreds of millions of dollars in health insurance expenses. Waxman is also demanding that the executives give lawmakers internal company documents related to health care finances -- a move one committee Republicans describes as "an attempt to intimidate and silence opponents of the Democrats' flawed health care reform legislation."

Saturday, March 27, 2010

On Barack Obama's Presidency

When a man is elected president it is expected he will be the President of all the People. When the President addresses the People, he is expected to speak to the whole People. When he represents the People to foreign governments, he is expected to deport himself in a statesmanlike manner. But, our President—the Marxist/Progressive Barack H. Obama—is failing those standards. As these examples illustrate, Obama speaks only to his base and against those that hold differing opinions:
Mocks the tea party movement [1]:

So, you know, when you see -- those of you who are watching certain news channels that -- on which I'm not very popular -- (laughter) -- and you see folks waving tea bags around -- (laughter)

Mocks dissenting opinion in Congress [2]:

So after I signed the bill, I looked around to see if there any -- (laughter) -- asteroids falling or -- (applause) -- some cracks opening up in the Earth. (Laughter.) It turned out it was a nice day. (Laughter.)

Mischaracterizes the People's voice on the health care bill [3]:

You met the lies with truth. You met cynicism with conviction. … Now, let me tell you what change looks like -- because those fighting change are still out there, still making a lot of noise -- (laughter)

Displays petty, unstatesmanlike behavior [4]:

President Barack Obama had Netanyahu cool his heels while he had dinner in private during the PM's White House visit.
Someone once said of President Clinton: 'He's not the worst president we've had but he is the worst man that ever has been President.' Obama is showing himself to be worse in both respects.

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Stupak not made of the "sterner stuff?"

DEAL WATCH: Obama Administration Awarded Hundreds of Thousands in Airport Grants to Stupak’s District Two Days Before Vote
The message is: Don't put these guys up on a pedestal as the Susan B. Anthony List was about to do.

Monday, March 22, 2010

We can't have you doing a lot of talking

obama-angry-2a.jpg

Consumers Union partisan activity

The Consumers Union, a nonprofit organization under IRS regulations, continues to use tax dollars to push the Progressive agenda:
Take a moment, celebrate the House of Representative’s historic vote, and thank yourself for all your hard work on health reform!
This email was signed:
Sincerely,
Liz Foley,
PrescriptionForChange.org
A project of Consumers Union
101 Truman Ave
Yonkers, NY 10703

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

The President on Fox News

The President's interview with Fox News is on TV now. I am not bothering to watch. Why? Because that man, Mr. Obama, will say things without regard to the truth. He will say anything, do anything to further the Progressive goal: Complete control of health care in this country. Something Theodore Roosevelt first proposed and no president before him has accomplished. Not Woodrow Wilson, not FDR, not LBJ. And, he will have the prize no matter the consequences for those in Congress who must vote on it. Even less for those of us that must live under it.

The Obama interview: Peh.

Open letter to GOP members

To: GOP Members of Congress

I've just finished watching an interview with a Democrat Representative on CNBC on the pending "deeming" of the health care bill in the House. And, it was a most frustrating experience.

When the CNBC interviewer challenged the Representative on the use of "deeming" for this bill, the Representative gave a smarmy reply recounting how the Republicans routinely used "deeming" when they had the majority.

Now, the minority leader has been protesting that "deeming" was never used for something so important. Well, let him who is without sin cast the first stone: The minority leader's protestations are on weak ground. It doesn't matter what the previous situation was. In the public's mind the minority leader's protest has been successfully deflected. And, justifiably so.

So, I hope the GOP members have learned a lesson and, when back in majority, will drop the shortcuts and legislate as directed by Article 1, Section 7.

Finally, should the Administration's bill pass and is signed by the President, start thinking "Repeal."

Sunday, March 14, 2010

Obama administration: Truth telling a rarity

Alexrod threat to GOP: 'Make my day'

It seems O and his men will say anything, do anything in pushing their agenda:
"… If this bill passes, this year, children with pre-existing conditions will now be covered. There will be an end to lifetime caps and annual caps on what the insurance companies will cover, so if you get sick you won't go broke, if you get sick they won't throw you off your insurance. The doughnut hole will be filled in, so senior citizens will save hundreds of dollars on their prescription drugs. The life of Medicare will be extended, and on and on and on."
Now, the truth:
There are holes galore in Axelrod's statement. The Senate health care bill, for example, does not eliminate the insurance coverage caps as Axelrod claims. Bans on discrimination against people with pre-existing conditions have been scaled back. And experts agree that taking money out of Medicare, as the bill does, would not extend the life of Medicare if that money is used to pay for the new health care entitlement instead of shoring up Medicare.
I guess the plan is to disregard the truth and say anything because lies repeated often enough tend gain the aura of truth.

Saturday, March 13, 2010

On the Democrat leadership

The Speaker has decided to play chicken with the Stupak twelve and push for a vote on the healthcare bill. The issue with Rep. Stupak and the pro-life group of eleven other representatives is the bill they are asked to vote for is the Senate bill which includes Federal coverage for abortion services. The twelve are having their arms twisted to get them to go along.

Arm twisting is par for the course in Congress, but what is most disturbing is what is being said by the leadership in this case. According to Rep. Stupak as reported in the NRO:
What are Democratic leaders saying? “If you pass the Stupak amendment, more children will be born, and therefore it will cost us millions more. That’s one of the arguments I’ve been hearing,” Stupak says. “Money is their hang-up. Is this how we now value life in America? If money is the issue — come on, we can find room in the budget. This is life we’re talking about.”
This idea—kill them so we don't have to care for them—sounds exactly like ideas put forth in the past by the likes of John Holdren (abortion for population control) and Ezekial Emanuel(age indexed distribution of healthcare). I wouldn't be suprised to hear they are the source. In any case, it is obvious the moral tenor of the Democrat leadership is severely lacking. It's to the point where one could conclude the progressive wing of the Democrat party, which includes the entire Obama administration, are unfit to govern.

Tuesday, March 09, 2010

Pelosi: Chutzpah defined

The Nancy [Pelosi] on the healthcare bill: We have to pass the bill so that people can see what's in it...

Breathtaking...

Friday, March 05, 2010

Paul Ryan vs. the President

The Republican dissects ObamaCare's real costs. Democrats stay mute.

'Every argument has been made. Everything that there is to say about health care has been said, and just about everybody has said it," President Obama declared yesterday as he urged Democrats to steamroll his plan through Congress. What hasn't been heard, however, is even a shred of White House honesty about the true costs of ObamaCare, or its fiscal consequences.
More at the WSJ on O's sleazy tactics and Rep. Ryan's rebuttal.

Thursday, March 04, 2010

It's all show

There he goes again.  Using people in lab coats as a prop while he once again tries to hoodwink the public about his healthcare reforms.

If they are indeed real medical personnel, where did they come from?  The AMA?  The White House staff?  According to press reports the AMA is not representative of the vast majority of practitioners.  If Staff, no more needs be said.

Or, are they merely a bunch of stand-ins supplied by SEIU like before.

Tuesday, March 02, 2010

Holding Dem's feet to the fire on pay-go

Kentucky's Bunning again blocks jobless benefits

WASHINGTON — To the increasing discomfort of his fellow Republicans, Sen. Jim Bunning on Tuesday again blocked the Senate from extending unemployment benefits and health insurance subsidies for the jobless.
The title contains the root motivation for Bunning's filibuster.   But, studies have shown that continually extending unemployment benefits have the effect of holding the unemployment rate up.   People receiving benefits don't work as hard to get reemployed.   And, I believe those studies are correct having gone through that twice in my working life.

Today at the U. S. Supreme Court

The Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments on McDonald vs. Chicago this morning:
08-1521 MCDONALD V. CHICAGO
DECISION BELOW:567 F.3 856
LOWER COURT CASE NUMBER: 08-4241, 08-4243, 08-4244
QUESTIONS PRESENTED:

Whether the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is incorporated as against the States by the Fourteenth Amendment's Privileges or Immunities or Due Process Clauses.

CERT. GRANTED 9/30/2009
This case is interesting because it will indicate the Court's willingness to hold to principles of constitutional government versus progressive ideology.

Sunday, February 28, 2010

Healthcare on Fox News Sunday

Fox News Sunday today provided a study in contrasts between the Democrats and the Republicans.

The topic was O's healthcare bill. The first segment had Senators Jon Kyl (R-AZ) and Robert Menendez (D-NJ). Typically, Kyl gave straight-forward answers to Mike Wallace's questions. Menendez, on the other hand, evaded answering directly preferring instead to monopolize the microphone and attack Kyl and the GOP. It's not surprising Menendez should act this way he having the morally weaker hand.

The second segment had Paul Ryan (R, WI-1st), the well-spoken ranking member on the House budget committee. Wallace characterized Ryan as the one Republican President Obama didn't want to mess with, someone who knows as much about the issue as he does.

Ryan made it very clear to everyone that was listening that relying on the CBO's costing of the current healthcare bill can be very misleading:
…the CBO has to score the legislation that's put in front of them. And the legislation that's been put in front of them is full of smoke, mirrors and gimmicks.
The Fox News panel predicted passage of the bill will fail. And, it will fail to pass if there are enough Democrats left that will do the morally responsible thing. We shall soon see.

Friday, February 26, 2010

The verdict is in: AIG bailout is a loser

AIG posts $8.9 bn loss,   warns of more aid

We've heard the warnings on bailouts.   Now the verdict is in:
The insurer said in a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission that without additional government support, "in the future there could exist substantial doubt about AIG's ability to continue as a going concern."
Bailouts don't work.   It didn't work for the airlines.   It didn't work for Chrysler.   Now we see it didn't work for AIG.

AIG is suggesting more taxpayer money is needed.   Our Congress better not take the bait.   If they do, they can be certain the voters will be taking names...

Thursday, February 25, 2010

The latest screed from Consumers Union

Evidently the Consumers Union—a nonprofit organization—is using their tax status to push the Progressive's agenda:



Minerva Novoa
Minerva signs off
Minerva Novoa,
Advocacy Web Administrator

Dear Howard,

Consumer confidence just hit an all-time low. Yet Wall Street bonuses climbed 17% last year, and financial industry profits may reach $55 billion – nearly three-times the previous record!

The financial industry is more out-of-whack than ever, continuing to reward those who gamble with our hard-earned money. Meanwhile, promised reforms designed to bring back personal responsibility, fair play and common sense are sidelined in Congress – and political opponents think you won’t notice, or won’t care!

It’s time Washington stops listening to the banks and listens to you. The Senate is putting together a financial reform bill, and the banks’ top brass know their big bonuses are at stake. Make sure your Senators know their responsibility to voters is at stake – tell them to support real Wall Street reform now!

First impression

On the healthcare summit:  Watching O's body language during Senator Lamar Alexander's opening statement, it wasn't hard to notice how Obama kept his chin up high.  This is the same pose Muammar al-Khdafi maintained in public.

Then, when Senator Alexander segued into a review of this nation's founding principles, O put his head in his hands as though he was just so put off.  And, he probably was as,  being a Progressive,  he considers the Constitution a museum piece of no importance for today.  And, he may have had the off-putting thought of him arguing against the founding principles;  something Progressives try to keep out of public view.

Then there were the statements by Pelosi and Reid.  Both tried the ploy of holding up the plight of some poor person in their district as though the whole nation is in the same fix.  Of course, it never occurred to either of them that these hardship cases are easily remedied through a means-tested voucher system at far less cost than the monstrosity they are proposing to inflict on the country.

Or,  maybe the thought did cross their minds but they chose to ignore it.

And,  as players holding weak hands are wont to do,  Reid included a personal shot at Senator Alexander.

The summit has concluded with the President conceding the Republicans made a few good points.  So now the onus is on the Democrat leaders to sit down with the other side and negotiate in good faith.  Let's see if Reid and The Nancy are up to the task.

Thursday, February 18, 2010

Dense does as dense is

UN climate chief quits, leaves talks hanging

Evidently, common sense will prevail given enough time!  de Boer now recognizes the lack of science underlying the global warming hype.
Exhausted and frustrated by unrelenting bickering between rich and poor countries, Yvo de Boer said he will step down July 1 to work in business and academia.
Never mind. He's quitting for all the wrong reasons.  Rather he is retreating to academia where he will mislead the next generation.

Government irresponsibility quantified

Social security payroll tax revenues have been part of the general revenue fund since the Eisenhower administration. Same for the medicare tax revenue. And, as everyone knows, the irresponsible Congress simply spent it on other stuff.

So, how much did the Government's spendthrift ways cost us? How much further ahead would we be if these payroll taxes were used to purchase something tangible—say, gold?

I have calculated that if the government had used my payroll taxes to purchase gold at the average prevailing price over my working lifetime, my half of the account would currently be worth 3.75 times what I paid in.

What is the current value of my account instead? Essentially, zero. Isn't Progress wonderful?

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

Hope and anger

For Obama, 'Hope' has been replaced by anger, frustration

The article points out that Americans are angry with the Obama administration and describes how O is reacting to it:
The Obama response has come in two parts.  One is to try to get better about communicating to people that he is fighting to address exactly what angers them.   The other is to put the onus on whomever he deems is getting in the way of progress, hoping to shift the heat onto them.
If anyone had the idea O got the message—that his programs, with their obscene deficit spending, are unwanted—forget it.   O is convinced his progressive agenda is exactly what the people want and cannot even begin to imagine the voters are reacting against it.

Obama hasn't changed his mind.   He is not letting up on pushing his progressive agenda.  Obama is sure to use every trick imaginable to foist his programs upon us.  So now is not the time for complacency; we will need to remain vigilant until he is out of office.

Hope: That we now recognize progressives for what they are and hope to never vote another into office.

Thursday, February 11, 2010

The 'healthcare' summit

There are rumors that the format for the February 25 healthcare summit will be the same question-and-answer format of the House Issues Conference in Baltimore.

O certainly is partial to that format because it allows him to monopolize the microphone as he did in Baltimore.

And, the Republicans would be foolish to accept a question-and-answer format. Rather, they should insist the format allow for formal presentations from both sides.

Refusal on the part of the President to adopt formal presentations would indicate O is not serious about an exchange of ideas over healthcare legislation.

More partisanship from the Consumer Union

Consumer Union persists in using members' email to push the Dem's healthcare reform. As you can see from the logo, they are a non-profit consumer organization taking a partisan position.

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Monday, February 01, 2010

Understanding Obama's mindset

From the State of the Union address: 

Still, [healthcare reform] is a complex issue, and the longer it was debated, the more skeptical people became.  I take my share of the blame for not explaining it more clearly to the American people. 
Blame? After all the speeches, one would think the legislation was thoroughly explained.  So, what is the President talking about?

It helps to understand a progressive's view of the role of the president.  From Woodrow Wilson's Leaders of Men

That the leader of men must have such sympathetic insight as shall enable him to know quite unerringly the motives which move other men in the mass is of course self–evident; but this insight … need only know what it is that lies waiting to be stirred in the minds and purposes of groups and masses of men. 
The competent leader of men cares little for the interior niceties of other people’s characters:  he cares much—everything for the external uses to which they may be put.  His will seeks the lines of least resistance; but the whole question with him is a question as to the application of force.  There are men to be moved:  how shall he move them?

So, what O, being the consumate Progressive that he is, is saying, I take my share of blame for failing to satisfactorily fulfill the role of progressive leader.  In a nutshell, this sums up O's mindset—how O sees his role as president:  Mover and shaker, progressive shaper of public opinion, all directed toward imposing the Progressive's agenda on the nation. 


Postscript:  From O's remarks at the GOP House Issues Conference: 

I am not an ideologue. 
Amazing! When did pigs begin flying?

Friday, January 29, 2010

Those poor people

'Too White' Berkeley Science Labs May Be Cut
The Berkeley (CA) Board of Education will consider, at its February 3 meeting, whether or not to cancel before and after school Science Labs for Advanced Placement Science classes at Berkeley High School because the classes are attended largely by white students. The proposal is aimed at addressing "Berkeley's dismal racial achievement gap"
Those poor people.   Their public officials are so pathetic.   But, Progressives are as Progressives do.  You'd think the people would vote the rascals out;  yet they don't.

Those poor people.

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Insight into Progressivism

Here is a gem from the PBD — Progressive Blog Digest:
View From the Corner: For some, "hope for change" now means "hope Obama will change." But hasn't "hope for change" always really meant "hope that We the People change?"
That last phrase is at the heart of progressivism and most likely is what the Progressives, especially O, had in mind.

Monday, January 25, 2010

Liberals? Conservatives?

Howard Dean, in commenting on the Massachusetts election, claimed the underlying reason for Brown's victory is Obama not being liberal enough. But, is liberalism the root issue?

In the days when monarchical rule was the norm, monarchic governments were strongly centralized and paternalistic to varying degrees. And, it was liberal political thought that ran counter to monarchy; conservative thought was supportive. When you think about it, Progressivism exhibits many of the same characteristics: Strong central government with a paternalistic, socialist bent.

So, it seems to me, the root issue underlying the Massachusetts election was not Obama's per se liberalism because he is not a liberal; he is a Progressive. Rather, by analogy, liberal politics would run counter to what a Progressive stands for.

So, Dean may be right about O's liberalism but not in the way he thinks.



Postscript: Historians that concern themselves with politics consider Progressivism to be a branch of historic liberal political thought. The analogy with historic monarchies seems compelling nevertheless.

Friday, January 22, 2010

Reaction to the Supreme Court's First Amendment Decision

Statement from the President on Today's Supreme Court Decision

Now that the Supreme Court has extended first amendment rights to corporations, O is all up in arms. Here is the President's response:

With its ruling today, the Supreme Court has given a green light to a new stampede of special interest money in our politics. It is a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans.More... This ruling gives the special interests and their lobbyists even more power in Washington--while undermining the influence of average Americans who make small contributions to support their preferred candidates. That's why I am instructing my Administration to get to work immediately with Congress on this issue. We are going to talk with bipartisan Congressional leaders to develop a forceful response to this decision. The public interest requires nothing less.
Yes, well, up to now, the unions—notably, AFL/CIO and SEIU—have been exercising their political speech rights on an almost monopoly basis. I suspect the fact that this monopoly is now broken is the real issue for Obama.

Thursday, January 21, 2010

Progressive media disinformation exposed

From an article on Human Events:
In the shocking new book released this week, Thiessen takes Amanpour and other public figures to task for making false and shameful comparisons between the CIA and the torturers of murderous regimes like the Khmer Rouge. Among those Thiessen exposes for their lies and misstatements are Attorney General Eric Holder, Senators Sheldon Whitehouse, Christopher Dodd, Dick Durbin, former White House Special Counsel Lanny Davis, Atlantic Monthly blogger Andrew Sullivan and others.
Apparently CNN's Amanpour is comfortable playing fast and loose with the truth until confronted with the evidence.

On abortion in America

The current issue of The Weekly Standard has a powerful commentary on abortion. Reading it made my blood run cold.

I am convinced that medical personnel—the doctors and nurses—that persist in doing abortions posses a seriously degraded humanity.

But, I hold the highest condemnation for those that push it, those that coerce hapless women to undergo it, but maintain their distance from it out on the sidewalk with their pro-choice signs or in the administrative offices.

I am of the belief that anyone that holds Roe v. Wade to be settled law ought to be compelled personally to witness an abortion; especially a late-term abortion. That goes for Supreme Court justices, politicians and right-to-choose-ers.

Postscript: The Weekly Standard article is entitled Mugged By Ultrasound.

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

Consumer Union's Political Activism

The following is an example of a Consumer Union issue advocacy email in favor of O's healthcare legislation. It seems the CU, like AARP, has become an advocate for the Progressive agenda.









Dear Howard,

This morning things look dire for health reform. But we've come too far to let partisan politics get in the way of reforms that will significantly lower the cost of health coverage for millions of Americans. We will be putting everything we have into the final weeks of this battle, and we want you to join us in Washington for it's historic denouement.

We're going to win this. And when we do, we want you with us, walking the halls of Congress at a truly historic moment in our nation’s history.
More...
Join us for Consumers Union’s Activist Summit in Washington in just three weeks and be there in person for our final push to get affordable health care for all Americans!

Click here to learn about Consumers Union’s Feb. 9-11 activist summit and to register.

Think you can’t possibly make a difference? Consider people like Cindy Shawcross from Fargo, N.D., who we met in 2008 while traveling the country collecting health care stories. Cindy, who had no experience in activism, came to our summit later that year, where she learned tools and skills on lobbying and organizing, as well as blogging, media relations and community outreach.

Today, Cindy is one of our top consumer voices in the halls of Congress on health reform – meeting several times with her Senators and Representatives, getting covered in national media including USA Today, writing her own blog, and serving as a leader in her community.

Our summit is designed to give regular people the tools to make a difference at the city, state or national level – securing more affordable health care, getting dangerous products off store shelves, ending rip-offs by the giant banks and phone companies.

This year’s summit coincides with the final countdown on national health reform! Part of the summit will include you lobbying Congress to pass the best bill possible!

Learn more about the Feb. 9-11 summit here, and how you can join us in Washington!

Please take a moment to look through what’s offered at this year’s activist summit. Or if you have question, please email me, Morgan Jindrich, directly at jindmo at consumer.org.

We look forward to having you be part of our final health care push!

Sincerely,
Morgan Jindrich
Consumers Union
506 W. 14th Street
Austin, TX 78701

Sunday, January 17, 2010

On the current Administration's view of the Constitution

I think it would help us to understand where O is coming from—in expanding the scope of the Federal government—by keeping in mind the Progressive's view of the Constitution; that, while the written Constitution was appropriate for the times in which it was drafted, it now is a museum piece of no importance for today because historical circumstances have changed and a fixed interpretation of the founding documents cannot possibly be an appropriate basis for governing.

Therefore, the current Administration feel that what they are doing is perfectly natural. O does not feel constrained by the Constitution's limits on Federal government. Neither did Pelosi when she uttered the famous "Are you kidding? Are you kidding?" in response to a reporter's question about the Constitutional basis for the healthcare bill.

And, that explains O's—along with the Progressives in Congress—lack of reticence about expanding the role of the Federal government.

I believe the thought never crossed their collective, Progressive mind that the people would have a different opinion. So, the results of the upcoming elections should be a shock to them.

We can only hope.

Thursday, January 14, 2010

The fix is in

Deal Exempts Unions From 'Cadillac' Health-Plan Tax Till 2018

Unions and Democratic negotiators agreed Thursday to scale back a proposed tax on high-end health-insurance plans in the health bill, in part by adding a provision exempting collectively bargained contracts from the tax through Jan. 1, 2018.

Is this one of the nastiest administrations in history, or what?

Tuesday, January 12, 2010

On the Progressive agenda--education

From Croly's discussion in Chapter XIII on how education applies to furtherance of the Progressive cause:
The individual can do much to aid national education by the single-minded and intelligent realization of his own specific purposes; but all individual successes will have little more than an individual interest unless they frequently contribute to the work of national construction. The nation can do much to aid individual education; but the best aid within its power is to offer to the individual a really formative and inspiring opportunity for public service.
O's USAservice.org TV ad fits right in.

Understanding the Progressive agenda

The Promise of American Life by Herbert David Croly

Here is a book, written in 1909, that is at the root of modern liberalism. It discusses in some detail how to use the powers of the Federal government to achieve a morally and socially desirable distribution of wealth.
The redemption of the national Promise has become a cause for which the good American must fight, and the cause for which a man fights is a cause which he more than ever values. The American idea is no longer to be propagated merely by multiplying the children of the West and by granting ignorant aliens permission to vote. Like all sacred causes, it must be propagated by the Word and by that right arm of the Word, which is the Sword.
This book is a must read for those that want to understand the agenda and actions of the Democratic Party's Progressive wing. The book may be downloaded from the Project Gutenberg site.

Monday, January 11, 2010

On the current state of affairs

But in a representative republic … where the legislative power is exercised by an assembly, which is inspired by a supposed influence over the people with an intrepid confidence in its own strength; which is sufficiently numerous to feel all the passions which actuate a multitude, yet not so numerous as to be incapable of pursuing the objects of its passions by means which reason prescribes; it is against the enterprising ambition of this department that the people ought to indulge all their jealousy and exhaust all their precautions.
~The Federalist Number XLVIII

Madison was warning against repeating the excesses of the state legislative bodies during the Confederation era as justification for the present Federal arrangement.

But, the Pelosi Congress, albeit with their Progressive agenda in lieu of Madison's populist fervor igniting their passions, has demonstrated how this department can still kick over the traces threatening to lead the country down a path to fiscal ruin.

And, what of the Reid Senate, that supposed temperate and respectable body of citizens that is to provide the check until reason, justice, and truth can regain their authority? Instead, we have a body similarly inflamed by Progressive idealogy that is barely a speed bump on the road to ruin.

And, must we even mention the Chief Executive has thrown in with them both?

So, what recourse do we have when the Executive and both Houses are in cahoots?

Thursday, January 07, 2010

The truth about the President

O is truly irritated over the Nigerian bomber episode. Not so much about what the Nigerian tried to do to the passengers of Northwest flight 253 on Christmas day. Not at all, really.

For O, being a progressive in the mold of Woodrow Wilson and a disciple of Saul Alinsky, it is more about the distraction from his progressive agenda; an agenda, the focus of which is, to transform America into a socialist state a la the European Union.

Wilson and Alinsky: The ideologue and the tactician. O, along with the members of his administration, are well versed in both. The near-term focus will be to put on an act to calm everything down. Then, it will be back to business...