Odd Citizen

Odd Citizen
An Odd Citizen’s Search For Vanishing Freedoms

Kerry & Boxer Join Cap & Tax Stupidity

September 30th, 2009

We all know that Barbara Boxer is empty headed and John Kerry is a stupid pathological liar. So it is no surprise that their recently published 800+ page, economy destroying, “Cap & Trade” bill contains insane, stupid provisions such as the following:

19 GAS.—
20 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Any person may petition
21 the Administrator to designate as a greenhouse gas
22 any anthropogenic gas 1 metric ton of which makes
23 the same or greater contribution to global warming
24 over 100 years as 1 metric ton of carbon dioxide.

Some question arise from this paragraph:
a) Why should the bill be open to petition by “any person”. Don’t these geniuses who wrote the bill have any scientific knowledge? Aren’t most gasses known substances? What the hell is an “anthropogenic gas?” I guess “any person” is “any lawyer” or “environmental zealot.”

b) The bill assumes some magic amount of global warming that will be produced by 1 metric ton of carbon dioxide over 100 years. What is that amount? Come on, geniuses, your glassy-eyed staffs must have some idea even if you don’t. And if the amount is zero, then what?

c) Why is the standard for damage stretched over the next 100 years?

d) Why do these people get elected to congress in the first place?

Oh Well, it’s good enough for Government work.

Stealthy Attack on Health and Liberty

September 27th, 2009

I was tempted to write about the Department of Transportation’s use of $1.0 Billion dollars to make loans to sports car companies, one of which is backed by Al Gore, and manufacturing cars in Finland.

Then I read an article about Social Security, in which, due to ineptitude in the bureaucracy: Social Security Owes ‘Fugitives’ Millions

Just tempted, but not enough to motivate me on a lazy Sunday. But then I ran across Andy Brietbart’s lead article on health care Obama’s Two-Part Health Care Plan is Hazardous to Your Health and it boiled my blood, and if you love liberty, it should boil yours too.

In stealth, the Obama crowd has ordained, staffed and funded yet another government bureaucracy, this one designed to force doctors to deliver health care to government specifications. These are the guys who can’t design a mail box, prevent issuing social security checks to jailed felons without denying them to wheelchair bound disabled people — 80,000 people owed $500 million in back payments according to a court ruling. We learn that the Obama administration, under cover of darkness, has already established a $1.1 Billion program to engineer government rationing of health care by federal bureaucrats:

The name given to this panel in the President’s Stimulus Bill is The Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research, and is an already funded $1.1 billion enterprise run by federal bureaucrats—not practicing doctors on the front line or patients. All 15 members of The Council have already been appointed by President Obama. The two part Plan consists of 53 boards and councils, whose underlying method of cutting costs is based on rationing and denying care, not preventing health care need, much like the British Health Care System.

Further in the plan we’re told that:

The language buried in the Stimulus Bill goes on to say that hospitals and doctors that are not “meaningful users” of the new systems will face penalties. The Secretary of Health and Human Services will be empowered to impose “more stringent measures of meaningful use over time.” According to those in Congress, penalties could include large six figure financial fines and possible imprisonment, even if the treatment was successful.

Combining this freedom sucking monstrosity with the incompetence we see everywhere else in the federal system is a recipe for tyranny by bureaucracy.

This kind of stealth attack on our freedom and our prosperity is unacceptable. We must resist vigorously and rip out this legislated insanity by its roots.

Miles per Ton of Coal

September 25th, 2009

We’ve all been entertained by the 100-230 MPG mileage claims for gasoline/electric hybrid cars. It’s entertaining because nobody agrees on how to calculate MPG when the gasoline engine may run from 0% to 100% of the time. In the first instance the MPG is infinite. In the second it equals a normal gasoline engine.

We do know a few other things, though. The typical claim for range on electricity alone for a plug-in vehicle is about 40 miles (Chevy Volt). After that it needs gas to go. The more miles you drive without a plug-in recharge the lower the gasoline mileage you get for your trip.

So let’s concentrate on the electric powered part of the cycle. Assuming a 40 mile range, how much coal needs to be burned in typical power plant to power the Volt for 40 miles? An easy way to estimate this is to use the Volt’s battery capacity, which is 16 KWH. The typical coal fired power plant running at 40% efficiency produces 2,460 KWH per ton of coal. So (ignoring transmission losses) 16/2,460 = .0065 (tons/40 miles) x 2000 (lbs/ton) = 13 Lbs. of coal per 40 miles driven.

Now, suppose every car in the USA were a Volt driven only 40 Miles per day as the environmental dreamers dream about. That would require 135 million autos (2006 count) x 13 lbs / 2,000 lbs = 87,750 tons of coal per day, or 32 million tons per year. In the U.S.A. about 1,146 million tons of coal are produced per year.

In 1994 it is estimated that U.S. “residential” vehicles traveled 1.74 Billion miles. If this were to be done under electric power using today’s efficiencies, as above, this would require 565 million tons of coal per year, a 50% increase compared to current production.

Oh-oh! The Greenies will be offended and angered. How dare we assume that all this transportation electricity will come from coal? Well, we can be completely assured about one thing. It won’t come from wind and solar and bio-mass. Only nuclear or coal are capable of producing this much juice. But nukes take many years to build (thanks largely to constant, niggling lawsuits by greenies), so even nuclear plants won’t be a quick solution. This leaves coal or natural gas.

Conclusion: There’s nothing wrong with electricity, nothing wrong with petroleum, nothing wrong with coal, but you don’t get something (like 240 MPG) for nothing. And nuclear may be needed. If it isn’t all nonsense in the first place.

(P.S. I’ve never claimed to be a math whiz, so you’re welcome to check my calculations. And actually, I think hybrids are really keen, but the hype about energy and CO2 is pure political bull.)

School Kids Worship Sun God

September 24th, 2009

Would you call this disgusting, or what? Via Drudge. YouTube citation:

“This was filmed around June 19, 2009 at the B. Bernice Young Elementary School in Burlington, NJ.”

Worship of the Sun God should not be part of any school curriculum. This teacher should be fired.

Original video withdrawn.

Here’s a version from the Shawn Hannity Show:

USPS Mailbox Misery

September 23rd, 2009

I live in a rural area where my post office box is one of those locked pigeon coop boxes supplied by the Post Office. The box is about one-half mile from my address. The Postal “Service” won’t do home delivery where I live. This is strike one of the misery.

The second element is the design of the boxes — undoubtedly specified by some wise-man or genius in the employ of our U.S. Government. On numerous occasions I’ve faced today’s problem. The postman can get things into the box which I can’t get out on my side. Today it was a hard-cover book. Using my trusty Swiss army knife, I was able to slice the bubble wrap and wrench the book out of the wrap and the box. The problem is that the front of the box, the customer side, has a lip around the opening. The postal delivery side has no lip. So the Postman can put things into the box that the recipient can’t extract without brutal surgery to the package and possible destruction of its contents.

It’s interesting too that standard boxes supplied by the postal service, itself, fit tightly into the box, but can’t be extracted without surgery!

Another genius design feature is that the box is locked by means of a lever which extends, unprotected within the box. If the box is really stuffed full the postal customer can’t unlock the box, because the lever becomes blocked by the mail in the box.

The performance of the US Postal Service is model for government service monopolies. The cost goes up, the quality goes down, the politicians add more subsidies. Deliveries were once scheduled six days a week, twice per day. Now we get one delivery, and not at home.

Do we really want to pattern our medical services after the U.S. Post Office?

All Together Now: Crisis. Panic. Catastrophe!

September 22nd, 2009

World financial collapse, climate being wrecked by human activity, food running out, population exploding.

What do all of these panics have in common? They are all used as excuses by statists to argue for more government control over humanity. They are all blamed on the developed world, which by their account owes a duty to the developing (poor) countries to spend a gazillion dollars in welfare to rescue the less fortunate masses.

Let’s take them one at a time:

The Financial Collapse is a byproduct of government’s regulation failures, not regulation of the private sector, but regulation of government’s own entities, Fannie Mae, Freddy Mac, HUD, Treasury and Federal Reserve. These were and remain completely out of control. In the midst of insane expansions of government spending, devaluation of the dollar and the growing dead hand of private sector regulations, the statists are calling for yet more of the same.

Climate Change Once called “Global Warming,” but in the face of actual cooling over the last 10 years it is now called “Climate Change” in order to preserve it as a crisis. This is demonstrably a mania engaging politicians, scientists, news publishers, movie stars and gullible self-promoters such as Al Gore. The proposed solution is to squelch the progress and living standards of successful countries and transfer their assets to help the “poor” Africans. Decreasing the wealth of the developed world and increasing the dependency of the under-developed world makes sense only to statists and nihilists.

Population Growth From a recent Breitbart article:

Ninety-eight percent of the expected population growth will occur in developing countries, especially in Africa, where numbers are set to double to almost two billion by 2050.

“How Niger is going to feed a population growing from 11 million today to 50 million in 2050 in a semi-arid country that may be facing adverse climate (change) is unclear,” said Adair Turner, a member of Britain’s House of Lords.

The population of Uganda was five million in 1950, is 25 million today and could reach 127 million by 2050, Turner said.

We are warned that:

“The inexorable increase in human numbers is exhausting conventional energy supplies, accelerating environmental pollution and global warming and providing an increasing number of failed states where civil unrest prevails.”

As pointed out notably by Mark Steyn in his book, “America Alone,” although Africa and the Arab countries’ populations are growing at an impressive rate, the populations of productive countries of Europe (including Russia) and Asia (including Japan, China) are shrinking rapidly. Only America has sustains a replacement rate of reproduction, in part due to its immigration policies.

The scare-mongers want control over what they view as looming catastrophe. But they seem blind to the reality that what they demand as a solution makes little sense. These alarmed statists led by the the U.N. want to see the (population shrinking) successful countries penalized so that the unsuccessful (population growing) countries can have more space and more resources for their exploding populations of uneducated, violence prone, unproductive, uncreative people. Oh, and by the way, there should be government run population controls to reduce the reproduction rates, but nobody wants to specify whose reproduction rate that should be.

The answer to all this is to step back, take a deep breath, and question the basic presumptions of the catastrophe crowd. Having done so, it should be clear that the unsuccessful, unproductive part of the world should emulate the productive, successful part. The successful countries are able to feed themselves, have stable to shrinking populations, increasing wealth and well being, and in spite of occasional pull-backs are financially successful as well. With respect to global climate, let’s just take a little more time (within the 100 year catastrophe window) to study the matter, paying particular attention to testing our theories against actual data.

It’s not as bad as it seems.

Obama Goes Pre-Emptive, Just Like Bush!

September 21st, 2009

U.S. Condemned For Pre-Emptive Use Of Hillary Clinton Against Pakistan

It can’t all be serious, or can it?

Big Government Begets Corruption

September 21st, 2009

Here’s a clearly stated video explaining how an ever expanding big-government trough attracts the pigs and corrupts the whole system. The only way to reduce waste and corruption is to remove the boodle from the trough — reduce government to its constitutionally permitted role.

Lights, Camera, Action!

Less Government, Less Taxation, Less Regulation = Less Corruption, More Liberty. Do it NOW!

Recession, Depression or Panic

September 16th, 2009

An opinion piece by John H. Cochrane and Luigi Zingles in the Wall Street Journal includes a graph titled When Concern turned to Panic

This graph illustrates dramatically the panic produced by the fire in a crowded theater outcries of then Secretary of Treasury Paulson and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke. I show it here to reinforce my contention that the recession is a byproduct of panic, and that this panic was clearly triggered by these two senior government officials. As in all panic situations others pile on, and the panic spreads.

See my posts of:
Sept. 17, Mass Delusions and Bigger Delusions
Sept. 17, Bubbles and Panics
Sept. 20, Financial Crisis Explained
Sept. 22, The Politics of Crisis
Sept. 24, The Herd in Crisis
Sept. 24, Light Shining Through?
Nov. 12, Government Money Riot
Nov. 22, A Stimulus Plan That Might Actually Work
Nov. 25, The Money Riot Continues
Jan. 9, Bent Reality Produces Fake Crisis
Jan. 12, $700 Billion Money Riot
Jan. 20, Recession or Money Riot Panic?
March 25, What Depression? We’re Being Lied To
May 6, Stimulus Fraud & Lies

Furthermore, this recession was never an impending “second great depression” as many economists, politicians and pundits proclaimed. See Allan Meltzer’s opinion piece and his chart reproduced below:

So the panic was caused by government officials and inflated by politicians who saw it as an opportunity to expand government.

The implications of all the above are:
1) The recovery will be driven by native forces in the capitalist system, as all recoveries have been.
2) The Obama administration tries to take credit for either avoiding a new depression or for the recovery. That’s absolute bunk.
4) The “stimulus” was a waste of money.
5) TARP was most likely completely unnecessary and again, wasteful.
6) Government habitually lies.

The Federal Government has done immense economic damage in the past 9 months by nationalizing banks, auto manufacturers, and the mortgage industry. The populist push to pile additional regulations upon what is already the most regulated industry in America, Finance, is insane and will cause additional damage. Why should anyone think that government regulators that were warned in detail about the Bernie Madoff fraud, but did nothing, would behave any more effectively if given broader responsibilities? What makes anyone think that a government agency, all of which were amply warned yet blind to the Fannie and Freddie frauds would have the foresight and guts to head off the bubble of credit default swaps that sank Lehman and got the Federal Government to nationalize AIG.

The only discipline that works is the fear of failure. So what would have happened if AIG had to declare bankruptcy and all those credit default swaps became worthless? It would have chastened the banks, such as Salomon Brothers which traded in them. Some might have been bankrupted. But instead, the all-wise Feds simply declared that all the bond-holders and stock owners of Merrill Lynch, Lehman Brothers, AIG, Bear Stearns, GM, Chrysler, hundreds of automobile dealers, and others would simply be screwed — their contractual and property rights nullified and their assets made worthless by government fiat. That is criminal.

In a lively economy such as ours it doesn’t take much to re-create paper-driven institutions such as investment banks. Entrepreneurs pick through the ruins and in months a dozen new entities arise out of the ashes of the fallen. The former employees of fallen Wall St. giants such as Lehman are already regenerating parts of the business where their expertise had value. Even automobile companies, with huge capital plants can be salvaged from wreckage, and would be if anything is worth saving.

It is a myth that any institution is too large or “systemic” to fail. Yes, it might hurt for a while, but free economies have amazing regenerative powers, and maintaining the discipline of potential failure is well worth the occasional stumble.

Free Markets Work. Government just gets in the way.

What Next in Afghanistan?

September 15th, 2009

Is it worthwhile or even wise for the U.S. to spend blood and treasure to build up the Afghan state? Do we really care if the Taliban regains control over Afghanistan? If we really cared about Islamic fanaticism then we should smite Saudi Arabia, the source of it all.

Let’s remember that the original purpose of our operations in Afghanistan was to get our hands on Osama Bin Laden and his cohorts. This made obvious good sense given the events of 9/11/01. Our beef with the Taliban was Mullah Omar’s refusal to hand over the Al Qaeda leaders and close the training camps. So we linked up with some Afghan enemies of Mullah Omar and kicked his butt. But we didn’t get Osama and his buddies.

Now, I’d like to offer a recipe for future operations in Afghanistan:

1. Forget state building. Fiercely and single mindedly conduct military operations going after Al Qaeda focusing on Bin Laden, Al Zawahiri, and other top figures, plus Mullah Omar. We’re not making friends here. We’re on a single-minded mission. We should fight with the best weapons we have and ignore the collateral damage.

2. Offer the Taliban a deal. After they deliver us the heads of the above individuals we’ll immediately withdraw and let them fight it out with their countrymen. We really don’t care who wins that battle.

3. We reserve the right to bring down hellfire without limit on the heads of the Afghans if they harbor Islamic terrorists in the future. They can be as viciously Islamic as they want within their own borders, but don’t even think of spreading it to us or our allies.

4. Pakistan will object to operations on their soil. But they have the incentive to take on the Taliban for their own salvation. If they want to team up with us, great. We welcome the help. But without their help we’ll get the job done on our own.

Insulting the Sun God

September 15th, 2009

Thanks to Glen Thrush via Drudge we can see the House of Representatives rules about insulting the Sun God president. (Really!)

Especially useful: The section on how to properly insult the executive branch in the in the chamber.

“Disgrace” and “nitwits” — okay.

“Liar” or “sexual misconduct” — ixnay.

Under section 370 of the House Rules and Manual it has been held that a Member could:

• refer to the government as “something hated, something oppressive.”
• refer to the President as “using legislative or judicial pork.”
• refer to a Presidential message as a “disgrace to the country.”
• refer to unnamed officials as “our half-baked nitwits handling foreign affairs.”

Likewise, it has been held that a member could not:
• call the President a “liar.”
• call the President a “hypocrite.”
• describe the President’s veto of a bill as “cowardly.”
• charge that the President has been “intellectually dishonest.”
• refer to the President as “giving aid and comfort to the enemy.”
• refer to alleged “sexual misconduct on the President’s part.”

How can our representatives properly represent us if they are gagged by rules of speech? What about free speech?

I can understand decorum and manners. But going to this lawyerly extreme I don’t think makes any sense at all.

One of the problems we have is that our head of state and our head of government are one and the same. In England they have a better system. The head of state lives in a palace and should not be insulted without insulting the country. That’s understandable. While the head of government governs from a humble address (10 Downing St.) and can be called whatever a representative wants to call him.

Representatives should be able to call our head of governmennt a “miserable, reckless, lieing, coward” without rebuke if he deserves it. We shouldn’t elect a head of government who can’t take it. My further suggestion is that we should follow the British example and install the winner of the Ms. America pagent in the White House as head of state and send the President of the United States Bureaucracy to a boarding house — a nice one, but a boarding house nonetheless.

Sorry Barack, but American citizens don’t need or want a Sun God

Inflation or Deflation? Experts Disagree

September 15th, 2009

First, I must admit that discussions of monetary policy make my eyes glaze over. But it gives me some comfort, or should it be fear, that the so-called experts can’t agree on it either. Below are two articles from British newspapers, one forecasting devastating deflation, the other inflation. My naive take on all this is that a) neither inflation nor deflation is good. Stable money is best; and b) the ugly predictions below are the direct result of government policies designed to use money supply to damp or goose the economy; and c) insane out of control spending on “stimulus” does not improve the economy, it just upsets the monetary balance.

Warnings of deflation from an article in Telegraph.Co.UK/b>

Professor Tim Congdon from International Monetary Research said US bank loans have fallen at an annual pace of almost 14pc in the three months to August (from $7,147bn to $6,886bn).

“There has been nothing like this in the USA since the 1930s,” he said. “The rapid destruction of money balances is madness.”

The M3 “broad” money supply, watched as an early warning signal for the economy a year or so later, has been falling at a 5pc annual rate.

Similar concerns have been raised by David Rosenberg, chief strategist at Gluskin Sheff, who said that over the four weeks up to August 24, bank credit shrank at an “epic” 9pc annual pace, the M2 money supply shrank at 12.2pc and M1 shrank at 6.5pc.

“For the first time in the post-WW2 [Second World War] era, we have deflation in credit, wages and rents and, from our lens, this is a toxic brew,” he said.

It is unclear why the US Federal Reserve has allowed this to occur.

Warnings of inflation from Financial Times of London:

“The comments from Mr White, who ran the economic department at the central banks’ bank from 1995 to 2008, carry weight because he was one of the few senior figures to predict the financial crisis in the years before it struck.”

Worldwide, central banks have pumped thousands of billions of dollars of new money into the financial system over the past two years in an effort to prevent a depression. Meanwhile, governments have gone to similar extremes, taking on vast sums of debt to prop up industries from banking to car making.

These measures may already be inflating a bubble in asset prices, from equities to commodities, he said, and there was a small risk that inflation would get out of control over the medium term if central banks miss-time their “exit strategies”.

Either of the scenarios, above, would mean misery for all of us. We should remember that not too long ago the experts were predicting that the U.S. would become economic road kill due to Japan’s then (apparently) successful economic policies. We can only hope now that while the experts play in the economists’ sand box, that U.S. industry will once again, as it did in the 80’s prove the experts wrong and irrelevant. People make economies. Experts just analyze them. Governments just mess them up.

Maybe we should conclude that simpler is better. Don’t trust the experts too much. Monetary stability can be accomplished with a few strong rules and the discipline to follow them.

Signs of Government Arrogance

September 14th, 2009

While on vacation this summer I visited a picturesque light house maintained by the Coast Guard. While standing next to the tower I looked down from the railing and saw a sign that promised me a jail term or fine if I stepped over onto the vegetation. I thought, “Couldn’t it just say: Please Keep Off of the Vegetation”? Then another threatening sign I noticed on the way out gave instructions and said “Failure to comply with these instructions will result in cancellation of visiting privileges.” As if the instructions, meant to ensure safety of the visitors, were not enough in themselves.

The signs pictured above anticipate that citizens will be criminals and will try to bribe the friendly automobile smog control inspectors and provide rules while visiting a park. As if this was not enough, you are encouraged to go back to town and obtain a complete set of rules and regs to comply with while communing with nature.

While some signs make sense and are useful, government signage tends to evoke an arrogant authoritarianism that grates on the honest citizen. It would be more dignified and civilized for signs to politely guide rather than threaten. But I guess when you have the big stick of the law, jail and fines behind you, then you don’t want to let anyone mistake your command for a mere suggestion.

Did you ever notice the signs that were once prominent in the post offices, which said: “It is a crime to assault a postal worker.” Oh, well, it never crossed my mind. But thanks for warning me anyway.

Demonstrations & Democracy

September 13th, 2009

It has been a life-long hobby of mine to observe crowd behavior, whether it be mass delusions, demonstrations, riots, or other forms of collective behavior, some pathological, some not. In its extreme forms this kind of behavior strips people of their individual judgment and sometimes even their self control. Riots are an example of this extreme. Mass delusions differ from the other forms in that, although they influence behavior, they don’t necessarily produce actions, but may play a part in demonstrations and riots.

Demonstrations are a closely related but different animal. Demonstrations are frequently the predecessor to riots, and any motivated and skilled agitator can turn a demonstration into a riot. I have personally witnessed, during my student years in South America how this can be, and is accomplished. Which is not to say that all demonstrations are preludes to riots.

An interesting and important aspect of demonstrations is that they are almost exclusively directed at grievances toward actions or policies of institutions (e.g. government or large businesses) which the demonstrators feel otherwise powerless to influence. By demonstrating en-mass, the participants hope to show those in power that they are opposed by a large number of people. The demonstrators carry signs and shout slogans justifying their positions and demanding solutions. But few if any participants believe these arguments will have any significant direct impact on the target of the demonstration. And in fact, very few demonstrations directly produce changes the demonstrators demand. Through publicity and in some cases implied intimidation, however, they can influence outcomes. But only a change in opinion or attitude, or fear within the target institution can produce the result the demonstrators argue for.

Another very important role of the demonstration is to encourage and reassure the demonstrators and their sympathizers, thus building more support for their positions. People like to join and root for what they perceive to be a winning team. And the larger the demonstration, the more effective it is likely to be. Those who run institutions are often no less susceptible to peer pressure than the average teen ager.

The implication of the foregoing is that: a)demonstrations are born of frustration in that no other means are apparent, and b) demonstrations are unlikely to directly produce the change demanded, but do build support.

Who demonstrates and why? Demonstrations are unnecessary and a waste of time when other means of change are available. Likewise, demonstrations are only useful to oppose large entities, such as government. This suggests that, in a well-functioning democracy there are ample means of influencing desired changes, and therefore the frustration needed to motivate demonstrations is removed. As government gets involved in ever more aspects of life, however, citizens are presented with an increasing number of issues over which they may feel powerless to change. This produces frustration, and frustration motivates demonstrations. One can observe this phenomenon in countries where the government controls large and important sectors of the economy. In France it is common for farmers to block roads with tractors because farm prices are low. If the government doesn’t control something there is no motivation to demonstrate. If the government does control something, then demonstration may be the only means of seeking change.

In the past, demonstrations have been a rarity in the U.S. compared with more statist societies around the world. Limited government, economic flexibility, and free speech are responsible for this. Post-WW-1 bonus marches, 1960’s civil rights demonstrations, and anti-war protests resulted from large-scale social movements or perceptions of large-scale injustice. Ordinary personal matters such as health insurance do not justify demonstrations. Demonstrations in a democracy are a symptom failure.

The “Tea Parties” we’re now seeing result from the perception of a government completely out-of-touch with the American people. There is a frustration with huge increases in spending, increasing government participation and regulation of the economy and intrusions into individual choices such as health care. A large segment of the American public perceives that these things are changing for the worse, and that these changes are out of their control. Government isn’t listening, they’re frustrated, so they demonstrate.

If the Obama crowd succeeds in implementing enough of its agenda of government expansion, then we’ll see a lot more demonstrations. We can demonstrate for better automobile warranties, lower prices, health insurance coverage for absent-mindedness, whiter teeth, availability of lettuce, ad-absurdum.

More demonstrations, more to demonstrate about, less freedom to make changes absent of demonstrations. This isn’t a change we should believe in or want to encourage.

It’s About Freedom, Dummy!

September 12th, 2009


It’s not about details of the health care bill.
It’s about Freedom.

It’s not about the “science” of global warming.
It’s about Freedom.

It’s not about Cap and Trade.
It’s about Freedom.

It’s not about Education.
It’s about Freedom.

It’s not about a national service corps.
It’s about Freedom.

It’s not about the economy.

It’s about Freedom.

It’s not about regulation of food safety.
It’s about Freedom.

It’s not about banking & mortgages.
It’s about Freedom.


On Health Care & Freedom

September 11th, 2009

After taking notes during the president’s much-praised health care address to a joint session of congress, I put them aside for a while. Many others reacted, so my comments would probably just add to the noise. However, after a few days of reflection, some generalizations pop out.

Obama’s vision of the health bill would place many requirements on private insurance plans, such as required coverage of pre-existing conditions, no caps on claims, mandated maximum premiums. So his requirements raise costs to issue insurance (how could they not?) while limiting premiums (how can this possibly work?). This is evidence of complete economic ignorance, if not insanity.

The plan increases government health care expenses while Obama says it will do the opposite. How could the government subsidize 30-40 million people’s insurance without increasing government expenses? Supporters claim that government involvement will reduce the actual cost of care through efficiencies. Think defense department procurement and $400 toilet seats. Medicare, Medicaid, VA and other governent health care programs are known to have vast amounts of waste and inefficiencies. So who can point out a government program that doesn’t?

The so-called “public option” will require government subsidies, no matter what it’s sponsors claim. Think AMTRAK and the Post Office, both of which were supposed to operated as profitable independent entities. Or think Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which were wildly profitable as long as their government sponsored Ponzie schemes held together. Then to prevent a disastrous crash massive (estimated up to $1 trillion) subsidies are required for rescue now in in the future.

And then, there’s the general promise not to raise taxes for those earning less than $250,000. Somebody has to pay for all the out-of-control spending already passed and anticipated. So how can Obama keep his promise? Easy, he imposes a value added tax and argues that this keeps the promise since it isn’t imposed on individuals.

“What’s so bad about that?” say the Obama gang. Why not be like Europe? The French and the Germans seem happy enough, even though the European economic stupor can be attributed directly to the welfare state underwritten by a value added tax system. But what they fail to mention is that Europeans have given up gobs of their freedom in return for this dull-but-secure lifestyle. And who is to say that the European model will not self-destruct as ever-increasing demands and ever-declining resources clash — which is already happening.

Thus, the real question is not about health care, or even taxation. The real question is a conflict between more government control of your life versus retaining the freedoms you now have. Do you want government run health care, or do you want your freedom?

It’s that simple, and it’s that vital.

IRS to Manage Obama-care

September 3rd, 2009

Healthcare under the Obama formula requires a Gestapo. Guess who that will be? Your Beloved IRS!

Here’s a quote from the article in the Washington Examiner.

Under the various proposals now on the table, the IRS would become the main agency for determining who has an “acceptable” health insurance plan; for finding and punishing those who don’t have such a plan; for subsidizing individual health insurance costs through the issuance of a tax credits; and for enforcing the rules on those who attempt to opt out, abuse, or game the system. A substantial portion of H.R. 3200, the House health care bill, is devoted to amending the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 in order to give the IRS the authority to perform these new duties.

The Democrats’ plan would require all Americans to have “acceptable” insurance coverage (the legislation includes long and complex definitions of “acceptable”) and would designate the IRS as the agency charged with enforcing that requirement. On your yearly 1040 tax return, you would be required to attest that you have “acceptable” coverage. Of course, you might be lying, or simply confused about whether or not you are covered, so the IRS would need a way to check your claim for accuracy. Under current plans, insurers would be required to submit to the IRS something like the 1099 form in which taxpayers report outside income. The IRS would then check the information it receives from the insurers against what you have submitted on your tax form.

If it all matches up, you’re fine. If it doesn’t, you will hear from the IRS. And if you don’t have “acceptable” coverage, you will be subject to substantial fines — fines that will be administered by the IRS.

If that doesn’t chill your blood, you must be a corpse!

Dear Rep. Raul Grijalva

September 2nd, 2009

Here’s an email I sent today to my congressional representative, Raul Grijalva:
Dear Mr. Grijalva,

Why haven’t you had any town hall meetings? Are you afraid of what you’re likely to hear?

Please understand. It’s not that we disagree with the details of your health care, environmental, banking, auto manufacturing, bailout and other schemes.

What we demand is LESS GOVERNMENT.
NO Government interference.
NO Loss of Freedoms.
NO Increased Taxes
NO Increased Regulations

Can you understand that?

(My Name)

Government of Liars & Cheats

September 1st, 2009

why do we elect a government that takes our taxes, promises us refunds for over payments, then issues an IOU instead of a check? My father just received one of California’s IOU-Warrants as payment for overpaid taxes. Getting paid with Confederate money? Where’s the jail for these swindlers?

Why do we elect a government that enlists automobile dealers in a “cash for clunkers” program and then refuses to pay the dealers the $2.8 Billion they are owed? This is money they have already paid out to their customers. Ordinary citizens would land in jail if we acted this way.

Enough of this government of lies an swindles!

How To Destroy America

September 1st, 2009

I can’t remember any time in my life when I’ve been so despondent about the prospects for the future and so fearful for the future of my children and grandchildren. We’ve had a lot of dumb governments in my lifetime, but never have they actually tried to destroy the country. This Obama monstrosity IS trying to destroy the country.

In no particular order, here are the wrecking balls being used to beat down our culture and our institutions:

1) Let Government take over Banking and real estate finance
2) Let Government take over major industries, such as automobile manufacturing
3) Prohibit exploration for and extraction of oil and minerals
4) Prohibit logging
5) Divert farming irrigation water to support wild fish
6) Destroy the capability of the CIA to do covert work
7) Destroy the capability of the CIA to interrogate captured terrorists
8)  Feminize our armed forces
9) Destroy the value of the dollar by borrowing beyond our means of repayment and spending vast amounts of money on useless projects
10) Send emissaries around the world to apologize for America’s imagined shortcomings and sins
11) Deprive the armed forces of the best and most modern weapons
12) Treat citizens as dummies and children needing government guidance and nurture
13) Congress voting and passing bills that have not been read and studied nor exposed to public criticism
14) Congress composing 1,000 page-plus bills (often in secret)
15) Treating foreign dictators (Hugo Chavez, Venezuela) as friends and foreign friends (Alvaro Uribe, Colombia) as enemies
16) Following the lead of socialist dictators including Castro and Chavez to condemn the constitution-saving actions in Honduras
17) Appointing dozens of Czars (FDR called his Czars “Dictators”) to perform functions not authorized by the Constitution or congress
18) Build an Americorps larger than the U.S. Marine Corps
19) Prohibit the building of nuclear power plants through obstructive regulations and support of environmental activists’ lawsuits
20) Create huge energy bureaucracies and energy taxes
21) Commit the U.S. to insane international climate protocols
22) Regulate venture capital and private hedge funds
23) Threaten soldiers and CIA operatives with prosecution for acts within the laws of the U.S.
24) Prosecute members of the previous administration for differences of opinion with the current gang
25) Appoint radical kooks to powerful government posts: John (“lets sterilize lots of women”) Holdren to Science Czar and Van Jones (proudly Communist Radical) to Green Jobs Czar — among others.
26) Raise taxes on the most successful minority and eliminate taxes for a dependent majority
27) Force government control over health care
28) Increase government control over education
29) Regulate food, drugs, transpsortation, communication, finance, entertainment, shelter and anything else the government can get its hands on
30) Divert food (corn) to motor fuel (ethanol) thus harming transpsortation and raising food prices
31) Provide continued cover for lawyers to mug cizizens through malpractice, product liability and other tort actions
32) Use labor unions (SEIU for example) as a source of goon squads to intimidate citizen protests.
33) Use the communication facilities of the executive branch to engage in a permanent political campaign of propaganda, email spam, misdirection, smear and slander
34) Continue attempts to nullify the constitution’s second ammendment right to keep and bear arms (which has nothing to do with hunting or target practice)

This is just a partial, top of my head list of the ugly, destructive actions that have become the signature of the Obama democrats within the past 8 months. This is more than enough, if all these are carried out to their logical conclusion, to leave us in danger of losing our liberty and our country.

Mr. Obama, Ms. Pelosi, Mr. Reid, and all of you other syncophants and socialists out there — if you keep trying you might succeed in destroying the country you apparently hate.

But you won’t do it without a fight.